Article by AQEEL AHMED RAJPAR

Before we discuss about the politics of O-zone, we have to known what O-zone is? According to the web definition

“Ozone is a form of oxygen. Each ozone molecule is made of three oxygen atoms, so its chemical formula is O3. But unlike oxygen, ozone is a poisonous gas, and an increase in its concentration at ground level is not something that we want. But in the stratosphere, where ozone exists naturally, it blocks out the sun’s ultraviolet rays and is a life-saver. Ozone functions by sterilizing the water and relieving it of unwanted bacteria and microscopic organisms. Ozone is explosive and is harmful to fish and to humans, if in large quantities”.

Ground based measurements of Ozone were first started in 1956, at Halley Bay, Antarctica. Satellite measurements of ozone started in the early 70’s, but the first comprehensive worldwide measurements started in 1978 with the Nimbus-7 satellite. Nimbus-7 carried a TOMS (total ozone mapping spectrometer, and a SBUV (solar backscatter UV meter). The TOMS finally broke on May 7th, 1993, but today there are several different satellites measuring concentrations of ozone and other atmospheric gases. Gases in the troposphere and lower stratosphere are sampled by weather balloons or by airplanes such as the ER-2 managed by National aeronautics and space Administration (NASA).

WHY OZONE DEPLETED?

Due to the harmful gasses emission in the atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide, and nitrogen oxide. The release of manmade chemicals such as chlorine, and CFC’s (Chlorofluorocarbons) were also the main cause of Ozone depletion. Chlorofluorocarbons were first created in 1928 as non-toxic, non-flammable refrigerants, and were first produced commercially in the 1930’s by DuPont (a chemical company). CFC’s are a common industrial product, used in refrigeration systems, air conditioners, aerosols, solvents and in the production of some types of packaging. Nitrogen oxides are a by-product of combustion processes, eg aircraft emissions. Today many different CFC’s are produced and worldwide consumption in 1988 was estimated at over billion kilograms.

We can say that Deforestation is also the big cause of ozone depletion, because trees absorb these harmful gasses and when we cut or burn the forest, it will create havoc for the Global environment. Deforestation is the second big cause after coal which disturbing the natural environment.

The synthetic chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are now well-known as environmental ‘baddies’, even though they are useful and completely non-toxic substances. They get their bad name because they are ozone-eaters (properly called ozone-depleting substances).

CFCs are not the only ozone-depleting substances, but they are the most abundant. Some ozone-depleting substances are naturally occurring compounds.

CONSEQUENCES OF OZONE DEPLETION:

As we know that ozone layer absorb UVB ultraviolet light from sun, depletion of ozone increase surface UVB levels, which could lead to damage, including increases in skin cancer. Decreases in stratospheric ozone are well tied to CFC’s and there are good theoretical reasons to believe that decreases in ozone will lead to increases in surface UVB, there is no direct observational evidence linking ozone depletion to higher incidence of skin cancer in human beings. This is partly due to the fact that UVA, which also been implicated in some forms of skin cancer, is not absorbed by ozone, and it is nearly impossible to control statistics for lifestyle changes in the populauce.

EFFECTS ON HUMANS:

UVB (the higher energy UV radiation absorbed by ozone) is generally accepted to be a contributory factor to skin cancer. In addition, increased surface UV leads to increased tropospheric ozone, which is a health risk to humans. The increased surface UV also represents an increase in the vitamin D synthetic capacity of the sunlight. The cancer preventive effects of vitamin D represent a possible beneficial effect of ozone depletion. In terms of health costs, the possible benefits of increased UV irradiance may outweigh the burden.

1. Basal and Squamous Cell Carcinomas The most common forms of skin cancer in humans, basal and squamous cell carcinomas, have been strongly linked to UVB exposure. The mechanism by which UVB induces these cancers is well understood absorption of UVB radiation causes the pyrimidine bases in the DNA molecule to form dimers, resulting in transcription errors when the DNA replicates.

2. Malignant Melanoma Another form of skin cancer, malignant melanoma, is much less common but far more dangerous, being lethal in about 15% - 20% of the cases diagnosed. The relationship between malignant melanoma and ultraviolet exposure is not yet well understood, but it appears that both UVB and UVA are involved.

