Log In | Register
Ozone-Friendly Chemicals Lead to Warming
A section of the ice sheet covering much of Greenland is seen in this Aug. 17, 2005 file photo. Scientists say the ice is thinning and blame global warming, predicting a 3-foot rise in ocean levels by the end of the century through a combination of thermal expansion of the water and melting of polar ice. When more than two dozen nations decided to fix the ozone hole over Antarctica in 1989, they had little idea that their solution — replacing the CFCs with other chlorine-containing gases — would also be a big contributor to global warming. (AP Photo/John McConnico, File)
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (7)
A perfect example of the law of unintended consequences hard at work.
- 2 votes
#1 - Sun Aug 20, 2006 2:29 PM EDTSo now we need a technological fix to cover the last technological fix.
- 2 votes
Me thinks we'll be seeing a similar cause and effect for the GMO in the near future.
"The U.N. report says the atmosphere could be spared the equivalent of 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions if countries used ammonia, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide or other ozone-friendly chemicals, rather than HCFCs and HFCs, in foams and refrigerants. Such alternatives are more common in Europe."
Quick question...
Since when was Carbon Dioxide considered an ozone freindly chemical?
- 1 vote
#3 - Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:10 AM EDTVery interesting, bingojackson- do you have any links to this information?
- 1 vote
Although HCFC's and HFC's from refrigerants are to blame for the ozone hole, CO2 is responsible for global warming. So I can almost see how it can be called ozone friendly, however I fail to see how putting extra CO2 into the atmosphere from failed fridges and AC units, not to mention the extra costs in electricity to run them (any brownouts in your bit of air conditioned California recently?) is any better.
I suppose it depends on whether you want your kids to die from skin cancer, or rising sea levels coupled with disasterous weather conditions and a lack of food brought on by global warming turning productive farmland in the dustbowls of the depression again.
What we need to do is put less CO2 into the atmosphere, not more, and find a way to run all our HCFC and HFC reliant technology on something more benign and in a more energy efficient way. While we're at it we could try investing a bit more money in alternative energy to stave off those browouts in our increasingly technological, and energy hungry world.
Maybe we'll start getting somewhere then.
I'll post some links later.
- 2 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
