'second hole' in ozone layer opens over the Arctic

[Scpg02.]

Hole in the sky: Europe, Canada and Russia at risk as continent-sized 'second hole' in ozone layer opens over the Arctic

By Rob Waugh

Last updated at 1:08 PM on 3rd October 2011

The ozone loss over the Arctic was so severe this year that for the first time a 'hole' in the ozone layer, similar to the one over the Antarctic, appeared.

At a level of around 13 miles above the ground, 80 per cent of the ozone was lost, potentially exposing people on Earth's surface to harmful ultraviolet-B rays from the sun, which can cause sunburn and skin cancer.

The loss happened not because of increased use of ozone-destroying chemicals - now banned, and rarely used - but because cold high-altitude weather made the existing chemicals 'more active'.

~snip~

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...rctic.html

[Richard111]

This is nothing but alarmist crap!

You need direct sunlight to make ozone. There is not much sun at the North Pole right now and getting less, winter is coming on.

Now make a simple diagram of a globe, mark the 13 mile high level, chose several "hole" sizes, like 70N or 60N and then check how much sunlight will hit anywhere on the earth in winter. ! ! ! !

Since when do people sunbathe in winter?

In summer the "ozone hole" is filled in again. It is a seasonal thing.

How about some data on ozone between latitudes 23.5N and 60N, anyone?

---

I get the Mail every day and paged through the whole weeks copies - they never bothered to print the article for the lay public.

[Sunsettommy]

Dobson Sites

Click on a RED ball

[Sunsettommy]

Quote:At a level of around 13 miles above the ground, 80 per cent of the ozone was lost, potentially exposing people on Earth's surface to harmful ultraviolet-B rays from the sun, which can cause sunburn and skin cancer.

There are very few people living in the Arctic.Who wear thick coats and be indoors often.

Quote:The loss happened not because of increased use of ozone-destroying chemicals - now banned, and rarely used - but because cold high-altitude weather made the existing chemicals 'more active'.

"Chemicals" that have always existed there.

Later in the article we get the real cause pointed out:

Quote:Dr Michelle Santee of Nasa's Jet Propulsion laboratory said, 'It was continuously cold from December to April, and that has never happened before in the Arctic.'

But the usual distortion statements are evident:

Quote:This year's loss was recorded in the initial analysis carried out by the World Meteorological Organization. It wrote: 'Depletion of the ozone... has reached an unprecedented level over the Arctic because of the continuing presence of ozone-depleting substances in the atmosphere and a very cold winter in the stratosphere.'

With a billion years of atmosphere data to draw from....
A million years?.....
A Thousand.....

Less than a hundred actually.

But when you want to bullshit your way with "unprecedented" and other misleading statements.For the purpose of advancing some cheap claims.

The really funny part is that they did not reveal how much chlorine was present above the "natural" chlorine level.

More misleading statements:

Quote:Levels of harmful UV-B rays rose, but were not sustained. It's still not clear what risks this new hole has posed or will pose to human health.

People in Alabama and other southern states will have more UV-B exposure than folks in the Arctic regions will.Even with that "hole" around.

Quote:While chlorine compounds such as CFCs have been phased out in most countries, they persist in the upper atmosphere for decades.

Chlorine has been around in the atmosphere for a very long time.

You are pathetic.

[Scpg02.]

Quote:and a very cold winter in the stratosphere.'

That is the real reason. It is getting colder.

[Richard111]

Thank you for the link to the Dobson Sites SST. I looked at the recent graphs for Barrow and Mauna Loa and they prove my point perfectly.
Take note of the TOTAL change in ozone levels between the two sites.

I made a simple drawing to show sunlight at the North Pole between summer and winter to explain what all this was about to my wife. Will try and scan it in tomorrow.

[Questioning_Climate]

So the cold causes the hole in the north but man causes it in the south. However, man is largely based in the north and the circulation tends to keep them separate. So how does that work?

Irrespective of my previous comments which are just a poke at the stupidity, it should be noted, as has been said already, that ozone is made by UV interaction with oxygen. As we know from the recent paper from the UK MetOffice UV levels have declined with solar activity and resulted in a cooling. Thus it may well not be the cooling causing reduction of ozone but simply lack of UV to create it in the first place.

GWPF article relating to MetOffice paper: http://www.tinyurl.com/685dcpz
NB: Presently pay-walled.

[Scpg02.]

(10-09-2011 02:38 PM)Questioning_Climate Wrote:  Thus it may well not be the cooling causing reduction of ozone but simply lack of UV to create it in the first place.

That would make sense.

[Richard111]

I've posted my personal ramblings on this subject over at Layman struggles.