Of course he did it with his own charm which I always like to see. And it is funny to see the "flat earth society" mantra being thrown at him. But he is an effective Congressman.
http://www.adn.com/news/environment/warming/story/7748402p-7659322c.html
WASHINGTON -- Climatologists around the world may agree that burning fossil fuels is a significant contributor to global warming, but U.S. Rep. Don Young isn't buying it.
"I am a little bit concerned when everything that is wrong is our fault, that the human factor creates all the damages on this globe," the Alaska Republican said during a debate on the U.S. House floor Thursday. "That is pure nonsense."
U.S. Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., suggested Young sounded like one of the "charter members of the Flat Earth Society."
Well to the "Flat Earth Society," here is one for the books.
The headlines from Japan where the Kyoto Treaty was thought up............
Report: Ozone Hole May Disappear by 2050
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060520/ap_on_sc/japan_ozone_hole
TOKYO - The ozone hole over the Antarctic is likely to begin contracting in the future and may disappear by 2050 because of a reduction in the release of chlorofluorocarbons and other ozone-depleting gases, according to a team of Japanese scientists.
The findings are based on a series of numerical simulations carried out by Eiji Akiyoshi of the National Institute for Environmental Studies, near Tokyo, using projected emissions of chlorofluorocarbons and other gases blamed for the ozone hole.
According to a report posted Friday on the institute's Web site, the hole is at its largest now but is likely to gradually start contracting around 2020 and disappear by around 2050.
The team's findings are in line with research by other scientists.
Some, however, have suggested the hole won't heal until much later because old refrigerators and air-conditioning systems — many in the United States and Canada — are still releasing ozone-killing chemicals. Both countries curbed those chemicals in newer products.
Satellites and ground stations have been monitoring the ozone hole over the South Pole since its discovery in the 1980s.
Chlorofluorocarbon levels in the earth's atmosphere have been declining since the mid-1990s due to international efforts to reduce emissions.
Is that so................
http://earthbulletin.amnh.org/D/3/3/index.html
Drew Shindell, an ozone specialist at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, notes that in the presence of volcanic aerosols, "one chlorine molecule can destroy 400 ozone molecules before it bumps into something else" -20 to 40 times more ozone molecules than would be destroyed in the absence of volcanic aerosols.
Volcanic aerosols also break down ozone in another way. The chemical reactions that destroy ozone speed up when particles like ice crystals are in the air, because the ice crystals provide a surface on which the reactions can occur. That is why an "ozone hole" appears over the Antarctic each winter. There are no more CFCs there than elsewhere, but there are more ice crystals: more tiny platforms on chemical reactions can take place. The aerosol particles created by volcanoes play a role similar to ice crystals. They provide ready surfaces for chemical reactions, in effect spreading the ozone hole over the entire globe.
What If A Volcano Bigger Than Pinatubo Occurred?
Pinatubo produced more aerosols in 1991 than did any volcano in the past 100 years. But it was far from the largest volcanic eruption ever. If an eruption ten or a hundred times more massive occurred tomorrow, the affect on global ozone could be disastrous. Past volcanoes of such size did not threaten the ozone layer because there were no manmade CFCs in the stratosphere. By the same token, until there are no more CFCs in the stratosphere, volcanic eruptions will continue to pose a threat to the ozone layer.
The good news is that CFC production is already being phased out. However, the CFCs released in past years will be around for some time. "Fifty years from now, there will still be as many CFCs up there as there were in 1980," Drew Shindell says. "It takes a really long time for them to come out of the atmosphere." The risk posed by the combination of volcanoes and CFCs will linger well into next century, until the CFCs are gone.
It is funny to read the contradiction from Drew Shindell. Even though he admits the destructive capabilities of volcanoes, he discounts the chlorine gases in the eruption by talking about the CFCs from human activity.
It is also funny to see a government agency like the EPA make assinine statements like this......
Myth: Volcanoes and the Oceans are Causing Ozone Depletion
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/science/volcano.html
Second, there is no historical record that shows significant increases in stratospheric chlorine following even the most major volcanic eruptions. Although El Chichon, in 1982, did increase concentrations of HCl in the stratosphere by 10%, that extra chlorine disappeared in about a year. When Mt. Pinatubo erupted in 1991, measurements found no increase in stratospheric chlorine. The dramatic increase in chlorine concentrations simply cannot be explained by a concurrent increase in volcanic activity.
