I share same opinion with Kenneth and Lien

Interested

The polar vortices are prominent structures of atmospheric circulation responsible for the chaotic mixing of tracers within the area defined by the vortex edges. The question of whether the main reason for the intensification of the Antarctic vortex is the cooling by ozone depletion, is still open. However, considering complex nonlinear interactions between tracer mixing through chaotic advection, chemical reactions, and radiative transfer, it is clear that ozone depletion should be considered in predicting the shape and intensity of the vortex.

The ideal method for studying the problem should be related to the theory of mixing kinematics developed in the context of chaotic advection.

For examples of the methodology please consult:

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAS4036.1

Ozone is as Kenneth M Towe

Ken ... The answer is related to the feedback between the dynamics of the vortex and the chemistry. According to Schoeberl and Hartmann: “The Dynamics of the Stratospheric Polar Vortex and Its Relation to Springtime Ozone Depletions”

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/251/4989/46

“The aircraft data show that gradients of potential vorticity and the concentration of conservative trace species are large at the transition from mid-latitude to polar air. The presence of such sharp gradients at the boundary of polar air implies that the inward mixing of heat and constituents is strongly inhibited and that the perturbed polar stratospheric chemistry associated with the ozone hole is isolated from the rest of the stratosphere until the vortex breaks up in late spring”

The temperature in such isolated vortex is low, which contributes to the small ozone concentrations. Chemical kinetics within this well-isolated "vortex reactor" is the cause of further depletion of ozone by catalytic reactions, the details are well known, a summary is presented on the following page:

http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/people/faculty/djj/book/bookchap10.html

“Several aircraft missions were conducted in the late 1980s to understand the causes of the antarctic ozone depletion. These studies found the depletion of O3 to be associated with exceptionally high ClO, a result confirmed by satellite data. Parallel laboratory experiments showed that at such high ClO concentrations, a new catalytic cycle involving self-reaction of ClO could account for most of the observed O3 depletion”

Ozone depletion due to the chemical reactions further contributes to a reduction in temperature within the vortex, because much less of UV radiation is absorbed. The net effect of all these dynamical, radiative, and chemical processes (forming multiple feedback loops) is a cooler and stronger Arctic vortex.

The statement: "sharp gradients at the boundary of polar air implies that the inward mixing of heat and constituents is strongly inhibited and that the perturbed polar stratospheric chemistry associated with the ozone hole is isolated from the rest of the stratosphere until the vortex breaks up in late spring” doesn’t imply any specific mechanism of the perturbation of the chemistry inside of the vortex.

It only contains the suggestion regarding kinematics of mixing in this isolated system. According to the numerous studies from the early 1990s, we know that matter within the Antarctic Vortex is transported / mixed by chaotic advection.

The simplistic models based on the Fick’s diffusion are not sufficient to understand how the flow kinematics influences chemistry. The general description of the intricacies of mixing in chaotic systems is presented very nicely by Ottino in his seminal book: Kinematics of mixing. The application of the theory of mixing to geophysical systems was subsequently investigated by Pierrehumbert in the work on global mixing petterns.

To summarize the major findings, we can say that the multiple stretching and foldings of the tracer filaments lead to generation of very large gradients of the chemical tracers, therefore the chemical reactions progress very differently compared to the well mixed reactor.

How these reactions affect vortex dynamics and the net effect of chemistry in this chaotic mixing regime is still unclear. In order to advance our understanding, we must use realistic mathematical models of mixing and chemistry in the Antarctic vortex.

The link to a relevant paper is available at the following site:

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0469%281993%29050%3C2462%3AGCMOIS%3E2.0.CO%3B2?download=true

(A brief summary is in section 6: Grand synthesis)

Ken ... Thanks for the comments. Empirical evidence indicates indeed the recovery of ozone with increasing temperature. The remaining question is whether or not the chemical forcing inside the vortex can affect its shape and, subsequently, the complex chain of interconnected dynamic processes that affect the weather.

The summary of observations for the Northern Polar Vortex (NPV), is provided by Denton et al. (2018): "The depletion of stratospheric ozone in the northern hemisphere caused by solar proton events: the role of the polar vortex"

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017GL075966

The authors suggest the importance of the rapid descent of long-lived NOx species in NPV during the polar winter.

Dear Lien,

the simplest description of the mechanism by which ozone depletion affects the atmospheric circulation starts with the cooling effect of ozone depletion:

ozone is important for maintaining the relatively high temperature of the stratosphere because it absorbs shortwave radiation (especially ultraviolet light) from the sun, so if it is depleted, the temperature of the stratosphere falls.

Ozone depletion occurs mainly over Antarctica where temperatures are low enough to allow the ozone depleting chemical reactions involving CFCs to occur.

Crutzen, Molina and Rowland won the 1995 Nobel prize for working out the mechanism for this important anthropogenic effect: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/1995/summary/

The result is an increase in the horizontal temperature gradient between the extra cold Antarctic and the mid latitude stratosphere. Thermal wind balance then implies a corresponding increase in the zonal wind around Antarctica.

This mechanism has been known for decades, it is seen in observational analyses of atmospheric temperatures and winds and it has been reproduced in climate models many times.

Note that the surface winds also increase along with those in the stratosphere. The mechanism for this involves interaction with the storm track in the troposphere and you can read about it in Kidston et al 2015, Nature Geoscience:https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2424?foxtrotcallback=true

Best regards

Adam

According to Gillett and Thompson (2003): “Simulation of Recent Southern Hemisphere Climate Change”, Science, Vol. 302, Issue 5643, pp. 273-275

DOI: 10.1126/science.1087440

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/302/5643/273

we can simulate climate change in the Southern Hemisphere by forcing the system with ozone-depleting substances using the mechanism proposed by Rowland, Molina and Crutzen.

The idea presented by Ken should be verified, however, using a more realistic model of vortex dynamics with chemistry. Perhaps we have the situation where opposites are complementary. It is also possible that the destruction of ozone is a mechanism inducing a bifurcation affecting the chaotic dynamics of the vortex.

Kenneth M Towe

The ClO· is still shown in the figure to be present from the top to the bottom of the entire ozone layer falsifying the statement it was presented with: "ClO is not found where ozone depletion was talking place".

Denying data is not science!

Obviously, the question that keeps haunting Kenneth is if there can ever by a honest reason to hide sources and refuse to give referces. The answer is obvious but he always refuse.

The figure also show ClO· is present below 25 km. Thus the statement remains false: "ClO is not found where ozone depletion was talking place".

It takes a atmospheric chemist to asses that is a meaningful concentration. This is not a skill Kenneth M Towe

If the measured ClO· at e.g. 25 km is used together with the rate constant for reaction with ozone in an ozone dynamic mass balance it predicts a significant decrease in ozone concentration is caused by the ClO·.

These 25 year old papers describe problems in making the mass balance of ozone at different altitudes fit, that are long solved. Still none of them support Kenneth M Towe

So Kenneth M Towe

A scientist that doesn't have any evidence for a claim would retract the claim and go back to the laboratory to search for evidence. I think the former is unlikely for Kenneth M Towe

Good discussion.

Tropospheric jet response to Antarctic ozone depletion: An update with Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) models

The article published in 'Environmental Research Letters' (May, 2018).

Article Tropospheric jet response to Antarctic ozone depletion: An u...

Thanks Dr. Asit Kumar Batabyal for the recent reference. I read that S.-W. Son al., 2018 agrees with my point that the ozone loss processes are now very well understood: "All models reasonably well reproduce Antarctic ozone depletion in the late 20th century." Article Tropospheric jet response to Antarctic ozone depletion: An u...

I always agree with the scientific discussions made by @Henrik Rasmus Andersen . Especially those related to the CFCs(The main cause of ozone depletion and the ozone hole is manufactured chemicals, especially manufactured halocarbon refrigerants, solvents, propellants and foam-blowing agents (chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), HCFCs, halons), referred to as ozone-depleting substances (ODS). These compounds are transported into the stratosphere by the winds after being emitted from the surface.[2] Once in the stratosphere, they release halogen atoms through photodissociation, which catalyze the breakdown of ozone (O3) into oxygen (O2).[3] Both types of ozone depletion were observed to increase as emissions of halocarbons increased.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion

For us it is a documented research, yet no one could prove that this is wrong with a new theory or published work.

The question is full blown nonsens. I don't think Kenneth M Towe

September 16th - the World Ozone Day (International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer). World Ozone Day is observed under the decision of United Nations for carrying on the awareness programmes and also closely following up and monitoring the ozone layer enveloping Earth.

