ilw
Ozone Protection
PROGRESS REPOR
-------
Contents
About This Report 2
Achievements in Ozone Protection 4
Then and Now 12
The Technology Revolution 14
The Phaseout 18
Partners in Ozone Protection 22
Military Leadership in Ozone Protection 26
Promoting Sun Safety 28
The Impact of Ozone-Depleting Substances on
Climate Change 32
A WalkThrough History 34
Looking Ahead 36
Office of Air and Radiation
United States Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (6205J)
Washington, DC 20460
www.epa.gov/ozone
EPA-430-R-07-001
April 2007
-------
Achievements in
Stratospheric Ozone
Protection
PROGRESS REPORT
-------
Countries around the world are phasing out the production and use of chemicals that
destroy ozone in the Earth's upper atmosphere. The United States has already phased out
production of those substances having the greatest potential to deplete the ozone layer. At
the same time, we have ensured that businesses and consumers have alternatives that are
safer for the ozone layer than the chemicals they replace. These vital measures are helping
to protect human health and the global environment.
With our many partners, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proud to have
been part of a broad coalition that developed and implemented flexible, innovative, and
effective approaches to ensure stratospheric ozone layer protection. These partnerships
have fundamentally changed the way we do business, spurring the development of new
technologies that not only protect the ozone layer but, in many cases, also save energy and
reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Together, we continue to look for alternatives c
technologies that are as ozone- and climate-friendly as possible.
This report covers the important and substantial achievements of the people, programs,
and organizations that are working to protect the Earth's ozone layer. As impressive as
these accomplishments are, our work is not done. Even though we have reduced or elimi-
nated the use of many ozone-depleting substances, some still remain. Additionally, since
ozone-depleting substances persist in the air for long periods of time, the past use of these
substances continues to affect the ozone layer today. We must also continue to ensure that
the alternatives being brought to the market support the country's long-term environmen-
tal goals in a cost-effective manner.
-------
m m Those of us who have been fighting for the ozone laye
since the early 1980s look back in amazement at what
has been accomplished. Most of us consider our work
on ozone as the most important part of our lives.
—Dr. Iwona Rummel-Bulska,
United Nations Environment Programme
-------
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL DECADES, EPA'S STRATOSPHERIC PROTECTION
DIVISION AND ITS PARTNERS HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT STRIDES TO
PROTECT THE EARTH'S STRATOSPHERIC OZONE LAYER, THE ENVIRON-
MENT, AND PEOPLE'S HEALTH.
Healing the
Ozone Hoi
The ozone layer acts like a shield in the
upper atmosphere (the stratosphere), to
protect life on Earth from harmful ultra-
violet (UV) radiation. In 1974, scientists
discovered that emissions of chlorofluo-
rocarbons, or CFCs, were depleting
ozone in the stratosphere. CFCs were a
common aerosol propellant in spray
cans and were also used as refrigerants,
solvents, and foam-blowing agents.
In the 1980s, scientists observed a thinning
of the ozone layer over Antarctica, and peo-
ple began thinking of it as an "ozone hole."
Additional research has shown that ozone
depletion occurs over every continent.
As our scientific knowledge about ozone depletion
grew, so too did the response to the issue. In 1987,
leaders from many countries came together to sign a
landmark environmental treaty, the Montreal Protocol on
Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer. Today, more than
190 countries—including the United States—have ratified the treaty. These
countries are committed to taking action to reduce the production and use of CFCs and
other ozone-depleting substances to protect the ozone layer. Countries are phasing out
the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances in groups, focusing on
those chemicals with the most ozone-depleting potential first, followed by those that pose
the next greatest ozone-depletion risk (in this document, these chemicals are referred to as
"first-generation"and "second-generation"substances, respectively).
-------
Sustained recovery of the ozone
layer will require worldwide phase-
out of ozone-depleting substances.
Global Ozone Depletion and Recovery
ar 4
Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change/Technology and Economic
Assessment Panel. Special Report on Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the
Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluoro-
carbons. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.) Figure SPM-3.
The ozone layer has not grown
thinner since 1998 over most of the
world, and it appears to be recovering
because of reduced emissions of
ozone-depleting substances. Antarctic
ozone is projected to return to pre-
1980 levels by 2060 to 2075.
OZONE: GOOD
UP HIGH, BAD
NEARBY
Ozone is a gas that
occurs both in the Earth's
upper atmosphere (the
stratosphere) and at
ground level. Ozone can
be "good" or "bad" for
people's health and the
environment, depending
on its location in the
atmosphere.
"Good" ozone is pro-
duced naturally in the
stratosphere and is
"good" because it blocks
harmful UV radiation
from reaching the Earth's
surface where it can
harm people and
ecosystems.
"Bad" ozone is an air
pollutant found at
ground level and is "bad"
because it is harmful to
breathe and can damage
crops, trees, and other
vegetation. Ground-level
ozone is a main compo-
nent of urban smog.
For more information,
see:
-------
We care about ozone depletion because a thinner
ozone layer allows more UV radiation to reach the
Earth's surface. Overexposure to UV radiation can
cause a range of health effects, including skin damage
(skin cancers and premature aging), eye damage
(including cataracts), and suppression of the immune
system. Researchers believe that overexposure to UV
radiation is contributing to an increase in melanoma,
the most fatal of all skin cancers.
-------
By the year 2165, actions to prot<
and restore the ozone layer will
mff
save an estimated 6.3 million U.S. lives that
would have otherwise been lost to skin cancer
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. November 1999. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean
Air Act, 1990-2010. EPA 4W-R-99-001. www.epa.gov/air/sect812/prospective1.html.
-------
Protecting
the Planet
UV radiation can damage sensitive crops, such as soy-
beans, and reduce crop yields. Some scientists believe
that marine phytoplankton, which serve as the base of
the ocean food chain, are already under stress from UV
radiation. This stress could have profound effects on
the food chain and on food productivity.
Additionally, since most ozone-depleting substances
are also potent greenhouse gases, replacing these sub-
stances with alternatives that are safer for thi
layer can also reduce greenhouse gas en~
slow climate change.
-------
Phasing out ozone-depleting substances has already reduced greenhouse gas emis-
sions by more than 8,900 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE) per
year*—equivalent to the cumulative carbon dioxide emissions associated with...
Generating enough electricity
to power every
U.S. home for more
than 13 years...
And
Preserving 89 million
acres of forests from
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division, Allowance Tracking System, 1989-1995.
Calculations made using U.S. Climate Technology Cooperation Gateway tool at www.usctcgateway.net.
