Environmental Warming In Global Warming

What are some of the chemicals that caused the ozone hole to form over the stratosphere in Antarctica?

During the past several hundred years, civilization has made rapid progress in industries like air travel, automobiles, and energy production. These developments were made without consideration of the long-term effects that their emissions may have on the planet. Changing weather patterns are now wreaking havoc around the world, and scientists attribute this to human-caused climate change. During President Obama’s State of the Union address in 2015, he stated that, “No challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change,” (“Remarks by the President”). Warming temperatures caused by anthropogenic climate change have disastrous consequences that pose a threat to humanity and the environment.

Global warming is defined as the recent increase in the world 's temperature that is believed to be caused by the increase of certain gases (such as carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere. There are many different theories on whether global warming is similar or not to climate change. Simplistically, climate change is different because climate change is defined as a change in global or regional climate patterns or, in particular, a change apparent from the mid to late 20th century onwards and attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide produced by the use of fossil fuels, having been measured over long periods of time, due to the changes in Earth’s orbit and organic carbon which reflect sunlight. Global warming and climate change are not to be confused because global warming is caused mainly by anthropogenic factors like the emission of carbon dioxide gas and use of fossil fuels whereas climate change is completely natural, however, according to Milan Radovanovic, “it is clear that the anthropogenic factors dominate the increasing temperature and the natural ones have the maximum influence…” (Radovanovic). Therefore, “the contribution to global warming from natural forcings and from natural internal variability is in the range between -0.2 to 0.2 [degrees] celsius over the period 1951-2010…” (Radovanovic). Natural factors have had the most effect on global temperature in the past 59 years totaling a 0.4 degrees celsius increase in

The article primarily appeals to individuals with interest in global warming. The main point that Wood focuses on is the idea of sulfur-aerosol injection, in which sulfur dioxide would be pumped into the sky. However, there are several issues with this concept that he addresses in his article.

Look around. Every day, everyone will witness some sort of carbonic emission in some form dispersing into the atmosphere. You hear enough about it on the news, whether you care or not. However, the question lingers: is it even that big of a deal? Most likely, if you are a Republican, you will say that Democrats are blowing the whole climate change situation out of the water, or that the warming of our earth is completely natural. Notice how they switched it from global warming to climate change; that is because their previous assumptions and models have not been completely accurate, right? On the other hand, if you are a Democrat, you are most likely seething over the statements you just read and want to do anything you can to prevent this possible catastrophic disaster. 97% percent of climate scientists agree that Climate Change is here and now, caused by all of us… right? Democrats are also more likely to target and blame carbon emissions on the rising temperatures. Nevertheless, William McDonough, a famous urban planner, says that targeting carbon is a purely political move. Further, carbon should be a useful resource for humans, and an imbalanced carbon cycle is to blame. In fact, McDonough claims this imbalance is the result of poor and inadequate urban designing. Are any climate change believers right? Or are Donald Trump and friends correct in pointing the finger at the problem and saying, “wrong!” First and foremost, let us explore the partisan views on the issue.

Earthly effects of the ozone layer are discussed in Fixing the Sky. Also in Fixing the Sky, Schiermeier talks about how the flow of air is dramatically affected by the ozone layer. Schiermeier focuses on the temperatures around the world, while Hirth in The Optimal Share of Variable Renewables focuses on how costly it is to reach the goal of usage of renewable energy. When reading through both articles the intended outcome was clearly for two different audiences. Schiermeier is for the general audience of college students or high school students with only slight knowledge about the ozone layer, however Hirth’s article is for an audience that is well informed in macroeconomics and microeconomics. Schiermeier’s article was a much easier read than Hirth’s. An example of how easy flowing Schiermeier’s sentences are: “Scientists are only now gaining the necessary computing power to run long-term simulations that allow them to test which effects of climate warming might win out” (Schiermeier, 2015, pg. 1). Schiermeier’s article uses average words that most college students would know and understand. In parts of Hirth’s article usage of advanced language that only economic masters would know and understand was used, but some areas of the lengthy article were understandable to someone that has only taken the basic macroeconomics. An example of how drastically hard the article is to read would be; “A certain share of the cogenerating technologies lignite, hard coal, CCGT, and OCGT are forced to run even if prices are below their variable costs” (Hirth, 2015, pg.

How does the rising use of fossil fuels impact the earth? The simple answer is that the earth’s temperature rises, otherwise known as global warming. Global warming then devolves into climate change. Global warming has been “proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia” (“Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?”) because of the world’s increasing reliance on fossil fuels. World-wide natural disasters, such as Hurricane Harvey, may be correlated to an increased risk in extreme weather events due to climate change. There has been efforts to curb climate change, such as pieces of legislation like the Paris Climate Accord, but beliefs of individual leaders such as Donald Trump, who “claims to think that links between carbon emissions and climate change are ‘a hoax’” (Steadman 19), has halted the fulfillment of such agreements between states. If there is not effective efforts to slow the emission rate, the earth will face devastating consequences. Therefore, the leaders of countries across the world must work together to develop a solution to slow climate change, or else the future will be disastrous.

