View source for Ozone depletion and climate change

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

This IP address range has been globally blocked.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.

Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

This block affects editing on all Wikimedia wikis.

The IP address or range 62.210.0.0/16 has been globally blocked by ‪Hasley‬ for the following reason(s):

Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected:

This block will expire on 16:21, 18 December 2025. Your current IP address is 62.210.136.28.

Even while globally blocked, you will usually still be able to edit pages on Meta-Wiki.

If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

Other useful links: Global blocks · Help:I have been blocked

You can view and copy the source of this page:

'''Ozone depletion and climate change''' are environmental challenges whose connections have been explored and which have been compared and contrasted, for example in terms of global regulation, in various studies and books.

There is widespread scientific interest in better regulation of [[climate change]], [[ozone depletion]] and [[air pollution]], as in general the human relationship with the biosphere is deemed of major [[Historiography|historiographical]] and political significance.<ref>[http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/928 2010, Review] of [[Joachim Radkau]], ''Nature and Power: A Global History of the Environment'', {{ISBN|978-0521616737}}, by [[David Christian (historian)|David Christian]], 2010</ref> Already by 1994 the legal debates about respective regulation regimes on climate change, ozone depletion and air pollution were being dubbed "monumental" and a combined synopsis provided.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.brill.com/climate-change-ozone-depletion-and-air-pollution |title=Alexander Gillespie. Climate Change, Ozone Depletion And Air Pollution: Legal Commentaries Within The Context Of Science And Policy 1994 |access-date=2014-08-26 |archive-date=2016-04-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160405081247/http://www.brill.com/climate-change-ozone-depletion-and-air-pollution |url-status=dead }}</ref>

There are some parallels between atmospheric chemistry and anthropogenic emissions in the discussions which have taken place and the regulatory attempts which have been made. Most important is that the gases causing both problems have long lifetimes after emission to the atmosphere, thus causing problems that are difficult to reverse. However, the [[Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer]] and the [[Montreal Protocol]] that amended it are seen as success stories, while the [[Kyoto Protocol]] on anthropogenic climate change has largely failed. Currently, efforts are being undertaken to assess the reasons and to use synergies, for example with regard to [[data reporting]] and policy design and further exchanging of information.<ref>Sebastian Oberthür, International Environmental Agreements July 2001, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 357-377, Linkages between the Montreal and Kyoto Protocols – Enhancing Synergies between Protecting the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate</ref>

Ozone depletion is not a primary cause of climate change, however there exists a physical science connection between the two phenomena. The Earth's atmospheric ozone has two major effects on the Earth's temperature balance. Firstly, it absorbs solar ultraviolet radiation, leading to the heating of the stratosphere. Secondly, it also traps heat in the troposphere by absorbing infrared radiation emitted by the Earth's surface. Ozone depletion in the stratopshere has had a negative [[radiative forcing]] impact, however anthropogenic increases in the tropospheric abundance more than offsets this.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Department for Environment |first=Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) webmaster@defra gsi gov uk |title=Ozone Depletion and Climate Change- Defra, UK |url=https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/research/ozone-uv/moreinfo?view=deleption-climate-change |access-date=2024-08-19 |website=uk-air.defra.gov.uk}}</ref> Additionally, [[chlorofluorocarbon]]s (CFCs) and other [[halocarbon]]s which have caused ozone depletion are strong [[greenhouse gas]]es, and the warming influence of the addition of these to the atmosphere has been greater than the net effect of the antropogenic changes in the amount of ozone.<ref name=":0" />

== Policy approach ==
{{main|Politics of global warming|Montreal Protocol|Kyoto Protocol}} 
[[File:Bob Watson.jpg|thumb|[[Robert Watson (scientist)|Sir Robert (Bob) Watson]] played an important role in both cases]]

There are both links and major differences between ozone depletion and global warming and the way the two challenges have been handled. While in the case of atmospheric ozone depletion, in a situation of high uncertainty and against strong resistance, climate change regulation attempts at the international level such as the Kyoto Protocol have failed to reduce global emissions.<ref name = RG/><ref name=cass/>
The [[Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer]] and the Montreal Protocol were both originally signed by only some member states of the [[United Nations]] (43 nations in the case of the Montreal Protocol in 1986) while Kyoto attempted to create a worldwide agreement from scratch. Expert consensus concerning [[Chlorofluorocarbon|CFCs]] in the form of the [[Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion]] was reached long after the first regulatory steps were taken, and {{as of|2012|12|29|lc=y}}, all countries in the United Nations plus the [[Cook Islands]], the [[Holy See]], [[Niue]] and the [[supranational union|supranational]] [[European Union]] had ratified the original [[Montreal Protocol]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/1328&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en |title=EUROPA – PRESS RELEASES – Press Release – Environment: European Union hails universal ratification of the Montreal Protocol on protecting the ozone layer |publisher=Europa.eu |date=16 September 2009 }}</ref> These countries have also ratified the London, Copenhagen, and Montreal amendments to the Protocol. {{As of|2014|04|15}}, the Beijing amendments had not been ratified by two state parties.<ref name="ozone.unep.org">{{cite web |url=http://ozone.unep.org/Ratification_status/ |title=Status of Ratification – The Ozone Secretariat |publisher=Ozone.unep.org |date=15 April 2014 |access-date=25 August 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141008112847/http://ozone.unep.org/Ratification_status/ |archive-date=8 October 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

