“Boondoggle” Of The Century

Now, hundreds of scientists predict ‘Global Cooling’ is just around the corner

solar geoengineering
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

By Kevin Roeten:

Kevin Roeten
Science Editor

While billions of dollars have been spent on “ozone research,” almost no money has been spent on UV readings at the surface…

All of a sudden, after the ‘horrendous’ 1978 ozone scare, Science Blog discovers aerosols could cool the planet without ozone damage. This has occurred numerous times before. Large volcanic eruptions typically contain large quantities of sulfate aerosols.

One idea was solar geoengineering, or injecting light-reflecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere to cool the planet. But these sulfate aerosols like sulfuric acid in the stratosphere, which was thought to damage ozone.

Now, researchers from the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, SEAS, have identified an aerosol for solar geoengineering which actually cools the earth. The team found calcite could counter ozone loss, while also reflecting light and cooling the planet. Calcite is one of the most common compounds found in the Earth’s crust.

Is Calcite The Solution?

This research fundamentally rethinks what kinds of particles should be used for solar geoengineering, said Frank Keutsch, the professor of Engineering and Atmospheric Science at SEAS. If aerosols actually harmed the ozone, particles would need to neutralize sulfuric, nitric, and hydrochloric acid. To find such a chemical, Keutsch referred to his periodic table. After eliminating the toxic elements, and rare metals, he was left with the alkali Earth metals, which included sodium and calcium carbonate. “Essentially, we ended up with an antacid for the stratosphere,” said Keutsch.

Through extensive modeling of stratospheric chemistry, the team found calcite could counter ozone loss by neutralizing emissions-borne acids in the atmosphere, while also reflecting light and cooling the planet. The researchers have already begun testing calcite in lab experiments mimicking stratospheric conditions. Keith and Keutsch caution introducing anything into the atmosphere may have unanticipated consequences. Stratospheric chemistry is complicated and we don’t understand everything about it,” Keith said. It seemed some ‘light’ dawned.

Atmospheric Dynamics Rule Ozone

Actually, atmospheric dynamics, not chemistry, is the driving factor for thickness of the ozone. Now, hundreds of scientists predict ‘Global Cooling’ is just around the corner.

New scientific evidence continues to show the ozone depletion models and the resulting ban on CFCs are based on a huge lieRogelio Maduro, expounds on this inThe Holes in the Ozone Scare”, [1993].

Satellite Crista-Spas

New satellite ozone data and atmospheric studies based on actual measurements, confirm the ozone is not homogeneous. The scientific research strips any shred of credibility from the claims of the ozone depletion theorists. The dramatic new satellite ozone data revealed the Crista-Spas info from the Shuttle, 1994. The Crista team announced its first results in 1995, but results were barely covered in the European press, but not covered in the US.

Crista-Spas is a group of instruments deployed on a space platform measuring atmospheric gases creating three-dimensional images of the gases in the stratosphere[Crista-Spas Project]. These 3-D images show the models behind the ozone depletion scare are completely wrong. The Crista-Spas is one of those unique experiments giving scientists a look at the real processes shaping the atmosphere. Crista-Spas is able to monitor 15 atmospheric gases in extreme. The original methodology was axiomatically wrong. The promoters of ozone depletion scare have been using to forecast ozone depletion rates and forced policy (“The Ozone Depletion Theory“).

The Crista researchers emphasized:

“One can only understand these occurrences if one examines them in their totality and mutual interdependence. One finds no solution to the ozone problem if one examines only the photochemical side, but neglects the energetics and dynamics. Instead of a uniform distribution of ozone along a [band of constant] latitude, as the current models predict. Crista showed a patchwork of large and small structures in the ozone distribution. The first results show that photochemical models alone do not adequately describe the condition of the atmosphere. Dynamic processes and transports must be considered, for which temperatures, waves, and turbulences show themselves responsible.”

Dr. Ulrich Grossman, a leader of the Crista project summarized results (1):                  

When the modelers “talk about zonally averaged values, it is useless.”  The ozone layer “is very, very structured. All these structures are moving around, like what you see in the weather map… You have to take all these into account if you want to make a real, reliable forecast for ozone over the next… 20 or 40 years.”

The Crista-Spas experiments have existed for more than 30 years. Rockets have been launched with different types of infrared spectrometers. Grossman: “You see variation from one day to the other, from kilometer to kilometer … The results never, never looked like a model prediction”. Their earlier results were always so different from the model predictions, he said. The researchers concluded structures they were finding must be constantly occurring, and only building a satellite would really work. The project was eventually funded by the German Space Agency, using cryostat.  NASA provided the Space Shuttle to carry Crista-Spas aloft.

American Geophysical Union published a scientific paper by scientists from Norwegian and Russian institutes showing thickness of the ozone over Russia is determined by meteorology, not chemistry.(2) Scientists, Kjell Henriksen and Valentin Roldugin analyzed one year of daily samples from six Soviet measuring stations at two different altitudes. They discovered changes in the ozone layer were directly caused by the horizontal and vertical movement of air masses, or wind dynamics. A analysis showed chemistry played no role in thickness of the ozone over these stations.

Norway Has Major Results

Other scientific papers have confirmed ozone depletion is wrong. From the World of Physics published a thorough review of ozone science by Thormod Henriksenfrom the University of Oslo, presented the ozone was thinner in the 1940s than today. (4)

Norway has several ozone measuring stations operating continuously managed by some of the most qualified scientists in the field. Norway has some of the best, consistent data for a historical analysis of ozone trends. Henriksen describes the history of ozone research in Norway, and analyzes ozone starting in the 1940s. Figure 1 compares measurements done at the Dombaas research center in 1940-1946 and 1978-1994. Visibly, the ozone went through a thinning process in the 1940s similar to that occurring now, with the exception, as noted by Henriksen, “the ozone layer over southern Norway was thinner in the period between 1940 to 1946 than it is today.”

