I just told my kid about how we fixed acid rain through regulation just this morning
Comment on Aerosol
raptir@mander.xyz 1 day ago
Kids these days don’t even know about the hole in the ozone later.
Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 hours ago
MoffKalast@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
Well it’s understandable, the concept of being able to actually do something about the environment on a world scale instead of just blindly pretending it’s not a thing until it kills us all is a bit hard to believe for younger generations for obvious reasons.
ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 hours ago
I don’t understand, why would it sound implausible? Isn’t that what governments are FOR?
leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 hours ago
It’s what governments are supposed to be for.
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 15 hours ago
Not when all governments have been captured by oil tycoons it isn’t.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 hours ago
I think the only reason it worked was because there were cheaper alternatives to CFCs already available. So it didn’t cost them money.
starlinguk@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Trump wants to bring it back.
LillyPip@lemmy.ca 19 hours ago
We managed to dial things back a bit, so that became a smaller problem.
We used to see regular news reports of actual rivers on fire. Things are still way too bad, but we forcefully throttled some things as we saw how quickly the damage was compounding.
Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
And there was that whole thing about trying to make cars burn a little cleaner so you could actually see from 1 side of a major city to another
Obi@sopuli.xyz 14 hours ago
Oh my god I needed your comment for it to finally click, I was thinking “they stopped putting their hair up to protect their shoulders from the increased UVs”? But of course, it was referencing the sprays!
Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 day ago
ozone later
Well that’s because we’re at now, not at later.
someguy3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
We’ve had one ozone yes, but what about later ozone?
jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
nozone
someguy3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
gets hit on head by aerosol can.
BurgerBaron@quokk.au 22 hours ago
Well not to worry, all these internet swarm satellites might cause another one.
PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 16 hours ago
how so?
BurgerBaron@quokk.au 16 hours ago
Video overview: https://youtu.be/oKK0dgDIxKY
There’s many studies, so here’s two:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2025EF007229
Article: https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/how-elon-musks-dying-satellites-could-hurt-the-ozone-layer
tl;dr: the massively increased rate of rocket launches and re-entry satellite burn-ups is creating a significant amount of pollution that is probably damaging the Ozone layer.
yeah@feddit.uk 13 hours ago
Fucks saaaake.
unknown@piefed.social 7 hours ago
The aluminium nanoparticles these satelites shed when they burn up in re-entry during their disposal, are also toxic.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17435390.2025.2511694
Eternal192@anarchist.nexus 22 hours ago
Most don’t know that we have an ozone layer let alone that there is a hole in it.
mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
One of my coworkers insists that the hole in the ozone layer is an iris that expands and contracts for regulation. When I asked him what it was regulating, he just shrugged and gave a look that said “I don’t know, you tell me”
He also claimed that believing that humans were capable of changing the global climate was pure hubris, despite the USSR deleting the Caspian sea decades ago.
And he thinks the wind turbines that have been installed in the past 10 years are making tornadoes worse, contradicting his claims that humans can’t change the climate
vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 20 hours ago
I think your coworker may be a lost cause, do you think you could convince him that anti-freeze and turpentine will make him see god?
chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
“For regulation” is a pretty weird take, but it is self regulating (in the absence of pollution from humans). When the ozone layer is thin, more UV gets through from the sun. UV from the sun ionizes O2 and splits it apart, creating oxygen free radicals which recombine and create ozone. Thus, less ozone leads to more ozone, hence self-regulation.
Flyberius@hexbear.net 1 day ago
Oh don’t worry, it’s coming back
jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
I thought the aerosols that affect the environment refer to the tiny aerosol particles at higher levels in the atmosphere.
Everyone in the 80s seemed to confuse the with aerosol hairspray, which wasn’t really a huge contributor. Still aren’t most sprays today generally not this so called aerosol style anymore?
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 hours ago
It was the Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that were used as the primary propellant in aerosol sprays. More commonly known by the brand name Freon. Notice that basically every aerosol can manufactured today has a “CFC Free” badge somewhere. Refrigerant systems also moved away from using actual Freon, and now use alternative refrigerants.
CFCs were actually invented by the same guy who invented leaded gasoline, Thomas Midgley Jr… He is probably the single most environmentally destructive chemical engineer in history.
mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
On the plus side, one of his inventions killed Thomas Midgley Jr., arguably the most environmentally destructive chemical engineer in history
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 15 hours ago
Name me another chemical engineer that could be argued did more harm. I don’t think all of Monsanto with agent orange and Roundup has done more than the TEL and CFC fuckup.
Where’s he buried? How long is the line to piss on his headstone?
VinegarChunks@lemmus.org 8 hours ago
Why were “CFC propellants” even helpful to the manufacturer? Can’t you just use compressed air in spray bottles to make them spray?
marcos@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Late 80s hairsprays and other canned aerosols were a sizeable contributor.
