It is said that presence of Ozone at ground level is bad and the presence at height is good which prevets the UV radiations comming from Sun.
My Question: Shall we recommend the emmision Ozone from our day-to-activities or not?

sarasheed

Ground level ozone is pollution.

http://www.nsc.org/library/facts/ozone.htm

We humans can produce all the ozone we want to, but to get it 10-30 miles above the ground into the stratosphere where it would be useful would take many times the power of the defunct Soviet Energia heavy-lift rocket.

I don't know what the life cycle of an ozone molecule is or why it does not travel to the stratosphere from the ground.

Lightning creates more Ozone than we'll ever generate...You'd be better served by trying to control the GHG generated from human and animal activity.

.
My Question: Shall we recommend the emmision Ozone from our day-to-activities or not?You should definitely not. Too much ground level Ozone is harmful in a number of ways. See for instance Health and Environmental Effects of Ground-Level Ozone (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/naaqsfin/o3health.html)

/Claes

and animal activity.

That's funny right there..........I don't care who ya are! :notme:

It is said that presence of Ozone at ground level is bad and the presence at height is good which prevets the UV radiations comming from Sun.
My Question: Shall we recommend the emmision Ozone from our day-to-activities or not?

sarasheed

Is there a significant source or concentration of g-l ozone in the area in question? If not, then you don't need to worry about it, unless there are specific regulatory concerns. If so, then...

Lightning creates more Ozone than we'll ever generate...You'd be better served by trying to control the GHG generated from human and animal activity.

That's like saying, "There's a carbon monoxide concentration in my basement because the furnace is shot, but I'm not going to worry about it because forest fires create a lot of CO."

Tell me Jim, what's the difference between naturally created Ozone and man-made Ozone?

Why is a GHG from industrial activity worse than a GHG created from the breathing and flatulance of animals and people?

As for your furnace CO...put an alarm in the basement because CO is heavier than air and is extremely dangerous when confined. The CO from a forest fire is in the open environment where it can react in nature and be converted into other compounds.

Tell me Jim, what's the difference between naturally created Ozone and man-made Ozone?

Why is a GHG from industrial activity worse than a GHG created from the breathing and flatulance of animals and people?

As for your furnace CO...put an alarm in the basement because CO is heavier than air and is extremely dangerous when confined. The CO from a forest fire is in the open environment where it can react in nature and be converted into other compounds.

I think there's a potential here for some :topic: and verboten political discourse, but I will say that the obvious difference between naturally-caused phenomena such as lightening-induced ozone and bovine flatulence and similar emissions that are artificially generated is that one of them is at least partially controllable and the other is not. In this sense, my analogy regarding CO leaking from a furnace vs. the same gas being produced by a forest fire is perfectly apt--one is controllable by the user and the other isn't.

Got a rise out of ya didn't I?:lol:

Tree huggers, Do-gooders and Chicken Little's have their cumulative eyes focused on nits when they should be addressing the beams. Nothing is going to happen until everything as a whole is addressed as a whole. That's one of the major problems with Kyoto and some of the "other" fix the environmental plans for "correction" out there......worry about the little pot-hole and not address the sink-hole.

Managing Ozone, GHG and all that other fuzzy, feel-good dribble and garbage is no good unless it is going to total and all inclusive, none of this "developing economy krap" should even be considered. How long do economies need to take? Some of "excluded" have been developing for 2000+ years. It's time to hit the "pause" button, rewind, edit and start to "play" over.

Oops!

Excuse me!

Just had a little ozone emmision!
:horse:

Just a quick scientific side-note.

Ozone is NOT particularly a greenhouse gas and doesn't particularly contribute to global warming. Ozone (O3) is a relatively unstable molecule that is fairly common in the upper atmosphere, where is does an effective job of blocking UV. It can be created from regular O2 by high-voltage electricity or radiation from outer space.

Man-made chemicals (for example Freon) can destroy the ozone if they get to the mesosphere in large enough quantities. This takes a while to do or to undo. As the ozone is destroyed, there is more UV to cause sunburns and skin cancer. The switch away from freon has helped slow and reverse the destruction of ozone.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas (GHG) that blocks infrared light. The heat from the ground creates IR, but with too much GHG, the IR doesn't escape as easily into space, so there is more heat "trapped" around the earth, making it warm up.

Methane (CH4) is another GHG. That is the one created by cows (and other animals).


So, if you shock someone by rubbing your feet on the carpet and then touching them, you are creating a bit of ozone.
If you shock someone with a little odor, you are creating a bit of methane. :rolleyes:


Tim F

Got a rise out of ya didn't I?:lol:

Tree huggers, Do-gooders and Chicken Little's have their cumulative eyes focused on nits when they should be addressing the beams. Nothing is going to happen until everything as a whole is addressed as a whole. That's one of the major problems with Kyoto and some of the "other" fix the environmental plans for "correction" out there......worry about the little pot-hole and not address the sink-hole.

