Environment Pollution and Climate Change
Open Access

Ozone layer; Fluorocarbons; Refrigerants; Global warming

Introduction

They reach the stratosphere without any change. In the stratosphere they’re separated by the strong ultraviolet shafts of the solar radiation. To quote J.E. Hobbs, “In 1975 about 3000 million barrels ejected further than, tons of fluorocarbons, and the total affair of frons (substantially F- l 1 and F- 12) was nearly 1000 tons [1].

World-wide product and release of F- 11 and F- 12 grew by about 10 percent per annum up to 1974, but fell in 1975 and 1976 by about 15 percent. It’s uncertain how important of the fall in affair was due to concern about the hazards of fluorocarbons, how important of the world profitable depression and the profitable attractiveness of contending products”. It has been discovered that the atmospheric attention of CFC are showing an upward trend. It may be refocused out that CFCs are the destroyers of ozone. Still, there are antithetical opinions about the effect of CFC on ozone [2].

In the opinion of the scientists, while man’s exertion isn’t going to change ozone product rates, the addition of chemicals similar as F- 11 and F- 12 may laterally increase the rate of destruction and so reduce its average attention. It’s really true that ozonosphere acts as sludge for the dangerous ultra-violet shafts of certain wavelengths. Ultra-violet radiations of these surge lengths are dangerous to utmost forms of terrestrial life. Indeed a nanosecond bit that passes through the ozone sub caste is set up to beget eye vexation and skin cancer. It impairs the growth of certain crop shops and has an adverse effect on a variety of organisms from bacteria to invertebrates. The ozone reduction leading to increased ultraviolet radiation may beget several on-biological damages performing in briskly deterioration of maquillages, fabrics, plastics and other accoutrements [3,4].

It’s an established fact that growth of mortal civilization in general and urbanisation and industrialisation in particular have released vast amounts of colorful kinds of adulterants into the atmosphere. The adulterants beget damage to the physical terrain, foliage, accoutrements,and they intrude with the climate also [5].

Chlorofluorocarbons and Ozone reduction

In the 1920s, refrigeration and air exertion systems used composites similar as ammonia, chloromethane, propane and sulfur dioxide as refrigerants. Though effective, the composites were poisonous and ignitable, and exposure to them could affect in serious injury or death. A platoon of druggists at Frigidaire led by Thomas MidgelyJr.( 1889- 1944) worked to develop nontoxic, noninflammable druthers to the refrigerants [6].

The platoon concentrated their trouble on composites containing carbon and halogens similar as fluorine and chlorine. Similar composites were known to be unpredictable and chemically inert, both important parcels for the platoon studying their use in refrigeration. The first emulsion they developed was dichlorodifluoromethane, CCl2F2, which they dubbed “Freon”. Midgely would admit the Society of Chemical Industry’s Perkin Medal for this exploration in 1937; in 1941, he was awarded the Priestley Medal, the American Chemical Society’s loftiest award, for his benefactions to chemistry. By the early 1970s, CFCs were in wide use, and worldwide product of the composites had reached nearly one million tons per time, representing roughly a$ 500 million slice of the chemical assiduity [7,8].

The significance of ozone

From an environmental viewpoint, ozone is a confusing patch. In the troposphere, the region of the atmosphere from Earth’s face up to about 6 long hauls, ozone is a contaminant that’s a element of photochemical gauze. But in the stratosphere, the region of the atmosphere from 6 to 31 long hauls, ozone absorbs potentially dangerous ultraviolet (UV) radiation.

As the Royal Swedish Academy of lores put it in its advertisement of the 1995 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “Indeed though ozone occurs in similar small amounts, it plays an exceptionally abecedarian part in life on earth. This is because ozone, together with ordinary molecular oxygen (O2), is suitable to absorb the major part of the sun’s ultraviolet radiation and thus help this dangerous radiation from reaching the face. Without a defensive ozone subcaste in the atmosphere, creatures and shops couldn’t live, at least not upon land. ” Rowland’s interest in the fate of CFCs in the atmosphere was sparked by a talk he heard at a conference in 1972. The speaker bandied results attained by James Lovelock a British scientist who had constructed a largely sensitive way to measure trace feasts. Lovelock had measured trichlorofluoromethane in the atmosphere in quantities that suggested that virtually all of the CFC- 11 ever manufactured was still present in the atmosphere [9].

