The Unintended Consequences of Healing the Ozone Hole

The ozone hole is so last century. Didn't we solve that one already?

Actually, it's still here...on September 24, 2006, the ozone hole was, in fact, the largest it's ever been. Gladly, however, by banning those dreaded CFCs and other ozone-depleting chemicals, the missing patch of our upper atmosphere is well on its way to healing. Just like a dude with a bad hangover, it simply takes awhile for the atmosphere to purge the chemicals from its system.

That's the good news a large team of scientists reported yesterday, on the 23rd anniversary of the Montreal Protocol, the international treaty now frequently billed as the most successful example of global cooperation on an environmental threat to date. The team said the ozone hole has finally stopped getting worse and should be patched up between 2045 and 2060—"slightly earlier" than expected.

But as environmental problems often seem to go, here too, it's one step forward and two steps back. The report also notes that global warming is aggravating the ozone hole; and—conversely—the hole, which is located over the South Pole, could be helping accelerate surface warming of the ice.

What's most interesting to me is how the Montreal Protocol—a living breathing meeting of nations, not just a piece of paper–itself has the potential to help heal the climate crisis. It turns out that both the chemicals that deplete the ozone layer (CFCs and its cousins) and their more ozone-friendly replacements (called HFCs) are both some of the most potent greenhouse gases in existence.

Once molecule of an HFC—which today is used in many refrigeration and air conditioning systems—warms the planet up to 11,000 times more than one molecule of CO2. And in the future, as developing nations switch to HFCs (they had more time than rich countries to phase out dangerous CFCs) and also generally acquire more "luxuries" such as refrigerators, the use of these chemicals is expected to skyrocket in coming decades (by leaps and bounds in China alone).

So what we have is this: the Montreal Protocol is patching the ozone hole, but if "progress" continues on the same path, these actions could drastically add to global greenhouse gas emissions. That's the pessimistic view.

There is a more optimistic view. While bickering and mistrust plague the U.N. climate talks every year, the Montreal Protocol negotiators actually like each other and, believe it or not, are fairly decent at compromise. What's more, there happen to be chemicals that can replace both HFCs and CFCs and do no harm to either the climate and the ozone layer. Companies like Coca-Cola, Ben & Jerry's, and General Motors are already using them.

In recent years, there's been a huge push from tiny island nations—you know, the ones seriously freaked out by climate change—to use every fast-acting option possible to delay sea-level rise and other warming effects. A big part of their push has been using the Montreal Protocol to get rid of HFCs. Already, there's been progress. The 196 signing nations have agreed to phase-out ozone-depleting chemicals faster because of their climate effects. Now, this November, for the 2nd year in a row, they will consider a proposal from the Federated States of Micronesia (and a similar one from the U.S., Canada and Mexico) to tackle the HFC problem as a standalone climate problem too.

The proposal has a lot of support, but last year there were concerns from China, and some other nations that held it back. Hopefully this year will be different. If you'd like to help that out, you can sign this letter to the U.N. Ozone Secretariat registering your support for the proposal.

Photo credit: NASA, Ozone Hole Watch

Follow Change.org's Environment page on Facebook and Twitter.