After the Vienna Convention, the halocarbon industry shifted its position and started supporting a protocol to limit CFC production. US manufacturer [[DuPont]] acted more quickly than their European counterparts.<ref name="Shabecoff, Philip A1">{{cite news |author=Shabecoff, Philip |title=U.S. Report Predicts Rise in Skin Cancer with Loss of Ozone |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/05/us/us-report-predicts-rise-in-skin-cancer-with-loss-of-ozone.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=5 November 1986 |page=A1 |access-date=10 January 2013}}</ref> The EU shifted its position as well after Germany, which has a substantial chemical industry, gave up its defence of the CFC industry<ref name = RG/> and started supporting more regulation. Government and industry in France and the UK had tried to defend their CFC-producing industries even after the Montreal Protocol had been signed.<ref name="ReferenceA">[[Reiner Grundmann]], ''Transnational Environmental Policy'', London: Routledge, {{ISBN|0-415-22423-3}}</ref>

The Vienna Convention was installed before a scientific consensus on the ozone hole was established.<ref name = RG>[[Reiner Grundmann]] [http://www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_book/mpifg_bd_39.pdf "Technische Problemlösung, Verhandeln und umfassende Problemlösung", (Technical trouble shooting, negotiating and generic problem solving capability)] in ''Gesellschaftliche Komplexität und kollektive Handlungsfähigkeit'' (Complexity of society and collective ability to act), ed. Schimank, U. (2000). Frankfurt/Main: Campus, pp.&nbsp;154&ndash;82 [http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/faces/viewItemFullPage.jsp;jsessionid=1F12495443EF6AC95BFF12F29F3C4829?itemId=escidoc%3A1235032%3A2&view=EXPORT book summary] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141012202222/http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/faces/viewItemFullPage.jsp;jsessionid=1F12495443EF6AC95BFF12F29F3C4829?itemId=escidoc%3A1235032%3A2&view=EXPORT |date=2014-10-12 }} at the [[Max Planck Gesellschaft]]</ref> On the contrary, until the 1980s the EU, [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration|NASA]], NAS, [[United Nations Environment Programme|UNEP]], [[World Meteorological Organization|WMO]] and the British government had issued scientific reports with divergent conclusions.<ref name = RG/> [[Robert Watson (scientist)|Sir Robert (Bob) Watson]], Director of the Science Division at NASA, played a crucial role in the process of reaching a unified assessment.<ref name = RG/>

== Policy and consensus ==
[[Image:Atmosphere layers-en.svg|thumb|right|upright|Layers of the atmosphere (not to scale). The Earth's ozone layer is mainly found in the lower portion of the stratosphere from approximately {{convert|20 to 30|km|mi|0}} above Earth.]]

[[Aant Elzinga]] wrote in 1996 about the consensus, that the [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] has tried in the prior two reports a global consensus approach to climate action.<ref>[[Aant Elzinga]], "Shaping Worldwide Consensus: the Orchestration of Global Change", in Elzinga & Landström eds. (1996) ''Internationalism and Science'': 223-255. {{ISBN|0-947568-67-0}}.</ref>  [[Stephen Schneider (scientist)|Stephen Schneider]] and Paul N. Edwards, noted in 1997, that after the [[IPCC Second Assessment Report]], the lobby group [[Global Climate Coalition]] and a few self-proclaimed “[[climate change denial|contrarian]]” scientists tried to discredit the conclusions of the report. They pointed out that the goal of the IPCC is to fairly represent the complete range of credible scientific opinion and if possible a consensus view.<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://ent.arp.harvard.edu/sci/climate/journalclub/SanterComm.pdf|title=The 1995 IPCC Report: Broad Consensus or "Scientific Cleansing"?1|publisher=Harvard University|author=Paul N. Edwards|author2=Stephen H. Schneider|year=1997|journal=Ecofable/Ecoscience|pages=3–9|access-date=2015-05-14|archive-date=2016-03-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304130611/http://ent.arp.harvard.edu/sci/climate/journalclub/SanterComm.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In 2007, [[Reiner Grundmann]] compared climate actions in Europe and the United States, he interpreted the inaction besides existing consensus, and noted,  ''Political agenda that drove US climate change policy. The high visibility of [[climate change denial|skeptical]] scientists in the media resonates with this'', and wrote that Germany started ambitious goals, reduced emissions, because ‘balanced reporting’ led to a bias in climate change coverage in advantage of skeptical arguments in the U.S., but not so much in Germany. Additionally, Grundmann pointed out that after warnings from scientists in 1986 the [[German Parliament]] commissioned the ''Enquetekommission ‘Vorsorge zum Schutz der Erdatmosphäre’'' (Precaution for the Protection of the Earth's Atmosphere), to assess the situation, consisting of scientists, politicians and representatives of interest groups. Three years later the report made an impact with the assessment of the state of the art in climate research, an assessment of the threat of climate change itself as well as suggestions for clear emissions reduction targets, even though he argues there was no consensus, and attributed the success of the report to strong precautionary action, and that no scientific outsiders or [[climate change deniers]] were involved.<ref name=PAR>{{cite journal|url=http://stsclimate.soc.ku.dk/papers/grundmannclimatechangeandknowledgepolitics.pdf|title=Environmental Politics Climate Change and Knowledge Politics|journal = Environmental Politics|volume=16|issue=3|author=Reiner Grundmann|pages=414–432|year=2007|doi=10.1080/09644010701251656|bibcode=2007EnvPo..16..414G |s2cid=153866225|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140826115142/http://stsclimate.soc.ku.dk/papers/grundmannclimatechangeandknowledgepolitics.pdf|archive-date=2014-08-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/11/080/1108030.pdf|author=Bundestag.de|year=1990|title=Dritter Bericht der ENQUETE-KOMMISSION Vorsorge zum Schutz der Erdatmosphäre}}</ref>

A linear model of policy-making, based on a position that "the more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be", was not applied in the ozone case.<ref name=CLT>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1177/0011392110376031 | volume=58 | title=Climate Change: What Role for Sociology?: A Response to Constance Lever-Tracy | year=2010 | journal=Current Sociology | pages=897–910 | last1 = Grundmann | first1 = R.| issue=6 | s2cid=143371210 }} Current Sociology November 2010 vol. 58 no. 6 897-910, see [http://csi.sagepub.com/content/56/3/445.abstract Lever Tracy's paper in the same journal] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150429120425/http://csi.sagepub.com/content/56/3/445.abstract |date=2015-04-29 }}</ref> On the contrary, the CFC regulation process focused more on managing ignorance and uncertainties as a basis of political decision making, as the relationships between science, public (lack of) understanding and policy were better taken into account.<ref name=cass/><ref name="PAR" /><ref name = Ungar>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1088/0963-6625/9/3/306 | volume=9 | year=2000 | journal=Public Understanding of Science | pages=297–312 | last1 = Ungar | first1 = Sheldon| title=Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: Climate change versus the ozone hole | issue=3 | s2cid=7089937 }}</ref> In the meantime, such a player in the IPCC process as [[Michael Oppenheimer]] conceded some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asked for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of repetitions of the large-scale approach every six years.<ref name=MO>[[Michael Oppenheimer]] et al., "The limits of consensus", in ''Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2008-2009: with a Special Section on Energy and Sustainability'', Donald Kennedy, Island Press, 01.12.2008, separate as {{cite journal | doi = 10.1126/science.1144831 | volume=317 | title=The Limits of Consensus | year=2007 | journal=Science | pages=1505–1506 | last1 = Oppenheimer | first1 = M. | issue=5844 | pmid=17872430| s2cid=129837694 }}</ref> It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties.<ref name=MO/> Others also see mixed blessings in the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and have asked for dissenting or minority positions to be included<ref name=hu>Mike Hulme, [http://www.csap.cam.ac.uk/media/uploads/files/1/fdsaw.pdf "Lessons from the IPCC: do scientific assessments need to be consensual to be authoritative?"] in (eds.) Doubleday, R. and Willesden, J. March 2013, page 142 ff</ref> or for statements about uncertainties to be improved.<ref name=nocon>[http://judithcurry.com/2013/04/22/do-scientific-assessments-need-to-be-consensual-to-be-authoritative/ Do scientific assessments need to be consensual to be authoritative?] Curry, JA and PJ Webster, 2012:  "Climate change: no consensus on consensus". CAB Reviews, in press, 2012</ref><ref>{{cite journal | url=http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html | title=Climate heretic: Judith Curry turns on her colleagues | publisher=NatureNews | date=1 November 2010 | doi=10.1038/news.2010.577 | access-date=22 December 2010| last1=Lemonick | first1=Michael D. | journal=Nature }}</ref>

== Public opinion ==
{{main|Public opinion on climate change}}
The two atmospheric problems have achieved significantly different levels of understanding by the public, including both the basic science and policy issues.<ref name = Ungar/> People have limited scientific knowledge about global warming and tend to confuse it with<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Boyesa | first1 = Edward | last2 = Stanisstreeta | first2 = Martin | year = 1992| title = Students' perceptions of global warming | journal = International Journal of Environmental Studies | volume = 42 | issue = 4| pages = 287–300 | doi = 10.1080/00207239208710804 | bibcode = 1992IJEnS..42..287B }}</ref> or see it as a subset of the ozone hole.<ref>Compare Sheldon Ungar, 2000 and various web sites such as [[Gavin Schmidt]]s realclimate complaint in [http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/ozone-depletion-and-global-warming/Ozone depletion and global warming 2005] or the [http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/ozone-hole-and-gw-faq.html UCS FAQ on the topic]</ref> Not only on the policy level, ozone regulation fared much better than climate change in public opinion. Americans voluntarily switched away from aerosol sprays before the legislation was enforced, while climate change has failed in achieving a broader scientific comprehension and in raising comparable concern.<ref name = Ungar/>