-------
Protecting the ozone layer has enormous
benefits for the United States.
Because stratospheric ozone depletion is a
global issue, people in other countries also
benefit from the investments we make in
technology and sound science to protect the
ozone layer. In turn, we benefit from the
accomplishments of other nations.
-------
Every dollar invested in ozone protection provides
$20 of societal health benefits in the United States/
Efforts to protect the stratospheric
ozone layer will produce an estimated
$4.2 trillion in societal health benefits
in the United States over the period 1990 to 2165.*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ah and Radiation. November 1999. The Benefits and Costs
of the Clean Air Act, 1990-2010.EPA4W-R-99-001.www.epa.gov/air/sect812/prospectivel.html.
-------
"hen:
Ozone-Depleting Substances Were All Around Us.
N O W * More Ozone-Friendly Products, Better Processes, and
New Equipment Are In Use
All parts of our daily lives have been touched by ozone-depleting substances. Prior to the 1980s, CFCs and other
ozone-depleting substances were pervasive in modern life. But thanks to the work of individuals, businesses, organ-
izations, and governments around the world, substitutes that are safer for the ozone layer continue to be developed
for many ozone-depleting substances. The phaseout of ozone-depleting substances has also made a substantial
contribution toward the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions since their global warming potential is very high.
Computers
Then: Solvents containing CFCs and
methyl chloroform were used to clean
circuit boards during their production.
Now: Some companies have eliminated
the need to clean circuit boards during
their production. Others use water or
have temporarily switched to HCFCs.
Polystyrene Cups and
Packing Peanuts
Then: Some polystyrene cups and foam
packing "peanuts" were made using CFCs.
Now:These products are made with materials
that do not deplete the ozone layer.
Aerosol Cans
Then: CFCs were the propellant
used in various spray cans.
Now: Pumps and alternative
propellents using hydrocarbons
are being used.
12
Central Air
Conditioners
Then: CFCs were used as
the coolant in household
air conditioners.
Now: HCFCs and MFCs
have replaced CFCs.
Furniture
Then: Foam-blowing agents
containing CFCs were used
in furniture making.
Now: Water-blown foam is
being used.
Refrigerators
Then: CFCs were used in refrigerator
coolants and foam insulation.
Now: MFCs have replaced CFCs, and
substitutes are on the horizon that will
have reduced greenhouse gas impacts.
-------
Common Ozone-Depleting Substances and Some Alternatives*
Substance
Ozone-Depleting
Potential*
Global Warming
Potential**
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
Halons
Carbon tetrachloride (CCI4)
Methyl chloroform (CHCI3)
Methyl bromide (CH3Br)
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
(HCFCs)
Hydrofluorocarbons (MFCs)
Refrigerants, cleaning solvents, aerosol propellents, and
blowing agents for plastic foam manufacture.
Fire extinguishers/fire suppression systems, explosion
protection.
Production of CFCs (feedstock), solvent/diluents, fire
extinguishers.
Industrial solvent for cleaning, inks, correction fluid.
Fumigant used to control soil-borne pests and diseases in
crops prior to planting and in commodities such as
stored grains. Fumigants are substances that give off
fumes; they are often used as disinfectants or to kill pests.
Transitional CFC replacements used as refrigerants, sol-
vents, blowing agents for plastic foam manufacture, and
fire extinguishers. HCFCs deplete stratospheric ozone,
but to a much lesser extent than CFCs; however, they are
greenhouse gases.
CFC replacements used as refrigerants, aerosol propellents,
solvents, and fire extinguishers. MFCs do not deplete
stratospheric ozone, but they are greenhouse gases.
0.6-1.0
3-10
1.1
0.1
0.6
0.01 -0.5
0
4,680 - 1 0,720
1,620-7,030
1,380
144
5
76 - 2,270
122-14,130
This is a limited list and does not represent all of the alternatives approved by EPA's Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. For a complete
list, see: www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists/index.html.
Ozone-depleting potential (OOP) is the ratio of the impact on ozone caused by a chemical compared to the impact of a similar mass of CFC-11.The OOP
ofCFC-11 is 1.0.
Global warming potential (GWP) is the ratio of the warming caused by a substance compared to the warming caused by a similar mass of carbon dioxide.
• I Mi-
ll • •
Fire Extinguishers
Then: Halons were commonly used in
hand-held fire extinguishers.
Now: Conventional dry chemicals, which
don't deplete the ozone layer, and water
have replaced halons. MFCs are also used.
Car Air Conditioners
Then: CFCs were used as the coolant
in automobile air conditioners.
Now: MFCs have replaced CFCs.
Degreasers
Then: CFCs or methyl chloroform were used
in many solvents for degreasing.
Now: Water-soluble compounds and hydrocar-
bon degreasers that do not deplete the ozone
layer are available for many applications.
13
-------
The Technology
In the 1980s, only a few businesses and gov-
ernment organizations were optimistic that
technology could be developed to meet the
challenge of effectively eliminating the use
of ozone-depleting substances. But over the
next two decades, the reductions of these
substances, called for in the Montreal Protocol,
galvanized a global technology revolution.
14
-------
Corporate Leaders
Companies around the world invested in unprecedented
research and development to find ways to eliminate the use of
ozone-depleting substances. Creating effective product substi-
tutes or rethinking processes that had been in place for decades
was no trivial task. Many factors had to be considered and thor-
oughly evaluated.
Some businesses took a traditional path—retrofitting equipment,
re-engineering products or processes, or finding in-kind replace-
ments. Others found an opportunity to invent completely new
technologies or products. These efforts required major corporate
investment to develop new technologies, test them, and speed
their deployment to the marketplace.
There are hundreds of examples of important achievements in ozone layer protection. The
following are just a few stories from some technology leaders. Many other organizations also
made significant achievements in their fields.
Today, technology is
being developed
and deployed that
protects the ozone
layer while saving
energy and prevent-
ing greenhouse gas
emissions.
SC JOHNSON ^Johnson
ELIMINATES USE A FAMILY COMPANY
OF CFCs IN AEROSOLS
One of the first instances of U.S. corporate leader-
ship for protection of the ozone layer occurred on
June 18,1975, twelve years before the Montreal
Protocol, when SC Johnson announced its plan for a
corporate elimination of CFCs used as aerosol prod-
uct propellants. Its announcement was also well
ahead of the announcement by the federal govern-
ment that most CFC-based aerosol products for
consumers would be banned in the United States.
