The Ozone Threat: Managing with Uncertainty

The ozone layer serves as protection of the Earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. Over a span of decades it has been found out and continuously theorized that the said layer is thinning or depleting. This depletion is speculated by scientific experts to have negative effects to human beings and most importantly to the environment.

Studies have been done regarding the possible negative effects of the depletion of the ozone layer. First, it was said that a small 5% decrease in the ozone would probably produce thousands of new cases of skin cancer every year. Second, solar radiation can damage the planktons in the oceans which provide the world its oxygen supply. Apart from that, the existence of certain plant and animal species will be jeopardized. Lastly and probably the most alarming of all, the solar radiation can and will lead to climatic changes such as the melting of the polar ice caps which will then lead to a gradual rise of the sea levels and will eventually flood coastal areas around the world.

A major cause of the depletion of the ozone layer are from the chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) gases that are released from aerosol spray cans which rises up to the stratosphere. A major player in this problem is the Dupont Company from the United States which is said to be the largest producer of the gases that harm the stratosphere. Aside from producing one billion pounds of fluorocarbons, the company is constructing a new chlorofluorocarbon plant which will be the largest in the world.

Despite countless scientific experiments and researches regarding the ozone layer, a lot of people are still skeptical about the depletion and its effects. Most would say that the depletion is only but a myth or a theory with no real accurate results. DuPont’s move was to heckle the theory and refuse to believe that there is an actual negative effect created by the CFCs. The company lobbied for the prevention of the passage of a legislation that would ban CFCs which will eventually lead to the death of their business. The company claims injustice because banning of CFC’s can be implemented despite not having enough scientific evidences that the ozone is indeed diminishing. They claim that the scientific results generated are mere exaggerations.

In the year 1978, certain government agencies in the US placed a federal ban on all “nonessential” use of CFC’s. By 1979, some countries passed similar bans. Also in the same year, the National Academy of Sciences found out that the ozone layer was actually depleting at twice the rate and it was finally accepted as probable. Due to better technology and techniques it was estimated that the ozone will deplete to 16.5% over the next 30 years. The research also warned about increases of skin cancer, widespread destruction to food crops, ocean phytoplankton and other sea organisms. Despite the studies conducted, DuPont argued that no ozone depletion has been detected. They stated that CFCs were responsible for keeping food from rotting in 100 million American homes, transporting food unspoiled on refrigerated trucks and cars and selling fresh food in supermarkets, food stores and restaurants. The American society will not be able to feed itself if CFCs were to vanish or cease to be produced. Billions worth of equipment will be rendered useless and CFC dependent economies will be destroyed.

In 1980, several European nations together with Japan agreed to decrease CFC production. During Ronald Reagan’s presidency, US government efforts to control CFCs slowed to a halt, DuPont decided to suspend its research to find alternatives to CFCs. In March of 1982, the National Academy of Sciences, the same agency that released the previous research revised its estimates of the future ozone loss downward to between 5-9%, half of the levels predicted in their 1979 report. A fourth research further decreased the depletion to only 2-4% because of recent discoveries that reaction of methane and other gases will generate the ozone that would replace those destroyed by the CFCs. But, the new report issued another concern which is the growing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide and its impact on the atmosphere or what has been called the “greenhouse effect.”

In 1985, 21 nations including the US met and agreed to cooperate in atmospheric research and the monitoring of ozone levels. Eventually, no agreement on restricting the use of CFCs was reached because some nations refused to abide. In the same year, a scientist reported that a giant hole in the ozone layer over the Antarctic has been developing. It was shortly confirmed after satellite observations saw the presence of the said hole. It was the first clear direct evidence that the ozone layer was breaking down at a very high rate. Observations in October 1985 indicated a 50% loss of the ozone over the Arctic region. Though despite this finding, DuPont continued its expansion of CFC production in Japan. Apart from DuPont, Allied-Signal, the second largest producer was reported to be planning to increase their CFC sales.

In 1986, leaders of the CFC industry started to change their positions. The Alliance for Responsible CFC Policy supported “a reasonable global limit on the future rate of growth” of CFC production. DuPont also stated that its position was to “be prudent to take precautionary measures to limit CFC growth worldwide.” However, DuPont and other US producers lobbied against any federal legislation that would limit CFC production unless there were international agreements placing similar limits on producers outside the US.

In 1987, 64 nations met in Montreal, Canada to negotiate an international agreement on CFC production. 24 of the nations with the US among them agreed to freeze their CFC consumptions and cut their consumption by half by 1996. The problem was, less developed nations which accounts for 15% of the CFC global consumption refused the agreement because of the critical role that CFC plays in their economic development. Therefore, CFC producers argued that the Montreal agreement is catastrophic for their businesses. Despite the talks in Montreal, the industry remained opposed to the complete termination of CFCs. Pennwalt, the third largest US manufacturer of CFCs argued that ceasing production will create economic chaos for the consumers and without greater scientific justification it would be irresponsible to stop production. Allied-Signal suggested that annual production increases of 4-5% during the next 30-40 years would be tolerable and that ozone depletion should not cause concern, not at least for a hundred years.

Studies later on revealed that, if CFCs continues to grow at a rate of 2.5% a year, the number of skin cancer cases in the US would increase by 105 million. Early deaths will multiply by 2 million for people alive and born through 2075. DuPont again insisted that scientific evidences do not point to the need for dramatic CFC emission reductions. Suggestions for DuPont to cease production were unwarranted since there are no agreements within the scientific community of potential health effects of observed ozone change.

A report released by a panel of scientists in 1987 in the Ozone Trends Panel concluded that CFCs together with atmospheric climatic factors were responsible for ozone depletion. After further discussions, DuPont moved to phase out their production of CFCs. The total social costs was estimated to be $27 billion by 2075, but if companies failed to act, costs of cancer deaths, medical expenses, damages to crops, materials, the fishing industry and the effects of the rising sea levels would sum up to $6.5 trillion by 2075. If the ozone depletion was indeed proven to be true, it would have been cheaper for the companies not to mention more ethical if CFC production was halted. It would be very costly for the companies to stop producing their main product now but its future effects would be more fruitful saving them from paying trillions of dollars for damages.

In 1989, twelve European nations agreed to a complete ban of all CFCs by the year 2000. The Clean Air Act was also signed by President Bush in 1990 which puts a total end of the production of CFCs in the US by the year 2000.

Countless studies might reveal the extent of the damage done by CFCs to the ozone layer, a lot of people might continue to be skeptical about the actual depletion happening in the stratosphere. But, it is an undeniable fact that there is no way to predict how the world will change in a span of 50 years and the best thing that can be done is to be practical now. If CFCs does destroy the ozone layer, its effects and damages are irreversible.

RECOMMENDATION:

Since carbon footprint is a major contributor to greenhouse gases, a major factor of climate change, here are practical ways to help minimize carbon footprint: Reduce energy consumption through light. We can switch to LED (light-emitting diode) to lessen energy consumption. Use light colored paints and flooring to reflect light; clean dust from light fixtures so light will shine through; turn off background lights when reading or carrying out tasks that depend upon focused lighting and instead use a small focused lamp. Use compact fluorescent lights over incandescent light bulbs.

Choose white for your roof. By using white-colored roof and roof insulation lessens our energy use by preventing heat transmission. Surround your house with greens and birds. Plant trees around the house and have green walls with plants. Choose trees and plants endemic to your place. Avoid using pesticide. Put birdhouses or hollow logs to attract birds. Birds eat seeds, pests and insects that pollinate flowers and spread plant seeds.

Treat water as a finite resource. Make use of “gray water”. It’s reusing water from washing the dishes to wash your car and for cleaning. Collect and store rainwater. Cut shower time in half.

Don’t set the air-conditioner temperature too low. Set the thermostat to 24 degrees. The room should be sealed as possible to make the most of the energy. There shouldn’t be space under the door, between windows and around floor vents.