What the EPA cannot say is how CFC's from human activity can reach the stratosphere to break down the ozone layer which is above the troposphere.
Moreover chlorine gas is heavier than oxygen and does not rise. So without a mechanical means, the chlorine gas cannot enter the stratosphere.
Thunderstorms have been suggested as a means to transport the CFCs, but the same scientist who suggest this, say the chlorine gases that naturally occur in volcanoes, get "rained out."
CFCs get "rained out" of thunderstorms.
And don't forget the ozone gases that are generated by the storm's lightning. It is mother nature's way of cleaning the gases. Chlorine and ozone elimnate each other.
Thunderstorms have little effect in a means to transport the CFCs.
Volcanic activity can transport the gases that destroy the ozone layer in the stratosphere and the TOMS pics prove this. The SO2 and sulfates that cause the HCI to be converted to chlorine monoxide show up on the TOMS. You won't see a thunderstorm showing up on the TOMS.
And once the gases are there, they stay for years and years.
There has been a ban on CFCs for years, but the EPA can't explain the increase in chlorine. And they admitted to the increase in chlorine in the stratosphere with the eruption of El Chichon in 1982.
This alone proves the naysayers wrong when they say HCI's get "rained out" of volcanoes.
The Atmospheric Impact of the 1991 Mount Pinatubo Eruption is here.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/self/index.html
From the words of one scientist.
D. J. Hofmann
Climate Monitoring & Diagnostics Laboratory
Boulder, Colorado USA
David.J.Hofmann@noaa.gov
Depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer, which protects the biosphere from harmful solar ultraviolet radiation, is known to be caused by certain chlorine- and bromine-bearing molecules which enter the stratosphere and undergo chemical transformation to reactive species that attack ozone. The most effective of these chemical processes are heterogeneous, i.e., require the presence of a surface to catalyze the reaction. Thus, the surface area presented by polar stratospheric cloud particles, which form under extremely cold conditions, is the main reason that ozone depletion is much worse in Antarctica. However, it has been shown that the heterogeneous chemical processes are also efficient on the surfaces of sulfuric acid aerosol droplets which exist under warmer temperatures in the global stratosphere. Under normal conditions the amount of sulfate aerosol in the stratosphere is very small. However, following a major explosive volcanic eruption, such as that of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991, sufficient sulfur dioxide is injected into the stratosphere, where it chemically converts to sulfuric acid vapor and condenses, to increase the mass of sulfate aerosol in the stratosphere by more than an order of magnitude. The ensuing increase in droplet surface area catalyzes additional ozone depletion by the pre-existing halogen gases. Regulations on emissions of certain gases have been effective and total equivalent chlorine (a quantity which takes into account the ozone depletion efficiency of all the chlorine- and bromine-bearing gases) reached a maximum at the surface about 1995. Although not as well measured, it is expected that it is also near a maximum in the stratosphere. Thus, the stratosphere is near its most vulnerable position in terms of chemical ozone-depletion potential. A major eruption during the next 15-20 years would result in global ozone reductions up to about 5% and bring the ozone depletion issue back into the spotlight.
What do the volcanologists say? Go here.
http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/gas.htm
Chlorine gas can negatively effect the earth's environment. Chlorine is emitted from volcanoes in the form of hydrochloric acid (HCl), which breaks down into chlorine and chlorine monoxide (ClO) molecules. The sulfate aerosols furnish sites for chemical reactions that release the chlorine atoms. These eruption-derived chlorine atoms are added to man-produced chlorine already present in the stratosphere. The reactive chlorine atoms then proceed to destroy ozone, with each chlorine atom being recycled many times.
Ozone loss by volcanic eruptions combined with CFC use by people creates a greater threat to ozone depletion; we can only attempt to control man's contributions. The ozone layer begins at 12 kilometers (7.2 miles) above the earth s surface in temperate latitudes. It is a shield that protects living beings from the most harmful of the Sun's ultraviolet radiation known as UV-B. In high doses, UV-B damages cellular DNA in animals and plants. A well developed ozone layer absorbs this radiation, and protects us from these harmful effects.
They do cite the CFCs but with the use in decline and we still seeing increases in chlorine in the stratosphere, the scientists in Japan and those who agree with them are today's members of the "Flat Earth Society".
Don Young is right and he should start to question the EPA on their comments on Mt. Pinatubo. The EPA comments on Mt. Pinatubo are nothing more than a lie.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment