Remember me
▼ Content

Importance of ozone


Importance of ozone08-11-2015 02:52
Totototo
★☆☆☆☆
(117)
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/annual-antarctic-ozone-hole-larger-and-formed-later-in-2015

Can someone give me a detailed explanation of the role that ozone plays in the atmosphere? In which way does it contribute to Global Warming?
08-11-2015 03:56
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3689)
Totototo wrote:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/annual-antarctic-ozone-hole-larger-and-formed-later-in-2015

Can someone give me a detailed explanation of the role that ozone plays in the atmosphere? In which way does it contribute to Global Warming?

Atmospheric O3 (ozone) absorbs a lot of UV (including all the UV-C) and converts it to thermal energy.

There is no Global Warming to which it can contribute.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
08-11-2015 23:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
IBdaMann wrote:
Totototo wrote:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/annual-antarctic-ozone-hole-larger-and-formed-later-in-2015

Can someone give me a detailed explanation of the role that ozone plays in the atmosphere? In which way does it contribute to Global Warming?

Atmospheric O3 (ozone) absorbs a lot of UV (including all the UV-C) and converts it to thermal energy.

There is no Global Warming to which it can contribute.


Some of this energy goes into breaking up the ozone, and some goes into creating it, with a net gain in ozone during the day. The rest remains thermal energy.

No Global Warming. This activity in the ozone layer prevents energy from reaching the surface of the Earth, effectively cooling it from what it otherwise would've been.
09-11-2015 00:01
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Totototo wrote:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/annual-antarctic-ozone-hole-larger-and-formed-later-in-2015

Can someone give me a detailed explanation of the role that ozone plays in the atmosphere? In which way does it contribute to Global Warming?


Ozone forms when UV light from the sun strikes the oxygen in the upper atmosphere. The resulting O3 molecule is particularly effective at blocking further UV light from penetrating deeper into the atmosphere.

Ozone is an unstable substance and very reactive. To make it, all you really have to do is shove energy into oxygen. It really doesn't matter how. Once the energy source is removed, the ozone naturally decays on it's own over time, returning to oxygen.

The reason you get a hole at the poles is due to low energy available there, combined with the natural high pressure prevalent at the poles.

As long as you have sunlight and oxygen, you will have ozone. We do not have the power to destroy the ozone layer, even if we wanted to.
Edited on 09-11-2015 00:02
09-11-2015 04:49
Totototo
★☆☆☆☆
(117)
Thank you both for the answers.

This activity in the ozone layer prevents energy from reaching the surface of the Earth

I know the NASA report says otherwise, but wouldn't the hole over Antartida allow more heat to enter? I mean heat enough to melt? I'm sure there's something wrong with how I worded the question.

The reason you get a hole at the poles is due to low energy available there, combined with the natural high pressure prevalent at the poles.

As long as you have sunlight and oxygen, you will have ozone. We do not have the power to destroy the ozone layer, even if we wanted to.

Interesting. So ozone-depleting substances have no role at all in the depletion of the ozone layer? Please help me understand, because you're basically saying that the protocol banning CFCs and other chemicals (can't remember the name of the protocol) was for nothing. I'm confused.
09-11-2015 11:04
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p



Edited on 09-11-2015 11:04
09-11-2015 23:05
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Totototo wrote:
Thank you both for the answers.

This activity in the ozone layer prevents energy from reaching the surface of the Earth

I know the NASA report says otherwise, but wouldn't the hole over Antartida allow more heat to enter? I mean heat enough to melt? I'm sure there's something wrong with how I worded the question.

The reason you get a hole at the poles is due to low energy available there, combined with the natural high pressure prevalent at the poles.

As long as you have sunlight and oxygen, you will have ozone. We do not have the power to destroy the ozone layer, even if we wanted to.

Interesting. So ozone-depleting substances have no role at all in the depletion of the ozone layer? Please help me understand, because you're basically saying that the protocol banning CFCs and other chemicals (can't remember the name of the protocol) was for nothing. I'm confused.

Heat will not enter at the poles for the same reason there is little ozone. There is little energy there due to the bad angle of the sun. The amount of energy will not melt the ice, except in the usual summer pattern.

Ozone depleting substances cannot deplete ozone much faster than ozone already depletes, the catalytic nature of the reaction notwithstanding. The same UV sunlight that makes ozone breaks down the depleting substance with all the rest. This is for the amount of substance that actually gets up that high (they are heavier than air, and tend to stay lower in the atmosphere). Ozone layers are destroyed each night by natural decay. Not all layers are completely destroyed. They are recreated each day when the energy becomes available again.

The protocol was not for nothing, but what it did do is not about ozone. It's about patents running out on R-12 refrigerant. It's about DuPont manufacturing a scare and forcing everyone to a new refrigerant with a new patent. This stuff is cheap to make and was also used as a propellent for spray cans.

