Thread: Why is the Ozone layer getting stuffed ??

Not sure if i read it or seen it on the discovery but someone was saying that the Ozone layer is 20-30% smaller that what it was years ago . Most of this is just scare tactics by greenies and some people that wanted to get their face on tv like Al Gore .Who flys around the world telling people to stop driving and FLYING because it is destroying the plant ......... Get a shovel Al and scoop ya crap up ya clown

I had yet another "environmental arguement" with an idiot at the train station the other day. I pointed out that their brand new environmentally friendly vehicle was harming the environment more than my Ba5t4rd 4wd.

A: All of the components on their vehicle were new, mine we 2nd hand therefore reducing manufacturing related pollution and reducing landfill.

B: My vehicle can fit up to 9 people, theirs cannot, therefore reducing manufacturing related environmental costs.

c: Mine has allready, and in the future will last a lot longer than their vehicle, therefore again reducing manufacturing related environmental costs.

And then

D: Would you like me to put my Land Rover on the back of your scooter so we can car pool and only have to use the one vehicle? Or would you prefer for me to put your scooter into the back of my Land Rover?

Guess what, he declined my generous offer.

I never meant for this to be an environmental discussion (iam far from a Greenie)
i was just pointing out (tongue in cheek) how much smoke some American Pick ups can produce

Originally Posted by Defender=1st

I never meant for this to be an environmental discussion (iam far from a Greenie)
i was just pointing out (tongue in cheek) how much smoke some American Pick ups can produce

Like all things American you instinctivly know that they're not good for you, full of coated crap, oversized and obnauxious.

But after meeting them in the flesh for the first time you instantly feel good and must get close to at least one, to do this your almost guaranteed to part with some of your hard earned, what ever the amount, but for some strange reason your happy to do so. Then after about 1/2 an hour afterwards you get that horrible feeling in your mouth, you feel used and broke, you feel greasy, you want to go home and scrub yourself clean.


Long term, all you have to keep after the sordid affair is the memories. The memories of the taste, the sensation of the first time you held the beautiful thighs and/or breasts in your hands, placing them up to your wanting mouth. The georgous smell and feel of their seductive skin.

Then before you know it, the take Zinger chicken off the menu and replace it with Hot and Spicy. Damn KFC

Originally Posted by Chucaro

Just wonder if a Jumbo flight from Sydney to LA do not produce more pollution that a our cars in our life time ?

AND from the editorial of the January RAA magazine "car emissions only account for 7.8% of total national emissions and total emissions for aircraft, road, rail, domestic transport and shipping 14% " for Oz. Not gonna buy a Prius

One thing that is clear from this thread is that there is a need to clarify the difference between ozone depletion and greenhouse effects.

Ozone (O3) exists in the stratosphere as a result of UV light interacting with oxygen molecules (O2). It was thoroughly documented about twenty years ago, that the ozone layer was being attacked by flourine ions that resulted from disassociation of CFCs in the UV at this altitude. As CFCs are extremely stable, except in UV light, any CFCs vented to the atmosphere eventually end up in the stratosphere. The ozone layer provides a shield that prevents most of the UV light from reaching the surface, and so is quite important from a human and animal health point of view. The problem was quickly recognised as being man made, and international action was rapidly taken to alleviate the situation, and production of CFCs has now virtually ceased, although it will take several centuries for all those in the atmosphere to work their way through the system.

The Greenhouse effect is a totally unrelated situation. The temperature of the earth is maintained at its current level by the greenhouse effect, where the atmosphere is less transparent to infra red radiation than it is to visible light, so that the earth's net radiation balance is positive. This effect is due to a variety of gases in the atmosphere of which the most important is carbon dioxide. The concern is that a manmade increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will cause a rise in global temperatures.

Certainly, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased in the last two hundred years as a result of the industrial revolution, and there is also some evidence that it has increased over the last ten thousand years as a result of the development of farming.

There is also good evidence that temperatures world wide have increased in the last fifty years, and appear to be still increasing.

But that is about where the agreement ends. It is almost impossible to have any proof of worldwide temperatures further back than about fifty years, as data collection was not good enough. There are various ways of estimating temperatures in the past but they are all subject to various objections.

To try and see what is likely to happen in the future, computer models are constructed to match past temperatures and greenhouse gas measurements, and extrapolated into the future. The problems with these models are multiple - to run on existing computers they have to be a gross simplification; the historical data they are based on is suspect; the mechanisms that affect greenhouse as distribution are not well understood; all existing models largely ignore the southern hemisphere; and other problems.

Contrary to the general media presentations, Australia's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions are almost negligible - a result of the small population by world standards. Anything that could be done by Australians, even total depopulation and return to bush, would not make a significant difference, even though the per capita consumption is high, mainly the combination of a high standard of living plus relying on coal for power generation. Of comparable nations the US is higher per capita, and Europe lower, largely because of high energy prices and the use of nuclear power.

Despite this, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would seem to make sense (largely as an example to the main contributors - US, China, India, Europe), although the most effective way to do this is not the obvious one.

For a start, the largest contribution to CO2 emissions is power generation - and the obvious way of reducing this is to reduce power usage - do without airconditioning by improving insulation for example, reduce purchases of new everything and so on - and increase the cost of power!

John

I realise this is off the topic of ozone layer stuff, but what were they doing with those trucks????

What were they towing?

r

its a baby tractor pull,,
the sleds have sliding weights,, as it gets further along the track the weight moves forward making it ever harder to move.




I dont think theres much hope of reducing power useage in the world with China buying and producing ever larger quantities of goods.

Its a bit hard to tell a family in China to NOT buy an airconditioner when we have them already--