The Ozone Hole is Shrinking: The CFC ban Has Nothing to do with the closing of the ozone hole

American Thinker ^ | 10/25/2019 | Michael Nollet

[Openurmind]

I had an operating repair shop and lived through that play by play and day by day. The one thing they stopped shy of and we were worried about, was to make it illegal to put 134a in the older systems if we like. I think the only reason they did not, especially in Ca, was because this just slipped their minds or they would have. Now days they would indeed do this in a similar situation.

[joe fonebone]

the ozone hole is like a chimney, allowing atmosphiric pollutants to excape into space..... it opens during large pollution cycles and closes during weak cycles..

[be-baw]

I assume you mean an auto repair shop..? If so, did you have to make any modifications to vehicles (like replacing gaskets, etc) to accommodate the restrictions, or was still being able to use 134a sufficient?

[dadfly]

bookmark

[Truthoverpower]

Being an engineer and doing a tremendous amount about the HVAC our industry I can tell you for a fact that this entire nonsense was a giant conspiracy to make money and to have to constantly change refrigerant and that is all it is ever been Freon was a perfectly good refrigerant R 12 was also a perfectly good refrigerant both of which could’ve continued to have been used perfectly fine but they made the entire industry switch to much more expensive stupid and ineffective refrigerant which also corroded the internal piping and caused much more maintenance headaches again this entire nonsense and Al Gore was a giant Dupitt in a part of it was a conspiracy to generate revenue for the HVAC industry

[Openurmind]

As soon as 134a came out we immediately started to experiment. We completely cleared an older system of the R12, we unhooked the lines and blew everything out very well to make sure we had as much oil out as possible and charged it with R134 and R134 oil. Works absolutely great in the older systems and we have been doing it since.

The only thing we ran into over time was the incompatibility of what O-Rings were present in the R12 systems. To prevent these from degrading and leaking over a period of time, we found that all we had to do was just replace all the O-Rings with urethane or silicon O-Rings while we had it apart to clean it out.

So all it costs is some time, labor and the price of a few new O-Rings and you are ready to recharge with 134 and 134 oil. :)

[9422WMR]

Well does this mean I can buy a Freon powered BB submachine Gun again?
Those were fun!!

[The Truth Will Make You Free]

I was involved in Earth Day #1 1970 and this was a big issue then. I always assumed banning CFCs was an environmental success story and evidence of man's ability to impact the global atmosphere. This would lead credence to manmade global warming as being possible.

The points I made were from the article. It hadn't occurred to me the article is wrong. I don't have time to research this, so I'm tabling it for now. My mistake -- accepting a single source article too quickly. You may be right, but there is another point of view.

[JohnBovenmyer]

The ‘problem’ of the ozone ‘hole’ isn’t that O3 is a directly good thing — up close and personal we call ozone ‘smog.’ It’s that ozone blocks some wavelengths of ultraviolet light that are potentially harmful. It doesn’t block the worst, shortest wavelengths, UV-C. O2 blocks all of those and no one claims we’re running out of O2. Rather O3 just reduces some of the middle, UV-B, wavelengths. It doesn’t block the longer wavelengths, UV-A, which reach the surface unblocked, are similar to most tanning beds, and arguably cause more skin cancer than UV-B.

The ozone 'hole' only is present during the antarctic winter, when and where dang little bare skin, human or otherwise, is being exposed to UV light. It's hiding from frostbite instead under parkas, fur or feathers. Simpler, skinless lifeforms, like plankton, evolved having melanin to protect themselves. The antarctic summer doesn't have an ozone hole. Nor does the arctic at any time of year. We actually have better long term data on the lack an an arctic ozone hole then on the antarctic one being a new, human caused, problem. Dermatologists have been measuring UV levels (not ozone directly, but the sole important consequence of ozone) in Canada and US since the early 60s and they've been stable. The measuring equipment changed along the way and the eco-chicken littles like to ignore the older northern data set, but the best data available is decent data and says no change for 50+ years. Before the first ozone measuring satellite launched on late 70s and discovered a hole there was virtually no southern data on ozone and UV levels. All they had was measurements from 1957-8, nothing else. The theory that CFCs might catalyze ozone depletion was posited in 1974. I learned of that in 1974 and was taught there was then just the one, twenty year old, data point. But the eco-chickens grew its importance beyond Moses' stone tablets. The hole could been there most winters before CFCs were invented; they can't disprove that.

Eco-chickens love to claim that the loss of the narrow, partial protection ozone provides threatens the existence of life on earth. They conveniently ignore that nature provides an excellent internal control on the consequences of no ozone. Very little ozone, year round, stays over equatorial latitudes. What forms there circulates away to the poles. There has been a year round ozone 'hole' over the tropics as long as we can say. Yet life seems to thrive there. As a Dermatologist for 30+ years, who's been following this issue for 40+ years, I've long been skeptical about it. Sadly some of my field's literature has bought into it. But to me, it's just an unproven, overhyped claim from the same bunch of socialists pushing "the climate is falling" hoaxs in attempt to gain themselves funding and power.