I had to laugh a bit, when I read the above article again, written by me in 1989. The way I remember things is that I did most of the work and that Siemens Germany was eager to follow my lead because of the tremendous savings in the use of solvents. Never mind all that, the article does give a bit of a background to the ozone ‘problem’. What I am interested in now is finding out if there ever was a problem with our ozone layer and if our health could be in danger because of it. Let us have a look at some data.

The oldest data we have for ozone come from Arosa, Switzerland:

Source here:  Ozone measurements – MeteoSwiss

We notice a drop from about 330 to 315 DU between 1970 and 2015, on average.  This is about 5%. First, understand what we are measuring, exactly. To convert Dobson Units to parts per million (ppm), scientists use a conversion factor of 2.69 DU that equals to 0.001 ppm. This means that we are measuring 330/2.69 x 0.001 = 0.12 ppm. This is 0.000012 % v/v. It is an extremely small amount and obviously that affects the accuracy of our measurements. In real terms that 5% difference translates to only 0.006 ppm. Our source does not mention the possible error in their measurements but I think that with 0.006 ppm ozone we are reaching the limit of what is possible for us to measure. It is also reported by our source that there were changes in method and machine over time. I had a look at the original data from Arosa myself and was able to present a polynomial with a correlation coefficient of 0.5 showing a bending point, revealing an upward trend. See graph below. This suggests the possibility of a sine wave curve which would mean that the 5% drop could be wholly or at least partially due to natural phenomena happening over time on the top of our atmosphere (TOA).

How big are the holes at the poles? Here are the satellite data:

Source: 20 Questions and Answers | Ozone Secretariat   (Question 11)

Our attention is drawn to the broken line in the middle which apparently represents the average that was measured before the introduction of the satellite measurements, namely 1970-1982. I think these measurements were few and far in between and confined to just a few places, so I wonder how this could possibly be made representative of the whole area between the specified latitudes of the Arctic- and Antarctic. Anyway, the thing that strikes me most is that there is no trend upwards, from anytime, as is the case with the Arosa data. The ‘holes’ simply go on and on and on….I certainly don’t understand why our source is claiming that our ozone ‘problem’ has been resolved and that the ‘holes’ will disappear in a few decades. See: https://youtu.be/05HS141u4yA (The clip is only 2 minutes)

I would now like to introduce a report which caught my attention quite some time ago:

https://eodg.atm.ox.ac.uk/eodg/papers/2005Papendrea1.pdf

I should first explain again that NOx, Ozone (O3) and Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2) are all made naturally TOA from the gases nitrogen, oxygen and water (vapor), respectively. The reactions are initiated by the varying amount of the most energetic particles (radiation of the shortest wavelengths) that we get from the sun. For some reason Papendrea et al were interested in measuring Hydrogen Peroxide TOA. They came to a most interesting conclusion:

‘Our data show a peak in H2O2 in the equatorial stratosphere and large values in the Antarctic ozone hole region. We also find some night – day variations in the H2O2 concentrations. Our retrieved profiles are in reasonable agreement with expected photochemical behavior and with a previous balloon profile.’

One would expect the peak of H2O2 around the equator as here most of the evaporation of water on earth is taking place. The presence of more water vapor at high altitudes above the Antarctic is somewhat puzzling. Perhaps it is due to ongoing volcanic activity, or, more likely, a particular wind with moist air is drawn up high by the Antarctic cold. Warm air always rises. Either way, in my opinion, the reaction initiated by the sun’s most dangerous rays to form Hydrogen Peroxide from water vapor (OH radicals) would take preference to that of Ozone from Oxygen. That is my explanation for the ‘ongoing hole’ in the Ozone layer above Antarctica.

So, what about our health, now?

After looking at the whole absorption spectrum of Hydrogen Peroxide, I was astonished to find how similar it is to that of Ozone. In terms of protection against dangerous rays from the sun, H2O2 does exactly the same thing as what Ozone does……

As we all know, Australia has the highest incidence of skin cancer. I therefore want to close off with a few quotes from the report: 

https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-hole-in-the-ozone (University of Melbourne).

“So, if the ozone hole is still there, that’s why we still need to be sunsmart, right? Wrong. It’s a very common misconception, but in fact the ozone hole does not extend over Australia. Ozone depleting substances have resulted in a thinning of ozone above Australia of about five per cent, whereas over Antarctica in spring almost complete loss of ozone is seen in some layers. So the problem of the ozone and skin cancer remains regardless of when the ozone hole eventually recovers. The skin cancer problem is due to the high natural UV concentrations that occur in the southern hemisphere, especially close to the tropics. This is because the atmosphere is cleaner (less pollution from industry and less dust from land masses) and the southern hemisphere gets more radiation than the northern hemisphere because the Earth is closer to the sun in January than July.

But probably the biggest problem is that, for many Australians, we have inherited the genes of our northern hemisphere ancestors and don’t possess natural protection in our skin. The English skin, for example, has evolved 50 degrees north of the equator, where solar exposure is much less than even southern Tasmania. Plus, in the 1960s there was a change in social attitudes towards exposure to sun and the stigma of being tanned changed from being a sign of the working class (many hours logged out of doors) to being wealthy (lots of free time to go on holidays to the beach). Some years later it turned out getting a tan was a bad idea as the rates of melanoma started to rocket upwards.”

Best is to continue to cover up your skin to protect yourself against the sun’s harmful rays that still do come through the atmosphere. Use your hat!

Henry Pool