Assignment – Atmospheric systems and society.

_________________________________________________________________________________

1. Stratospheric Ozone

Figure 2: Observed and projected changes in global stratospheric ozone

(a)

Describe the overall trend shown in the recorded annually averaged data in Figure 2.

- Overall the Total ozone has decreased since after 1970. However it is clear that the average
ozone is increasing slowly after plateauing in after 2000

[2]

(b)

State one chemical responsible for the trend in the recorded annually averaged data between
1980 and 1990 shown in Figure 2.

- The gas CFC(chlorofluorocarbons)

[1]
 (c)

Outline one impact of low concentrations of stratospheric ozone on humans.

- Skin cancer due to UV-radiation

[1]

(d)

Identify the year that stratospheric ozone is predicted to return to 1980 levels in Figure 2.

- 2042

[1]

(e)

Describe two reasons for the projected change in ozone levels after 2020 in Figure 2.

- Technological development in terms of substituting CFCs with other substances that don’t harm
the ozone layer
- The Montreal Protocol which is an international agreement that imposes regulations that
decrease the use of ODS.

[2]

(f)

Outline one factor that may affect the reliability of the model projections in Figure 2.

- It is difficult to collect data on the use of ODS which is illustrated by the fact that there are
illegal markets for CFCs that don’t comply with the regulations of the montreal protocol. This
means that the data isn’t necessarily accurate and therefore the reliability of the projection is
affected.

[1]

2. Photochemical Smog

Figure 3: Concentration of atmospheric pollutants associated

with photochemical smog
 [Source: Reprinted from Environmental Pollution and Control, fourth edition, J. Jeffrey Peirce,
Ruth F. Weiner and P. Aarne
Vesilind, Chapter 18 – Air Pollution, Page 253, Copyright 1998, with permission from Elsevier
(http://www.elsevier.com).]

(a.i) Identify one primary pollutant from the pollutants shown in Figure 3.

- NO (nitrogen oxide)

[1]

(a.ii) Outline why the pollutant named in Question 3 (a)(i) is referred to as a primary pollutant.

Because NO is directly emitted from cars or factories. And primary pollutant means that it reacts
to form secondary pollutant which is the case for NO.

[1]

(b) Outline one reason why there is an increase in nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons early in the
day.

- Because the sun is down the primary pollutants aren't reacting to create secondary pollutants.
 [1]

(c) Explain the changes in ozone concentration over the period shown in Figure 3.

- The primary pollutants react to create secondary pollutants in the Troposphere as the sun
appears radiating UV-light and thus the primary pollutants decrease while ozone(secondary
pollutant) increases rapidly and peaks around noon because the sun is at its highest. Then it
decreases again in the afternoon because the sun is setting.

[3]

(d) State one environmental impact of the accumulation of ozone shown in Figure 3.

- Damage to plants

[1]

(e) Outline two local conditions that may increase the severity of photochemical smog.

- Topography - areas with volcanos that can potentially erupt would cause tremendous amounts
of primary pollutants.
- High population density more resources used more pollution

[2]

(f) Outline the role of catalytic converters in reducing photochemical smog.

- Catalytic converters are highly impactful because they can collect the smog and convert it such
that it isn’t unhealthy for humans.

[1]

3. Troposphreric Ozone

Figure 3: Tropospheric ozone levels in Mexico City

 (a) With reference to Figure 3, calculate the difference between the highest concentration and
lowest concentration of tropospheric ozone. 175ppb - 73ppb = 102ppb

[1]

(b) State two factors necessary for the chemical formation of ozone in the troposphere.

- UV-radiation
- Primary pollutants. NO. NO2 etc.

[2]

(c) Outline why a high concentration of ozone in the troposphere is a direct problem for humans,
while in the stratosphere it is a benefit to humans.
 - Because the troposphere is the layer of the atmosphere that we are in and the fact that ozone
is poisonous to humans means that ozone in the troposphere is dangerous. However in the
stratosphere ozone has another role other than being poisonous it is a protective blanket
against uv-radiation from the sun which can cause skin cancer.

[2]

(d) Suggest possible reasons for the overall trends of tropospheric ozone levels in Figure 3.

- Regulations on industry production

- redistribution of the industry to have them situated further away from mexico city
- regulations on use of cars on specific days
- using less polluting substances in industry

[4]

4. Section 2

(a) Outline two factors that affect the frequency and severity of photochemical smog in an area.

- Local topography is significant for the frequency and severity of photochemical smog. This is
illustrated by the case of New Delhi that has a high increase in photochemical smog in
November because of regulations of crop farming in a region to the west of New Delhi which
leads to crop burning. This crop burning emits primary pollutants that are driven directly to New
Delhi because of the Himalayas next to New Delhi traps and drives the photochemical smog
over New Delhi.
- Climate is another important factor that dictates the frequency and severity of photochemical
smog. This is illustrated by the phenomenon Thermal inversion that occurs frequently in
warmer climates where this photochemical smog is trapped under a layer of warm air. This
prevents the photochemical smog from rising and is thus trapped at ground level.