Managing Ozone, GHG and all that other fuzzy, feel-good dribble and garbage is no good unless it is going to total and all inclusive, none of this "developing economy krap" should even be considered. How long do economies need to take? Some of "excluded" have been developing for 2000+ years. It's time to hit the "pause" button, rewind, edit and start to "play" over.

I'm not going to take the bait. The original question had to do with ozone in a local (presumably) enclosed area. I expressed no opinion regarding the politics of global warming one way or the other. I just pointed out your logical error, which was equating controllable sources of GHGs with uncontrollable sources. Unfortunately, the subject has been politicized, which is unfortunate for those of us who are interested in being objective about scientific issues.

Has anyone read State of Fear by Michael Crichton?

My opinion, which is important, is that we are staving off a horribly cruel ice age by our biomass and fueled industry adding a protective blanket of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. Unfortunately, we will never know this, because computer modeling will be an undeveloped science in the near future.

CPU's of the 25th Century will never be able to reveal this for a lack of data.

Good luck.

Thanks for the clarifications given on the thread.

It is understood that Ozone at Groung is polusion and it is bad for human beings and it can be controlled by us.It is also reported that the Ozone layer thickness at height is getting reduced and it is not good for human beings.Can we do something to maintain the Ozone layer at height to avoid UV radiations comming to Earth? Is it not true that Ground Level Ozone can go to height and compensate for increasing the Ozone layer thickness at Height?

sarasheed

sarasheed

Ozone is an unstable molecule, O3, and to guess it probably does not last long enough at ground level to travel to the height of mesosphere or stratosphere or whatever.

At a guess, the ozone molecules produced at ground level are pollutant for a time and then the atoms dissipate back into O2.

In the stratosphere or mesosphere or whatever, oxygen is continually recombined into O3 by radiation which is blocked by the process. At a guess.

Dear Otletsade,

Can we conclude that that decrease in the Ozone layer thickness in Stratosphere is not due to the Ozone produced at Ground level? If so,what are the probabable causes for reduction in Ozone layer in Stratosphere?

sarasheed

Well, we have concluded that CFC's emitted at ground level are stable enough molecules to travel to the upper atmosphere, where the radiation strips chlorine into a free state. The chlorine stripped from CFC's can destroy ozone molecules.

We think.

Isn't it odd that CFC molecules and ozone molecules do not cancel out in the upper atmosphere, I mean...

CFC ground level = safe to human
Ozone ground level = harmful to human

CFC upper atmosphere = harmful to human
Ozone upper atmosphere = safe to human

CFC ground level = stable molecule
Ozone ground level = unstable molecule

CFC upper atmosphere = unstable molecule
Ozone upper atmosphere = stable molecule

CFC ground level = no effect on ozone
Ozone ground level = no effect on CFC

CFC upper atmosphere = destroys ozone
Ozone upper atmosphere != destroy CFC

Has anyone read State of Fear by Michael Crichton?


I haven't yet, but probably will, but only for entertainment; I prefer to get my science from scientists, not novelists.

I've read it, and even though it is a work of fiction, there is a good deal of fact and common sense written into it.

:topic: How can a molecule of a substance heavier than air...like a CFC.....get into the upper atmosphere and destroy the Ozone?

Atestade....You've got a couple of real good posts here:applause:

I've read it, and even though it is a work of fiction, there is a good deal of fact and common sense written into it.

The same could be said of Dr. Seuss, but I don't think I'd go there for science information.

How can a molecule of a substance heavier than air...like a CFC.....get into the upper atmosphere and destroy the Ozone?

First hit (http://www.epa.gov/Ozone/science/heavier.html) when searching Google for "cfc heavier than air" (without the quotes).

Dorothy's house was heavier than air too....the winds blow hard enough even you'd reach the Stratosphere

Now tell us how Ozone generated in Podunk, Anystate gets to the South of Argentina and Chile.

p.s. Checked out your Blog Page...nice

Dorothy's house was heavier than air too....the winds blow hard enough even you'd reach the Stratosphere

Now tell us how Ozone generated in Podunk, Anystate gets to the South of Argentina and Chile.

Wind, perhaps?:D

Materials from Chernobyl spread across much of Europe. Materials from major volcanoes spread around the globe. I don't find it too tough to image that the updrafts from thunderstorms could carry pollutants to the upper atmosphere and then the jet stream carries it around the globe.

Granted, these winds tend to travel more east-west than north-south, but over the course of years, it may well get pretty mixed and distributed.

And of course, people in South America and Africa have a few air conditioners and used spray cans that used CFC's, so they could well have come from the Southern Hemisphere, too. :yes:

Tim F

Dorothy's house was heavier than air too....the winds blow hard enough even you'd reach the Stratosphere

Now tell us how Ozone generated in Podunk, Anystate gets to the South of Argentina and Chile.

