Ozone Layer Depletion Issues - Essay Example

APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT POLICY. OZONE LAYER DEPLETION BY: FATI ADAMS TABLE OF CONTENT 1. Introduction Ozone layer depletion The cause and effects of ozone layer depletion 2. Legislation and policies Montreal protocol Regulation EC 1005/2009 Regulation EC 2037/2000 3. Other countries efforts to curb the ozone layer depletion 4. Need for international response 5. Implementing the international response 6. Conclusion 7. References Introduction The interplay of several natural conditions reduce hazards caused by extra-terrestrial environment for the survival of living organisms in the planet earth. Most importantly are the layers that make up the earth’s atmosphere. Troposphere is the layer in contact with the earth and within which there is the occurrence of snow, rain, clouds and other weather elements. The temperatures and gases composition in this layer are balanced to sustain life. Above troposphere is the stratosphere. Forrest (1994) posits that without the stratosphere, we would not survive. The layer absorbs the hazardous Ultra Violet radiations emitted by the sun which would, otherwise, destroy the life of both animals and plants. The others include mesosphere, thermosphere and exosphere as shown in the diagram below. Figure 1: Layers of the atmosphere of the earth (NASA, 2013) Ozone is a gas that occurs naturally and which concentrates into a layer in the stratosphere to form the protective stratospheric ozone layer. Siva and Reddy (2011) describe the ozone layer as the sunscreen of the earth. The layer is made up of ozone, which has molecules with three oxygen atoms (O3). The layer is located between 19km -50 km above the surface of the earth, and absorbs almost 99% of the high frequency rays of the sun. The ozone layer’s thickness varies with geographical locations and seasons. Of notable concern is the fact that there have been signs of depletion of this sensitive protective shield called the ozone layer particularly the hole discovered in Antartic Peninsula towards the end of the 19th century. The depletion of the ozone layer causes problems wheredirect UV rays from the sun poses a health risk to human beings. Over the years, this has been an issue of serious concern among different nations. As such, various measures have been proposed that are meant to address the problem. This includes legislation being passed by different countries in order to help control the situation. This paper specifically looks at how the Montreal Protocol has been designed to address the problem. The paper will also discuss various measures that have also been taken by other countries to deal with the same problem. The paper starts by explaining the problems caused by ozone layer depletion and goes on to explain in detail the extent to which this problem can be solved. Ozone layer depletion The problem of ozone layer depletion was first noticed around 1978 and it has been significantly gaining attention by different countries. For instance, the ozone hole that became noticeable towards the end of the 19th century denotes a region in which the depletion of the ozone layer is quite severe such that it is below 200 Dobson units (Bakers, 2000; Monahan, 1991). However, the ozone holes despite their imminent danger, do not blur the massive and progressive losses of ozone at the Polar Regions and even low but significant ozone loss in the other parts of the globe (Hannigan and Coffey 2012; Manney and Larsen, 2011). Sava and Reddy (2011) discuss how the ozone hole cause stratospheric warming during spring. This ozone hole is over the Antartic Peninsula, and in 2011, the ozone layer was just 160Dobson units. The depletion by then exceeded 50% (Smith, previdi and Plovani, 2013; Persson and Dastidar, 2013). It is hoped that this problem might spread to other areas if left unchecked. As a matter of consequency, the temperatures of the Antarctica’s ozone layer have been rising, and stratospheric clouds now exist on a small area that remains cold enough (Hannigan and Coffey, 2012). This has given rise to debate about the need for international intervention to deal with the problem. Need for international response The continued depletion of the protective ozone layer is a global issue that a single country or even a group of countries cannot solve. The release of ozone depleting substances does not necessarily affect the atmosphere where it is produced. It is with this understanding that the international community came up with Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol (Munasingh and King, 1992). However, these interventions have been subject to ratification by individual countries. They also did not spell out what exactly an individual country would do to combat ozone depletion. Instead, it was up to the country to legislate its own regulations. That is why the US continues using ODS as propellant and china continued producing thousands of metric tonnes of CFCs till 2007. All these limitations underscore the need for a more international response to depletion of the ozone layer. Such an international response should address all aspect of ozone depletion. The response should apply to all countries. It should lay restrictions on production, distribution and consumption of ozone depleting elements by dictating the maximum amount that a country can produce. Individual countries should, therefore, ensure that production and use of ODS does not exceed the set limit. An international body should also be set up to monitor and ensure that all countries adhere to the international policy. Defiant should be face penalties such as trade injunction with the world. Legislation and policies The solution to the ozone layer depletion problem has been the touchstone of analysis of making environmental policies and global issues. The interplay among international negotiation, domestic regulation, scientific assessment and development technological innovation and different private and public interests is at the core of endeavours to fight the destruction of the ozone layer. Governmental, as well as intergovernmental scientific research bodies such as the NASA, have been a significant asset in the establishment of international policies regarding the ozone layer depletion and the causes as well providing relevant information to formulate legislation and policies (Crutzen and Oppenheimer, 2008). This will go a long way in attempting to curb this problem which poses a serious health hazard to human beings. The cause and effects of the ozone layer depletion Scientists and chemists discovered that the major cause of ozone depletion is Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and bromine that is also referred to as the Halocarbons (Haas, 1992; Polvani et al., 2012). These compounds interfere with the natural balance that exists between the production and destruction of ozone in the stratosphere. However, although natural phenomena may cause loss of thinning of the ozone layer, the CFCs and bromine catalyses destruction leading to less that required level of the ozone layer within a relatively shorter period (Dyominov and Zadorozhny, 2008). These destructive elements are released by human activities, and unlike other elements; they are not washed back to earth by the rains. The ODS do not easily break down in the troposphere and, therefore, they can be in the atmosphere for more than a century. The Ultra violet rays of the sun breaks down the CFCS releasing chlorine which subsequently, break ozone to oxygen molecule and oxygen atom; the atom combine with chlorine but is released to combine with another free oxygen atom and leaves chlorine free to break more ozone to oxygen. Sava and Reddy (2011) argue that a chlorine atom can repeat the process of breaking the ozone 100000 times. Over 80% of the stratospheric ozone layer depletion is attributed to CFCs. The increased penetration of UV radiations poses a danger on human eyes, causes skin cancer as well as infectious diseases. The radiations are known to cause damage to the eye cornea leading to blindness. They also destroy the immune system of the body making the body susceptible to infectious diseases (West and Munoz, 2006). The lack of or inadequacy of immunity exposes the skin especially those of races with light skin to infectious agents. The plants are also affected by the UV-B radiation which causes mutation to plants and, therefore, may lead to biodiversity changes in some ecosystems (Aggarawal et al., 2013). The rays also affect the plants’ metabolism, which impacts the competitive balance in the plants (Lidon, 2012). The Aquatic ecosystems are also affected by the ozone depletion. The UV rays hinder the reproduction and growth of phytoplankton which is the main food for sea animals (Neale Davis and Cullen, 1998). Studies have also revealed that the Ultra Violet-B has a damaging effect on the early development of shrimp, fish amphibian, crabs and other animals (Wilkinson et al., 2012). Elsewhere, the ultra violet radiations negatively affects the aquatic and terrestrial biogeochemical cycles and consequently, impact the greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide and carbon sulphide. It inhibits the natural process of plants leading to build up of greenhouse gases, alters production and decomposition of plants and increases the rate of degradation of organic matter dissolved in seas (Perin and lean, 2004). The UV rays affect air quality in the troposphere and materials. The radiations can destroy some compounds such as hydrogen peroxide, which would have adverse impacts on life. The rays degrade both the natural biopolymers and synthetic polymers reducing the lifetime of items made by such polymers (Sava and Reddy, 2011). Finally, the ozone layer depletion causes changes in climate. The ozone layer absorbs infrared emitted by the earth as well as ultra violet from the sun. These functions regulate the temperatures of the troposphere (Misra et al., 2012). Depletion of the ozone layer, therefore, means that temperature regulation function is lost, and high temperatures would have adverse effects on climate change (Akanle, 2010). Montreal protocol At international level, Montreal protocol has been a tool adopted as a treaty by numerous countries to counter the causes of ozone depletion. The protocol was established in 1987 with the mission of phasing out substances that are responsible for depletion of the ozone layer; these include ozone depleting substances such as those used in air conditioning equipment, refrigerators, solvents, fire fighting equipment and fumigants (Morriessette, 1987; Rowlands and Greene, 1995). The international community believes that if the treaty is adhered to, the recovery