SC Johnson demonstrated that hydrocarbon propel-
lants were more economical and that its customers
preferred products that were more protective of the
ozone layer. By March 1978, when EPA banned CFCs
as propellants in cosmetic products, consumers had
already virtually halted the purchase of cosmetic
products that contained CFCs.
DUPONT™ LEADS
WITH SOUND SCIENCE
For more than two decades, DuPont™ has provided
industrial leadership in the protection of stratos-
pheric ozone. In the 1970s, the company's manage-
ment made a business decision to invest in good
science and conduct its own atmospheric modeling
to help decipher the evidence that CFCs were
affecting stratospheric ozone. By the time the
Montreal Protocol was signed, DuPont™ had already
led the chemical industry by abandoning CFCs and
developing alternatives. The company helped to
form the international Programme for Alternative
Fluorocarbon Toxicity Testing (PAFT), through which
it invited producers to examine the environmental
impacts of the potential new alternatives.
§§ The unprecedented progress we have seen in
ozone layer protection was a direct result of
cooperation among governments, industry,
environmental organizations, and scientists
worldwide. Industry's innovations sped CFC
phaseout while providing essential services
such as air conditioning and refrigeration. We
are very optimistic that the same spirit of coop-
eration can carryforward to other environmen-
tal issues such as global climate change.
—Thierry Vanlancker, Director,
DuPont™ Fluorochemicals
-------
Partnerships for Progress
Private and public leaders around the world
collaborated to develop and test new technolo-
gies to eliminate the need for ozone-depleting
substances. These organizations and individu-
als broke down many technical, institutional,
and financial barriers, paving the way for the
commercialization and standardization of new
materials, products, and processes. In addition,
corporate leadership played a key role in the
negotiation of the Montreal Protocol phaseout
schedules. As a result of this leadership, phase-
out targets were more easily achieved.
Multi-Industry Coalition
The Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric
Policy, one of the first multi-industry environ-
mental coalitions, was formed in 1980 to
address the issue of stratospheric ozone
depletion. It represents industry sectors that
rely on fluorocarbons (such as CFCs, HCFCs,
and HFCs). In 1986, the Alliance called for a
global solution to address ozone depletion. In
1992, the Alliance requested the phaseout
schedule for CFCs and certain HCFCs be accel-
erated. The Alliance continues to be a leading
industry voice in ozone protection and climate
change issues.
Fire Protection
The fire protection sector played a key role in
the U.S. transition from first-generation ozone-
depleting substances to a variety of similar
substitutes (such as
HFCs and inert gases)
and alternatives
(including water,
aerosols, and foam) as
fire protection agents.
Early collaboration by
industry, government,
and the military to
research, develop, and
test the alternatives
allowed the sector to
achieve its dual goals of
f The industry accepted the challenge to
protect the ozone layer and managed
the transition to new technologies
while preserving the significant societal
benefits offered by fluorocarbon tech-
nologies. The result has been good for
the environment, consumers, and the
participating industries.The success is
unprecedented.
— Kevin Fay
Former Executive Director
Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy
1) fire protection to save property and lives and
2) environmental protection for many—and
often challenging—applications. Leadership in
the revision of national and international
industry standards have ensured the adoption
of the alternatives and continued worldwide
progress away from halons. The sector has also
taken steps to reduce emissions of halons dur-
ing system testing and servicing, and of HFCs
used as halon alternatives.
Four fire protection industry organizations
developed a Voluntary Code of Practice that
encourages its members to follow government
regulations and
industry standards; EMA 'the life safetV 9rouP
J Saving Lives, Protecting Property
limit the use of
HFCs for testing and
training; and
minimize emissions
from false discharges
and during storage,
handling, and transport.
The organizations that
developed the code are
the Fire Equipment
Manufacturers'
Association (FEMA),
the Fire Suppression
Systems Association
(FSSA), the Halon
Alternatives Research
Corporation (HARC),
Fire Suppression Systems Assotiotion
HARC
16
-------
Alr-Condltlonlng
• s» £ and Refrigeration
«•%• Institute
AHAM
association of home
appliance manufacturers
and the National Association of Fire Equipment
Distributors (NAFED®).
As part of the Voluntary Code of Practice, the
sector also created a program known as the
HFC Emissions Estimating Program to collect
data about HFC emissions from fire protection
applications. This program is helping the
industry set benchmarks to minimize unneces-
sary greenhouse gas emissions and document
the progress being made.
Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration
EPA and the air-
conditioning and
refrigeration sector
have worked closely to
find acceptable substitutes for the use of CFCs
as coolants in household and car air condition-
ers and commercial refrigeration systems. In
2006, EPA and the Air-Conditioning and
Refrigeration Institute joined forces to mini-
mize the use of HCFCs and HFCs in the manu-
facture of more than 8 million residential and
commercial air-conditioning units and refriger-
ation systems annually. HCFCs are far less
damaging to the ozone layer than CFCs, and
HFCs are not ozone-depleting substances.
However, both HCFCs and HFCs are green-
house gases. EPA and the Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers took this into account
and agreed to work together to significantly
reduce HFC emissions during the manufactur-
ing of 12 million refrigerator-freezers in the
United States and more than 60 million world-
wide each year.
The partnerships plan to reduce HCFCs and
HFCs emissions during all stages of production,
including delivery, storage, transfer of refriger-
ants and system charging, testing, and refrigerant
recovery. The guidelines provide a framework for
protecting the global environment beyond cur-
rent mandates through advanced technologies.
Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning
IInternational
Prior to 1994, most air-
conditioning systems
used in cars and other
vehicles required CFC
refrigerants. While vehi-
cles manufactured in
1995 and later do not use
CFCs in their air-
conditioning systems,
many older cars still require them for servicing.
Industry partners have developed procedures
to retrofit cars to use alternative refrigerants,
such as HFC-134a, and to reduce the amount of
refrigerant leaked into the air during servicing.
SAE International™, Delphi, and the Mobile Air
Conditioning Society (MACS), together with
EPA, established a precedent-setting servicing
procedure using new technology that allows
for onsite recovery and recycling of motor vehi-
cle air-conditioning refrigerant. The procedure
prevents millions of pounds of refrigerant from
being released to the environment and enables
it to be reused, thereby reducing the need for
new refrigerant. Automobile manufacturers
worldwide have approved this process and
allowed it to be covered under vehicle war-
ranties. It has also been adopted for HFC-134a
refrigerant, which is used in modern car air-
conditioning systems.
17
-------
Ph
t
•istorically, the United States has been one
>f the largest consumers of ozone-depletin<
ubstances in the world. Over the past two
tecades, however, EPA and its partners have
liminated U.S. production of the most
damaging first-generation ozone-depleting
ubstances, such as CFCs and halons, and
leveloped options that are safer for the ozone
ayer than the chemicals they replace. Some of
:he second-generation replacement sub-
itances, such as HCFCs, are themselves under
Dhaseout schedules. These compounds are
elated for complete phaseout by 2030.
PA is responsible for controlling chemicals that
lamage the ozone layer by implementing the
equirements of Title VI of the Clean Air Act,
which is the legal framework for U.S. compliance
vith the Montreal Protocol and its amendments.
"he United States has met its commitments and
deadlines under both the Montreal Protocol and
Clean Air Act. We could not have achieved these
results without the collaboration of our partners
from all sectors of our economy.
18
-------
U.S. Production of First-Generation Ozone-
Depleting Substances Phased Out on Schedule
Chemical Group
Halons
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
Carbon tetrachloride
Hydrobromofluorocarbons
(HBFCs)
Methyl chloroform
Chlorobromomethane
Methyl bromide
Production
Phaseout Dates
January 1, 1994
January 1, 1996
January 1, 1996
January 1, 1996
January 1, 1996
August 18, 2003
January 1,2005
Deadline
Met
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
U.S. Production of Second-Generation Ozone-
Depleting Substances Phaseout on Schedule
Chemical Group
Hydrochlorofluoro-
carbons (HCFCs)
Production
Phaseout Dates
Cut production 35 percent
by January 1,2004
Cut production 65 percent
by January 1,2010
Cut production 90 percent
by January 1,2015
Cut production 99.5 per-
cent by January 1,2020
Complete phaseout by
January 1,2030
Deadline Met
/
(One year
ahead of
schedule)
On track to
meet all future
requirements
-------
-
Spurring Action
NRDC
THE EARTH'S BEST DEFENSE
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
played a key role in spurring international treaty
talks, domestic regulatory action, and adoption of
Clean Air Act provisions targeting ozone-depleting
substances. In 1986, NRDC made the first proposal
to phase out CFCs and halons over a 10-year period. The environmental
community, government, and industry collaborated in developing practi-
cal, sector-by-sector schedules for phasing out ozone-depleting chemicals
and introducing safer alterna-
tives. As a result, industri-
alized countries ended
halon production by 1994
and nearly all CFC pro-
duction by 1996. Today,
developing countries are
also well on the way to
eliminating these
chemicals.
Many people thought that the phase-
out of CFCs would be very hard. Yet
when countries agreed to the Montreal
Protocol, companies found new solu-
tions, discovered business opportuni-
ties, and saved money. There's a lesson
here for global warming: It will not be - -
as hard as many people think. //
—David D. Doniger,
Policy Director, Climate Center
Natural Resources Defense Council
Achieving Goals Through Flexibility
Because eliminating or replacing some ozone-depleting substances has
presented technical and other challenges, EPA has used flexibility and
innovative strategies to achieve the phaseout targets set forth in the
Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act. For example, EPA has:
• Granted exemptions allowed under law for devices
or applications for which immediate full-scale replace-
ment is not feasible, such as critical uses of methyl
bromide, used to control pests in agriculture and food
storage, and essential uses of CFCs for medical
devices, such as metered dose inhalers.
• Supported careful management of existing invento-
ries of ozone-depleting substances and encouraged
their proper destruction.
• Established tradable permits for import and produc-
tion of ozone-depleting substances. The system pro-
vides flexibility while also ensuring that the phaseout
20
-------
schedules for these substances are met. The sys-
tem also allows imports of ozone-depleting sub-
stances to encourage their proper destruction and
to reduce the ultimate amount of harmful materi-
als released to the atmosphere.
• Supported efforts to reclaim and recycle ozone-
depleting substances to reduce emissions while
meeting the needs of critical users as they transi-
tion to alternatives.
EPA's SNAP Program
The foundation for EPA's regulatory efforts to adopt
more ozone-friendly substances is its Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. The program
was established in 1994 to ensure a smooth transition
to safer, practical, and economically feasible alterna-
tives across multiple industrial, consumer, and mili-
tary sectors.
The SNAP program provides a regulatory frame-
work for EPA to evaluate the health and environ-
mental impacts of alternatives to ozone-depleting
substances that companies develop. Under the
program, EPA reviews alternatives for a variety of
end uses, such as refrigeration, air conditioning,
insulation foam, and fire suppression. Based on this
evaluation, EPA determines which substitutes are
acceptable, which are acceptable with conditions,
and which are unacceptable.
Through the SNAP program, EPA has
approved more than 300 alternatives for
more than 60 industrial, commercial, and
consumer end uses.
SELF-CHILLING CANS
Most technology applications reviewed
by the SNAP program have broad and
immediate market implications. These
applications include mobile and station-
ary air conditioning, domestic and com-
mercial refrigeration, fire suppression,
solvent cleaning, and aerosols, to name a
few.The SNAP program also reviews new
technologies with potentially large mar-
ket penetration, such as a portable, self-
chilling can that would allow consumers
to drink cold beverages any time and any
place. To work, the coolant must be
directly vented to the environment; how-
ever, the Clean Air Act prohibits inten-
tional venting of refrigeration devices
except where the refrigerants used are
found to be safe for the environment.
EPA worked to make sure that this new
technology could remain viable by allow-
ing the use of recycled carbon dioxide in
self-chilling cans, and in 2001 disallowing
the use of two MFCs. As a result, emis-
sions equivalent to 8 million tons of car-
bon per year were avoided, which is
roughly equivalent to the emissions
associated with burning more than
68 million barrels of oil.
*Note: This figure assumes 1 percent of the bever-
age can industry had adopted HFC-134a as the
refrigerant in self-chilling cai
21
-------
Partners in
Ozone Protection
Many organizations are playing a pivotal role in protecting the stratospheric
ozone layer—both in the past efforts they made to eliminate use of first-
generation ozone-depleting substances and in their current undertakings to
reduce their use of second-generation ozone-depleting substances. Leadership,
investment, and innovation are the keys to these important achievements.
22
-------
Replacing Halons
in Fire Protection
Before the U.S. production of halons ceased in January 1994,
these chemicals were extensively used as fire extinguishing
agents because they were effective and safe, and left no agent
residues. Most halm-based fire extinguishing applications can
now be replaced with other means of fire protection, particularly
for new installations. However, halons are still employed for
some essential uses, such as on civil aircraft, legacy military
systems, and other important, existing installations. The halons
necessary for these essential uses must be derived from existing
supplies.
