Happy Nice Mall

But the virtues of the treaty, ultimately ratified by each country, are more pervasive than its impact on the ozone hole. Many of these chemicals are also potent greenhouse gases. So, as an important side benefit, their reductions over the last three decades have already facilitated warming and may reduce it as much as possible. 1 ˚C reduction in worldwide average temperatures by 2050.

now one new work in Nature highlights another important bonus, albeit unintentionally: reducing the burden placed on plants by ultraviolet radiation from the sun, inhibiting photosynthesis and slowing growth. Anna Harper, a senior lecturer in climate science at the University of Exeter and co-author of the paper, said the Montreal Protocol avoided “a catastrophic collapse of forests and cropland” that would add hundreds of billions of tons of carbon to the atmosphere. in an email.

The Nature article, published Aug. 18, found that if production of ozone-depleting substances continued to increase by 3% each year, additional UV radiation would reduce the growth of trees, grasses, ferns, flowers and crops worldwide.

Earth’s plants will absorb less carbon dioxide and release as much as 645 billion tons of carbon from the land into the atmosphere this century. This could increase global warming by up to 1 ˚C in the same period. It will also have devastating effects on agricultural yields and food supplies worldwide.

The effect of rising CFC levels on plants and the direct warming effect on the atmosphere could push temperatures 2.5˚C higher this century. Horrible warming forecasts for 2100 already, researchers found.

“Although originally designed as an ozone protection agreement, the Montreal Protocol has been a very successful climate agreement,” says Paul Young, a climate scientist at Lancaster University and another author of the paper.

All of this raises a question: Why can’t the world enact a similarly aggressive and effective international treaty clearly designed to address climate change? At least some scholars think there are crucial but largely overlooked lessons in the success of the Montreal Protocol, which takes on new meaning as global warming accelerates and the next UN climate conference approaches.

a fresh look

At this point, the planet will continue to warm for the next few decades, regardless. scary UN climate report warned last week. But whether the situation gets worse will depend heavily on how aggressively climate pollution can be reduced in the coming decades.

To date, countries have failed to put together an agreement that contains sufficiently ambitious and binding commitments to phase out greenhouse gas emissions, through both the Kyoto Agreement and the Paris climate agreement. The countries will meet at the next UN conference in Glasgow in early November with the explicit goal of accelerating these goals under the Paris agreement.

Scholars wrote long papers and all books Examining the lessons learned from the Montreal Protocol and common points and differences Among related efforts on CFCs and greenhouse gases.

A common view is that its relevance is limited. CFCs were a much simpler problem to solve, as they were produced by a single industry (mostly by a few large companies such as DuPont) and used in a limited range of applications.

On the other hand, almost every component of every sector of every nation pumps out greenhouse gases. Fossil fuels are the energy source that drives the global economy, and much of our machinery and physical infrastructure is designed around them.

But Edward Parson, a professor of environmental law at the University of California, Los Angeles, says it’s time to look again at the lessons learned from the Montreal Protocol.

This is because as the dangers of climate change become more apparent and dire, more and more countries are pushing for stricter rules, and companies are getting closer to the stage where the likes of DuPont have come: a shift from resolutely contesting scientific findings to reluctantly accepting new rules. was inevitable, so they needed to better understand how to operate and profit under them.

In other words, we are reaching a point where it may be possible to set more prohibitive rules, so it’s crucial to use the opportunity to create effective rules.

Constantly enforced strict rules

Parson’s author. Protecting the Ozone Layer: Science and StrategyAn in-depth history of the Montreal Protocol published in 2003. He stresses that the phasing out of ozone-depleting compounds is a more complex issue than is often appreciated, because a significant portion of the world economy relied on them in one way or another.

He adds that one of the most enduring misconceptions about the deal is the idea that the industry is already developing alternative products and is therefore more willing to eventually settle.

On the contrary, the development of alternatives took place after the regulations were made. Rapid innovation continued as the rules tightened and industry, experts and technical organizations determined how much progress could be achieved and how quickly. Parson says this has produced more and better alternatives than ever before in “repeated positive feedback.”

The prospect of profitable new markets also helped. Many of these companies have made a lot of money from switching to new products.

This shows that the world should not wait for innovations that will make addressing climate change cheaper and easier. Countries need to enforce rules that progressively reduce emissions, forcing industries to find cleaner ways to generate energy, grow food, produce crops and move objects and people around the world.