[TillE]

I'm struggling to understand how anyone could possibly be aware that there was a threat to the ozone layer, but also think that it magically solved itself. The catalyst action of CFCs is not remotely controversial, no more than the IR absorption spectrum of CO2.

Whether it's environmental disasters or internet social media activities, there's an interesting bias towards thinking that the status quo is stable, just because it's been that way for a few years. Stuff changes. Take a step back and actually look at the whole picture.

[refurb]

The ozone layer healed itself despite the fact the Chinese continued to produce and release MASSIVE amounts of CFCs after the signing of the Montreal Accord in 1987. It wasn't until 2007 or so until they stopped. However, the layer stopped thinning in 1997 [1]. Interesting no?

[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/06/27/environment-china-...

[DennisP]

Your article does not say that China was producing such massive quantities of CFCs that the efforts of all other signatories to the treaty were negated. What your article does say:

> Scientists largely credit the Montreal Protocol, signed by about 150 countries, with reversing the depletion of the ozone layer

[refurb]

This graph shows that in 1997, reductions in CFC had just begun, yet the ozone hole had been reversed.[1]

Also, apparently there isn't agreement that the hole has gotten better: "Work has suggested that a detectable (and statistically significant) recovery will not occur until around 2024, with ozone levels recovering to 1980 levels by around 2068."

So which is it?

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ozone_cfc_trends.png