of the ozone layer will be achieved by the year 2050. Although this may be seen to be a long way in to the future, it is important to appreciate the fact it takes time for industries to change their operation and, therefore, face out ozone depleting substances. This protocol includes in its provisions adjustment that enables it to quickly respond to new discoveries related to the measures that can be taken to slow down the problem of ozone depletion. The adjustments also have been accelerating the rate of reduction of substances that are already listed in the protocol. It has been made as dynamic as possible to incorporate new scientific information by adjusting existing provisions or adding new provisions, attract countries from all over the world and is supported by all environmental organisations. The protocol has also undergone amendment a number of times. Amendments, unlike the adjustments, require ratification by parties to the protocol. Additionally, financial mechanisms have been put in place to enable developing nations comply with the requirements of the protocol. It is expected that countries that subscribe to the protocol should have legislations in line with the protocol. UK is one of the members of the protocol and consequently has legislations and policies in line with the provisions of the protocol. The protocol was reached after realising the seriousness of the problem if left unattended. Montreal Regulation EC2037/2000 Scott (1998) and Milmo (1998) report that in 1998 in order to implement and exceed the requirements of Montreal protocol, European Commission adopted proposals that would regulate the ozone layer depletion. This was meant to ensure that there is compliance among the member states to ensure that that the causes of ozone layer depletion are mitigated. The proposals were turned to EC regulation, initially 3093/94/EC and then regulation EC2037/2000. This legislation banned the supply of Halons, CFCs, hydrobromofluorocarbons, carbon tetrachloride and trichchloroethane as well as bromochloromethane. These bans apply on materials with both recycled and virgin substances (Dixon, 2012). The legislation also made more thorough revision to the HCFCs controls on the use. Additional controls were made. The major feature of the legislation was that, from 2001, no HCFCs would be used in making new equipment, with a few exceptions. Repairing HCFCs system would be limited to using recovered refrigerant from 2010 to 2014. The major end HCFCs users were subjected to tougher use controls. They are required by the legislation to recover ozone depleting elements from equipments and prevent any leakage from their systems (Dixon, 2012). The EC regulation banned, with the exception of essential cases, supplying of substances that deplete ozone in containers that are disposable. It also banned, immediately, importing of ozone depleting elements except for hydrofluorocarbons. HCFC control dates were set upon which ban would be introduced to the products and equipment that HCFCs cover. The ban extended to CFCs as well as halons and items made up of these substances. The legislations have ensured compliance to the Montreal protocol as they have operated towards eliminating the use of ODS. As a result in 2010, the UK which is a member of the European Union totally phased out its consumption of substances that deplete ozone layer. This was 10 year before its obligation as set by the Montreal protocol. It has also been proactive in banning the use of chemical such as methyl bromide in fumigations. The legislations have not only been successful in phasing out the ODS, but also has also driven to new technologies to replace the phased out products. Regulation EC 1005/2009 In 2009, the EU proposed regulations commonly known as EC 1005/2009 meant to ensure that the provisions of Montreal protocol are met. To achieve this, the legislation has laid down rules relating to production, export and import, use, placing on the market, recycling, recovery and reclamation as well as destruction of the ozone layer depleting substances. The implication of this regulation has been on new substances, controlled substances as well as equipment and products that have or rely on substances that deplete the ozone layer (The European parliament and the Council, 2009). The regulation EC1005/2009 prohibit producing ODS, use and marketing these substances and marketing of equipment and products that contain or rely on the controlled substances. The legislation also bans importing of ozone depleting substances or equipment and products that contain or rely on such substances. This extends to free circulation or release of the imported controlled substances in the community. Montreal protocol envisions phasing out ODS. In compliance to this, chapter four of the regulation EC 1005/2009 lays down the rules on recovery and destruction of used ODS. Efforts are expected to prevent or ensure minimum emission or leakage of substances that deplete the ozone layer from their industries or equipment such as refrigeration systems (The European parliament and the Council, 2009). All these prohibitions have been made to ensure that no chances are left to destruction of the ozone layer in the future. As a result of the regulations adopted, research by Naess (2004) reported that EU had been successful in phasing out over 90% of its ozone depleting