The National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA®) develops voluntary standards
for the fire protection industry that are
adopted as industry practices in the
United States and around the world. The
association has developed U.S. standards for important
halon replacement technologies and worked to change
testing procedures and streamline the acceptance criteria
for alternatives. The standards have been instrumental in
supporting adoption of halon replacement agents world-
wide. In addition, NFPA® has organized conferences
internationally to promote the elimination of halon emis-
sions caused by testing, training, leaks, and accidental
discharges. It has also worked closely with the fire pro-
tection industry to approve a nonchemical pressure test
for fire extinguishers in place of discharge testing—
thereby preventing significant emissions of ozone-
depleting substances.
NFPA®
NATIONAL FIRE
PROTECTION ASSN.
The Halon Alternatives Research
Corporation (HARC) was originally
founded as a U.S. government partnership with industry
to develop halon alternatives. It has since evolved into
an industry-led effort. HARC members include the major
chemical manufacturers, equipment suppliers, and serv-
icing companies in the fire protection industry. In addi-
tion to serving as a clearinghouse and facilitating organi-
zation for research on halon alternatives, HARC has been
a leader in establishing the mechanisms by which recy-
cled halons are internationally traded in order to meet
essential uses. It implemented a comprehensive halon
recycling and banking program and helped to focus
global attention on the need for proper recycling of
halons.
PROTECTING PATIENTS
AND THE PLANET
As originally designed, metered
dose inhalers used CFCs to deliver
vital medication (such as albuterol)
to asthma sufferers. Thanks to the
availability of alternative albuterol
therapies, in 2005, the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration removed
CFC-based metered dose inhalers
containing albuterol from the list of
essential and exempted medical
devices. As a result, hundreds of
thousands of metered dose inhalers
sold each year will be CFC-free. The
switch is expected to result in a
reduction of the consumption of
CFCs by 850 metric tons per year.
3M developed the
world's first safe and
effective alternative to
CFC-driven asthma inhalers—a
technology that had remained
unchanged for some 40 years.
Collaborating with more than seven
different companies, 3M redesigned
virtually all of the inhaler's compo-
nents and helped to reformulate
numerous drugs to use CFC-free
technology. The company has also
worked worldwide to educate
patients and physicians on how
ozone layer protection and patients'
safety can go hand-in-hand. 3M set
the stage for the ultimate, substan-
tive phaseout of CFCs in metered
dose inhalers with no impact on
patient safety.
23
-------
Improving Commercial Refrigeration
Refrigeration and air conditioning typically use a compressed refrigerant to
cool and/or dehumidify. CFCs were once used pervasively in refrigeration
applications but have since been replaced by HCFCs—a transitional substi-
tute—HFCs, or, in some cases, hydrocarbons.
Raley's® Family of Fine Stores
is a pioneer among grocery
store chains in transitioning
the coolants in its refrigeration systems to
ozone-friendly alternatives. Raley's® is already
using HFCs for all major remodels and new
store construction and has successfully convert-
ed more than 70 percent of its inventory to
HFCs. Raley's® is also pioneering a spirit of
cooperation among grocers by sharing its techni-
cal expertise with its competitors. This exchange
of information will reduce refrigerant emissions
from grocery stores as they convert to alterna-
tives and build new stores that do not rely on
ozone-depleting refrigerants.
The Coca-Cola
Company has
committed to using refrigeration equipment that
contains no ozone-depleting substances and to
spreading the ozone protection message world-
wide. Since Coca-Cola is one of the world's
largest multinational corporations, these efforts
are having far-reaching results. In 1994, the com-
pany stopped purchasing refrigeration equip-
ment containing CFCs. All of the company's
new vending machines and dispensing equip-
ment use more ozone-friendly alternatives.
Additionally, Coca-Cola requires the capture of
all refrigerants during maintenance of these
machines. The company also created an Ozone
Protection Seminar for its worldwide operations,
which are based in both developed and devel-
oping nations. At EPA's request, the company
created a generic version of the seminar, which
EPA and the World Health Organization use as a
training program in developing countries. Coca-
Cola has also made the program available to
other companies and organizations to encourage
adoption of similar environmental practices.
TRANSFORMING SOLVENT USE IN ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING
The phaseout of ozone-depleting substances launched a global change in the way solvent users clean metal
parts, deflux wiring assemblies on printed circuit boards, and remove contaminants from precision mechanical
parts and assemblies. In the 1980s, two first-generation ozone-depleting substances, CFC-113 and methyl
chloroform, were used extensively as solvents in industrial cleaning operations. The solvent cleaning industry
conducted far-reaching research and development to reduce the demand for solvents in the first place, find
appropriate ozone-friendly chemical substitutes (such as HFCs and HCFCs), and replace existing cleaning
methods with substitute technologies, including aqueous cleaning and no-clean technologies.
In 1988, AT&T® and Petroferm <
jointly announced that AT&T®
was using a naturally derived Petroferm product to deflux electronic
circuit assemblies. The announcement signaled that CFCs were no
longer essential for sophisticated electronics manufacturing. AT&T®
also set the first aggressive phaseout goal for ozone-depleting
substances of any electronics manufacturer: 50 percent reduction
by 1991 and complete elimination by 1994.
Another company, Motorola, also took great 4f| MOTOROLA
strides to completely eliminate the use of all
ozone-depleting substances from its manufacturing processes.
Motorola accomplished this goal in 1993.
...Eliminating the use of
ozone-depleting sub-
stances was one of the
most challenging techno-
logical problems ever faced,
but the efforts of mankind
worldwide prevailed and
solutions were found.
— Robert G. Holcomb,
Corporate Director,
Environmental Affairs, Motorola
24
-------
New Technologies in Pest Management
Methyl bromide is a first-generation ozone-depleting substance, and it has long been used in agriculture
and food storage to effectively control a wide variety of pests in the United States and other countries. The
U.S. phaseout of methyl bromide took effect on January 1, 2005, except for allowable exemptions.
V."
Pillsbury
In 1993, before the phaseout
of methyl bromide, the
General Mills-owned
Pillsbury Company® made
the decision to eliminate as
much pesticide use as possi-
ble. In just four years, the
company completely eliminated its use of
methyl bromide. To provide customers with
safe food products, General Mills continues to
use heat treatment and other non-methyl bro-
mide materials, as well as integrated pest man-
agement programs, in high-volume flour mills
and food processing plants.
MDow AgroSciences
Dow AgroSciences™
developed alterna-
tives to methyl bromide that can be economic
and effective. Since 1998, the company has
developed alternatives that approach methyl
bromide's ability to control pests and disease.