3. Cortical Cataracts Studies are suggestive of an association between ocular cortical cataracts and UVB exposure, using crude approximations of exposure and various cataract assessment techniques. A detailed assessment of ocular exposure to UV-B was carried out in a study on Chesapeake Bay Watermen, where increases in average annual ocular exposure were associated with increasing risk of cortical opacity.

4. Increased Tropospheric Ozone Increased surface UV leads to increased tropospheric ozone. Ground-level ozone is generally recognized to be a health risk, as ozone is toxic due to its strong oxidant properties. At this time, ozone at ground level is produced mainly by the action of UV radiation on combustion gases from vehicle exhausts

POLITICS OF OZONE:

Some environmental issues are not of such importance but in the short span of time they become highly discussed throughout the globe, ozone problem is the best example of such type of environmental problems. Initially it was of only scientist’s interest but soon it became a politically discussed issue as it is laying drastic impacts on living as well as non living things of the globe.

In the U.S there were suggestions by the Secretary of the interior that the solution of ozone depletion was to be found not through regulating industry for restoration of ozone, but in the wearing of sunglasses and hats. This shows the lack of interest of the govt. towards the solution of the problem. A New York Times cartoon appeared depicting a flock of sheep protecting themselves from genetic mutations by following the secretary’s advice! Eventually US policy was reversed. During this time President Reagan himself suffered from a skin cancer. This event really speeded up the ozone negotiations and established a sense of urgency for resolution of the problem by reducing the ozone depleting chemicals.

The reduction of ozone-depleting chemicals is to succeed, the transitional countries of central Europe and the developing nation in Asia, Africa and Latin America will have to cooperate as well. Currently, China and India, whose combined population accounts for about 35 percent of the world’s population, contribute only about 3 percent of total ozone-depleting chemicals. But in view of the growing demand for refrigerator in those countries, control over CFC production is essential. At first both china and India refused to sign the Montreal Protocol because of the emerging demand for refrigeration among their citizens. But after receiving a pledge of financial aid from developing countries to assist in switching to CFC-free technologies, both countries signed the protocol. The amendments in Montreal protocol occurred in 1990 London, 1992 Copenhagan, 1995 Vienna, 1997 Montreal, and 1999 Beijing.

The Frame work convention on climate change which also known as the Earth Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 has followed a similar pattern. The FCCC was opened for signature on May 9, 1992. It entered into force on March 21, 1994. Its stated objective is “to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a low enough level to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” Its parties recognize that a serious problem exists and that the developed countries have a particular responsibility to curb the sources of greenhouse gases and to preserve ‘sinks’.

 

They failed however to establish a binding target for reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. Thus the states that the parties will attempt to reduce their emission to 1990 levels by 2000.

The Group of 77 a UN based grouping of underdeveloped countries found it divided on this issue. The oil producing countries unlike other states, refused to accept international restrictions private disagreements that must have occurred between say, Bangladesh, with its miserably poor population located at sea level, and oil rich Saudi Arabia.

For many countries the threat, although potentially catastrophic, is hardly urgent or immediate. Thus in the climate change negotiations, Japan, Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand, concerned about the effects upon their economic performance, have opposed stringent measures to control greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union has taken a more proactive stance to which the US government had by the mid-1990’s become more sympathetic.

Only USA and China emits 48 % of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere but both were not taken any satisfactory steps in this regard, due to their financial issues. Even USA giving suggestion to third World countries to reduce your emissions and stop deforestation, if we see the data, we find that only 20 % of world emission is in the part of third world, and the big Emitters and Polluters of the world, USA and China, doesn’t take any suitable steps instead of suggestion to third world.

George Bush President of USA in his statements said that we don’t know which chemical really harm the Global environment, and on the other hand Al Gore attacks the republican congress for pursuing an “Environmental Jihad” , he believe that the chlorofluorocarbons creating big problem for environment, and countries like USA should reduce their chlorofluorocarbons emission.

DuPont, which made 1/4 of the world’s CFCs, spent millions of dollars running full-page newspaper advertisements defending CFCs in 1975, claiming there was no proof that CFCs were harming the ozone layer. The chairman of DuPont commented that the ozone depletion theory was “a science fiction tale…a load of rubbish…utter nonsense.”

The UN (United Nations) sponsored resolutions depend a great deal on the willingness of individual governments to back those resolutions with laws, preferably laws which offer meaningful punishments and rewards to their respective industries. Although collective UN interest in preserving the environment is high, individual ambassadors must return to their countries with agreements that their governments can live with.