When ozone is measured in Dobson units the intention is to measure the sum of ozone in the entire column of atmosphere at a location. This parameter is measured and published by NASA and WMO for any day and location.

Ozone measured in Dobson units cannot describe the loss of ozone because one cannot measure the lost ozone, only the existing ozone.

The point doesn't exist but Kenneth M Towe

A lot of information regarding 'Ozone' is available on the following site:

NASA Ozone Watch - Images, data, and information for the Southern Hemisphere

https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/monthly/SH.html

Sebastian Overmans ozone has been measured from ground stations since the 1950'es and the longest dataset from the Antarctica suggests the ozone depletion began before NASAs satellite was launched. The British Antarctic survey updates this dataset every year on their homepage.

Kenneth M Towe

No one but Kenneth M Towe

The area of the ozone hole depends on the area covered by the polar vortex which varies from year to year due to the variable weather. Inside the larger or smaller vortex the ozone loss is similar high because there is excess chlorine to use the ozone up. Before the man made CFC poisoned the stratosphere with chlorine the ozone depletion didn't occur as is seen in the Halley Bay/Base data from the 1950'es to mid-1970'es.

Kenneth M Towe

Article The 1991 Antarctic ozone hole - TOMS observations

I agree. Still Kenneth M Towe

Perhaps I just show that Kenneth M Towe

Kenneth M Towe

I will continue as long as Kenneth M Towe

Atmospheric circulation is the large-scale movement of air, and together with ocean circulation is the means by which thermal energy is redistributed on the surface of the Earth.

The Earth's atmospheric circulation varies from year to year, but the large-scale structure of its circulation remains fairly constant. The smaller scale weather systems – mid-latitude depressions, or tropical convective cells – occur "randomly", and long-range weather predictions of those cannot be made beyond ten days in practice, or a month in theory (see Chaos theory and Butterfly effect).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_circulation

I agree with @Adam A. Scaife and Henrik Rasmus Andersen concerning thermal energy from Ozone Depletion.

@Kenneth M Towe

This restricted area is equal to Australia so it is has a significant effect.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctica

The additional question of the absolute amount of ozone that have been lost in "the "Antarctic" from 1957 to the present" is not relevant for the subject of the question this thread is about. Kenneth M Towe

Kenneth M Towe

Yes I totally agree with@Henrik Rasmus Andersen.

Kenneth M Towe

Article Tropospheric jet response to Antarctic ozone depletion: An u...

"Bothered" - How do we distinguish if the question is dum or inconvenient?

It would seem all 32 authors of the paper ignored the question for two weeks. Is Kenneth M Towe

Lame can be funny.

While we wait I need to remind you about your promised evidence for that Dr. Dobson observed an ozone hole in Antarctica in 1956. Your evidence that the Nobel Prize of 1995 was an error. I am sure you have read it before and the absence of an answer is not funny.

I previously found Dr. Dobson's publication from 1968 that contain a figure of the ozone measured by his team at Halley Bay in the years 1956-1958. The problem with the figure relating to Kenneth M Towe

Is this because Kenneth M Towe

Is it possible that the ozone hole is actually caused by CFCs and the brilliant scientists who discovered this rightly received the Nobel prize?

The evidence for the statement "All models reasonably well reproduce Antarctic ozone depletion in the late 20th century." can be found in the paper it is cited from the abstract of. It is peer-reviewed and published in a very respected journal so experts have checked the data support the claim. This is opposite to Kenneths claims there evidence to the contrary are easy to find proving a lack of scientific schooling.

" Who are these experts? " -> Reviewers, Editors, 32 authors who are experts in atmospheric science, unlike Kenneth M Towe

Obviously Kenneth M Towe

While Kenneth M Towe

Malfoy, your claim was there was no ozone data. I showed again you lie!

Of interest for you is anything different from the truth.

That parameter would completely foolish. Properly the reason you are interested in it.

Still the data support the conclusion in the article.

Mordred, neither I nor the the paper made any claim about the accumulated total ozone loss over years. It appear no scientist have shown any interest in this none-parameter.

Kenneth M Towe

Another un-sourced clip. Some single measurements with an un-described method. Very unlikely to be useful for determining the elusive non-existing yearly accumulated ozone loss.