These products are being used successfully on a
wide variety of crops around the world. Dow
AgroSciences™ has also developed new uses for
sulfuryl fluoride (a pest control tool in the
building fumigation industry for more than 40
years) that can replace methyl bromide in some
food processing, grain milling, and stored
commodity applications.
Sound Science
Underscores Achievements
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been key players in advancing the
world's understanding of stratospheric ozone depletion and trends.
NASA maintains satellites in
various Earth orbits and con-
ducts research to acquire a
long-term, comprehensive set
of environmental measure-
ments about the Earth. NASA
has also been instrumental in assessing the
effects of worldwide aviation on the global
atmosphere. In addition to its data gathering
efforts, NASA has reduced the use of ozone-
depleting substances in its space program by
more than 96 percent—from more than 3.5 mil-
lion pounds in 1991 to less than 150,000 pounds
in 2004. To achieve such significant reductions,
NASA invested years of focused effort and
resources to research, test, develop, qualify, and
implement important techno-
logical advances for mission-
critical uses of ozone-deplet-
ing substances.
NOAA determines the extent
of depletion over Antarctica
(the ozone hole), makes ground-
based measurements of ozone in
the atmosphere, and monitors the
gases responsible for depleting
stratospheric ozone. Its global
network of research stations and
scientists continues to play an important role in
monitoring and tracking the recovery of the
ozone layer.
25
-------
Military Leadership in
26
-------
The U.S. military has led the way in the technology revolu-
tion. Since 1990, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
has reduced its overall usage of first-generation ozone-
depleting substances from more than 16.5 million pounds to
less than half a million pounds in 2005, a 97 percent reduction. The Armed
Services and defense agencies have been key players in discovering, testing,
and implementing important alternatives to ozone-depleting substances.
This work has served as a foundation and model for technology changes and
advancement in the global marketplace.
Fire Suppression
Alternatives
DoD spearheaded efforts to identify more
ozone-friendly alternatives to halons used for
fire suppression in aircraft engines. Five dif-
ferent DoD aircraft are using HFCs instead of
halons, including three fighter aircraft and
two helicopters. DoD also developed solid
propellant inert gas generators, similar to the
inflation devices
used for automobile
airbags, as alterna-
tives for halons in
aircraft dry bay fire
suppression appli-
cations.
HFC Refrigerants
on Vessels
In 1993, DoD began converting its ship
and watercraft air-conditioning and refrig-
eration systems to those that use more
ozone-friendly alternatives. More than 400
vessels now use alternative refrigerants
such as HFCs. The switch is not only pro-
tecting the ozone layer but also reducing
greenhouse gas emissions. When complete,
the project will result in annual green-
house gas emission reductions equivalent
to the emissions from more than 5,000
automobiles per year.
PROTECTING SOLDIERS ON THE BATTLEFIELD
DoD was the first in the world to design an effective alternative to the halon
systems used in ground combat vehicles to suppress explosions in crew com-
partments. The new halon-free systems have been used successfully in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and all new ground combat vehicles are expected to be out-
fitted with this alternative system.
27
-------
Promoting
Su
Because it will not be possible to
see the full effect of efforts to
restore the Earth's protective
ozone layer for at least another
50 years, EPA is also working
to protect public health from UV
radiation. EPA's SunWise Program
promotes sun safety in schools
nd communities around the
Duntry. Sun safety can include
variety of measures, such as
wearing sunglasses, hats, and
other protective clothing;
applying sunscreen; and planning
outdoor activities around the UV
Index to avoid overexposure to the
sun as UV levels get higher.
• he UV Index provides a daily
>recast of the expected risk of
verexposure. The Index predicts
UV intensity levels on a scale Q£
1 to 11 +, where 1 indicates a low
risk of overexposure and 11 +
signifies an extreme risk.
28
-------
EPA's SunWise Program
EPA launched the
SunWise Program
a program that radiates good ideas
A Partnership Program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
www.epa.gov/sunwise
in 2000 to teach the
public about the
risks of overexposure to UV radiation. SunWise start-
ed out as a school-based program for kindergarten
through eighth grade students and has grown to
include a number of informal education, sports, com-
munity, and nonprofit organizations. By forming
partnerships with these groups, SunWise pursues a
more comprehensive approach to teaching children
and their caregivers about sun safety.
SunWise continues to expand its reach. By the end of
2006, the program had registered more than 13,700
partner schools involving more than 17,000 educators
in all 50 states. In addition, 1,500 partner organiza-
tions, such as science museums, children's museums,
and camps, have partnered with SunWise.
Percentage of K-8 Schools Participating
in EPA's SunWise Program
Jfc
UNWISE IN ARIZONA
in Arizona, lessons about using sunscreen, covering up, and
vearing sunglasses now join reading and writing as part of the
tandard curriculum. In 2005, Arizona became the first state to
mandate the use of SunWise educational materials in every K-8
uul. Arizona children are at a high risk of developing skin cancer
because of the amount of time that they spend outdoors all year and the intense level
of UV radiation in the state. Teachers are encouraged to spend five to 10 hours on sun
safety education each year.
29
-------
Recognizing Leaders
in
T
Sun Safety
he SunWise Recognition Program recognizes elementary and middle school educators and
administrators and other organizations showing exemplary and enthusiastic commitment
to sun safety education.
The Shining Star Award recognizes partner schools and educators that have shown a lasting
commitment to sun safety education, either by adapting the program in new and effective ways,
discovering unique ways to share the SunWise mes-
sage more broadly, or implementing the program in
multiple classrooms or grade levels.
The Helios Leadership Award is given to SunWise
partners that meet all of the eligibility criteria for the
Shining Star Award and that have shown outstanding
leadership in school-based sun safety education by
either 1) instituting a policy to address sun safety that
can serve as a model for other schools/districts,
2) erecting a shade structure, or 3) addressing the
issue of sun safety in a way that distinguishes them
from Shining Star Schools.
PARTNERING FOR SUN
PROTECTION
Together with a pair of -^^
experts—the National
Weather Service (NWS)
and the American
Meteorological Society
(AMS)—SunWise devel-
oped a tool kit to help ff^k
meteorologists educate n
-" •. : .'.;, ye i
children about UVradia-
tlon and sun protection.
SunWise and NWS also developed the
UV Alert, a real-time tool the public can
use to protect themselves from over-
exposure to UV radiation. People who
subscribe to the UV Alert receive e-mail
notification when the level of solar UV
radiation is predicted to be unusually
high in their area. They can also receive
daily notification of the UV Index to help
them plan their outdoor activities.