The metaphors used in the CFC discussion (ozone shield, ozone hole) resonated better with non-scientists and their concerns.<ref name = Ungar/>  The ozone case was communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the [[popular culture]]" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the [[public opinion on climate change]] sees no imminent danger.<ref name = Ungar/> The ozone hole was much more seen as a "hot issue" and imminent risk compared to global climate change,<ref name="PAR" /> as lay people feared a depletion of the ozone layer ([[ozone shield]]) risked increasing severe consequences such as [[skin cancer]], [[cataract]]s,<ref name="Dobson2005">{{Cite journal| first1 = R.| last1 = Dobson| title = Ozone depletion will bring big rise in number of cataracts| journal = BMJ| volume = 331| issue = 7528| pages = 1292–1295| year = 2005| pmc = 1298891 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.331.7528.1292-d               }}</ref> damage to plants, and reduction of [[plankton]] populations in the ocean's [[photic zone]]. This was not the case with global warming.<ref name = RG/>

== Personal risk assessment and knowledge ==
[https://sociology.utoronto.ca/people/faculty-and-staff/sheldon-ungar/#:~:text=Sheldon%20Ungar%20has%20researched%20real,to%20research%20institutes%20in%20Germany. Sheldon Ungar] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506032600/https://sociology.utoronto.ca/people/faculty-and-staff/sheldon-ungar/#:~:text=Sheldon%20Ungar%20has%20researched%20real,to%20research%20institutes%20in%20Germany. |date=2021-05-06 }}, a Canadian sociologist, assumes that while the quantity of specialized knowledge is exploding, in contrast scientific ignorance among lay people is the norm and even increasing. Public opinion failed to tie climate change to concrete events which could be used as a threshold or beacon to signify immediate danger.<ref name = Ungar/> Scientific predictions of a temperature rise of {{convert|2|C-change|0}} to {{convert|3|C-change|0}} over several decades do not resonate with people, for example in North America, who experience similar swings during a single day.<ref name = Ungar/> As scientists define global warming as a problem of the future, a liability in the "attention economy", pessimistic outlooks in general and the attribution of extreme weather to climate change have often been discredited or ridiculed in the public arena (compare the [[Gore effect]]).<ref>Sheldon Ungar Climatic Change February 1999, Volume 41, Issue 2, pp 133-150 Is Strange Weather in the Air? A Study of U.S. National Network News Coverage of Extreme Weather Events</ref> Even when [[James Hansen]] tried to use the [[1988–89 North American drought]] as a call to action, scientists kept stating, in line with the IPCC findings, that even extreme weather is not climate.<ref name = Ungar/> While the greenhouse effect, ''per se'', is essential for life on earth, the case was quite different with the [[ozone hole]] and other metaphors about ozone depletion. The scientific assessment of the ozone problem also had large uncertainties; both the ozone content of the upper atmosphere and its depletion are complicated to measure and the link between ozone depletion and rates of enhanced skin cancer is rather weak. But the metaphors used in the discussion (ozone shield, ozone hole) resonated better with lay people and their concerns. 
{{Blockquote|The idea of rays penetrating a damaged “shield” meshes nicely with abiding and resonant cultural motifs, including “Hollywood affinities.” These range from the shields on the Starship Enterprise to Star Wars&nbsp;... It is these pre-scientific bridging metaphors built around the penetration of a deteriorating shield that render the ozone problem relatively simple. That the ozone threat can be linked with Darth Vader means that it is encompassed in common sense understandings that are deeply ingrained and widely shared.<ref name = Ungar/>
|author= Sheldon Ungar}}

The CFC regulation attempts at the end of the 1980s profited from those easy to grasp metaphors and the personal risk assumptions taken from them. The fate of celebrities like President [[Ronald Reagan]], who had skin cancer removal from his nose in 1985 and 1987, was also of high importance.<ref>Ungar (2000) compares the similar important role of [[Rock Hudson]] and [[Magic Johnson]] for the public perception of AIDS.</ref> In case of the public opinion on climate change, no imminent danger is perceived.<ref name = Ungar/>

== Cost-benefit assessments and industry policy ==
{{main|Economics of global warming}}

