Quote:

Abstract Under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, new controls are being implemented to reduce emissions of HFC-23 (CHF33 ), a by-product during the manufacture of HCFC-22 (CHClF22 ). Starting in 2015, China and India, who dominate global HCFC-22 production (75% in 2017), set out ambitious programs to reduce HFC-23 emissions. Here, we estimate that these measures should have seen global emissions drop by 87% between 2014 and 2017. Instead, atmospheric observations show that emissions have increased and in 2018 were higher than at any point in history (15.9 ± 0.9 Gg yr−1± 0.9 Gg yr−1 ). Given the magnitude of the discrepancy between expected and observation-inferred emissions, it is likely that the reported reductions have not fully materialized or there may be substantial unreported production of HCFC-22, resulting in unaccounted-for HFC-23 by-product emissions. The difference between reported and observation-inferred estimates suggests that an additional ~309 Tg CO2CO2 -equivalent emissions were added to the atmosphere between 2015 and 2017.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13899-4

But wait weren't China supposed to be the new face of Climate Change? :o


And the ozone hole was supposed to be smaller.How did that happen?

dont you mean KFC?..

cods wrote on Jan 24^th, 2020 at 3:12pm:

dont you mean KFC?..

;D

(sorry Lee)

lee wrote on Jan 24^th, 2020 at 11:49am:

Quote: Abstract Under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, new controls are being implemented to reduce emissions of HFC-23 (CHF33 ), a by-product during the manufacture of HCFC-22 (CHClF22 ). Starting in 2015, China and India, who dominate global HCFC-22 production (75% in 2017), set out ambitious programs to reduce HFC-23 emissions. Here, we estimate that these measures should have seen global emissions drop by 87% between 2014 and 2017. Instead, atmospheric observations show that emissions have increased and in 2018 were higher than at any point in history (15.9 ± 0.9 Gg yr−1± 0.9 Gg yr−1 ). Given the magnitude of the discrepancy between expected and observation-inferred emissions, it is likely that the reported reductions have not fully materialized or there may be substantial unreported production of HCFC-22, resulting in unaccounted-for HFC-23 by-product emissions. The difference between reported and observation-inferred estimates suggests that an additional ~309 Tg CO2CO2 -equivalent emissions were added to the atmosphere between 2015 and 2017. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13899-4 But wait weren't China supposed to be the new face of Climate Change? :o And the ozone hole was supposed to be smaller.How did that happen?

It is getting smaller, thanks to global efforts to reduce CFC emissions.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Min_ozone.jpg/370px-Min_ozone.jpg

lee wrote on Jan 24^th, 2020 at 11:49am:

Quote: Abstract Under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, new controls are being implemented to reduce emissions of HFC-23 (CHF33 ), a by-product during the manufacture of HCFC-22 (CHClF22 ). Starting in 2015, China and India, who dominate global HCFC-22 production (75% in 2017), set out ambitious programs to reduce HFC-23 emissions. Here, we estimate that these measures should have seen global emissions drop by 87% between 2014 and 2017. Instead, atmospheric observations show that emissions have increased and in 2018 were higher than at any point in history (15.9 ± 0.9 Gg yr−1± 0.9 Gg yr−1 ). Given the magnitude of the discrepancy between expected and observation-inferred emissions, it is likely that the reported reductions have not fully materialized or there may be substantial unreported production of HCFC-22, resulting in unaccounted-for HFC-23 by-product emissions. The difference between reported and observation-inferred estimates suggests that an additional ~309 Tg CO2CO2 -equivalent emissions were added to the atmosphere between 2015 and 2017. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13899-4 But wait weren't China supposed to be the new face of Climate Change? :o And the ozone hole was supposed to be smaller.How did that happen?

lee once again spreading misinformation, this time about the Ozone layer.

Notice how the thread title mentions CFCs but the quote in the OP contains no mention of CFCs.  ;)

As the graph below shows, HCFCs are quite low on the list of ozone depleting chemicals

lee you seem to forget that some of us have a background in science and we can see right through the BS that you post  ;D

---

What an excellent post Mr Barnacle.

Well done.  8-)

While I understand the effects CFC's have on the ozone layer no one is really talking about the elephant in the room.

That is the British detonated 12 atomic / nuclear bombs in the heart of Australia.

You recon that didn't blow a hole in the ozone layer.....???

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 8:32am:

It is getting smaller, thanks to global efforts to reduce CFC emissions.

lee wrote on Jan 24^th, 2020 at 11:49am:

Instead, atmospheric observations show that emissions have increased and in 2018 were higher than at any point in history (15.9 ± 0.9 Gg yr−1± 0.9 Gg yr−1 ).

There seems to be a problem with that.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 10:37am:

lee once again spreading misinformation, this time about the Ozone layer. Notice how the thread title mentions CFCs but the quote in the OP contains no mention of CFCs.

lee wrote on Jan 24^th, 2020 at 11:49am:

Under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, new controls are being implemented to reduce emissions of HFC-23 (CHF33 ), a by-product during the manufacture of HCFC-22 (CHClF22 ).

For the uninformed -

HFCFC - hydrofluorochlorocarbon

CFC - chlorofluorocarbon

Now from the link for further reading - for those that wish to be informed -

"Due to their influence on climate, the major hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were regulated under the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and have recently been included in the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol to ensure that their radiative forcings does not offset climate gains provided by the phaseout of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs)1,2,3. "

But please get back to us Barney. It is obvious you are (not) so well read as you portray.

lee wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 11:55am:

freediver wrote on Jan 25th, 2020 at 8:32am: It is getting smaller, thanks to global efforts to reduce CFC emissions. lee wrote on Jan 24th, 2020 at 11:49am: Instead, atmospheric observations show that emissions have increased and in 2018 were higher than at any point in history (15.9 ± 0.9 Gg yr−1± 0.9 Gg yr−1 ). There seems to be a problem with that.

Except that your quote relates to HFCs  ;)

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 12:08pm:

Except that your quote relates to HFCs

Poor petal. Just knows so little of chemistry. ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 12:08pm:

"Due to their influence on climate, the major hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were regulated under the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and have recently been included in the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol to ensure that their radiative forcings does not offset climate gains provided by the phaseout of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs)1,2,3. " But please get back to us Barney. It is obvious you are (not) so well read as you portray.

Here we go again
lee going into a long convoluted distraction from the fact that he has been caught out again
I won't be wasting my time trying to convince him of that though. lee's only reason for being here is to spread misinformation

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 12:13pm:

lee going into a long convoluted distraction from the fact that he has been caught out again

poor petal. Caught distorting the truth again. Now please tell us why you no longer believe the CSIRO. ;)


The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 25^th, 2020 at 12:13pm:

I won't be wasting my time trying to convince him of that though. lee's only reason for being here is to spread misinformation

The only reason is because you have no credible comeback.

Although of course you may be able to come up with a reason for this "misinformation".

BTW - HCFC's have been around for at least 40 years.