The ozone hole is closing slightly because it already was. From the little data we have on it, it seems to follow a sinusoidal period of about 90 years. We do not have a complete record of even a half cycle, but the plot does seem to have the shape of a sine wave. No mechanism has been found for this period as of today, if in fact it is a simple oscillator or something more complex.
Edited on 09-11-2015 23:13
09-11-2015 23:10
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Ceist wrote:
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p


Google may be your friend, but it is not God. Most of these articles are as wrong about ozone as similar articles are as wrong about global warming.

Buried in the Google search, though, is a link or two on how ozone is created in the atmosphere (or anywhere else). You should read these. You should also read up on the various ozone layers and how they are created and destroyed each day.
09-11-2015 23:24
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p


Google may be your friend, but it is not God. Most of these articles are as wrong about ozone as similar articles are as wrong about global warming.

Buried in the Google search, though, is a link or two on how ozone is created in the atmosphere (or anywhere else). You should read these. You should also read up on the various ozone layers and how they are created and destroyed each day.


It's not Google. It's an internal search of the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. Do you have a vision impairment as well as a learning impairment?



Edited on 09-11-2015 23:32
10-11-2015 18:26
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3689)
Ceist wrote:
It's not Google. It's an internal search of the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. Do you have a vision impairment as well as a learning impairment?

Let's see, Into the Night presents a process while you present a name.

Do you have any science that refutes the process presented by Into the Night. If you don't, then Into the Night answered the original question. The name "American Chemical Society" doesn't answer any questions, nor does it impress anyone, nor does it fool anyone into thinking you somehow speak for the American Chemical Society.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-11-2015 22:02
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p


Google may be your friend, but it is not God. Most of these articles are as wrong about ozone as similar articles are as wrong about global warming.

Buried in the Google search, though, is a link or two on how ozone is created in the atmosphere (or anywhere else). You should read these. You should also read up on the various ozone layers and how they are created and destroyed each day.


It's not Google. It's an internal search of the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. Do you have a vision impairment as well as a learning impairment?


...and how did you find these links, twit?
10-11-2015 22:26
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p


Google may be your friend, but it is not God. Most of these articles are as wrong about ozone as similar articles are as wrong about global warming.

Buried in the Google search, though, is a link or two on how ozone is created in the atmosphere (or anywhere else). You should read these. You should also read up on the various ozone layers and how they are created and destroyed each day.


It's not Google. It's an internal search of the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. Do you have a vision impairment as well as a learning impairment?


...and how did you find these links, twit?

You're calling ME a twit because you didn't even notice the url http://www.acs.org and thought the search string was a Google search string?

You Sky Dragon Slayers are a laugh a minute.



10-11-2015 23:04
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p


Google may be your friend, but it is not God. Most of these articles are as wrong about ozone as similar articles are as wrong about global warming.

Buried in the Google search, though, is a link or two on how ozone is created in the atmosphere (or anywhere else). You should read these. You should also read up on the various ozone layers and how they are created and destroyed each day.


It's not Google. It's an internal search of the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. Do you have a vision impairment as well as a learning impairment?


...and how did you find these links, twit?

You're calling ME a twit because you didn't even notice the url http://www.acs.org and thought the search string was a Google search string?

You Sky Dragon Slayers are a laugh a minute.

Yes. I am calling you a twit because you are focusing on the url rather than how you obtained the url.
11-11-2015 10:40
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
From the American Chemical Society

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/molecule-of-the-week/archive/o/molecule-of-the-week-ozone.html?_ga=1.185369377.904332583.1434535371

Do a search and you'll find a lot more articles on the ozone layer:

https://search.acs.org/search?q=ozone%20layer&client=acs_r2&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=acs_r2&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=acs&partialfields=&as_filetype=&as_ft=i&filter=p


Google may be your friend, but it is not God. Most of these articles are as wrong about ozone as similar articles are as wrong about global warming.

Buried in the Google search, though, is a link or two on how ozone is created in the atmosphere (or anywhere else). You should read these. You should also read up on the various ozone layers and how they are created and destroyed each day.


It's not Google. It's an internal search of the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. Do you have a vision impairment as well as a learning impairment?


...and how did you find these links, twit?

You're calling ME a twit because you didn't even notice the url http://www.acs.org and thought the search string was a Google search string?

You Sky Dragon Slayers are a laugh a minute.

Yes. I am calling you a twit because you are focusing on the url rather than how you obtained the url.
Okay, I'm calling you a complete and utter moronic idiot then.
The websites of science institutions like acs.org, aip.org, royalsociety.org, nasonline.org etc are very easy to type in the address bar or have in favorites, especially for those who are actually interested in science and visit them frequently. So I'm not surprised that you don't know them.
I bet you can find wattsupwiththat.com easily as it's probably on your favorites bar.