[[Cass Sunstein]] and others have compared the differing approach of the United States to the Montreal Protocol, which it accepted, and the Kyoto Protocol, which it rejected. Sunstein assumes that the [[Cost–benefit analysis|cost-benefit assessments]] of climate change action for the US were instrumental in the US' withdrawal from participation in Kyoto.<ref name=cass>[http://law.vanderbilt.edu/files/archive/Sunstein-2008.pdf Of Montreal and Kyoto: A Tale of Two Protocols] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140826120056/http://law.vanderbilt.edu/files/archive/Sunstein-2008.pdf |date=2014-08-26 }} by Cass R. Sunstein 38 ELR 10566 8/2008</ref> [[Daniel Magraw]], also a lawyer, considers governmental motivations besides relative costs and benefits as being of higher importance.<ref name=cass/>  [[Peter Orszag]] and [[Terry Dinan]] took an insurance perspective and assume that an assessment which predicted dire consequences of climate change would be more of a motivation for the US to change its stance on global warming and adopting regulation measurements.<ref name=cass/>

The US chemical company [[DuPont]] had already lost some of their zeal in defending their products after a strategic manufacturing patent for [[Freon]] was [[Chlorofluorocarbon#Regulation and DuPont|set to expire in 1979]]. A citizen boycott of spray cans gained importance in parallel. Not by chance, the United States banned the use of CFCs in aerosol cans in 1978.<ref name="Morrisette1989">{{cite journal|title=The Evolution of Policy Responses to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion|journal=Natural Resources Journal|year=1989|first=Peter M.|last=Morrisette|volume=29|pages=793–820|url=http://www.ciesin.org/docs/003-006/003-006.html|access-date=2010-04-20 }}</ref>

Government and industry in France and the UK tried to defend their CFC-producing industries even after the Montreal Protocol had been signed.<ref name="ReferenceA" /> The European Community rejected proposals to ban CFCs in aerosol sprays for a long time. The EU shifted its position after Germany, which also has a large chemical industry, gave up its defence of the CFC industry<ref name = RG/> and started supporting moves towards regulation. After regulation was more and more enforced, DuPont acted faster than their European counterparts as they may have feared court action related to increased skin cancer, especially as the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency|EPA]] had published a study in 1986 claiming that an additional 40&nbsp;million cases and 800,000 cancer deaths were to be expected in the US in the next 88 years.<ref name="Shabecoff, Philip A1"/> The identification and marketing of a 100% ozone-safe hydrocarbon refrigerant called "Greenfreeze" by the NGO Greenpeace in the early 1990s had a rapid significant impact in major markets of Europe and Asia.<ref>Stafford, et al., 2002, "Forces Driving Environmental Innovation....", http://www.greenpeace.org/greece/Global/greece/report/2011/greenfreeze/6_Greenfreeze_story_2004_en.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161010215153/http://www.greenpeace.org/greece/Global/greece/report/2011/greenfreeze/6_Greenfreeze_story_2004_en.pdf |date=2016-10-10 }}</ref><ref>Greenpeace, "[http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/greenfreeze.htm GREENFREEZE: A REVOLUTION INDOMESTIC REFRIGERATION],"</ref> The climate change protocols were less successful. In the case of Kyoto, then secretary of the environment [[Angela Merkel]], prevented a possible failure by suggesting to use 1990 as starting date for emission reduction. In so far the demise of the Eastern European heavy industry allowed for a high commitment, but actual emissions kept on growing on a global scale.<ref>Andrew Purvis, [http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1663317_1663319_1669897,00.html "Leaders & Visionaries: Angela Merkel"], ''[[Time magazine|Time]]'', Oct. 17, 2007</ref>

== Science background ==
{{main|Ozone depletion|climate change}}There are various links between the two fields of human-atmospheric interaction. Policy experts have advocated for a closer linking of ozone protection and climate protection efforts.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Molina |first1=M. |author-link1=Mario Molina |last2=Zaelke |first2=D. |last3=Sarma |first3=K. M. |last4=Andersen |first4=S. O. |last5=Ramanathan |first5=V. |last6=Kaniaru |first6=D. |year=2009 |title=Reducing abrupt climate change risk using the Montreal Protocol and other regulatory actions to complement cuts in CO2 emissions |url=http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/10/19/0902568106.full.pdf |journal=[[Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences]] |volume=106 |issue=49 |pages=20616–20621 |bibcode=2009PNAS..10620616M |doi=10.1073/pnas.0902568106 |pmc=2791591 |pmid=19822751 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Norman CS, DeCanio SJ, Fan L |year=2008 |title=The Montreal Protocol at 20: Ongoing opportunities for integration with climate protection |journal=Global Environmental Change |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=330–340 |bibcode=2008GEC....18..330N |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.03.003}}</ref>

