Montreal Protocol

The largest Antarctic ozone hole in September 2000.

The Montreal Protocol is a protocol to the Vienna Convention for the protection of the ozone layer, designed to protect the ozone layer by reducing the production and consumption of numerous substances that have been studied that react with it and are believed to be responsible for its depletion. The agreement was negotiated in 1987 and entered into force on January 1, 1989. The first meeting of the parties was held in Helsinki in May of that 1989. Since then, the document has been revised several times, in 1990 (London), in 1991 (Nairobi), in 1992 (Copenhagen), in 1993 (Bangkok), in 1995 (Vienna), in 1997 (Montreal) and in 1999 (Beijing). It is believed that if all countries meet the objectives proposed within the treaty, the ozone layer could have recovered by the year 2050. Due to the high degree of acceptance and implementation that has been achieved, the treaty has been considered an exceptional example of international cooperation, with the aim of recovering the ozone layer.

The treaty focuses on the elimination of global emissions of substances that deplete the ozone layer (SACO). The treaty proposes the reduction in its production and consumption up to the partial elimination.

Measures for the elimination of CFCs

According to the signatory States of the agreement, the objective of the treaty is:

"Recognizing that the worldwide release of certain substances can significantly deplete and modify the ozone layer in a way that could have harmful effects on health and the environment,... Resolute to protect the ozone layer by adopting preventive measures to equitably control the total global emissions of ozone-depleting substances, with the ultimate goal of eliminating them, based on advances in scientific knowledge, taking into account technical and economic aspects and bearing in mind the development needs of developing countries"

To this end, they agreed to reduce their levels of consumption and production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) according to the level of development of their economies. Developing countries, defined under Article 5.1, have a different baseline and schedule applied than developed countries (also known as non-Article 5, Non-A5 countries). The following tables present the reduction schedules for the two groups of countries and the ODS as grouped in the annexes of the Protocol.

Notes

There is an elimination (reduction to zero for 2010) of some substances (halons 1211, 1301, 2402 and CFC 13, 111, 112, etc) as well as some substances that require special attention (carbon tetrachloride, 1,1,1 -trichloroethane). The phase-out of the less active hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFs) began in 1996 and will continue until their complete phase-out in 2030.

At that moment, one of the key issues is the participation of developing countries in meeting the goals of the Montreal protocol, which proposes to stop using products that are harmful to ozone. The goal is to achieve it by 2010.

HCFC phase-out management plan

As reflected in the communications of the Executive Committee of the Montreal Protocol (ExCom 53/37 and ExCom 54/39), the Parties to the Protocol have agreed on 2013 as the date on which HCFC production levels will be fixed and agreed begin the reduction process from the year 2015. Because HCFCs also damage the ozone layer, they are used as temporary replacements for refrigerants, solvents, propellants for plastic foam production, and in fire extinguishers. They are used as a temporary replacement since their potential effect on ozone (known as ODP – Ozone Depleting Potential) is almost 20 times less and their global warming potential (GWP – Global Warming Potential)) is significantly smaller as well. The lack of alternatives to CFCs and HCFCs (for example in inhalers used to treat asthmatics or people with respiratory conditions) are the reason for the few exceptions that exist to their use, as well as the halons still in use in fire suppression systems in aircraft and submarines. The provisions of the Protocol include a requirement that the Parties base their future decisions on current scientific foundations as well as all available and updated environmental, technical and economic information that is evaluated by a panel of experts from the international community. Reports on the progress have been reported on several occasions by the World Meteorological Organization. There are also reports prepared by government organizations and NGOs where alternatives to ozone-depleting substances are presented, since these have a strong impact on certain productive sectors due to their use in agriculture, energy production, refrigerants, and laboratory measurements.

