Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: The Ozone Hole

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    68
    Post Likes

    The Ozone Hole

    I've been in this business a long time, and I’ve asked this question repeatedly since the 90's. I thought I’d ask it here. This is not a trick question, nor is it politically motivated. I'd simply like to find an honest, and accurate answer. I have opinion, but no real answer.

    Before the Montreal Protocol of 1987, Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), and Hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) refrigerants were widely used with very successful, and safe results, and the cost to produce and operate the equipment used by these inexpensive refrigerants was also very reasonable.

    Those refrigerants, and the equipment that used them, actually opened up areas of the world to habitation where climate was unacceptable for a majority of humans. As a matter of fact, those refrigerants were also so useful that they were often the propellent used in spray can products, used in the foam manufacturering process, and also used in a very wide variety of other applications including meat and produce preservation, on and on.

    Then, some scientists sounded an alarm, and announced to the world that there was this huge hole in the ozone layer over the South Pole in Antarctica. They offered science explaining how the chlorine in our CFC's and HCFC's were destroying the ozone layer. And why this was bad, and the consequences if we didn't immediately launch an effort to eliminate the use of these chemical substances.

    Shortly thereafter, World Representatives held the Montreal Meetings, and the world set out to eliminate those substances which, according to those scientists, were destroying the ozone. I have no argument with the chemical science that explains how ozone can be depleted in the atmosphere. I do question the validity of the argument that the US and other Countries in the Northern Hemisphere are responsible for an ozone hole over the Earth's Southern Pole.

    As we all know, the Earth rotates on it's tilted axis, and it travels around the Sun in a, more or less, circular orbit. Because of this unique rotation, we have unequal heating of the Earth's surface, which generates our seasons, and something we call the Coriolis Force, which affects everything from the water draining from your bath tub, to, most importantly for this discussion, the mixing of the Earth's atmosphere.

    Simply stated, because of the Corrilious Force, there is minimal mixing of the Atmosphere of the Northern Hemisphere with the Atmosphere of the Southern Hemisphere.

    Since their invention, the vast majority of those CFC and HCFC refrigerants were produced, utilized, and released into the heavily Industrialized Northern Hemisphere of the Earth ....... Not the Southern Hemisphere.

    How is it possible that the huge ozone hole those scientists discovered over the South Pole was caused by CFC's and HCFC's from the Northern Hemisphere?

    Explain please.......

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    77
    Post Likes
    Because the money says so.

  3. Likes ga-hvac-tech liked this post.
  4. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hibbing, MN
    Posts
    928
    Post Likes
    Another question... We know that CFC’s and HCFC’s settle to the floor because they are heavier than air. How, then, do they get up into the ozone? I also remember hearing that 1 volcanic eruption spews more chlorine atoms into the atmosphere than we could produce in refrigerant in 20 years. Why don’t they crack down on volcanoes?

    One word... Money
    If God didn't want us to eat animals... He wouldn't have made them out of MEAT.

  5. Likes ga-hvac-tech liked this post.
  6. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Oklahoma home its in the name
    Posts
    2,701
    Post Likes
    Also there is naturally a "hole" in the ozone over the poles because ozone is produced by UV and the poles don't get as much direct radiation.

    Sent from the Okie state usin Tapatalk

  7. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Oklahoma home its in the name
    Posts
    2,701
    Post Likes
    I keep wondering what is going to shut down hydrocarbon refrigerants. Or Maybe they will stay around because they force us to use oem parts.

    Sent from the Okie state usin Tapatalk

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Chariton, Iowa
    Posts
    592
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by GenesisRefrig View Post
    Another question... We know that CFC’s and HCFC’s settle to the floor because they are heavier than air. How, then, do they get up into the ozone? I also remember hearing that 1 volcanic eruption spews more chlorine atoms into the atmosphere than we could produce in refrigerant in 20 years. Why don’t they crack down on volcanoes?

    One word... Money


    Here's my issue with the "a natural process is already doing far worse than we ever can, so why bother" argument.

    Imagine one day a crack in the ground opens up in your neighborhood and starts seeping crude oil which then runs down the street and into the nearest storm drain. Would you then be like, "Well it's already there so why not dump my used engine oil in too."

    I certainly hope not.

  9. Likes Bombboy90, ksefan liked this post.
  10. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    26
    Post Likes
    Here is what the EPA says about it:

    1. CFCs and HCFCs are carried up into the stratosphere by air currents despite being heavier than air.

    2. A single chlorine atom can destroy up to 100,000 ozone molecules.

    3. Tests taken above erupting volcanoes indicate that they contribute small amounts of chlorine to the atmosphere compared to CFCs and HCFCs.