substances. This is expected to be enhanced by the recent regulation of 2009. Implementing the international response The provisions of Montreal protocol are essential guidelines that will ultimately phase out substances that deplete ozone layer. Any efforts, at the international levels, to combat ozone layer depletion should focus on strengthening the provisions of the Montreal and other existing protocols instead of creating new treaties. Contributing to the on-going efforts will result in synergy that will enable full recovery of the ozone layer. Just like the previous international policies, much of the implementation should be at the individual country level. The international community will formulate the general policy, establish the global needs and bind all countries. It should also oversee the legislation and projects that individual countries put in place to address the ozone layer depletion problem. Major governmental and intergovernmental bodies of research and science such as NASA will help in evaluating the success of the international policy. Individual countries will be expected to come up with legislation that clearly outline the steps to be taken to address its production and consumption of ODS. Such legislation will be scrutinized by the international community responsible for global ozone layer policy implementation. Other countries’ efforts to curb the ozone layer depletion Before the ozone hole was discovered, many states in the US banned the use chlorofluorocarbons, especially in spray cans. Federal legislation banning the use CFCs in US was passed in 1978. Consequently, producing as well as consumption of CFCs reduced drastically in US. However, CFCs continued being used in other areas such as propelling. This increased in 1980’s because of increasing space crafts and aircrafts being propelled. Unlike the US, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Canada banned or restricted using chlorofluorocarbons as propellant. In addition to the Montreal Protocol, Russia has also been a big player in the projects of combating ozone depletion. It has conducted several researches, which are meant to reduce depletion of the ozone layer. In 1990, Russia approached the ozone problem by controlling production and consumption of ODS with the objective of first reducing and then phasing the substances out by the year 2000 (Kotov and Nikitina, 2005). In 1996, Russia stopped completely both production and consumption refrigeration elements that contained Chlorofluorocarbon. It also banned them from trade in these substances. Currently, Russia has been working on a national programme of producing ozone benign substances for refrigeration. The programme also envisages progression of research of the ozone layer and ways of the ozone layer interaction with human and the biosphere. Russia intends to convert the country to ozone benign technology by collecting and recycling ODS. India has also been committing efforts to reduce depletion of the ozone layer. The country has been seeking technology and funds to phase out HCFCs (Sims, 2006). The country has been successful in phasing out ODS such as CFCs in 2008 which was before the time scheduled by the Montreal Protocol. Its focus now remains HCFCs which are not only ozone depleting agents but greenhouse elements. China has also been making huge strides and even sacrificing its huge projects to combat the problem. In 2007, the country closed 5 of its six plants that produce both chlorofluorocarbons and halons (ASHRAE, 2007). This was done as part of the country’s plan to reduce CFCs. Consequently, the production of CFCs reduced from 55000 metric tonnes to 550 metric tonnes. Almost all other countries, especially in the developed countries, which are the major ODS producers, have frameworks that are intended to reduce the ODS. Like the EU, most of the policies and legislation are in line with Vienna convention and Montreal Protocol. Conclusion In conclusion, it is vital to recap that the ozone layer is vital human life and its protection means protecting life. The problem of ozone depletion is a global problem, and solving the problem is the responsibility of the entire world. EU and other countries in the world have been putting in place legislation and policies that lower production and consumption of ODS. International responses such as Vienna convention and Montreal Protocol have achieved success in countries that ratify them. New international responses should focus on contributing to existing efforts to better achieve success in ozone depletion prevention. The intervention should apply to all countries of the world since the problem is a global one. Despite the hurdles that might be experienced –implementation of such a global policy will help to further reduce the ozone layer depletion. . References Aggarawal, A., Kumari, R., Mehla, N., Deepali, R.P., Bhatnagers, S., Sharma, K., Vashishtha, A. and Rathi, B., (2013).Depletion of the Ozone Layer and Its Consequences: A Review. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 4(10), pp. 1990-1997. Akanle, T. (2010).Impact of Ozone Layer Protection on the Avoidance of Climate Change: Legal Issues and Proposals to Address the Problem. Review Of European Community & International Environmental Law, 19, 2, pp. 239-249 Anonymous. (2009). India adopts a proactive policy on ozone depletion. Accord Fintech. 