Whats The Difference Between Minohd And Ultra Hd

ozone holes of Fear - 2 º Part

by Roger Maduro and Ralf Schauerhammer * Translation by Eduardo Ferreyra *

by Roger Maduro and Ralf Schauerhammer Translation Eduardo Ferreyra

English Translation of book that 1992 provoked the wrath and fury of the international environmental corporation

Volcanoes can be the most dramatic source of atmospheric gases, but oceans are definitely the biggest source. Extensive studies on the annual flow of chlorine and sulfur in nature were made in the 50s and 60s for the most important atmospheric scientists from Sweden, Erik Eriksson. Among the many surprising discoveries made by Eriksson to examine the transport and exchange of gases in the atmosphere was the fact that annually circulated through the atmosphere 10 times more sulfur than that released by industrial activity. Until the appearance of the work of Eriksson, most scientists had assumed that all the pollution came from the man. Eriksson showed sulfur natural sources are vastly superior to industrial emission sources.

In a paper published in the journal Tellus, in April 1959, "Annual Circulation Chlorine and Sulfur in Nature," Eriksson was set carefully at the sources of atmospheric chlorine and calculated that the sea water contributes about 600 million tons of chlorine into the atmosphere annually, transported there by about 1000 million tons of sea salt particles. (The sea water containing NaCl, or sodium chloride, common table salt. These salt particles enter the air through evaporation of sea water released into the atmosphere by the action of the waves, spraying aerosols into the air.)

This means that seawater contributes 800 times more chlorine into the atmosphere, which is contained in the entire world production of CFCs . But the comparison Freon presumably the amount of chlorine released by CFCs is even more surprising: the seawater provides 80,000 times more chlorine than the alleged dissociation in the stratosphere of CFCs. The proponents of the theory of ozone destruction argue, of course, that not a single ounce of this chlorine reaches the stratosphere, because the rain drags him back to the surface. They do not bother to explain the origin of chlorine in the stratosphere had before CFCs were invented. Therefore, there is no reference to chlorine in the oceans in the apocalyptic works of ozone, although Eriksson et al provide evidence that, indeed, vast amounts of chlorine from the sea can be, and indeed reach the stratosphere.

For example, Eriksson was to determine rigorously, not only how much chlorine was produced by the oceans, but how much time remained in the atmosphere, what was happening with him and where it was finally deposited. This was an extremely question Eriksson critical, as there are large concentrations of salt surface in the world that are hundreds of miles of ocean. Where does the salt?

Studies indicate that large amounts of salt back into the sea after a short period of time, through dry deposition or rain, and large amounts of salt may remain suspended in the atmosphere for long periods of time. Eriksson reviewed studies show that the increased turbulence and convective cells over land can lead to air currents and ocean salt content up to greater heights. This is especially the case of the warm currents. Eriksson concluded:

"It is difficult to overestimate the significance of these findings and show that chlorine-rich air can be transported at high levels in the continents, thus passing over mountain barriers without loss of chlorine by washing . Once on the continent, mixing with colder air will cause the precipitation of water and salt from the sea from that stratum. The transport and subsequent accumulation of sea salt makes it easy to understand the formation of the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah . [P. 397].

addition, languages \u200b\u200bhot air flowing from climatic disturbances such as thunderstorms are rich in chlorine. This is extremely important since the storms, especially hurricanes, carry huge amounts of air, chemicals and water vapor from the surface to the top of the troposphere and can penetrate and inject large amounts of air directly into the stratosphere There are many other compelling work to show that vast amounts of marine and other sources chlorine do reach into the stratosphere.

Three scientists from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, AC Delaney, JP and WH Sheldovsky Pollock published a paper in the edition of December 20, 1974, the Journal of Geophysical Research ("Stratospheric Aerosol: The Contribution from the troposphere) which documented the presence of chlorine and bromine in the stratosphere originated in the oceans, noting that in the stratosphere is much more chlorine and bromine that resulting from direct injection of particles of sea salt. Delaney et al, write that there are twice as chlorine "than might be expected to accompany the sodium, as the other component of the salt sea of \u200b\u200batmospheric aerosols, and bromine is present in an excess of about 200 times more. "They emit the hypothesis that the particles of salt, NaCl and NaBr, are destroyed in the lower troposphere and the gases released are then transported to the stratosphere where they recombine again to form particulates.