Henriksen points out ultraviolet [UV] radiation has hardly changed:

“[In] the last 50 years the ozone layer has not changed to such a degree that biological effects are to be expected. In other words, there have hardly been any changes in the levels of UV-radiation, and therefore it is a dead-end to connect the recent years’ development of the ozone layer with the increase of skin cancer.”

Henriksen concludes:

“We can safely state that the picture of a depletion of the ozone layer is far more complicated than the picture that the media often gives. Those who expect a depletion timed with the release of CFC gases, will look in vain in their measurement results. It looks like the amount of ozone did increase in the 1950s and 1960s and reached a maximum in the 1970s. Since then, the amount of ozone has been decreasing. We believe that the low values in 1992 and 1993 are due to the volcano Mt. Pinatubo.”


Source: Adapted from Thormod Henriksen, “Ozone Layer and Ultraviolet Radiation”, 1994.

More Evidence of NO Depletion

Harvard Astrophysicist Sallie Baliunas put the data in perspective in a paper presented on ozone, 1995. (5)  Baliunas focused on the unreliability of ozone depletion, claiming 0.3 percent depletion per year. The natural variability of the ozone, she said, is orders of magnitude greater than alleged man-made “depletion.” “Over Washington, D.C.,” she noted, “ozone varies annually by 25 percent, some 80 times greater than the stated anthropogenic decline.”

She said any estimate of “ozone depletion” has to factor the Sun’s ultraviolet output, and the shift in wind patterns and meteorological conditions, particularly in the upper atmosphere. As with ozone, Baliunas examined the statistical ‘fudge’ methods used by the ozone depletion theorists to embellish their theory.

The 1994 World Meteorological Organization’s report on ozone depletion estimated a  depletion in 1970 and 1978-1979. The second set is when satellites started measurements. The first starting point is actually designed to skew the ozone record.

Baliunas: Choosing 1970 or 1978-1979 as the starting point creates the maximum possible downward trends in ozone since then. The selections of the starting points, for example, 1976 or 1957, would indicate no significant downward trend since then. The fact that the inferred trend depends entirely on the selection of the endpoints means that the trend has not been reliably determined.”

Another graphic distortion in the WMO report is to magnify ozone depletion by plotting very small changes out of context. One WMO figure, highlighted by Baliunas, omits the zero- point of the scale, so the amount of depletion looks extremely large from one data point to the next. When the WMO figure is compared with a normal presentation of the same data (Figure 2, below), Baliunas notes, “the fluctuations in ozone are seen to be insignificant.”


Figure 2: Shows thickness of the ozone varied considerably yearly. The 1957 readings , show thickness of the ozone layer is the same as today. Thus, no long-term depletion of the ozone layer.

Ozone levels in the Northern Hemisphere show insignificant variations, but can be manipulated to show what looks like a big hole, simply by changing scale. Dr. Baliunas pointed out the World Meteorological Organization version of these ozone data (a) leaves out the zero point of the scale, making small variations seem very large. The same data viewed on a scale from 0 to 350 (b) shows ozone fluctuations to be insignificant. Dr. Sallie Baliunas’ testimony to US Congress, 1995.

The Skin Cancer Scare

The proposed ban by politicians will cost nations over $5 trillion over the next few years. If it were not for the mass hysteria has been created over alleged dangers of increasing skin cancer rates, there would be no ban on CFCs today, and newspapers would never respond.

During the same four- to six-week period the so-called ozone hole appears over Antarctica, a nitrogen oxide [NOx] hole also develops over the same area. Both the so-called ozone hole and nitrogen oxide hole are created in Antarctica by the same natural phenomena,.

First, the scare stories about UV and ozone depletion are based on minuscule increases in UV, compared with natural variations in UV-B determined by one’s altitude and distance from the Equator. Second, there is no evidence levels of UV-B have increased at the surface of the Earth, despite the claims of ozone depletion. Andthirdit is not UV-B that causes the malignant skin cancer, but UV-A, which is not screened out by the ozone layer.

UV-B varies by 5,000 percent from the equator to the Poles. It also varies with altitude. All this is simple geometry: There is more sunlight exposure at the equator, and the atmosphere is thinner in the mountains, so more UV-B gets through.

Actual instrumental measurements of UV at the surface show no increase in UV levels, despite widespread claims of ozone depletion in northern latitudes. Just as with the ozone the levels of UV radiation go through tremendous seasonal fluctuations. The most extensive study of UV-B surface radiation is by Joseph Scotto at theNational Cancer InstituteScience (6) presented evidence the amount of UV-B at ground level stations across the US had decreased between 1974 and 1985. Instead of rejoicing, the promoters of the ozone depletion scare made sure all the observing stations were shut down.

A correct statistical analysis showed the trend in ‘UV’ was zero.

While billions of dollars have been spent on “ozone research,” almost no money has been spent on UV readings at the surface. The hautiness of many has insinuated God will not allow the unrestricted production of ozone.


Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@CHARTER.NET.

© Copyright by Kevin Roeten, 2017. All rights reserved.

Kevin Roeten
About Kevin Roeten 168 Articles
CHO's science editor Kevin Roeten is a former Chemical Engineer. He enjoys riding the third rail of journalism: politics and religion. As an orthodox Catholic, Roeten appreciates the juxtaposition of the two supposedly incompatible subjects.   Kevin is a Guest Columnist for the Asheville Citizen-Times, and the Independent (Ohio), and writes for numerous blogs (Nolan Chart, Allvoices) and newspapers, including USA Today.   A collaborator in the book Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture (Jason Wright and Aaron Lee), he is also an amateur astronomer, and delves into scientific topics.   Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net.