Re: Endless Oil?

From: Bill Ward (bwardREMOVE_at_ix.netcom.com)
Date: 09/29/04 

Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 02:40:06 GMT

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:20:51 -0500, "charliew2"
<charliew2@ev1.net> wrote:

>
>Harry Conover <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:7ce4e226.0409250627.4b37adb1@posting.google.com...
>> Thomas Lee Elifritz <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
>news:<4154CD54.923E1B27@everywhere.net>...
>> > September 24, 2004
>> >
>> > Harry Conover wrote:
>> >
>> > > Fred, I'm still trying to grasp how suffient quantities of a
>> > > relatively heavy molecule could diffuse into the upper atmosphere in
>> > > quantities sufficient to cause even measurable damage to the ozone,
>> > > let alone cause any damage of consequence. Recall, there is this
>> > > factor called gravity. Has anyone ever even bothered to document the
>> > > relative abundance of gasses that exist in the atmosphere at sea
>> > > level, 50,000-feet, 100,000-feet, etc.?
>> >
>> > Harry is one confused little puppy. Vermont is perfect for Harry.
>> >
>> > http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Education/Ozone/depletion.html
>> >
>> > Thomas Lee Elifritz
>> > http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
>>
>> Tom, I read your citation, but I don't see my requested measurements
>> in it. Do you?
>>
>> Once again, what is the ambient CFC density at sea-level, at
>> 50,000-feet, and at 100,000-feet?
>>
>> To that I'll add a second question. What is the critical concentration
>> required to have any significant effect at all on the ozone layer?
>>
>> Please, show me the numbers and less arm waving!
>>
>> Harry C.
>>
>> p.s. Nice photo on your home page, but be sure not to stay in that
>> ozone depleted solar radiation too long! :-)
>
>You guys are of course, talking about something that needs more debate:
>
>* has CFC caused ozone depletion only been demonstrated in the laboratory?
>* if the ozone hole only forms over Antartica in the winter and early
>spring, does it have any environmental impact?
>* do measurements exist to demonstrate that ozone is actually decreasing
>during times of the year that actually matter, or is the whole ozone hole
>debate based solely on theory?
>
>Note - this is not my attempt to discredit assumed problems with the ozone
>hole. I would like to know if enough followup scientific investigation has
>been done to verify and quantify the assumed seriousness of the problem. If
>followup investigations haven't been done, why not?
>

The decomposition rate of ozone is only half the equation.
The production rate is equally important

My understanding is that ozone (O3) is formed when short UV
hits O2 in the upper atmosphere. The UV is absorbed in the
process, thus reducing the amount reaching the surface.

One thing about photochemical reactions is that they stop
when the lights go out. During winter at the poles, it's
continuously dark - no UV, no O3 formation..

So why is anyone surprised when the [O3] drops during the
polar winter?

Can someone fill me in on the production rate and lifetime
of the O3 layer without Freon? If the O3 layer were
somehow completely removed, how long would it take to be
reformed by the solar UV?

Regards,

Bill Ward

 

 

Loading