I am having a hard time following the hole in the ozone layer stuff. I am trying to understand but things don't seem to add up for me.
For one, how do you make a hole in a gas?? Isn't that like Scooby-Do logic where the fog is so thick he cuts it with a butter knife??
Also, the hole is supposed to be over the north pole where there has never been any industry that I know of.
So first ozone is: "An unstable, poisonous allotrope of oxygen, O3, that is formed naturally in the ozone layer from atmospheric oxygen by electric discharge or exposure to ultraviolet radiation.". It's made every day.
Something I do understand is that ozone is a diamagnetic molecule. "Of or relating to a substance that generates a magnetic field in the direction opposite to an externally applied magnetic field and is therefore repelled by it." So if that being true, wouldn't that mean that ozone molecules would be pushed apart in a strong magnetic field? Making it appear to be thinner there? Like at the north pole?
The stuff that eats up the ozone layer are bromine or chlorine. " Bromine gas is heavier than air, so it would settle in low-lying areas." "Chlorine gas is a chemical compound consisting of one chlorine atom and two atoms of oxygen. It's poisonous, colorless, flammable, and heavier than air-which means it will sink to low areas in your home or business before spreading out." So if both are heavier than air, how are they getting 23,000 feet off the ground and into the ozone layer?
The more I look for answers the more I scratch my head.
@MalteseFalconPunch yeah I have to go through later on tonight and actually reread all of the comments. I got my boys today and so my attention is a little split at the moment. I'm glad most of the people actually saw that I was looking for answers and not trying to start a fight.
@MalteseFalconPunch Yes, it's converted to O2 in a catalytic cycle. The main catalyst is ClOOCl. It's a result of (a) anthropogenic release of CFCs and (b) the very special physical conditions within the polar vortex during winter.
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout its more likely the ditch on either side of the road for water run, not only holds water , but gets excess water from what's displaced by the road.
But you arent completely wrong about what's called 'carbon fertilisation'. And car exhausts do also release water vapour.
All you need to know about is how much CO2 we have in the atmosphere in parts per million and what that is going to mean for us.
When was the last time CO2 was 400 ppm? The last time global carbon dioxide levels were consistently at or above 400 parts per million (ppm) was around four million years ago during a geological period known as the Pliocene Era (between 5.3 million and 2.6 million years ago). The world was about 3℃ warmer and sea levels were higher than today.
We are on track to hit 500 PPM in 50 years, will get ugly then.
The wiki article about stratospheric ozone depletion might be helpful: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion You might need some basic knowledge of chemistry though.
I've got on more comment: polar ozone depletion is a stratospheric process, and is unrelated to the climate change you mentioned in the title of your post.
@helenS Thank you. I will look more closely into it.
SW-User
The ozone is made up of a lot of gasses? They can change, they might reflect what else is happening in their environment, are they are solids to you? Unmovable and unchangeable?
I don't have any memes🤷♀️ but this first link😱 (so much fun ,right?) explains the ozoone layer,the second Climate change.."I'm a doctor not a Scientist ,Jim!!!"🤦♂️
there is so much wrong in there i wouldnt know where to start correcting all of this. i suggest a chemistry 101 book and start from their from scratch... there are a ton of misconceptions you have
@SW-User Well thank you for that. Also thank you for not posting a 30 min or longer video. Not to sound ungrateful but it really didn't answer any of my questions.
Greta thurnberg reminds me of the Catholic child saint. The Catholic girl claimed to see the Virgin Mary in the sky and ended up getting a large following with ‘trust me, something is going to happen in the sky and it’ll be cataclysmic, you’ll have to follow the rules of my religion to save the day’. With approval from adult clergymen. Sounds similar to Thurnberg’s claims in many ways. Before Greta the activists used some other little girl claiming that we only had a few more years, over a decade ago. They keep changing the terms too to keep it relevant. It was global cooling, then global warming, then climate change. She started with ‘climate crisis’ and now it’s ‘climate catastrophe’. Wonder what the the term will be next but it’s clearly going to be a secular version of some sort of demonic invasion, as they are ruining out of scary names.oh wait they already have their demons, the ‘far right’ are the secular demons.