Ozone is a greenhouse gas,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Is ozone a greenhouse gas? |url=https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=84&t=11 |access-date=2021-10-07 |website=www.eia.gov}}</ref> and changes in its atmospheric abundance due to human activity have [[radiative forcing]] effects. Ozone absorbs both [[ultraviolet]] (UV) radiation from the sun and [[infrared]] radiation emitted from Earth's surface.<ref name=":0" /> Human activity has depleted ozone in the [[Stratosphere|stratopshere]] and increased its abundance in the [[troposphere]], producing opposing radiative forcing effects.<ref name=":0" /> Estimates of the magnitudes of these effects have considerable uncertainty. The majority of models evaluate the overal radiative forcing impact of anthropogenic changes in ozone to be a moderate warming effect.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last1=Skeie |first1=Ragnhild Bieltvedt |last2=Myhre |first2=Gunnar |last3=Hodnebrog |first3=Øivind |last4=Cameron-Smith |first4=Philip J. |last5=Deushi |first5=Makoto |last6=Hegglin |first6=Michaela I. |last7=Horowitz |first7=Larry W. |last8=Kramer |first8=Ryan J. |last9=Michou |first9=Martine |last10=Mills |first10=Michael J. |last11=Olivié |first11=Dirk J. L. |last12=Connor |first12=Fiona M. O’ |last13=Paynter |first13=David |last14=Samset |first14=Bjørn H. |last15=Sellar |first15=Alistair |date=2020-08-17 |title=Historical total ozone radiative forcing derived from CMIP6 simulations |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-020-00131-0 |journal=npj Climate and Atmospheric Science |language=en |volume=3 |issue=1 |page=32 |doi=10.1038/s41612-020-00131-0 |bibcode=2020npCAS...3...32S |issn=2397-3722|doi-access=free }}</ref> Such estimation is difficult for multiple reasons, including that, unlike most other greenhouse gases, ozone is not a well-mixed gas in the atmopshere, so modelling must take into account its spatial distribution.<ref name=":1" /> Additionally knowledge of the [[Pre-industrial society|pre-industrial]] levels of ozone in the atmopshere is incomplete.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Stevenson |first1=D. S. |last2=Young |first2=P. J. |last3=Naik |first3=V. |last4=Lamarque |first4=J.-F. |last5=Shindell |first5=D. T. |last6=Voulgarakis |first6=A. |last7=Skeie |first7=R. B. |last8=Dalsoren |first8=S. B. |last9=Myhre |first9=G. |last10=Berntsen |first10=T. K. |last11=Folberth |first11=G. A. |last12=Rumbold |first12=S. T. |last13=Collins |first13=W. J. |last14=MacKenzie |first14=I. A. |last15=Doherty |first15=R. M. |date=2013-03-15 |title=Tropospheric ozone changes, radiative forcing and attribution to emissions in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) |url=https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/13/3063/2013/ |journal=Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |language=English |volume=13 |issue=6 |pages=3063–3085 |doi=10.5194/acp-13-3063-2013 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2013ACP....13.3063S |issn=1680-7316|hdl=2060/20140011862 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

Many [[Ozone depletion|ozone-depleting substances]] are also greenhouse gases, some are thousands of times more powerful than carbon dioxide on a per-molecule basis over the short and medium term.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Estrada, Francisco |display-authors=etal |year=2013 |title=Statistically derived contributions of diverse human influences to twentieth-century temperature changes |journal=Nature Geoscience |volume=6 |issue=12 |pages=1050&ndash;55 |bibcode=2013NatGe...6.1050E |doi=10.1038/ngeo1999 |s2cid=130224979 |hdl-access=free |hdl=2144/27169}}</ref> The increases in concentrations of these chemicals have produced 0.34&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.03&nbsp;W/m<sup>2</sup> of radiative forcing, corresponding to about 14% of the total radiative forcing from increases in the concentrations of well-mixed greenhouse gases.<ref name="spm_ozone" /> Because of their ozone depleting effects, production of CFCs and many other related substances have been banned globally by the 1987 [[Montreal Protocol]] and its subsequent revisions. By one model-based estimate, had these continued to be produced unabated global temperatures in 2100 would be 2.5&nbsp;°C greater than they would otherwise have been; 1.7&nbsp;°C from the direct greenhouse effect of the additional CFCs, and 0.8&nbsp;°C from increased CO<sub>2</sub> due to UV vegetation damage.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Scientists reveal how landmark CFC ban gave planet fighting chance against global warming |url=https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/social-futures/news/scientists-reveal-how-landmark-cfc-ban-gave-planet-fighting-chance-against-global-warming-1#:~:text=Ozone%20depleting%20substances,%20such%20as,1.7%C2%B0C%20global%20warming. |access-date=2024-08-21 |website=Lancaster University |language=en}}</ref>[[Image:Radiative-forcings.svg|thumb|300px|[[Radiative forcing]] from various greenhouse gases and other sources.]]