The ozone layer is in the Earth’s stratosphere and the necessity of this layer is to protect the Earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet radiation rays. “Since the late 1970s, an ozone hole has formed over Antarctica each austral spring (September / October), in which up to 66 percent of the total ozone is depleted” (Ozone Layer Protection). What directly causes holes in ozone are Chloroflourocarbons (CFCs), which rapidly damage the ozone layer. However, with the rising global warming temperature the CFCs’ process is catalysed, further damaging the ozone layer. “According to the estimates made by Dasgupta and Bhaumik (1995), it is likely that 10% decrease in ozone will lead to 20% increase in UV irradiance” (Gangul and Iyer 2006). Once an uncontrolled amount of UV radiation is exposed to lifeforms, especially to humans, “According to the estimates made by Vander Leun and De Gruijl (1993), 1% decrease in total stratospheric columnar ozone (SCO) will lead to 2.3% increase in non-melanoma skin cancer, 2% increase in cutaneous melanoma and 0.5% increase in the incidence of cataracts” (Gangul and Iyer 2006). More devastating effects from the depleting ozone layer are more destruction to agricultural fields, warming of oceans and increased acidity which is diminishing the amounts of phytoplankton, which can immensely affect the stability of the food chain. Therefore, the depletion of

In 1988, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration had conclusive proof products adding to the output of carbon dioxide and methane gases in the atmosphere were causing the earth to warm; and, if not stopped will make it inhabitable for human life. In the 1970’s the United States had conclusive proof that products releasing Chlorofluorocarbons into the atmosphere were causing the ozone layer to deplete; and, that if continued would be dangerous for human life. The United States took international global action, by joining the Montreal Protocol, to phase out the products producing chlorofluorocarbon and the ozone layer has been successfully replenished .

Phrases such as “climate change” and “global warming” are often thrown around on the news and in politics; however their meaning and significance was never clear to me. I enjoyed my reading of the Susan Solomon interview because, it was very informative and easy to understand. Solomon’s outstanding achievements as a female scientist are inspiring and remarkable. Her groundbreaking studies in Antarctica concerning the ozone hole, prove to us how important it is to take care of our planet. Human produced substances known as CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) have damaged our ozone beyond repair. It is hard to believe that humans can be so careless as to destroy their own Earth. Thankfully, “the nations of the world agreed to stop producing CFCs” in 1987.

Chlorofluorocarbons, CFCs: These substances are also of concern in connection with the destruction of stratospheric ozone (Chapter 2). Like N2O, they have no tropospheric sinks, but are infrared absorbers. Up to 1984, the tropospheric concentrations of three of the major commercial CFCs...

Climate change or colloquially known as global warming, now pose a new threat to civilization as the levels of greenhouse gases (GHG) are soaring to new levels. The most significant contributor to greenhouse gasses would be Carbon Dioxide (Co2). The levels of Carbon Dioxide (Co2) gas have risen to levels civilization has not seen before. As such, the effects of these levels are not known to civilization as data gathered from the ice cores drilled in the Antarctica only shows data up to 650,000 years ago. However we can conclude that present CO2 concentrations are higher compared to any time in the last 650,000 years (IPCC 2007). Current carbon dioxide concentrations are hovering around 389 parts per million (ppm) as of September 2011,

One of the first men to give thought into geoengineering was Nils Gustaf Ekholm, a Swedish meteorologist who in 1901 “speculated about the possibility of climate modification via engineered enhancements of [carbon dioxide] emission” because he believed that elevated carbon dioxide had beneficial effects on climate and plant growth (415, Keith 2000). Decades later, geoengineering, known in the 1950’s and 1960’s as ‘weather control,’ was mainly seen as a way to improve the natural state or mitigate natural hazards. Both the Soviet Union and the United States were the leading countries interested in this ‘weather control,’ and from the 1930’s through World War II both countries conducted experiments dealing mostly with cloud manipulation and precipitation. For example, a Soviet experiment during the winter of 1960-61 is reported to have cleared clouds over an area of 20,000 square kilometers (Keith 2000). In 1946, the United States General Electric research labs discovered cloud seeding which sparked a huge interest in weather modification within the country. It was not until 1965 that the attention was shifted from modification of weather to the modification of climate in order to fix the carbon dioxide problem, which is the center of interest today. David W. Keith spoke about this transition in his article Geoengineering the Climate: History and Prospect:

The world continuously faces a variety of threats every day, from natural disasters to terrorist, but one threat that society predominately contributes to all on their own, is climate change. There are many feasible explanations for the global threat of climate change. These explanations include but are not limited to, the act of deforestation to the rainforest and other trees, green house gas emissions, and sulfate aerosol, which cause poor air quality.

Alteration of this natural barrier of atmospheric gases can raise or lower the mean global temperature of the Earth”(Greenhouse Gas).