Great deflection away from having to provide any evidence from valid sources for your personal opinions and assertions though.



Edited on 11-11-2015 11:11
11-11-2015 21:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Ceist wrote:
[
Okay, I'm calling you a complete and utter moronic idiot then.

Nothing new to see here folks...move along.
Ceist wrote:
The websites of science institutions like acs.org, aip.org, royalsociety.org, nasonline.org etc are very easy to type in the address bar or have in favorites, especially for those who are actually interested in science and visit them frequently. So I'm not surprised that you don't know them.
I bet you can find wattsupwiththat.com easily as it's probably on your favorites bar.

I provided a mechanism. You provide links to irrelevancy. Well, if that's your cup of tea...
Ceist wrote:
Great deflection away from having to provide any evidence from valid sources for your personal opinions and assertions though.

Life is more than links, dude. I described a simplified chemistry of ozone and not even to you. You are the one jumping in and demanding stupid links. Maybe you ought to study the chemistry of ozone instead of googling and typing links you find everywhere without meaning.

I have not deflected or evaded anything. It is you that is inserting confusion here.
11-11-2015 22:37
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
[
Okay, I'm calling you a complete and utter moronic idiot then.

Nothing new to see here folks...move along.
Ceist wrote:
The websites of science institutions like acs.org, aip.org, royalsociety.org, nasonline.org etc are very easy to type in the address bar or have in favorites, especially for those who are actually interested in science and visit them frequently. So I'm not surprised that you don't know them.
I bet you can find wattsupwiththat.com easily as it's probably on your favorites bar.

I provided a mechanism. You provide links to irrelevancy. Well, if that's your cup of tea...
Ceist wrote:
Great deflection away from having to provide any evidence from valid sources for your personal opinions and assertions though.

Life is more than links, dude. I described a simplified chemistry of ozone and not even to you. You are the one jumping in and demanding stupid links. Maybe you ought to study the chemistry of ozone instead of googling and typing links you find everywhere without meaning.

I have not deflected or evaded anything. It is you that is inserting confusion here.


You're just talking non-science nonsense and pretending it's science. It's cute.
I'm just asking you for evidence to support your evidence-free pseudoscience views. I know you can't, because there isn't any.



Edited on 11-11-2015 22:38
12-11-2015 00:00
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7980)
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
[
Okay, I'm calling you a complete and utter moronic idiot then.

Nothing new to see here folks...move along.
Ceist wrote:
The websites of science institutions like acs.org, aip.org, royalsociety.org, nasonline.org etc are very easy to type in the address bar or have in favorites, especially for those who are actually interested in science and visit them frequently. So I'm not surprised that you don't know them.
I bet you can find wattsupwiththat.com easily as it's probably on your favorites bar.

I provided a mechanism. You provide links to irrelevancy. Well, if that's your cup of tea...
Ceist wrote:
Great deflection away from having to provide any evidence from valid sources for your personal opinions and assertions though.

Life is more than links, dude. I described a simplified chemistry of ozone and not even to you. You are the one jumping in and demanding stupid links. Maybe you ought to study the chemistry of ozone instead of googling and typing links you find everywhere without meaning.

I have not deflected or evaded anything. It is you that is inserting confusion here.


You're just talking non-science nonsense and pretending it's science. It's cute.
I'm just asking you for evidence to support your evidence-free pseudoscience views. I know you can't, because there isn't any.


Apparently you feel that there is some problem with my process. Describe it then. No links, you describe it yourself.
12-11-2015 01:46
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3689)
@ Into the Night, I realize you already know this but Ceist cannot discern religion from science and always confuses the two.

Ceist wrote:You're just talking non-science nonsense and pretending it's science. It's cute.


Translation of Ceist's comment: "You're just talking non-dogma science. I feel threatened."

Ceist wrote: I'm just asking you for evidence to support your evidence-free pseudoscience views. I know you can't, because there isn't any.


Translation of Ceist's comment: "I'm just asking for "supporting evidence" (the bread-n-butter of religion) to counter my science-free, unfalsifiable conjecture. I know you won't because that would amount to you accepting my shifting of the burden of proof onto you."


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist




Join the debate Importance of ozone:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
What would be temperature near surface if there is no ozone layer in stratosphere?207-01-2019 19:26
CO2 is causing ozone depletion, cause of climate change?1126-11-2018 22:53
equatorial Ozone depletion atmospheric sluff due to heating1514-05-2018 08:07
CO2, The Ozone Layer, The Chapman Cycle, The IPCC and NOAA2424-06-2017 22:37
CO2 and the Ozone Layer3123-06-2017 17:32
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact