Sunday, January 31, 2010

The Hole in Global Warming...

Well over two decades ago we, the public, were on the receiving end of the Montreal Protocol. Do you remember what that was? Here's a hint:

The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer is a landmark international agreement designed to protect the stratospheric ozone layer. The treaty was originally signed in 1987 and substantially amended in 1990 and 1992. The Montreal Protocol stipulates that the production and consumption of compounds that deplete ozone in the stratosphere--chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform--are to be phased out by 2000 (2005 for methyl chloroform).
Here's the thing...which I happened to mention on this blog quite a while ago under the very apt titles of "Behold the Idiots" and "I want a refund." I find it hard to believe that the Montreal Protocol served any valued purpose in reducing the size of the Ozone Hole. I base this on the fact that the Hole was bigger than ever just three years ago.

Stratospheric ozone has been depleted by 5 to 6 percent at middle latitudes, but has somewhat rebounded in recent years. The largest recorded Antarctic ozone hole was recorded in 2006.

Gosh!...those climate scientists screwed up the "model." Of course, despite the increased costs of switching over to approved automobile air conditioners that did not use freon and other costly changes that you likely weren't aware that you was all for naught.

Ah...but have faith...

While most of the world has warmed, parts of the southern hemisphere have remained stubbornly cold—oddly enough because of a gaping hole in the ozone layer. Now new research shows that all the efforts made by scientists and environmental advocates to close the hole may actually increase warming throughout the entire southern hemisphere.
I, actually, pointed this out a little less than a year ago.

June 10 2008 A new study led by Seok-woo Son and Lorenzo Polvani, in the Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics at SEAS, is suggesting that the winds in the Southern Hemisphere will be greatly impacted by the expected recovery of the ozone hole in the second half of this century. In a study that appears in the June 13 issue of Science, Seok-Woo Son, lead-author and a postdoctoral research scientist at SEAS, and Professor Polvani suggest that stratospheric ozone ought to be more carefully considered by the next Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) round of climate model predictions.

"We were surprised to find that the closing of the ozone hole, which is expected to occur in the next 50 years or so, shows significant effects on the global climate," said Lorenzo M. Polvan one of two principle investigators and professor of applied mathematics at SEAS. "This is because stratospheric ozone has not been considered a major player in the climate system. We believe the closing of the ozone hole is likely to have profound impacts on the surface winds and, also likely, to have an impact on other aspects of the Earth's climate, including surface temperatures, locations of storm tracks, extent of dry zones, amount of sea ice, and ocean circulation."
So, why trot out this "old" study now? Not much attention was paid back in June 2008. Well, the IPCC's agenda driven Climate Change stance is decaying rather quickly due to false premise, unreliable model, activist "scientists," climate-gate and various other idiocy. The whole "global warming" mantra is rather unpredictable (mostly because no one has developed a model that includes all the applicable factors in climate change...and likely never will). Also, as the Earth's climate cools (as it has been for the last decade) the global warming cabal is left looking...silly.

The fact that more press has been given to the Ozone Hole lately,...and it's inverse relationship to "warming" suggests that it's getting more difficult for the activist scientists and the "climate change machine" to hold back reports detrimental to their preconceived goals.

I look at both the Montreal Protocol legislation and the IPCC's Climate Change report and realize that the environuts are zero for two...while costing us all a pretty penny in the process. I, also, find it ironic that the downfall is delivered in cold hard scientific facts; the same type facts the IPCC is supposed to deliver, but decided on agenda driven tripe wrapped up in ulterior motives instead.