[4]

(b) Evaluate strategies to manage regional acid deposition using the pollution management
model.

- To evaluate strategies to manage regional acid deposition using the pollution management
model it is important to evaluate the cost and effects of the different strategies.

A clear strategy for reducing pollution is altering human activity. This would include things such
as replacing fossil fuels with alternatives such as electric cars instead of cars using fossil fuels.
Additionally, the reduction of energy use such as decreasing use of electricity and opting for
less private transportation in the form of public transport or car pooling. However, the reduction
of energy would have tremendous effects on major countries such as India and China where
the demand for power is increasing. Furthermore, our society is heavily reliant on fossil fuels
overall and alternatives are usually expensive because of limited replacement developments.
 Conversely, clean up and restoration such as recolonising damaged areas, international
agreements and liming acidified lakes and rivers aren’t regulating or altering human lives.
However, recolonising damaged areas and liming acidified lakes must be preserved and
repeated regularly on a massive scale which affect the biodiversity and is highly costly. For
international agreements it is difficult to establish because they either aren’t economically
beneficial or are severe in terms of alteration of human activity.

Comparing the alteration of human activity and clean up and restoration there are clear
discrepancies. The alteration of human activity would lead to decrease in use of fossil fuels
which would have tremendous effects in how we act and on our society that is incredibly reliant
on fossil fuels. Furthermore, the alteration of human activity wouldn’t just affect how we should
behave, and converting to alternatives to fossil fuels such as renewable energy sources is
extremely costly. In comparison, clean up and restoration doesn’t have direct effects on human
activity and thus we can live our lives as before. However, restoration and clean up is highly
costly and can affect the biodiversity and thus is hard to implement which is the same for
international agreements. Nevertheless, the effects are insignificant compared to the effects of
the alteration of human activity.

In summary, the alteration of human activity producing pollution causes severe effects on our
society and is highly costly. This is worse than clean up and restoration that is simply very
costly and does not have effects that compare to the significance of the effects of altering
human activity.

[7]

(c) To what extent have international agreements been successful in solving atmospheric air
pollution and climate change?

- To determine the extent of international agreements' success in solving atmospheric air

pollution and climate it is important to look at several different cases of international
agreements and their effects. In this essay I will determine the success of the Montreal
Protocol and the Kyoto Protocol.

The Montreal Protocol was highly successful in the compliance of countries and its
effectiveness. This is highlighted by the magnitude which consisted of 197 countries that
signified the first universal UN agreement. From 1986 to 1993 the consumption of ODS halved
and by 1995 it was under a tenth of the levels in 1986. Additionally, the Montreal Protocol led to
significant discoveries regarding Chemistry by Molina, Sherwood Rowland and Crutzen who
won a Nobel prize for their work. As we can see from the above the Montreal Protocol was
highly successful in both the compliance of countries and its effectiveness. This is shown by
how 197 countries participated in this agreement being the first universal UN agreements.
Furthermore, the effectiveness is highlighted by the dramatically decreasing levels of
consumption of ODS. At last, the partnership in the development of ODS reduction led to
important discoveries regarding Chemistry and these are the reasons why the extent of the
Montreal Protocol was highly successful.

The compliance and effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol was extremely unsuccessful in
reducing climate change. This is demonstrated by the fact that full compliance in the Kyoto
Protocol would not even have led to the decrease in climate change. The Kyoto Protocol
required a GHG reduction of 5.2% below levels in 1990, however a later study in 2007
highlighted that in order to hinder temperature rising above 2 Celsius the reduction of GHG
should be closer to around 10%-40% below 1990 levels. Despite this seemingly low
requirement that the Kyoto Protocol imposed, countries like Canada left the protocol and Japan
failed to fulfill the requirements.Furthermore, the reality was the antithesis of what was
intended. In 1990 the global GHG emission was around 23 billion tonnes and 32 billion tonnes
in 2008 which further increased to 36 billion tonnes in 2013. In Europe multiple countries were
successful in meeting the requirements to emit less GHG than in 1990. However, taking
eastern europe as an example merely met the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol which was
GHG emission to under 1990 levels, however as a result of the collapse of the soviet union the
countries in Eastern Europe did not have significant GHG emission. As we can see the
success of the Kyoto Protocol is limited. This is demonstrated by the requirements of the Kyoto
Protocol being too lenient. Additionally, despite low requirements failed to make countries
comply with the terms. Furthermore, the global emission of GHG increased dramatically
proving the effectiveness unsuccessful. Even when requirements were satisfied it was simply
as result of the loose way the requirements were stated demonstrated by Eastern Europe and
this is why the Kyoto Protocol was extremely unsuccessful.

In conclusion, it is clear that the extent of success of international agreements are varied. For
the Montreal Protocol it was a hugely successful international agreement that consisted of 197
countries and was highly successful in reducing the consumption of ODS. Contrarily, the Kyoto
Protocol saw limited success. The global GHG increased making the effectiveness
unsuccessful and had little compliance from countries taking part in this protocol despite low
requirements.

[9]