Delaney et al. talk about fact that chlorine must come from the sea, but they can not find a clear chemical pathway by which ions can dissociate and recombine, and the same is even more true for bromine. An interesting mechanism that they propose to carry chlorine and bromine to the stratosphere is "the folding of the stratosphere and on a smaller scale turbulent transfer between the troposphere and the stratosphere." It was not until several years after this study that other researchers established that there were many sources for chlorine, in addition to the salt in the oceans.

Exchange Processes

Troposphere-Stratosphere

It is clear that the volcanoes and the ocean sent massive amounts of chlorine and bromine in the atmosphere. The biggest scientific problem of the matter is, these gases reach the 10 or 16 miles high in the stratosphere, and if so, how are they transported?

As discussed in a work of Elmar R. Reiter, "Processes of troposphere-stratosphere exchange" (Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics) There are four basic mechanisms for moving aerosols and gases from the troposphere to the stratosphere: (1) seasonally adjusted average height of the tropopause, (2) large movements organized, large scale, through meridional circulation, ( 3) transport of vortex (vortex) on a large scale, mainly in the region of the "jet stream" and (4) transport to small and medium scale eddies through hurricanes and other storms that can penetrate the stratosphere and inject there large amounts of water vapor, hot air and tropospheric gases.

Here we see the third mechanism, the current jet. These currents play a critical role in determining the weather in the weather systems across the world, and yet they are the least understood atmospheric phenomenon. Each hemisphere has three jet streams: one in the subtropics, one in the midlatitudes and over the poles - which is only at certain times of year. Figure 1.3

CUT SECTION OF MASS AIR FLOW
from the stratosphere to troposphere,
NEAR THE JET STREAM

A three-dimensional view of the flow of air masses from the stratosphere to the troposphere near the jet stream. Isentropic surfaces are indicated by thin lines. Thick lines are used to indicate constant wind speeds, the front edges, and the tropopause.

Source: Adapted from Elmar R. Reiter, "Stratosphere Troposphere Exchange Processes Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 13, No. 4 (August 1975).

The basic point here is that the jet streams of air exchanges occur very intense, where air the troposphere is taken up and injected into the stratosphere, and vice versa. Figure 1.8 shows a cut in section of a jet stream, indicating the path of stratospheric air. The wind speed is higher in the center, sometimes exceeding 200 knots, and is weaker on the outside of the current vortex. Figure 1.4 is a bit more complicated, showing the cyclonic nature of the jet stream, an anticyclone beneath it, and how does a simultaneous injection of air from the troposphere into the stratosphere and vice versa.

Figure 1.5 is perhaps one of the clearest. Shows a continuous series of measurements of the troposphere-stratosphere interactions, conducted by Reiter Reinholt on Zugspitze mountain Germany's highest. (It should be noted that Reiter Reinholt is not related in any way with Elmar Reiter.)

can see how air masses entering the troposphere into the stratosphere several kilometers above the tropopause, the start date. Then a stratospheric intrusion breaks down through the tropopause and from the core of the jet stream there is an injection of stratospheric ozone-rich air to the surface of the earth. Figure 1.4

NATURE OF HURRICANE JET STREAM

lines short lines show the lines of vorticity in the cyclonic side of the jet stream, while the lines point-and-dash lines show the vorticity of the anticyclonic side. The gray band indicates stratospheric air moves down into the troposphere. The thick black line that crosses from left to right represents the tropospheric air upward through the jet stream toward the stratospheric

Source: Adapted from Ermar R. Reiterates "Stratosphere-Exchange Processes Troposf'era", Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 13, No. 4 (August 1975).

Shortly after this event, the troposphere, "bounces" and the opposite happens: the air in the troposphere makes its way through the tropopause and tropospheric air leads to a height of 20 kilometers, twice tropopause height. Later, another more intense stratospheric intrusion, where the jet stream sent back ozone-rich air to the surface of the Earth. (An aside on this subject: There ozone in the stratosphere is ozone in the Earth's surface and there is ozone in the middle of the two.

According to the standard environmentalist dogma, ozone in the stratosphere is "good" because it filters out harmful ultraviolet rays mislabeled, while ozone in the troposphere is "bad" because it is the main component of urban smog. However, as Figure 1.5 and many other scientific studies show, the stratospheric ozone injections are very common, and many scientists believe are the main source of tropospheric ozone. In fact, it is likely that the stratospheric ozone down to the surface of the Earth, causing a "smog alert" that can be wrongly blame the car).

In fact, ground-level ozone is paying some dishes broken by others. Although toxic levels have been determined by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), is beneficial as a germicide always present, useful for combating infections resulting from small cuts or grazes. In fact, it encourages the installation of ozone generators in hospitals to control the spread of disease among patients and to help heal the wounds from accidents or surgery. Chlorine

Biomass Burning

Until the late '70s, the amount of gas supplied to the atmosphere by biomass burning and forest fires are considered minimal, but careful measurements of forest fires since then indicate that this is an important source of gas for global atmospheric chemistry. The burning of biomass may actually contribute to the atmosphere than carbon dioxide all the industrial activity of man in the world. In a 1989 interview with an author, scientist Alberto Setzer, the Brazilian Institute for Space Studies calculated that in 1987 the burnings in the Amazon rain forest had freed more than 540 million tons of carbon dioxide. The American scientist Richard Houghton in a conversation with the authors in 1988, advanced a higher figure based on an estimate which included not only to CO, from the burning of forests, but the amount released by the newly exposed soil: 4 billion tons. This means that only the burning of the Amazon - which is less than half of all the world's forest area is burned by man and subject to primitive agriculture, produces almost as much CO, as any release of CO was attributed to industrial activities: 5 billion tons. Another

gas released by burning biomass includes chlorine, the villain of the hole in the ozone layer in the form of CH3Cl (or methyl chloride). According to one of the first papers on the subject ("Biomass Burning as a Source Atmospheric Gases CO, H2, N2O, NO, CH3, Cl, and COS, "Nature, Nov. 15, 1979, pp 253-256), 420,000 tons of chlorine contained in CH., C1 were released in 1979 by burning biomass, the authors of the work, Paul Crutzen, Leroy Heidt, Joseph Krasnec, Walter Pollock and Wolfgang Seiler, warn, however, that their estimates may be too low.

Since this work of Crutzen et al. appeared originally published in Nature, the rate of global deforestation, biomass burning and Slash-and-burn has increased exponentially - the result of the austerity policies imposed on developing countries and the failure of agencies international finance such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for the transfer of advanced technologies. Therefore no surprise that more accurate satellite surveys show that global deforestation and burning of tropical forests are at least 10 times more than what was expressed by Crutzen et al. This means that biomass burning is releasing at least 4.2 million tons of chlorine into the atmosphere.

biogenic This chlorine generated, according to Crutzen et al., Can pose a serious threat to the ozone layer because it dissociates into the stratosphere in the same chlorine atoms produced by the recited dissociation of CFCs. One of the most interesting points of this work is that it represents another attempt by Paul Crutzen to prove that man is destroying their nest. Crutzen, one of the first proponents of ozone depletion in the early '70s, in recent years has been rather silent on the subject of "chlorine-de-la-biomass", perhaps to avoid drawing attention to the fact that there are other sources of chlorine to the atmosphere, in addition to man-made CFCs.

In a lecture given in March 1989 in Williamsburg, Virginia, on biomass burning, scientists documented the extent biomass burning around the world, not just those caused by human activity, but also contributed by the forest fires of Mother Nature. While world attention was riveted on large forest fires in Yellowstone in 1989, across the world, a vast area of \u200b\u200bSiberian forest in northern China and were burning; million hectares of forests were burned to the ground. It is a fact, natural forest fires are recorded as most of the biomass burned in the Northern Hemisphere.