CFCs are greenhouse gases, but with their phase out in progress, attention is now being focused on a more pervasive greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. Fossil fuels produce carbon dioxide when burned, and it is thought that increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may lead to increased average temperatures on planet earth. To limit the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, another international protocol was drafted at a 1997 meeting in Kyoto, Japan. The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty which calls for the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions. To do this, a nation that ratifies the protocol would have to drastically reduce its use of fossil fuels. This is not necessarily an easy thing to do, and for this reason, the United States has not yet ratified the treaty.

Montreal protocol is the first world resolution regarding this problem of ozone deletion. The original Montreal Protocol was signed in the fall of 1987, based on negotiations started between European Scandinavian countries and the US over CFC’s in aerosol sprays in 1983. The protocol has gone through a series of revisions (each one named after the city where the revision committee met) as new information from science and industry has become available. In November 1992, Copenhagan, laid down the most stringent CFC phase-out schedule for CFC’s for the world to date; and was signed by over 100 nations representing 95% of the world’s current CFC consumption. Trade sanctions on CFC’s, Halons and products that contain them, were imposed as of April 1993 on nations not signing the protocol, and in May 1993 this ban was extended to the export of halocarbon solvents such as Methyl chloride and Carbon.

This protocol laid out a schedule for the phase-out of CFC’s and related halocarbons by the year 2030. An additional impact of the protocol was to mandate the sharing of technology between countries in order to speed the replacement and recycling of CFC’s.

In 1988, Sweden was the first country to legislate the complete phase-out of CFC’s, with a scheduled phase-out of CFC’s in all new goods by 1994. In March 1989 environmental ministers of the EEC announced a total phase-out of CFC’s by the year 2000.

In November of 1990 an amended federal Clean Air Act was signed into law. This legislation included a section (Title IV) entitled Stratospheric Ozone Protection which directs the EPA to write regulations affecting every industry using Class 1 and 2 halocarbons. Compounds are included in either class 1 or 2 based on their ODP. The act lays out a U.S. schedule for the phase-out of all class 1 compounds by the year 2000 and tightens regulations dealing with documentation and recycling of class 2 compounds. In addition congress; in the 1989, 1990 Omnibus Reconciliation Acts and the 1990 Floor Stocks Tax; imposed taxes on the use, storing and importation of listed CFC’s and Halons. The Omnibus Acts tax is based on both the amount-used of the compounds and the compounds ODP, so companies are encouraged to stock and use halocarbons less harmful to the ozone layer.

The reduction and eventual elimination of Ozone-deleting chemicals can only be successful if states cooperate internationally. Most industrial states have either eliminated or have significantly reduced the production of aerosol products. The most difficult remaining challenge involves the development of alternative systems of refrigerators and the development of tighter control over CFC’s in existing refrigerators and air conditioners. Because CFC’s are a major source of ozone depletion, the DuPont Corporation has decided to halt its $750-million production of Freon and to develop a CFC-free alternative. Many industrial states have already taken CFC-reduction measures, including the use of machines for recycling CFC’s from refrigerator and home and car air conditioners.

The ozone regime has attracted most attention because it addressed a dramatic global problem. The indications here are good since strong measure have been taken to eliminate CFCs. Even though the ozone layer will not return to its formal health until some point beyond the middle of the twenty-first century, the signs are encouraging. In the early 1996 readings were taken which showed a reduction in atmospheric concentrations of ozone depleting chemicals. This is the first physical indication that the ozone regime is working.

There are so many platforms available to start this mission to stop emission, such as Montreal protocol and Kyoto protocol and many other amendments in these protocols, the UNEP resolutions are also there but the problem is the implementation and the way, how to start, or who to start. If only USA and China cooperate in this regard we will see, good and healthy sunny days, cozy days, and warm days in our future, but both the super power doesn’t take any satisfactory steps due to their economic reasons, my question to them is that what will they do with their economy when people suffering from the skin cancer and other diseases. I am suggesting to these big emitters and polluters of the world that take effective steps in this regard instead of suggesting others. I think UN role to resolving this issue is very important, Nation sates should cooperate and take this problem as need of time, then may be our grand children’s will see some good and healthy environment.