    4. The rise in chlorine in the atmosphere over the last 40 years matches the rise in fluorine, which has different natural sources [so the conclusion is that the additional chlorine and fluorine came from CFCs and HCFCs].

    5. The amount of chlorine in the stratosphere measured by NASA and other agencies over the last 20 years matches the rise of CFC and HCFC emissions over the same period.

    However, it is hard today to know where the truth really lies because we've all seen cases of data manipulation to further political and other agendas.

  11. Likes YOUNG FROSTY, ksefan liked this post.
  12. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Oklahoma home its in the name
    Posts
    2,701
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by bdserv View Post
    Here is what the EPA says about it:

    1. CFCs and HCFCs are carried up into the stratosphere by air currents despite being heavier than air.

    2. A single chlorine atom can destroy up to 100,000 ozone molecules.

    3. Tests taken above erupting volcanoes indicate that they contribute small amounts of chlorine to the atmosphere compared to CFCs and HCFCs.

    4. The rise in chlorine in the atmosphere over the last 40 years matches the rise in fluorine, which has different natural sources [so the conclusion is that the additional chlorine and fluorine came from CFCs and HCFCs].

    5. The amount of chlorine in the stratosphere measured by NASA and other agencies over the last 20 years matches the rise of CFC and HCFC emissions over the same period.

    However, it is hard today to know where the truth really lies because we've all seen cases of data manipulation to further political and other agendas.
    That is definitely the problem. If you look at both sides they both have logical arguments and neither one is partially compelling. I guess I am just not an atmospheric scientist.

    Sent from the Okie state usin Tapatalk

  13. Likes ksefan liked this post.
  14. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    9,768
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by R600a View Post
    That is definitely the problem. If you look at both sides they both have logical arguments and neither one is partially compelling. I guess I am just not an atmospheric scientist.

    Sent from the Okie state usin Tapatalk
    And that's the point. Why doesn't the OP ask a scientist.
    Unless the OP wants the dribble down answer...
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

  15. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    in a house, Appomattox, Va.
    Posts
    4,826
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by danielthechskid View Post
    Here's my issue with the "a natural process is already doing far worse than we ever can, so why bother" argument.

    Imagine one day a crack in the ground opens up in your neighborhood and starts seeping crude oil which then runs down the street and into the nearest storm drain. Would you then be like, "Well it's already there so why not dump my used engine oil in too."

    I certainly hope not.
    I've wondered that about la brea tar pits, that a natural disaster, but we don't clean that oil up, and it kills animals all the time.
    Col 3:23


    questions asked, answers received, ignorance abated

  16. Likes R600a liked this post.
  17. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    532
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by hvacker View Post
    And that's the point. Why doesn't the OP ask a scientist.
    Unless the OP wants the dribble down answer...
    I agree. The best way to argue this is to put up the original paper that discussed the ozone hole theory and then post scientific arguments why you think it is incorrect and supporting this with data where possible.

  18. Likes hvacker liked this post.
  19. #12
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    2,769
    Post Likes

  20. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    68
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Quote Originally Posted by hvacker View Post
    And that's the point. Why doesn't the OP ask a scientist.
    Unless the OP wants the dribble down answer...

    I am the OP, (original poster) of this thread. And yes, I have asked experts to please answer my question. As a matter of fact, my question is in front of, and still awaiting explanation, from a Colorado Atmospheric Research group right now. The question continues unanswered. The experts attempt to dazzle you with big words and technical jargon, but have a difficult time explaining away the Corrilious portion of the question.
    It's like talking to a flim flam service tech. You ask him a question about a smoking transformer, and he tries to dazzle you with his superior knowledge of net positive suction head.

  21. Likes Cagey57, ga-hvac-tech liked this post.
  22. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    46,089
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Artrose View Post
    I am the OP, (original poster) of this thread. And yes, I have asked experts to please answer my question. As a matter of fact, my question is in front of, and still awaiting explanation, from a Colorado Atmospheric Research group right now. The question continues unanswered. The experts attempt to dazzle you with big words and technical jargon, but have a difficult time explaining away the Corrilious portion of the question.
    It's like talking to a flim flam service tech. You ask him a question about a smoking transformer, and he tries to dazzle you with his superior knowledge of net positive suction head.
    And this is the reason I do not get into these discussions anymore...
    Because the 'green' crusaders cannot 'prove' their science... rather they try to beat folks over the head... that we should blindly believe scientists, because they are supposed to be 'smart'...
    Sounds to me like a scam... and there is more than enough proof it is a scam... if someone is not blinded with the 'green message'.