So you think that any sort of gas or particulate matter generated at location "A" can only 1) stay right at ground level, where it was generated, if it's heavier than air, and 2) If it does manage to reach an elevation higher than the spot where it was generated, it can only go straight up?

Try this experiment: go outside on a windy day and make a fire. Watch the smoke.

Hey Jim,

That's twice in two days that we've posted similar ideas within a minute of each other!

I guess great minds really do think alike. :D

Not only that, but are names are only a few pixels different - maybe we share some psychic connection. :lol:


Tim

Tim..you stay out of this, you're too educated and smart:lol:

Next......which is being generated faster and in greater quantities and being released into the atmosphere..Ozone or ODC's?

Oops, I forgot, you're a Quality puke...ODC = Ozone Depleting Compound

Tim..you stay out of this, you're too educated and smart:lol:

Next......which is being generated faster and in greater quantities and being released into the atmosphere..Ozone or ODC's?

Oops, I forgot, you're a Quality puke...ODC = Ozone Depleting Compound

Is there a point here somewhere? What, pray tell, difference does it make if ODCs are generated faster or slower if they can't get to the ozone layer anyway? Or do you feel that it's not important for the various components of your argument to be logically connected?

Is there a point here somewhere? What, pray tell, difference does it make if ODCs are generated faster or slower if they can't get to the ozone layer anyway? Or do you feel that it's not important for the various components of your argument to be logically connected?

Naw, no point. I've just been bustin' your chops because you took the bait.:lmao:

There isn't enough being done and every improvement can only help.

Naw, no point. I've just been bustin' your chops because you took the bait.:lol:

No, I didn't. The bait was obviously intended to draw me into a political discussion, because nearly all of the arguments against the idea of global warming and what causes it are based on political talking points and not science.

Here's what I think: there is no reasonable doubt that warming is happening, but there is a significant amount of disagreement, purely in terms of objective evaluations of the data, as to what role human causation plays in it, if any. The climate scientists need to be able to do their work without interference from biased sources, no matter what the political persuasion of the biased sources might be. Matters of science do not get settled by popular opinion; science is not a democratic process.

We are having a Buna N (rubber) quality issue of the product failing prematurely. The usual cause of this failure is Ozone.

I am trying to determine if there are any items in our factory that would generate ozone. We have recently completed a renovation to the factory, new layout, new lighting, etc.

Thanks,
Phil

The climate scientists need to be able to do their work without interference from biased sources, no matter what the political persuasion of the biased sources might be. Matters of science do not get settled by popular opinion; science is not a democratic process.


I wouldn't probably disagree with this belief, if it wasn't for the fact that scientist themselves have some bias. With global warming we see it on both sides. With other topics, we see scientists who are worse than prostitutes; willing to study any subject matter that has grant money attached to it. The prostitute at least is likely to be upfront about what they are selling.

When you get into politically charged subject matter like this, it all needs to be suspect into proven otherwise.

Wayne

I wouldn't probably disagree with this belief, if it wasn't for the fact that scientist themselves have some bias. With global warming we see it on both sides. With other topics, we see scientists who are worse than prostitutes; willing to study any subject matter that has grant money attached to it. The prostitute at least is likely to be upfront about what they are selling.

When you get into politically charged subject matter like this, it all needs to be suspect into proven otherwise.

Wayne

At the time this thread was initiated, the Controversial Topics forum didn't exist. It does now, and and there's a thread for this discussion (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=32380). Let's keep the conversation there.

We are having a Buna N (rubber) quality issue of the product failing prematurely. The usual cause of this failure is Ozone.

I am trying to determine if there are any items in our factory that would generate ozone. We have recently completed a renovation to the factory, new layout, new lighting, etc.

Thanks,
Phil

Electrical arching can create ozone which is nothing more than O3. There may also be some chemical reaction in process that causes the O3 to be created.

Electrical arching can create ozone which is nothing more than O3. There may also be some chemical reaction in process that causes the O3 to be created.

There's some good information about potential sources of indoor ozone here (http://www.idph.state.il.us/envhealth/factsheets/ozone.htm).

Electrical arching can create ozone which is nothing more than O3

And that includes electric motors.

Storing rubber products in close proximity to DC electric motors can accelerate the rate at which ozone cracking occurs. The commutator of the motor creates sparks which in turn produce ozone.

Randy, Jim, and Harry,
Thank you for your replies. Welding operations are in the area, but no other potential items. We may need to repackage the seals so that they are not exposed to potential ozone. I want to rule out our factory as a potential contaminate.

We are checking with our supplier to see if there are potential ozone issues at their facility.

Thanks,
Phil

Welding? Oh yeah, lots of ozone from that (along with other nasties);)