They were an easy fix, and stopped being a problem almost as soon as people decided to do something. That was way before the problem reached mainstream media, so when people started talking about it, they weren’t a problem anymore. But they surely were a problem for some time.
its_kim_love@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
It’s kinda our last big environmental win.
Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
There’s been some conservation wins that I know of. Okaloosa Darter fish came off of endangered status, and eventually off of threatened The Red Cockaded Woodpecker was elevated from endangered to threatened a few years ago.
Texas_Hangover@lemmy.radio 1 day ago
Now your just making shit up.
Signtist@bookwyr.me 23 hours ago
Winner of the “most penis euphemisms in one name” award.
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
American Bison, too. The repopulation of American bison (often called buffalo) is one of the most successful repopulation efforts in history. The reason you’re able to order buffalo burgers at your local hipster burger joint is because American bison is no longer endangered. The population has come from less than 1000 total bison (all privately owned by a handful of conservationists) to over 400k today.
its_kim_love@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 hours ago
I had a Bison meatloaf once that was so good. It’s so much lighter than beef. It was like eating a meat cloud.
Skullgrid@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I saw on Ted Turner’s wiki page that he helped with that.
ruuster13@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
The irony of all ironies is how similar the words “conservation” and “conservative” are.
halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 19 hours ago
That’s because the root of both is to converse. To keep things the way they are.
Politics gets in the way of that reality since they don’t actively want to keep it the same, they actually want to regress back to previous times they can exploit personally.
starlinguk@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
None of that is worldwide.
rants_unnecessarily@piefed.social 4 hours ago
Yeah, last. Not latest, last.
DeadDigger@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
The thing is it kinda isn’t. The ozone layer still needs about 20 years to get back to 1960 levels and the number of problematic states for this increasing again
MonkRome@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
iirc ~1/4 of the worlds energy production is renewable. More than 90% of all new electricity capacity worldwide came from renewable sources in 2024. Doomers want you to believe it can’t happen again while we are in the very decade that is likely to change the world. Public policy doesn’t even matter at this point, renewable energy is cheaper, so nearly all new investments are in renewables.
Ophrys@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 hours ago
Energy sources are only part of the issue (albeit a major one) and enormous damage has already been done to a disastrous point, calling people “doomers” with an intent to ridicule their angst, worries and experiences is akin to climate change denial.
Also, public policy is constantly used in an expensive way if that it suits the ruling classes, markets are not some neutral forces in a vacuum.
MonkRome@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
I’m concerned about climate change. But if you ask most people how much progress we’ve made they would say “barely any”. That belief that we can’t do it, is the main thing aside from public policy slowing us down. When people think things are hopeless, they often don’t see the point in fighting or changing their behavior. I also think most people don’t realize that renewable energy adoption has accelerated so quickly the last few years. Every year we have had massive growth over last year in adoption.
Jako302@feddit.org 12 hours ago
That’s only the case because it was the cheapest option available for a while. Oil execs noticed the trend and got cold feet, now a lot of governments are cutting back subsidies for renewables and actively hinder new projects being build. Here in germany we have investors abandoning half build solar parks cause they aren’t profitable anymore. At the same time we allow oil companies to bid for gigantic offshore projects just so they can say that they have no interest in actually building it after they won.
With the ozon hole you could see the world working together to fix it despite it beeing somewhat less profitable. With renewables you can see governments actively working against the movement despite it being the best in terms of environment and profits combined.
MonkRome@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Solar is easily the cheapest energy and its getting cheaper every year. Repairing a coal power plant is not as attractive as a much cheaper to run biofuel plant. Etc.
Without knowing the specifics, I doubt profitability was the issue. Once a solar panel is installed it is pure profit with minimal maintenance. Companies get in trouble when they commit way more to a project than they can raise in investments. It seems more likely that is what happened.
Lastly your looking at a few countries that are pushing back with what amounts to theater (Germany is 56% renewable energy). Meanwhile the largest producer of energy in the world, China, is staying committed to converting to renewables and s also 56% of the way there.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 14 hours ago
We could stop producing any co2 today and the planet would continue warming for 100 years, it’s a pretty tough problem we have on our hands.
MonkRome@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Sure but the problem would be 100 times worse if fossil fuel adoption doest decline. Its good news that we seem to be on the way to shifting our behavior.
Midnitte@beehaw.org 1 day ago
Tbf, its not even yet a win technically.
jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
So is that good news, that we’re moving in the right direction?
Though the very next sentence from that linked source says
Midnitte@beehaw.org 23 hours ago
2018 to 2022 didnt see much change (and given how far until its fully returned to normal, I think you can see qhy - it takes a long time to fully heal), but we’re certainly pretty far into success compared to where we were.