    Sorry guys... I know my comments are gonna start a flame war in this thread...
    Just the way things go...

    I probably will not be part of it... too many other things to do.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Your comfort, Your way, Everyday!

    GA's basic rules of home heating and AC upgrades:
    *Installation is more important than the brand of equipment
    *The duct system keeps the house comfortable; the equipment only heats and cools (and dehumidifies)
    *Cheap is not good, good is not cheap; however expensive is not a guarantee of quality!
    Choose your contractor wisely!

  23. Likes R600a, GenesisRefrig liked this post.
  24. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    9,768
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Artrose View Post
    I am the OP, (original poster) of this thread. And yes, I have asked experts to please answer my question. As a matter of fact, my question is in front of, and still awaiting explanation, from a Colorado Atmospheric Research group right now. The question continues unanswered. The experts attempt to dazzle you with big words and technical jargon, but have a difficult time explaining away the Corrilious portion of the question.
    It's like talking to a flim flam service tech. You ask him a question about a smoking transformer, and he tries to dazzle you with his superior knowledge of net positive suction head.

    Experts might seem to dazzle because that's how they relate to each other. If you have ever been in the company of people with higher education that's normal conversation. It comes with education. No difference from most any other discipline.
    You wouldn't expect a rocket scientist to reduce their study to ordinary language just so ordinary people could build a rocket.

    Another question might be why does the Colorado Atmospheric Research group owe you an explanation?
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

  25. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Northern NV
    Posts
    2,259
    Post Likes
    Cl and F are both highly reactive. In fact F is the more reactive of the two. Why is it that only Chlorine is the only demon in the atmosphere? CFC's replaced by HFC's....

    And remember that R12 was about 0.50 a pound and not really profitable. Now we have expensive refrigerants, all new refrigeration systems and H&A/C equipment. Things are once again profitable!!
    “A dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein

  26. #17
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    68
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Quote Originally Posted by hvacker View Post
    Experts might seem to dazzle because that's how they relate to each other. If you have ever been in the company of people with higher education that's normal conversation. It comes with education. No difference from most any other discipline.
    You wouldn't expect a rocket scientist to reduce their study to ordinary language just so ordinary people could build a rocket.

    Another question might be why does the Colorado Atmospheric Research group owe you an explanation?

    In our trade, we all learn, and speak a language unique to our trade. After we've been in the business for a while, most of us have the ability to razzle dazzle the customer pretty good.

    Of course, being the professionals that we are, we don't do that. We bring it down to the customers level. Why do so many of us think it's acceptable for a scientist, or any professional, to do the razzle dazzle? It's not acceptable.
    By the way, the Colorado group blew me off this afternoon. Apparently I'm diggin up bones again. I'll let it rest for a while, again.

  27. Likes R600a liked this post.
  28. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    9,768
    Post Likes
    I remember the Coriolis effect from college studying weather. It's more active toward the poles. The ozone layer starts at something like 9 miles and goes up quite a way. Maybe the difference in altitude at ground level is a factor. Just how and to what extent the Earth's rotation affects the upper atmosphere has probably been studied to death. Just storm prediction alone fills volumes.
    Science is the discovery of what doesn't work as well as what does.
    There's a Nova (PBS) that tells the story of how the hole came about.

    Freon was once thought to be near perfect. There were others but all had a flaw. Like too toxic or explosive. Alcohol has always been a favorite.
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

  29. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Oklahoma home its in the name
    Posts
    2,701
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by hvacker View Post
    I remember the Coriolis effect from college studying weather. It's more active toward the poles. The ozone layer starts at something like 9 miles and goes up quite a way. Maybe the difference in altitude at ground level is a factor. Just how and to what extent the Earth's rotation affects the upper atmosphere has probably been studied to death. Just storm prediction alone fills volumes.
    Science is the discovery of what doesn't work as well as what does.
    There's a Nova (PBS) that tells the story of how the hole came about.

    Freon was once thought to be near perfect. There were others but all had a flaw. Like too toxic or explosive. Alcohol has always been a favorite.
    Alcohol my favorite refrigerant to drink.

    Sent from the Okie state usin Tapatalk

  30. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    9,768
    Post Likes
    Imagine going into a bar and asking for a double R22 on the rocks.
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •