Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 22:10:30 -0400
Reply-To: Bulley <gmbulley@BULLEY-HEWLETT.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Bulley <gmbulley@BULLEY-HEWLETT.COM>
Subject: Re: Who has the real skinny on R-12?
I was on a business trip to DC, meeting with some EPA folks (really). Just
got in.
Short form (cause I got a bunch to do):
Ozone in the upper atmosphere reflects most of the sun's harmful
ultraviolet rays away from the delicate life (like you, me, and BOB). The
ozone layer is naturally very thin. R-12, even in miniscule quantities
(Like a couple molecules) sparks a chain reaction in the upper atmosphere
that converts ozone (good stuff, when up there) into substances that are
useless to protect the planet from ultraviolet light, and which continue to
erode the ozone layer. It is complicated, and invisible to those on the
ground, but it is happening.
Ozone arrives in the upper atmosphere a number of ways, some natural, and
some manmade. Thunderstorms are a driver, mixing ground air high up into
the atmosphere. Volcanoes do some of the work as well. Unfortunately, our
beloved space launches are a tremendous source of ozone production and
distribution to the upper atmosphere, but I understand that NASA is working
on that.
R-134 I don't have the low-down on. IF it is a greenhouse gas, that is a
gas that traps heat in the atmosphere), as purported, than we switched to
the far lesser of two evils. It would take a LOT of R-134 to trap heat in
the atmosphere, far more than I understand is ever to be used for any
conceivable purpose.
Either way, a WARMER planet will drastically change life as we know it:
(underwater London, beaches in Tennessee, deserts in the Midwest, etc.).
Bummer.
A depletion in our ozone would pretty much END life here, as most life
(that I can think of) dies in strong UV. Cancel delivery of the newspaper
and the milk, you won't need, 'em.
Hope this helps.
G. Matthew Bulley
Bulley-Hewlett & Associates
www.bulley-hewlett.com
Cary, NC USA
888.468.4880 tollfree
-----Original Message-----
From: KENWILFY@AOL.COM [SMTP:KENWILFY@AOL.COM]
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 1999 8:52 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Who has the real skinny on R-12?
In a message dated 6/11/99 3:17:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Steve@Schwenk-Law.com writes:
<< Please, Ken, if you have doubts, read the scientific literature, not
EPA.
You
can't be serious that this is all a wacky conspiracy.
steve
>>
Hey all I was doing was asking questions. To me the whole thing doesn't
make
sense. They make a big deal about how that R-12 is going to mess up the
ozone layer, then they approve a replacement for it (R-134a) that is a
known
"green house" gas. So we don't mess up the environment one way we mess it
up
another (assuming the ozone hole idea and the global warming ideas are both
actually true).
I just wanted to know if anyone else saw the inconsistancies here.
As I have said before I am not a scientist or a chemist. But I hopefully
do
have the common sense God gave Lettuce (which some scientists or chemists
seem to lack).
Not a Flame.
Where is Super Bulley when you really need him?
Ken Wilford
Van-Again
John 3:16
|