A glimpse into the darkness

I police my social media fairly heavily, since I really don’t want to waste time on major bozos. This one snuck through, though.

Yeah, no. Ozone is a greenhouse gas, although a short-lived one that decays fairly quickly. Putting more ozone into the atmosphere isn’t going to help reduce global warming, although the stratospheric ozone layer is a useful radiation filter.

You don’t want to follow that clown. I looked, and it’s all flag-waving MAGA racist garbage, as you might expect.


  1. garnetstar says

    Huh? Ozone doesn’t react with carbon dioxide at all, but it is deadly and corrosive to your lungs: every time you breathe it in, you lose some lung tissue (it is the white component of smog).

    More ozone near the surface of the earth would be a lot more rapidly toxic to all life than even more carbon dioxide. It should stay up in the ozone layer, where it belongs. And people who have rich, imaginative fantasies about chemistry shouldn’t post them on Twitter.

  2. chrislawson says

    As you say, ozone is not a significant greenhouse contributor because it is so short-lived, but this numpy’s idea that ozone “cleans” the atmosphere and prevents global warming is a confabulation. Ozone is so reactive that at room temperature it will react with carbon to make CO2, a greenhouse gas. The only reason it doesn’t do this in the troposphere is there is not a lot of free carbon floating around the upper atmosphere. Ozone doesn’t do anything to reduce greenhouse gasses, nor does lightning create significant amount of ozone. Almost all of the atmospheric ozone is created by ultraviolet sunlight splitting O2 molecules.

  3. says

    You don’t want to follow that clown. I looked, and it’s all flag-waving MAGA racist garbage, as you might expect.

    Similarly, I just saw this over on Twitter: some pol in Mississippi refused to have a woman journalist on his campaign vehicle without a male chaperone! The profile of every user defending his decision whose profile I looked at before I got sick and tired prominently contained the word “Christian” 🙄. They just can’t go Gilead fast enough.

  4. Mark says

    Maybe CK is ineptly trying to claim that there’s no human-caused global warming and any warming is all lighting and ozone’s fault. Those with chronic Dunning-Kruger disease are usually hasty disjointed thinkers.

  5. microraptor says

    Ray Ceeya @2: You mean to tell me that the primary source of pollution on Earth isn’t supervillains in brightly colored outfits who do it for the lolz?

  6. wzrd1 says

    It’s just so hard to find reports and papers on sources of ozone, it’s as if oxygen doesn’t exist or something.
    Like, oh, a report on an “Exceptional Event Analysis” on a massive ozone bloom, its sources and the chief contributor in that event, the Fort McMurray fire.
    Page 8 beginning discussion on sources of ozone and shortly before, mention of the contribution of the fire to the exceptionally high levels experienced during the event.
    It’s a shame that there isn’t a way to search the internet for information. Maybe I should invent something to do just that, maybe name it Google and Google Scholar.

    Primary sources of ozone, volatile organic compounds, sunlight, NOx, power plants, motor vehicles.

    I remember that event in particular, by the time the miasma of ozone enriched air hit the greater Philadelphia region, it was exceptionally unpleasant to go outside. Had a sore throat for days after it finally dispersed. We get regular blooms from the south central PA region, which builds as it moves east and each region contributes to the daily ozone bloom. I’ve also noticed a decline in ozone from the region where a sizable federal logistical center is located over several counties, corresponding with a switch over from internal combustion engine equipment to battery powered equipment caused a measurable decline in ozone emissions. Alas, that was one series of dozens of point sources and motor vehicle contributions of commuters and transportation trucks still lead the way in ozone production.

    Alas, reports like the above have been declining, due to the current administration’s anti-science views.

  7. slithey tove (twas brillig (stevem)) says

    looks to me like a confusion about the damage we’ve been doing to the ozone layer from refrigerant CFC producing the ominously worded Ozone Hole as being part of the Climate Change issue we are causing by producing too much CO2.
    CFC’s damage to the ozone layer and CO2 damage to the Climate are completely separate, independent issues.
    Nevermind that the amount of ozone produced by lightning is infinitesimal compared to the damage we’re doing to the ozone layer, and that the ozone produced near the ground cannot rise up to the troposphere where the ozone layer protects us from UV solar radiation.
    Much like saying Global Warming can be solved by making ice cubes and letting them melt on your driveway.
    There is so much wrong in that simple statement, I hesitate listing and addressing all the errors

  8. chrislawson says

    slithey tove — the right wing don’t like to talk about CFCs because it’s an example of international co-operation using legislation and market interventions to persuade industry to abandon a technology for environmental reasons.

  9. says

    Oh, Facebook.

    They’re still punishing minorities for calling out white fuckery, but cis-het white folks are still free to bash us and use slurs. Would you believe a 7-day ban for “white trash”, when they’ve consistently been just fine with people using the n-word, and the t-slur?