The vastness of the fires of Mother Nature and her forests, however, does not lower the great tragedy happens in the Third World, when nations are forced to slash and burn rainforests simply to produce energy for cooking and heating. Over 60% of global deforestation is the result of cutting trees for firewood. Most countries in Central Africa obtained more than 90% of its energy from biomass burning.

Niger is a country that used to export timber, must now import millions of tons of fuel wood, for international lending institutions will prohibit the import of petroleum and coal, energy sources much more efficient. In fact, the majority of deforestation is the direct result of environmental policies that prevent reaching the advanced technology sector in development. If attempts to build nuclear plants in the Third World had not been blocked by environmentalists, most of the ecological disasters that are happening today in those countries could have been avoided. If the Africans could use tractors and fertilizers, for example, would not have to burn each year 5,000 square kilometers of savannah and plant to plant.

Returning to the issue of chlorine villain: At present, more than 4.5 million tons of chlorine gas are made annually by biomass burning mostly in the tropics. If we consider the recent information provided by the fire of Yellowstone National Park and others, reviewed in the March 1990 conference mentioned above, the amount of gases from forest fires in northern latitudes can contribute as much as burning biomass in developing countries. Consequently, the estimate for the chlorine produced by burning biomass is approximately double to 8.4 million tonnes. This represents. at least 11 times more chlorine than the entire global production of CFCs in a whole year (750,000 tons) and 1,120 times the amount of chlorine released by the alleged allegedly dissociation of CFCs.

Even this figure. 8.4 million tonnes, may prove to be a gross understatement. In his 1979 paper, Crutzen et al. warn that they did not include in its calculations for the gases could be released from the heating of the organic matter in the soil cover, "or of 40-80 x 10" gC (4 to 8 billion tons of carbon) matter being exposed to fire, but abandoned later as dead biomass, without burning above the ground. "(p. 2o6). They add that" the organic matter in the soil cover is particularly rich in nutrients and can make important contributions to the cycle of atmospheric trace gases and nutrients. "(P. 256).

Another point that Crutzen and his coauthors emphasize is the fact that emissions occur in tropical regions active atmosphere. The two largest of these regions are above the Amazon rain forest and Indonesia archipelago. They are known as the "stratospheric sources" of the world, because of the huge amount of water vapor and gases into the stratosphere by very violent convective storms in the region.

This is of great importance for study transport of chlorine and bromine into the stratosphere, because these rainforests are where you place the greatest amount of biomass burning, and the most active volcanic area is located in the area of \u200b\u200bthe "stratospheric fountain" of Indonesia, providing immediate transport to the stratosphere for biogenic and volcanic gases. The behavior of these dynamic regions, the Amazon rainforest, was first studied in depth during a joint air expedition conducted by NASA and the Brazilian space agency, INPE, 1985 and 1987. The results of the scientific expedition called Experiment Lindera Atmospheric Layer (ABLE), were summarized by Robert J. McNeal, head of the Division of Earth Sciences and Applications at NASA, during a testimony before the U.S. Senate on September 20, 1988:

"In the Amazon there is a mechanism that transports gas between the boundary layer of the planet and the free troposphere where they can come in patterns of large-scale circulation. All too often down deep convective storms of considerable volume, and an essential move continuously around the Amazon basin. Such storms download material from very high in the atmosphere, up to and including the stratosphere, ozone is a source (and] also raised material from the top of the forest cover to the top of the troposphere. ... The intensity and frequency of storms coupled essentially vertically to the surface and the troposphere in the Amazon region. "

These violent storms have enormous power. McNeal says that" individual convective storms carrying 200 megatons of air per hour, of which 3 megatons are water vapor releasing 100,000 megawatts energy into the atmosphere. "This is just a storm, on average, worldwide about 44,000 thunderstorms occur daily, mostly in the tropics, producing a total of more than 8 million of electric shock.

