Posted on 08/30/2006 7:48:40 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Oh, puh-leeze...
You said:
"...you...ignore the chart which, not so "usefully," show CFCs in the ozone layer..."
But, actually, my second "useful point" was DERIVED from that chart, because that chart showed CFC concentrations fade to oblivion at an altitude far BELOW the region of the stratosphere where UV absorbtion actually takes place. That chart was "useful", because it proved my point: There are no CFCs at the altitudes where UV radiation is absorbed.
So I wonder... How did you miss that?
And you also missed the chance to remark that halogen "atoms" (if any are created in the "ozone layer") would NOT be "too heavy" to float up 20 km higher into the upper stratosphere to do their ozone-smashing.
No, instead, you chose to embellish your little exercise in selective misunderstanding by using terms like "creationist" and "tin-foil hat".
It seems more than "plausible" that you are a "sore-loser"...
But thanks for the articles, anyway.
I did it! I did it!
I switched from spray to roll-on deodorant.
Hmmm, you agree CFCs get into the stratosphere, are broken down there and that the liberated halogens catalyse the breakdown of ozone. Having "lost" I'll just slink away.
You said:
"Hmmm, you agree CFCs get into the stratosphere, are broken down there and that the liberated halogens catalyse the breakdown of ozone. Having "lost" I'll just slink away."
But an honest debater would have said:
"Hmmm, ALTHOUGH you NEVER DOUBTED that CFCs get into the LOWER stratosphere, MY ATTEMPT TO CONVINCE YOU THAT THE HEAT OF A CHEMICAL REACTION CAN OCCUR UP TO 20KM FROM THE SITE OF THE REACTION ITSELF WAS A FAILURE, SO, Having "lost" I'll just slink away."
There! Fixed it!
The only way to avoid it is to import more from 'clean' countries like China, India and Russia while cutting our own industrial production; and send huge numbers of dollars overseas to 'backward' countries while reducing our own standard of living to stone-age levels.
I didn't make that argument. In fact I suspect that halogen catalysed destruction of ozone by CFCs at (IIRC) ~3%/decade wouldn't generate a noticable amount of heat compared to that of the ozone-oxygen cycle. I don't know specifically, but I'd guess the UV/oxygen interaction of the latter creates hundreds of times as much heat as the former.
It's reasonable to ask how much heat is generated when CFCs are photolyzed.
Who knows?
The answer may "enlighten" this discussion...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.