[[Drew Shindell]] has used climate models to assess both climate change and ozone depletion. In his view, while research up to now has been more about the impact of CFC emissions on stratospheric ozone, the future will be more about the interaction between climate change and ozone feedback.<ref name =shin/>   Already the natural ozone variability in the stratosphere seems to be closely correlated with the 11-year solar cycle of irradiance changes and has, via a dynamic coupling between the stratosphere and troposphere, a significant impact on climate.<ref name =shin>Solar Cycle Variability, Ozone, and Climate, Drew Shindell et al., Solar Cycle Variability, Ozone, and Climate (Science, vol. 284. no. 5412, pp. 305 - 308, 9 April 1999)</ref> Ozone acts like a shield in the stratosphere, and protects life from extremely harmful ultraviolet radiation that comes from the sun. In the absence of stratospheric ozone, life forms would simply not exist.<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11157-010-9226-3 | doi=10.1007/s11157-010-9226-3 | title=Antarctic terrestrial ecosystem and role of pigments in enhanced UV-B radiations | year=2011 | last1=Singh | first1=Jaswant | last2=Dubey | first2=Anand K. | last3=Singh | first3=Rudra P. | journal=Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology | volume=10 | issue=1 | pages=63–77 | bibcode=2011RESBT..10...63S | s2cid=85222110 }}</ref>[[File:Sources stratospheric chlorine.png|thumb|Sources of Stratospheric Chlorine|240px]]As with carbon dioxide and methane, there are some natural sources of tropospheric chlorine, such as [[sea spray]]. Chlorine from [[salt spray|ocean spray]] is soluble and thus is washed by rainfall before it reaches the stratosphere. It is ''stratospheric'' chlorine that affects ozone depletion. Only [[methyl chloride]], which is one of the [[halocarbon]]s, has a mainly natural source,<ref>{{Cite journal 
| last1 = Yokouchi | first1 = Y. 
| last2 = Noijiri | first2 = Y. 
| last3 = Barrie | first3 = L. A. 
| last4 = Toom-Sauntry | first4 = D. 
| last5 = Machida | first5 = T. 
| last6 = Inuzuka | first6 = Y. 
| last7 = Akimoto | first7 = H. 
| last8 = Li | first8 = H. -J. 
| last9 = Fujinuma | first9 = Y. 
| last10 = Aoki | first10 = S. 
| title = A strong source of methyl chloride to the atmosphere from tropical coastal land 
| journal = Nature 
| volume = 403 
| issue = 6767 
| pages = 295–298 
| doi = 10.1038/35002049 
| year = 2000 
| pmid = 10659845 
| bibcode = 2000Natur.403..295Y 
| s2cid = 4318352 
}}</ref> and it is responsible for about 20% of the chlorine in the stratosphere; the remaining 80% comes from man-made sources.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The Ozone Hole and Global Warming {{!}} Union of Concerned Scientists|url=https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/ozone-hole-and-global-warming|access-date=2020-06-19|website=www.ucsusa.org|language=en}}</ref> Chlorofluorocarbons, in contrast, are insoluble and long-lived, allowing them to reach the stratosphere. In the lower atmosphere, there is much more chlorine from CFCs and related [[haloalkane]]s than there is in hydrogen chloride from salt spray, and in the stratosphere halocarbons are dominant.<ref>[http://www.faqs.org/faqs/ozone-depletion/stratcl ozone-depletion FAQ, Part II], section 4.3</ref>

The same {{chem|CO|2}} radiative forcing that produces global warming is expected to cool the stratosphere.<ref name="ipcc2007">{{cite web | url=http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter9.pdf | title=Understanding and Attributing Climate Change | work=Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | access-date=2008-02-01 | publisher=[[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] | last=Hegerl | first=Gabriele C. | page=675 | display-authors=etal | archive-date=2018-05-08 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180508152907/http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter9.pdf | url-status=dead }}</ref> This cooling, in turn, is expected to produce a relative ''increase'' in ozone ({{chem|O|3}}) depletion in the polar area and in the frequency of ozone holes.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100116051422/http://earthwatch.unep.net/emergingissues/atmosphere/ozonedepletion.php Ozone depletion]. UNEP/DEWA/Earthwatch</ref> Conversely, ozone depletion represents a radiative forcing of the climate system<ref name="wg1_223">{{cite book |chapter-url=http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/223.htm |title=Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis |chapter=6.4 Stratospheric Ozone |year=2001 |work=[[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] Work Group I |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160603033740/http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/223.htm |archive-date=2016-06-03 }}</ref> of about −0.15&nbsp;± 0.10 [[watt]]s per square metre (W/m<sup>2</sup>).<ref name="spm_ozone">{{cite journal |title=IPCC/TEAP Special Report on Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons |publisher= [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] and Technology and Economic Assessment Panel |year=2005 |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/sroc_full-1.pdf |access-date=2007-03-04 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070221055911/http://www.ipcc.ch/press/SPM.pdf |archive-date = February 21, 2007}}</ref>

==See also==
*[[Climate change in the Arctic]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|30em}}