For more information about the UV Alert,
visit
I! V INDEX FORECAST
.'m.,..1 .'IM. r it V. , v.„.'-,.• 07. L-I..K, - 1 .,.'•„ •••:..• •.,-,...- a»: • >, M/TT It. 2006
Shining Star Award Winners
0McWane
Science cerffer
IN LEARNING
30
Screenshot of the UV Index Forecast, prepared daily
by the National Weather Service.
McWane Science Center
In Birmingham, Alabama, the
McWane Science Center is teaching
thousands of visitors about sun safe-
ty. The hands-on, interactive science
center and aquarium is one of the
many informal learning centers across the nation that is
teaming up with SunWise. Led by the efforts of Jan
Mattingly, the center has hosted teacher and museum
training workshops and created family event days so the
entire community can learn about sun safety.
-------
Helios Leadership Award Winners
Kyrene de la Colina Elementary School
Kyrene de la Colina
Elementary School
Stephanie Smith and
Kyrene de la Colina
Elementary School in
Phoenix, Arizona, have spread the SunWise mes-
sage in a number of creative ways. Each year,
students conduct the "Hats on Heads" activity—
keeping track of how many children are wearing
hats outdoors throughout the year. The Arizona
Commission on the Arts also awarded the school
the state's first sun safety grant and provided a
playwright who helps children write creative
plays about sun safety. Ms. Smith and the school
also raised funds for the building of two shade
structures on the school property.
Sea Gate Elementary School
In their six years of
Brzeski and Sea
Gate Elementary School in Naples, Horida, have
achieved great things in sun safety. Ms. Brzeski
has helped convince the School Board in Collier
County, where Sea Gate is located, to devote more
than $2 million for shade structures to cover play-
grounds at all of its 22 elementary schools—the
first project of its kind in the country. She also has
worked to provide 1,200 hats and 600 pairs of
sunglasses for students.
FODNMFIONOFAIHEIIICA
The SHADE® Foundation of America
The SHADE® Foundation of America
has been a SunWise partner since
2003. It has helped spread the mes-
sage of sun safety to schools across
the country and fund shade structures for a num-
ber of organizations. With EPA, the foundation
also sponsors an annual national poster contest for
children in kindergarten through eighth grade.
Posters submitted to the contest are original, cre-
ative, and suggest ways to prevent skin cancer and
raise sun safety awareness. In 2006, the winner got
to throw out the first pitch at a Red Sox game at
Fenway Park in Boston. More than 40,000 students
have participated in the annual contest since its
inception in 2003.
Holy Cross Lutheran School
Carlos Olivo and Holy Cross
Lutheran School in Dallas, Texas,
have developed a SunWise
school policy involving the
entire school and local health
advisors. The policy teaches
children to apply sunscreen
properly and encourages them to wear hats,
sunglasses, and protective clothing. The school
has constructed one shade structure and started
work to install a second one.
Evansville Cancer Center
Evansville Cancer Center
Vantage?::.
Robin Lawrence-Broesch
of the Evansville Cancer
Center in Indiana has
done a remarkable job of
spreading the SunWise
message to her community. She has conducted more
than 50 presentations that have reached more than
10,000 students. She organized a "Pool Patrol" pro-
gram that distributed free sunscreen and demon-
strated the importance of sun safety using the
SunWise UV-sensitive Frisbee. She also arranged
free skin cancer screenings at the center and was
featured in local media for her sun safety work.
Paul Gross, WDIV-TV
Paul Gross of WDIV-TV in
Detroit, Michigan,
is one of the many meteorol-
ogists across the country
using the SunWise Program
to teach his community
about UV radiation and sun
safety. On a TV spot featur-
ing the UV Index, Mr. Gross used the SunWise
Frisbee and UV meter to demonstrate the effect of
UV radiation. He also travels to local schools pro-
moting sun safety and utilizes SunWise activities
with students and their teachers.
31
-------
The Impact of Ozone-
Depleting Substances on
The search for alternatives for ozone-depleting substances has also led to opportunities to enhance
energy efficiency. For example, to avoid potential efficiency losses in some refrigeration applications,
EPA has worked extensively with automobile and equipment manufacturers and the supermarket
industry to transition to alternative refrigerants that not only protect the stratospheric ozone layer, but
that also contribute to better energy efficiency. This transition has improved cooling performance and
enhanced fuel efficiency, leading to a reduced demand for fossil fuel combustion and reduced emis-
sions and concentrations of greenhouse gases.
32
-------
Phasing out ozone-depleting substances in order to protect the
ozone layer directly benefits the Earth's climate in two ways.
First, because most ozone-depleting substances are also potent
greenhouse gases, phasing out these substances directly reduces
greenhouse gas emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) noted that the global decline in emissions of ozone-
depleting substances has substantial climate benefits. The combined
emissions of CFCs, HCFCs, and HFCs have fallen from about 33 per-
cent of the annual carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combus-
tion around 1990 to about 10 percent around 2000.*
Projected Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Avoided Through HCFC Phaseout and
Management of Refrigerant Emissions
Source: EPA
This graph illustrates the projected annual greenhouse gas emis-
sions (measured in million metric tons of carbon equivalent) that
will be avoided as a result of both the U.S. phaseout of HCFCs
and the improved management of refrigerant emissions.
The U.S. phaseout of
CFCs and halons will
result in substantial
reductions in green-
house gas emissions
over the period 1990
to 2010, as well as
additional reductions
from the phaseout of
HCFCs over the peri-
od 2000 to 2030.
Second, when substi-
tute materials are
introduced, the
equipment in which
they are used is usually
upgraded. This means
that the equipment is often less leaky and more energy efficient.
Less leakage reduces direct emissions of the substitute materials to
the environment. Greater energy efficiency requires less power
production, which in turn reduces the greenhouse gases emitted
during fossil fuel combustion.
The International Perspective
EPA's work to achieve climate co-benefits extends globally as well.
For example, EPA and the U.S. Department of Energy's National
Renewable Energy Laboratory have partnered with The Energy and
Resources Institute (TERI) in India to quantify fuel consumption due
to car air-conditioning use in India. In Europe and the United States,
car air conditioning systems are responsible for 4 to 6 percent of total
car fuel use. In India, that figure can be as high as 20 to 30 percent of
total car fuel consumption due to India's climatic conditions and the
predominance of smaller engine vehicles. TERI is examining various
regulatory and voluntary options that the government of India can
exercise to improve engine efficiency and reduce emissions of ozone-
depleting substances and greenhouse gases.
* Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change/Technology and Economic Assessment Panel. Special
Report on Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluo-
rocarbons and Perfluorocarbons. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.) Figure SPM-3.
CURRENT AND FUTURE
CLIMATE CHANGE
For over the past 200 years, the burn-
ing of fossil fuels, such as coal and
oil, and deforestation have caused
the concentrations of heat-trapping
"greenhouse gases" to increase sig-
nificantly in our atmosphere. These
gases prevent heat from escaping to
space, somewhat like the glass pan-
els of a greenhouse.
Greenhouse gases are necessary to
life as we know it, because they keep
the planet's surface warmer than it
otherwise would be. But, as the con-
centrations of these gases continue to
increase in the atmosphere, the
Earth's temperature is climbing above
past levels. According to NOAA and
NASA data, the Earth's average sur-
face temperature has increased by
about 1.2 to 1.4°F since 1900. The
warmest global average temperatures
on record have all occurred within the
past 15 years, with the warmest two
years being 1998 and 2005. Most of
the warming in recent decades is like-
ly the result of human activities. Other
aspects of the climate are also chang-
ing, such as rainfall patterns, snow
and ice cover, and sea level.
If greenhouse gases continue to
increase, climate models predict that
the average temperature at the
Earth's surface could increase from
2.5 to 10.4°F above 1990 levels by
the end of this century. Scientists are
certain that human activities are
changing the composition of the
atmosphere, and that increasing the
concentration of greenhouse gases
will change the planet's climate. But
they are not sure by how much it will
'change, at what rate it will change,
or what the exact effects will be.
-------
A Walk Through
Science
1928
Scientists
synthesize
CFCs.
1974
Nobel prize winners Molina and
Rowland discover that CFCs can
break down stratospheric ozone.
1973
Scientists detect CFCs in atmosphere.
1975
Scientists discover
that bromine, used
in fire-retarding
halonsand agricul-
tural fumigants, is
a potent ozone-
depleting
substance.
1985
British Antarctic Survey
team discovers Antarctic
ozone hole (7.3 million
square miles), marking
the first evidence of stratos-
pheric ozone depletion.
Scientific research reveals
stratospheric ozone layer
depletion has adverse envi-
ronmental and human
health effects.
1991
International scientists
agree that CFCs are
depleting the stratos-
pheric ozone layer in
the northern and south-
ern hemispheres.
Action
1975
SC Johnson announces
corporate phaseout
of CFCs as aerosol
product propellents.
1976
United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) calls for an
international conference to dis-
cuss an international response
to the ozone issue.
1978
U.S. bans non-essential uses of
CFCs as a propellant in some
aerosols (e.g., hair sprays,
deodorants, antiperspirants).
Canada, Norway, and Sweden
follow with a similar ban.
1987
Twenty-four
countries sign
the Montreal
Protocol on
Substances That
Deplete the
Ozone Layer.
1989
All developed coun-
tries that are parties
to the Montreal
Protocol freeze
production and
consumption of CFCs
at 1986 levels.
1981
UNEP develops a global
convention to protect
the ozone layer.
1996
U.S. eliminates
production and
import of CFCs,
carbon tetrachloride,
trichloroethane, and
hydrobromofluorocarbons.
1994
U.S. eliminates
production and
import of halons.
1993
DuPont™ announces that it
will halt its production of
CFCs by the end of 1994.
1992
U.S. announces an acceler-
ated CFC phaseout date of
December 31,1995, in
response to new scientific
information about ozone
depletion.
1990
Clean Air Act Amendments, including
Title VI for Stratospheric Ozone
Protection, signed into law.
34
-------
COLLABORATORS
IN ATMOSPHERIC
CHEMISTRY
2000
Japan Meteorological Agency
reports the hole in the stratospheric
ozone layer over the Antarctic is at
its largest to date—more than twice
the size of Antarctica.
2006
The ozone hole is reported to be the
biggest ever, exceeding that of 2000.
2060-2075
Earliest timeframe
projected for the ozone
layer to recover.'
2004
All developed coun-
tries reduce con-
sumption of HCFCs
by 35 percent from
baseline levels.
2002
All developing countries that
are parties to the Montreal
Protocol freeze methyl
bromide production at
1995-1998 average level.
2010
All developed
countries
reduce con-
sumption of
HCFCs by 65
percent from
baseline levels.
2015
All developed
countries
reduce con-
sumption of
HCFCs by 90
percent from
baseline levels.
2030
All developed
countries
scheduled to
complete the
phaseout of
ozone deplet-
ing substances.
2040
All developing countries
that are parties to the
Montreal Protocol
scheduled to completely
phaseout HCFCs.
mists
Sherwood Rowland and
Mario Molina discovered
that CFCs contribute to
ozone depletion. The two
collaborators theorized
that CFC gases react with
solar radiation and decom-
pose in the stratosphere,
releasing chlorine atoms
that are able to destroy
large numbers of ozone
molecules.
Their research was first
published in Nature maga-
zine in 1974. The National
Academy of Sciences con-
curred with their findings
in 1976, and in 1978CFC-
based aerosols were
banned in the United
States. Further validation of
their work came in 1985
with the discovery of the
ozone hole over Antarctica.
In 1995, the two chemists
shared the Nobel Prize for
Chemistry with Paul
Crutzen, a Dutch chemist
who demonstrated that
chemical compounds of
nitrogen oxides accelerate
the destruction of stratos-
pheric ozone.
Executive Summary, WMO/UNEP Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2006, Scientific Assessment
Panel of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, August 18,2006. p. 7.
-------
Looking
Ahead
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Stratospheric Protection Division
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (6205J)
Washington, DC 20460
www.epa.gov/ozone
www.epa.gov/sunwise
-------
Ithough EPA and its partners have achieved excellent results, our job
is not done. Healing the ozone layer will take many years—and
krequire a concerted worldwide effort—to accomplish.
In our work to expedite the recovery of the ozone layer, EPA plans to:
• Complete the phaseout of ozone-depleting substances.
• Continue educating the public, especially children, on how to protect
themselves from excess exposure to UV radiation through the SunWise
program.
• Continue to implement smart, flexible approaches.
• Continue to foster domestic and international partnerships to protect
the ozone layer.
• Encourage the development of products, technologies, and initiatives
that reap co-benefits in climate change and energy efficiency.
We've demonstrated that we can successfully meet the global challenge of
ozone layer protection, and we will continue to work with our partners to
make the environment safer for all generations.
-------
------- |