1-8 Baker, L., (2000). The Hole in the Sky: Think the Ozone Layer is Yesterdays Issue? Think Again. E: the Environmental Magazine, 11(6), pp. 34. Bryant, C., (2010). Twenty-Five Years of EU Environmental Law. Natural Resources & Environment, 25(1), pp. 39-42, 58. China Closes 5 of 6 CFC Plants. 2007. ASHRAE Journal, 49(8), pp. 7. Crutzen, P.J. and Oppenheimer, M., (2008).Learning about ozone depletion. Climatic Change, 89(1-2), pp. 143-154. Dixon, R.K., (2011). Global Environment Facility investments in the phase-out of ozone-depleting substances. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 16(5), pp. 567-584. Dyominov, I, &Zadorozhny, A. (2008).Greenhouse gases and future long-term changes in the stratospheric temperature and the ozone layer. International Journal Of Remote Sensing, 29, 9, pp. 2749-2774 Sims, H., (2006). The unsheltering sky: China, India, and the Montreal protocol. Policy Studies Journal, 24(2), pp. 201. Forrest, M (1994). Tracking the Ozone Layer; What is ozone layer and how does it affect you. Currents in science, technology and society 3(1), pp. 11-27 Hannigan, J, and Coffey, M. (2012). Intense Arctic Ozone Depletion in the Spring of 2011.  Arctic, 65, 3, pp. 339-343, Haas, PM. (1992).Banning chlorofluorocarbons: epistemic community efforts to protect stratospheric ozone. International Organization, 46, 1, p. 187 Kotov, V and Nikitina, E., (2005). Russia and International Environmental Co-operation,Green Globe Yearbook of International Co-operation on Environment and Development 17–27 Lidon, F, Reboredo, F, Silva, M, Duarte, M, &Ramalho, J. (2012).Impact of UV-B radiation on photosynthesis - an overview Emirates Journal Of Food & Agriculture (EJFA), 24, 6, pp. 546-556 Manney, G, and Larsen, N (2011).Unprecedented Antarctic ozone loss in 2011. Nature, 478, 7370, pp. 469-475 Milmo, S., (1999).EU plans comprehensive ban on ODS. Chemical Market Reporter, 255(4), pp. 6. Milmo, S., (1998).EC proposes acceleration of HCFC phase-out. Chemical Market Reporter, 254(2), pp. 8-9. Misra, O.P., Kalra, P., Rathore, S.K., S. and Sinha, P., (2012).Effect of increasing temperature due to depletion of ozone layer caused by CFC on the dynamics of two competing populations: a model. Journal of Applied Mathematics & Computing,38(1-2), pp. 279-293. Monahan, J.J., (1991). British study shows depletion of ozone worsening. Telegram & Gazette,112-123. Morrisette, P. M. (1989). The evolution of policy responsesto stratospheric ozone depletion.Natural Resources Journal 29, pp.793-820. Munasingh, M. and King, K., (1992).Protecting the Ozone Layer. Finance & Development, 29(2), pp. 24. NASA (2013).Layers of Earth’s Atmosphere. Retrieved from http://ete.cet.edu/gcc/?/volcanoes_layers/ Neale, P.J., Davis, R.F. and Cullen, J.J., (1998). Interactive effects of ozone depletion and vertical mixing on photosynthesis of Antarctic phytoplankton. Nature, 392(6676), pp. 585-589. Naess, T., (2004).The Effectiveness of the EUs Ozone Policy. International Environmental Agreements; Politics, Law and Economics, 4(1), pp. 47-64. Ogundele, F.O., Omotayo, A. and Taiwo, I.S., (2011). The dilemma of ozone layer depletion, global warming and climate change in tropical countries: a review. Academic Research International, 1(3), pp. 474-483. Peihl, K., (2002). What If the Hole in the ozone Layer Grows Larger? / What If the Polar Ice Caps Melted? School Library Journal, 48(7), pp. 132. Persson, O, &Dastidar, G. (2013).Citation analysis to reconstruct the dynamics of Antarctic ozone hole research and formulation of the Montreal Protocol. Current Science (00113891), 104, 7, pp. 835-840 Rowlands, I and Greene, O., (1995).Ozone depletion. Environment, 37(3), pp. 3. Smith, K, Previdi, M, &Plovani, L. (2013).The Antarctic Atmospheric Energy Budget- Part II: The Effect of Ozone Depletion and its Projected Recovery. Journal of Climate, 26, 24, pp. 9729-9744, Scott, A., (1998). EU to phase out ozone depleters. Chemical Week, 160(26), pp. 17. Siva, T and Reddy, K., (2011).Ozone layer depletion and its effects: A review.International Journal of Environmental Science and Development 2(1), pp. 30-37 Stookes, P. (2013). Opinion. Environmental Law Review, 15, 4, pp. 269-272, Perin, S. and Lean, D.R.S., (2004).The effects of ultraviolet-B radiation on freshwater ecosystems of the Arctic: Influence from stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change. Environmental Reviews, 12(1), pp. 1-70. Signe, B.A., (2006). The search for signs of recovery of the ozone layer. Nature, 441(7089), pp. 39-45. Polvani, L, Waugh, D, Correa, G, &Seok-Woo, S. (2011). Stratospheric Ozone Depletion: The Main Driver of Twentieth-Century Atmospheric Circulation Changes in the Southern Hemisphere. Journal of Climate, 24, 3, pp. 795-812 The European parliament and the Council, (2009). Regulation EC1005/2009; on substances that deplete the ozone layer. Official Journal of the European L286, 1-286,30 Ward, M.(1994). European Union sets CFC import quotas. Chemical Week, 155, 6, p. 13 West, S.K and MUNOZ, B.E., (2006). Ozone Depletion May Cause Increased Cataract Incidence. Review of Optometry, 143(1), pp. 10. Wheeler, J., (2002). Understanding ozone depletion. Supply House Times, 45(6), pp. 149-150. Wilkinson, S., Mills, G., Illidge, R and Davies, W., (2012).How is ozone pollution reducing our food supply? Journal of Experimental Botany, 63, 2, pp. 527-536 Read More