Rowland decided to devote a portion of his exploration to understanding the fate of CFCs in the atmosphere. Although CFCs are inert in the lower troposphere, Rowland realized that they can be broken down by UV radiation once they drift up into the stratosphere. In late 1973, Rowland and Molina, who had lately joined Rowland’s lab, used data from a variety of published sources to calculate that CFC motes released near the face of Earth would, over decades, wind up in the stratosphere where UV radiation would resolve off chlorine tittles. Each chlorine snippet would reply incontinently with an ozone patch, setting off a chain response that would destroy thousands of ozone motes. In their paper, they estimated that if CFC use was banned incontinently, ozone loss would go on for years. However, still, ozone loss would be indeed lesser, if CFC product continued.

“When we realized there was a veritably effective chain response, that changed the CFC disquisition from an intriguing scientific problem to one that had major environmental consequences,” Rowland told Chemical & Engineering News in an expansive interview in 2007. “You do not frequently get numerous chills down your reverse when you look at scientific results,” he added, but that had been one of those moments [10-12].

Conclusion

The product of CFCs in the United Stated or their import was banned as of January 1, 1996. Use of CFCs is confined to outfit placed into use previous to 1996. The product or import of HCFC- 22 and HCFC- 142b for use in new units or operations was banned in these. As of January 1, 2010, although product and import for use in being outfit is allowed through 2019. The product or import of HCFC- 141b for any purpose was banned as of January 1, 2004. Utmost HFC uses in new units or operations are being phased out under USEPA Rules over a staggered schedule that begins in 2016 and stretches through 2024. Under these Rules, utmost HFC uses in polyurethane and other lathers and in new retail food cooled cases will be phased out between January 1, 2016 and January 1 2020. Use of HFCs in mobile air exertion will end with Model Year 2020, while proscriptions on HFC use in new fire repression systems, cold storehouse, domestic refrigeration, and erecting chillers go into place on January 1 of 2018, 2021, 2023 and 2024, independently. Use of HFCs in being outfit is innocent by EPA regulations. Minnesota has an estimated 12 million domestic appliances and auto air conditioners that contain an aggregate of about, 1000 tons of CFCs, HCFCs and HFCs. Regulations are in place to help the release of CFCs, HCFCs and HFCs into the terrain. In addition to the colorful product bans, servicers and disposers of appliances and motor vehicle air conditioners are needed to gain technician instrument, proper refrigerant recovery or recycling outfit, and keep records.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest

1. Okot-Okumu J (2012) Solid waste management in African cities–East Africa.Waste Management-An Integrated Vision.

Google Scholar, CrossRef

2. Olawepo BB, Bello S, Blessing D, Ajayi AS, Eriakha EC (2021) Assessment of Waste Management Techniques from Palm Oil Producing Industry: A Case Study of Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research (Nifor) Benin City.

Google Scholar, CrossRef

3. Mertz W (1981) The essential trace elements.Science213: 1332-1338.

Google Scholar, CrossRef, Indexed at

4. Orlov DS, Sadovnikova LK, Suchanov NI (1985) Chemistry of soils.Moscow: Publishing house of the Moscow State University374.

Google Scholar

5. Orlov DS, Sadovnikova LK, Lozanovskaya IN (2002) Ecology and protection of biosphere at chemical pollution.

Google Scholar

6. Adewole MB, Uchegbu LU (2010) Properties of Soils and plants uptake within the vicinity of selected Automobile workshops in Ile-Ife Southwestern, Nigeria.Ethiop J Environ Stud Manag.

Google Scholar, CrossRef, Indexed at

7. Keifer Matthew, Casanova Vanessa, Garland John, Smidt Mathew, Struttmann Tim, et al. (2019) Foreword by the Editor-in-Chief and Guest Editors. J Agromedicine 24: 119-120.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

8. Rodriguez Anabel, Casanova Vanessa, Levin Jeffrey L, Porras David Gimeno Ruiz de, Douphrate David I, et al. (2019) Work-Related Musculoskeletal Symptoms among Loggers in the Ark-La-Tex Region. J Agromedicine 24: 167-176.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

9. Asare Godfred, Sean Helmus (2012) Underwater Logging: Ghana's Experience with the Volta Lake Project. Nature Faune 27: 64-66.
10. Kagawa A, Leavitt SW (2010) Stable carbon isotopes of tree rings as a tool to pinpoint the geographic origin of timber. J Wood Science 56: 175-183.

Google Scholar, Crossref

11. Irwin Aisling (2019) Tree sleuths are using DNA tests and machine vision to crack timber crimes. Nature 568: 19-21.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

12. Tenenbaum David (2004) Underwater Logging: Submarine Rediscovers Lost Wood. Environ Health Perspect 112: A892-A895.

Google Scholar, Crossref