March 23, 2009 at 06:24 pm - by Ganondorf (2 Posts) | |
|---|---|
 Does anyone out there think we can repair the ozone layer. Me, being an aspiring inventor, well I am trying all the ways I can to think of to reverse global warming. One of my ideas is to form a ball that can launch from cape canaveral and substain plant life long enough to enter the CO2 layer, absorb carbon dioxide, turn it into oxygen, go outside of the ozone layer, ( by the way, ozone is also formed when UV rays react to oxygen) make the UV rays react to oxygen either directly or through a glass roof with no SPF protection, the go back to the ozone layer and release the ozone. At least, that's my plan. What do you think? | |
June 5, 2009 at 06:55 pm - by Nloeb.1 (1 Posts) | |
|---|---|
 Before we begin to develop ideas to "repair" the ozone layer, we must first adress the basic questions:
Large amounts of a special form of oxygen, made up of three oxygen molecules instead of the usual two. This special oxygen is called O3, or ozone.
Ultraviolet Radiation sustains ozone by creating it. The ozone layer seems to be, without human interference, self sustaining.
Chlorofluorocarbons and Hydrochlorofluorocarbons can destroy the ozone layer. Thanks to the Montreal Protocol, as forezt mentioned in their post, these are no longer considered threats. CO2 is this generations great enemy of the ozone layer.
Stratospheric ozone (sometimes referred to as "good ozone") plays a beneficial role by absorbing most of the biologically damaging ultraviolet sunlight (called UV-B), allowing only a small amount to reach the Earth's surface. The absorption of ultraviolet radiation by ozone creates a source of heat, which actually forms the stratosphere itself (a region in which the temperature rises as one goes to higher altitudes). Ozone thus plays a key role in the temperature structure of the Earth's atmosphere. Without the filtering action of the ozone layer, more of the Sun's UV-B radiation would penetrate the atmosphere and would reach the Earth's surface. Many experimental studies of plants and animals and clinical studies of humans have shown the harmful effects of excessive exposure to UV-B radiation. At the Earth's surface, ozone comes into direct contact with life-forms and displays its destructive side (hence, it is often called "bad ozone"). Because ozone reacts strongly with other molecules, high levels of ozone are toxic to living systems. Several studies have documented the harmful effects of ozone on crop production, forest growth, and human health. The substantial negative effects of surface-level tropospheric ozone from this direct toxicity contrast with the benefits of the additional filtering of UV-B radiation that it provides. (source: http://www.ozonelayer.noaa.gov/science/basics.htm, Science: Ozone Basics: "What roles does ozone play in teh atmosphere and how are humans affected?")
Sufficient levels of ozone all around the globe. No areas of defficent ozone levels, such as the current 'holes' over Antarctica and
If we tried to repair the ozone layer by creating more O3, we risk adding too much O3, which would lead to an unprecidented amount of BLOCKED UV-B radiation. While overexposure of UV-B radiation can kill plants, too little will stunt their growth as well. If a miscalculation in repairing the ozone layer reduced levels of UV-B radiation drastically, consequences could be dire. The process of repairing the ozone layer, if attempted by man, MUST be a slow and gradual process. OZONE RELATED THOUGHTS Can we not gather massive amounts of solar energy by placing solar/heat energy gathering devices (perhaps sattelites with solar panels, if you must picture something) in or above the ozone layer? If this layer recieves the most uvb radiation, how can we go about harvesting it for energy, and why haven't we already? Do insects such as honeybees, who see in UVB waves, behave less effectively in areas with stronger ozone layer cover? Does it affect them at all? | |
May 30, 2009 at 07:53 am - by black_midniterave (1 Posts) | |
|---|---|
Well, global warming doesn't exist because it is called climate change. People have the misconception that since some places in the world are getting colder, that there is no such thing. CO2, along with water vapor, which is far worst than carbon dioxide is a green house gas. The ocean plays a large factor in dissolving carbon dioxide, which has been artificially introduced as carbon sequestration. Many companies are using this technique to relieve heat.
I think that in order to begin rebuilding the ozone layer, regulation standards needs to be increased. The Kyoto Protocol is a good example of what is said, rather than done. For example, regulations under the Bush administration failed to maintain the clean air act that would reduce carbon emissions by almost 50%, when researcher argue if enforced, it would actuallly result in a much higher %. So, it isn't a matter of what is said, it is a matter of what gets done. Also, minor changes of human conduction could produce an emmense effect, like not releasing helium filled balloons.
A solution lies within carbon reduction and a reconstruction of our respiring native plants(carbon fixation). | |
May 19, 2009 at 05:59 pm - by forezt (4 Posts) | |
|---|---|
I thought that the ozone layer was doing okay. Ever since the Montreal Protocol was put into effect, conditions have been improving as far as ozone levels are concerned. People I've spoken with have actually asked, "why can't we have a Montreal Protocol for climate change?" The answer is that CO2 emissions are much more widespread and harder to ameliorate than CFCs, the compounds that caused ozone depletion. Diplomatic solutions to the problem, like the Kyoto Protocol, have proven ineffective in the face of not only industry resistance (which also happened with the Montreal Protocol), but also the legitimate energy needs of third world nations like China and India. Therefore, you might be right to be thinking about engineering solutions to climate change. One of the more promising solutions that I've heard proposed is one type of direct carbon sequestration, in which CO2 is liquified and pumped deep underground where it dissolves into the groundwater. Of course, any engineering solution has risks; you know the whole think about an ounce of prevention. Another thing to look out for is bogus red-herring "solutions" like the oxymoronic "clean coal" which is a marketing campaign invented by the coal industry to buy time before people start demanding real, tough solutions. | |
April 22, 2009 at 04:34 pm - by Ganondorf (2 Posts) | |
|---|---|
Have any of you seen the movie The Core? If you have then you probably remember the part with the solar winds. That was AWESOME! It also motivated me more. | |
April 8, 2009 at 02:41 pm - by emilyshmemily (1 Posts) | |
|---|---|
ganondorf your not going to be able to reverse global warming because global warming is a natural thing its going to happen. BUT the things we do is what causes it to get worse. | |
April 1, 2009 at 06:56 am - by inFern0 (11 Posts) | |
|---|---|
 Wauw, I am truly impressed of you guys ideas, but to be absolutely honest with you guys I have no idea what you are talking about, I don't understand half of the words :) So I let it be up to you guys to find a way to repair the Ozone Layer if there is a way. But what I think that all of us should do in the meantime is to reduce the destruction of it, I think it is a responsibility for all of us to do what we can to reduce our personal level of Co2. Uh by the way I think it is awesome that freshbrain.org (organinc) have done their part already :) Have an awesome day guys :) | |
March 23, 2009 at 07:09 pm - by Aleighner (15 Posts) | |
|---|---|
 I would do things on more of a molecular level, finding a way to change the CO2 into at least water vapor but preferably a non-greenhouse gas. This seems like it would be easier done with another gas that could give up or receive atoms than it could with plants | |