History

Mario Molina and Frank Sherwood Rowland were the first to point to CFCs as being responsible for the ozone depletion observed in 1974. Their inert nature had made them very attractive for many applications. However, in the upper atmosphere, these substances are affected by the greater UV solar radiation present, with which they dissociate and the radicals (chlorine and bromine atoms) released attack ozone. At first it had been believed that these gases could not reach the highest layers of the atmosphere since they are denser than air. However, they have a very long half-life (between 75 and 120 years) and atmospheric air currents allow CFCs to reach heights that would be unlikely without moving air. Molina and Rowland's argument was based on a similar proposal by Paul J. Crutzen and Harold Johnston who had shown how nitrous oxide could act as a catalyst in ozone destruction. Although other scientists had independently proposed that chlorine could catalyze ozone losses (Ralph Cicerone, Richard Stolarski, Michael McElroy, and Steven Wofsy), Molina and Rowland were the first to identify CFCs as a huge source of atmospheric chlorine. Crutzen. Rowland and Molina received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1995 for their work on ozone. Ozone plays a fundamental role in absorbing most of the ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation, preventing it from reaching the planet's surface. The depletion of the ozone layer by CFCs would result in an increase in incident UV-B radiation on the surface with a striking environmental effect affecting crops, marine phytoplankton and strongly increasing the risk of skin cancer. After the publication of this work in 1974, Rowland and Molina had to testify before a hearing of the House of Representatives of the United States of America in December 1974. From there, many funds were allocated to study the problem and verify the results. initial results. The US National Academy of Sciences published a report in 1976 that validated the results and gave credibility to the Molina and Rowland hypothesis. In 1985, Farman, Gardinaer and Shanklin, working for the British Antarctic Service, shocked the international community when they published study results in the journal Nature showing an ozone "hole", a depletion ozone levels in the polar zone much higher than anyone would have anticipated. That same year, 20 countries, including most of the largest CFC producers, signed the Vienna Convention, which established the framework for negotiating international regulations on ozone-depleting substances.

During the 1980s, DuPont, the world's largest producer of CFCs, tried to convince the United States government and the general public that they were not responsible for the depletion of the CFC layer. ozone.

The Multilateral Fund

The Multilateral Fund for the implementation of the Montreal Protocol is the body in charge of providing funds and financing to assist developing countries to eliminate the use of ozone-depleting substances. The Fund is in charge of the Executive Committee where 7 industrial countries and 7 article 5 countries are represented, which are elected at the Meeting of the Parties. The Committee reports annually to the Parties on its operations at the Meeting of the Parties. Up to 20% of the Parties' contributions may be delivered through their bilateral agencies in the form of projects and activities eligible for funding. The Fund receives resources every 3 years through donors. These resources are used for the conversion of existing manufacturing processes, personnel training, the payment of patents and royalties on new technologies, and the establishment of national ozone offices.

Ratification

All member states of the The United Nations has ratified the Montreal Protocol, as have the Holy See, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the European Union. A smaller number of countries have ratified subsequent amendments. For example, only 154 countries have ratified the Beijing Amendment.

Impact

Ozone levels.

Since the Montreal Protocol came into effect, atmospheric concentrations of the most important chlorofluorocarbons and chlorinated hydrocarbons have stabilized or decreased. Halon concentrations have continued to increase as halons stored in fire extinguishers are released. However, the rate of increase has decreased and its presence is expected to begin to decline around 2020. The concentration of HCFCs has increased significantly, largely due to the multiple uses in which they replace CFCs (eg as solvents or refrigerants). Despite the fact that there have been reports of individuals attempting to avoid prohibition by smuggling from developing to developed countries, the degree of compliance with the Protocol has been enormous. For this reason, the Montreal Protocol has been considered the most successful international environmental agreement in the world to date. In a 2001 report, NASA found that ozone depletion over Antarctica had remained the same as it had been for the previous 3 years. Despite this, in 2003 the ozone hole reached its second largest extent in history. The latest scientific assessment (2006) on the effects of the Montreal Protocol states that “The Montreal Protocol is working. There are clear signs of a decline in the presence of ozone-depleting substances and some early signs of a recovery of stratospheric ozone. Unfortunately, hydrochlorofluorocarbons or (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are currently considered anthropogenic sources of global warming. On the internationally recognized scale in which the contribution of a carbon dioxide (CO2) molecule is assigned a value of 1, HCFCs and HFCs reach values of up to 10,000 times that of CO2, making them greenhouse gases. very powerful greenhouse. The Montreal Protocol is seeking to achieve the elimination of HCFCs by 2030, but does not impose restrictions on HFCs since they do not damage the ozone layer and therefore do not fall under the subject matter of the treaty. Because CFCs are also gases with strong greenhouse effect potential, simply replacing CFCs with HFCs does not imply increased environmental damage, but increased use and applications in human activities could put the climate at risk. endangered.