== Further reading ==
*{{cite book |first1=Richard Elliot |last1=Benedick |author2=World Wildlife Fund (U.S.) |author3=Institute for the Study of Diplomacy. Georgetown University |title=Ozone Diplomacy: New Directions in Safeguarding the Planet |edition=2nd |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4yM9uPRUvi4C |year=1998 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-65003-9}} (Ambassador Benedick was the Chief U.S. Negotiator at the meetings that resulted in the Montreal Protocol.)
* Chasek, Pam, [[David L. Downie]], and J.W. Brown (2013). ''Global Environmental Politics'', 6th Edition, Boulder: Westview Press.
* Andersen, Stephen O., K. Madhava Sarma and Kristen N. Taddonio. 2007., Technology Transfer for the Ozone Layer: Lessons for Climate Change, Earthscan Press, London.
*{{cite book |last1=Dotto |first1=Lydia |first2=Harold |last2=Schiff |title=The Ozone War |publisher=Doubleday |location=New York |year=1978 |isbn=978-0385129275 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/ozonewar00dott }}
*{{cite journal |first=David L. |last=Downie |title=Comparative Public Policy of Ozone Layer Protection |journal=Political Science |volume=45 |issue=2 |pages=186–197 |date=December 1993 |doi=10.1177/003231879304500203 |url=http://pnz.sagepub.com/content/45/2/186.extract |issn=0032-3187}}
*{{cite book |first=David L. |last=Downie |chapter=Ch. 16: The Vienna Convention Montreal Protocol, and Global Policy to Protect Stratospheric Ozone |editor-first=Philip |editor-last=Wexler |title=Chemicals, Environment, Health: A Global Management Perspective |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K1OaOl1I4XEC&pg=PA243 |year=2011 |publisher=CRC Press |isbn=978-1-4200-8469-6 |pages=243–260}}
* [[David L. Downie]] (2013) "Stratospheric Ozone Depletion". ''The Routledge Handbook of Global Environmental Politics''. New York: Routledge.
*{{cite book |first=Reiner |last=Grundmann |title=Transnational Environmental Policy: Reconstructing Ozone |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FYyVDlRhBvEC |year=2001 |publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=978-0-415-22423-9}}
*{{cite book |first=Alexander |last=Gillespie|title=Climate Change, Ozone Depletion And Air Pollution: Legal Commentaries Within The Context Of Science And Policy |publisher=BRILL|isbn=978-0-415-22423-9|year=2001}}
*{{cite book |last=Litfin |first=Karen |title=Ozone discourses: Science and politics in global environmental cooperation |publisher=[[Columbia University Press]] |location=New York |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-231-08137-5 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/ozonediscoursess0000litf }}

==External links==
*[http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/ozone-hole-and-gw-faq.html Is there a connection between the ozone hole and global warming?] [[Union of Concerned Scientists]] [[FAQ]]
* [http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/climate-change-and-stratospheric-ozone-depletion.-early-effects-on-our-health-in-europe WHOClimate change and stratospheric ozone depletion. Early effects on our health in Europe] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140928215331/http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/climate-change-and-stratospheric-ozone-depletion.-early-effects-on-our-health-in-europe |date=2014-09-28 }}
* [http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/managing-environmental-risks/ozone-depleting/ozone-climate.html Ozone depletion and climate change, Website of the Ministry for the Environment New Zealand] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150114154829/http://mfe.govt.nz/issues/managing-environmental-risks/ozone-depleting/ozone-climate.html |date=2015-01-14 }}
* [http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/ozone-depletion-and-global-warming/ Ozone depletion and global warming, realclimate Blog entry from Gavin Schmidt 2005]
* [http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch7s7-4-6.html IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis, Stratospheric Ozone and Climate] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181107061424/http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch7s7-4-6.html |date=2018-11-07 }}

{{Portal bar|Global warming|Environment|Ecology|World}}
{{human impact on the environment}}
{{Global warming|state=collapsed}}
{{Pollution}}
{{Natural resources}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Ozone depletion and global warming}}
[[Category:Ozone depletion|Climate change]]
[[Category:Climate change]]

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Template:Anthropogenic effects on the environment (edit)
Template:As of (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Blockquote (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Blockquote/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Catalog lookup link (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Chem (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Chem/atom (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Chem/link (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Cite book (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite news (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite web (view source) (protected)
Template:Climate change (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Comma separated entries (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Convert (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:DMCA (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (articles) (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:FULLROOTPAGENAME (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Global warming (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Hlist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Human impact on the environment (edit)
Template:ISBN (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Icon (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:If empty (view source) (protected)
Template:MONTHNAME (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:MONTHNUMBER (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main other (view source) (protected)
Template:Natural resources (edit)
Template:Navbox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Template:Pollution (edit)
Template:Portal-inline (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Portal bar (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Small (view source) (protected)
Template:Smaller (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Webarchive (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Yesno (view source) (protected)
Template:Yesno-no (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Yesno-yes (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:\ (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Catalog lookup link (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:Check isxn (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Convert (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Convert/data (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Convert/text (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Format link (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote list (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Icon (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Icon/data (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:If empty (view source) (protected)
Module:Labelled list hatnote (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbar (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbox (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox/configuration (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox with collapsible groups (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox with collapsible groups/configuration (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Module:Portal (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal-inline (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/images/c (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/images/e (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/images/g (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/images/w (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal bar (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal bar/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Separated entries (view source) (protected)
Module:Su (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:TableTools (view source) (protected)
Module:Webarchive (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Webarchive/data (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Ozone depletion and climate change.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion_and_climate_change"