Global Warming versus the Ozone Hole

Last week my old "boss" and advisor from NOAA came to give a talk at our department, and afterwards chatted with a few of the graduate students. She is one of the main scientists responsible for explaining the rapid ozone loss over Antarctica due to CFCs, and has had a lot of success since that discovery as well.

At any rate, we got into a discussion about how the global warming problem is similar or dissimilar to the ozone hole problem. As an atmospheric scientist-to-be, I find it very frustrating that much of the general public still either does not believe (a) that global warming is happening at all or (b) that it's man-made. To me, the evidence is quite staggering that both are true.

But what really gets me is the apparent distrust of scientific evidence by the public. Despite the fact the 98% of climate scientists agree that man-made global warming is occurring, only 80% of the U.S. public believe that temperatures have been rising over the last century. Only 54% of U.S. citizens believe it's caused by man. Clearly, somehow there is a disconnect between what the scientists are saying and what the public is believing. Perhaps it's the media portrayal of the issue as a theory instead of a fact, perhaps it's that climate skeptics tend to put more effort into getting their message to the public than typical climate scientists, but regardless, the discrepancy exists.

I find it fascinating that nowadays, it would be very difficult to find someone does not believe that the ozone hole exists and that it is caused by man; but despite that fact, one of the favorite "skeptic" arguments is that what man does couldn't possibly be substantial enough to overwhelm natural cycles. And yet, it's already happened once with the ozone hole. Why should CO2 be any different than CFCs??

What was interesting in this seminar last week is that my old advisor was saying that when they first had the data that the ozone hole was rapidly forming, and that it was caused by CFCs emitted by man, that there were the same old skeptics at the time trying to convince the public it wasn't happening. In fact, some of the same people claiming the ozone hole wasn't happening are the same scientists today claiming that global warming isn't happening! The one major difference, however, is that the United States actually took the lead in the case of the ozone hole to get policy passed to stop the emissions of CFCs, and Europe was the ones dragging their feet. And it was really the American people themselves, not the government or the industries, that drove the change by refusing to buy products like aeresol cans, for example.

Of course, now the United States is the one dragging their feet on CO2 policy while most of the rest of the world as taken bigger steps. Is it because of all the doubt in the American public about global warming that means our government isn't willing to commit to more change? And is it harder for the American people to demand change because using less gas and energy is much more difficult than not using hairspray any more?

Things are getting better though. Certainly in the last decade more and more of the general public have started to realize that global warming really is happening. Unfortunately, policy change is needed today, and if we have to wait another decade for the rest of the American public to get on board, we are only increasing the negative impacts on the environment that we can expect in the future.