- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
Why is there a hole in the ozone over Antarctica?
- Thread starter GTaudiophile
- Start date
It has to do with the air movement the "polar front" is a strong rotation of cold air around anartica. Air can not get out from Antartica. So it just sits there and lets the clorine free radicals (come for the CFC's) break up the ozone. Everywhere elses it gets to mix around.
It is a little more complicated but that's the jist of it.
Because who would believe it if someone said it was over a populated area? Noone (out of the average people) has been to Antartica, so noone can say its there or not there.
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
MoobyTheGoldenCalf
Golden Member
- Jul 26, 2001
- 1,146
- 0
- 76
Still early
Besides, this was once a big deal, and now noone cares about it anymore. And like said before, there could have always been one there. I'm just speculating.
XZeroII
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2001
- 12,572
- 0
- 0
We only started recording data in the late 70's and that's when we found it. Was it there 100 years ago? No one knows. A huge theory about where the hole comes from is that is has always been there. Ozone is created when sunlight hits the atmosphere, and everyone knows that Antarctica (and the north pole) only get sunlight for half of the year, then it's dark for a half of a year. This lack of sunlight would naturally cause there to be less ozone in those areas for certain parts of the year. This is not to say that people don't contribute, but nature could be 90% responsible, while man is only 10% (those figures are made up). Point is, we don't know.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
There is a science known as atmospheric chemistry and the mechanism for catalytic degradation of ozone by CFC's is understood. CFC's in the atmosphere have been documented. While you are correct in saying the proportion of manmade ozone breakdown vs. natural mechanisms is unknown, the lower limit of reasonable models suggests that a significant portion of loss is due to human cause. Perhaps we are responsible for 50 percent of the loss, and that would result in a significant increase in UV penetration.
It might have something to do with the rotation of the Earth on it's axis and the relative speed of a point on the surface of the Earth and the relation of the movement of the atmosphere to the movement of the Earth's surface.
like if you stand 840 feet from the south pole you will travel 1 mile in 24 hours, but if you stand on the equator you will travel a lot farther in 24 hours. The atmoshpehere behaves in a similar fashion.
So because it's relatively statioery the atmodshpere at the sout poll gets more effects from CFCs.
like if you stand 840 feet from the south pole you will travel 1 mile in 24 hours, but if you stand on the equator you will travel a lot farther in 24 hours. The atmoshpehere behaves in a similar fashion.
So because it's relatively statioery the atmodshpere at the sout poll gets more effects from CFCs.
WTF? So what I didnt read the whole thread and answered a post I wanted to answer. The only moron mate is you for that post.
It all has to do with something called the Grasshopper Effect. It causes warm air from warmer climates to "jump" from areas of smaller latitude to those of greater latitude (ie. to the poles). With it go all the pollution (like CO2, etc), which displaces the ozone making a hole. Hope that helps a bit. If you use Google you can find a bit more info about this type of effect.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter