Loss of the Earth’s ozone layer above the Arctic last winter was unprecedented, scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory told CNN on Monday.
In findings published in a new study in the journal Nature, scientists said a hole in the ozone was caused by an unusually long period of low temperatures in the stratosphere, the protective layer that shields the Earth’s surface from harmful radiation.
While ozone loss is a sadly common occurrence at the South Pole, recent findings document a similar event happening at the Earth’s northernmost point. “We’ve never seen that kind of phenomenon in the Arctic before,” Michelle Santee, an atmospheric scientist with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said.
Although it was comparatively small - “The area of the Arctic loss zone was about 60% the size of a typical ozone hole,” Santee said - the ozone hole has raised concerns among atmospheric scientists.
“The same process that destroys the ozone layer in Antarctica – chlorine and other man-made compounds such as CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) - takes place here also, but it’s just that it never occurred in the Arctic to the same degree,” Santee said.
Scientists from 19 international institutions took part in the study, according to a NASA press release.
The especially brutal cold temperatures experienced by much of the United States last winter have little to do with what’s going on in the stratosphere, Santee said.
“When we’re talking about the weather, we need to be clear we’re talking about weather in the stratosphere, not on the Earth’s surface. Cold conditions alone are not enough to cause such a phenomenon (ozone loss),” Santee said, “but you also need man-made compounds."
The ozone hole is relatively stable, Santee said.
“There’s a large weather pattern that keeps the area of extreme ozone loss confined to about 2 million square kilometers, or about five times the area of California,” Santee said. “But it does move around a little bit. It can shift around and it did drift above populated areas in March and April. This leads to greater values of UV radiation - but I should add that this was a very short time,” she said. “The exposure was very temporary.”
So long as the chlorine in the atmosphere remains elevated, ozone holes will be long-lived, atmospheric scientist Nathaniel Livesey said.
So what? Someday we all will die. Big whoop.
@edv...: How very klingon of you. K'PLAH!
Why be in a hurry?
never trust a scientist on a government payroll.
Never trust an anonymous poster named Mike.
Instead, do you by chance trust a pastor who tells you to give him 10% of what you make because the gods require you to?
edvhou812, why don't you just die, then, and leave room for people with functioning brains?
LETS SEE! WE HAVE A MASS AMMOUNT OF UFO'S AND YOU WONDER Y THE OZONE OF ALL PLACES IS DETERIORATING
What a pack of lies and photo-shopped pictures. Everyone knows the mental giants of the right have told us there is no problem with ozone layer and there is no climate change.
Last I checked, ozone creation requires oxygen and UV, since there is less greenery at da poles, ozone genesis is commensurately lower hence more rare. Does we also remembah H2O is the most signifigant 'greenhouse gas', making CO2, relatively speaking, insignifigant, period
Due to radiative forcing, while water may be the most abundant greenhouse gas, its contribution is extremely minor compared to carbon dioxide.
@one-up-ya: did ya notice it's smaller than it was? Did ya hear the bit about unprecedented?
What does that mean to you?
Who's still using CFCs? Something about this report smells fishy to me.
A lot of countries still use CFC's. Also, they hang around for a wile and can cause damage long after you stop using them
if you think these scientist are lying your dumb.
I believe there's a hole, i just don't think it's being caused by CFCs. Again i ask, Who's using CFCs?
No, you're dumb. Na na na na boo boo.
@saints4life, which scientists you referring to, theres 2 sides (at least) to the issue, can't believe em both can we?
Only a miniscule number of scientists (probably with special interests) don't agree. The vast majority of scientists, especially ones in academia, do. If you really think NASA has always been wrong about it for decades, and has been forcing lies into the media, don't you think the Republicans would've shut them down or replaced all of them when they're in power? They only disagree and use talking points to polarize the nation for political votes. In reality even their leadership agrees. For example, if you look for the date we signed the Montreal Protocol and its amendments, look who was President. Reagan. Then Bush.
Radiative forcing huh, oooh that has a ring to it doesnt it now,
Sure leeintulsa, that's the Part that made me smile.
GW, they did get shut down, but they're like weeds, robust weeds.
Still bent on CO2 huh. When I think of how little CO2 humans create compared to the vast amount created by volcanic activity, I smile again, widely.
Very interesting.. Now we have double barrel Ozone hole action but we will never know if Ozone holes existed centuries ago before we know how to detect them..
@Ed: yes, i was just now wondering about that. How do they know there haven't always been occasional holes?
Why did the unprecedented part make me smile? Ask yourself this; what precedent? Last year? 20 years? To short a time to project any real meaningful data from, so this precedent, to what from where?
Same thoughts exactly here as well.
You are aware we can measure the amount of incoming radiation through damage to carbon? This means we can figure out how much solar radiation has come through for as far back as we can find measurable organic material. Suffice it so say people much more knowledgeable than you can safely call this unprecedented
Excellent comment, just like we hear of "unprecedented ice loss in the Arctic, although, satellite records of ice loss go back only to 1979. If any of this is human generated, it is probably because alot of the undeveloped nations don't have the restrictions on CFC's that Europe and the US do.
Git Yur learn on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insolation