The widespread destruction of tropical forests as a result of deliberate policies that restrict the technological development will have consequences far greater imbalance in the global climate, the phantom threat of CFCs and other pollutants produced by man. As McNeal warned in his testimony:

E! replacement wetlands forests or pastures, most likely cause great impact on this huge oven, with the consequent large effect on rootstocks atmospheric circulation and, consequently, climate. The evapotranspiration and rain will fall. You can reduce the amount of latent heat transported to temperate and polar latitudes, and these regions may experience a cooler climate as a result. "

Algae vs.

.

CFC Other major suppliers of chlorine and bromine in the atmosphere . In 1981, an expedition led by atmospheric scientist Hanwant Singh, went on board Coast Guard Polar from Long Beach, California, to Valparaiso, Chile, taking air samples and surface water. Singh and colleagues found that sources in the ocean were emitting large amounts of methyl halides. Their study, published in the Journal of Geophysical Research (April 20, 1988) states: "It is determined for the eastern Pacific the average flows, sea air, for chloride, bromide and methyl iodide."

then explains that these organic compounds "are important transport of chlorine, bromine and iodide in the global atmosphere." Singh et al. reach the surprising conclusion that its actions along the eastern Pacific Ocean show a dominant source of methyl halides, and that "this is big enough to be blamed for the whole load tropospheric of these species. "(P. 8689, emphasis added).

Singh and his colleagues calculated that the oceanic source of these compounds released more than 5 million tons of methyl chloride and 800,000 tonnes of methyl bromide to atmosphere. It should be noted, moreover, that although his reading of methyl bromide averaged 23 parts per billion, measured only 0.7 parts per billion of halons. However, halons are the chemical fire extinguisher is being banned in U.S. because it contains bromine , a substance that the faction has labeled ozone destruction as much worse than chlorine.

In recent years, scientists in favor of ozone depletion have questioned the idea that ocean sources can produce such vast amounts of chlorine and bromine - amounts that by themselves without the help of sea salt and volcanoes, are much larger than the chlorine and bromine in CFCs and halons. Without any evidence, the faction of ozone depletion argues that man-made substances have to be the source of these methyl halides and no natural sources, because their computer models and say it . These models, however, consistent with the observed and verified.

The controversy between the models and the information was conclusively clarified with the publication in Science, July 13, 1990, the study conducted by Anne Marie and Lowell P. Wuosmaa Hager, Department of Biochemistry at the University of Illinois. They show that marine biomass is responsible for injecting a huge amount of chlorine and bromine in the atmosphere, and how it happens.

"halohydrocarbon The most abundant species in the upper atmosphere is methyl chloride, and is widely believed that the biological synthesis is largely responsible to sustain a global emission rate estimated at 5 million tons of methyl chloride per year. It is well documented synthesis of methyl chloride by fungal colonies of putrefaction of wood, and there were isolated studies reporting in vivo synthesis of methyl halides by marine macroalgae and phytoplankton. " [p. 160 ]

Wuosmaa The original contribution to this field and Hager is that they managed to synthesize in the laboratory and for the first time, one of the halohydrocarbon: the metiltribromuro. Furthermore, they discovered an enzyme that can synthesize the methyl halides. The enzyme is widely present in nature, including mushrooms, red seaweed and "frosty." The authors conclude that "although the production of 5 million tons per year represent a prodigious rate of methyl chloride, this figure may well be understood in terms of the large terrestrial biomass can contribute to their training." [P. 162].

One of the most interesting and Hager Wuosmaa work is his assertion about the biogenic sources of methyl halides may be much higher than previously calculated, both in the oceans and on land. Singh's team performed measurements in open areas of the Pacific Ocean, but the highest density of biomass located near the coast. This means that the oceanic biomass production may be greater when more extensive measurements are made. Added to this, and Hager Wuosmaa say the role of land plants in the production of methyl halides has been totally ignored. For example, they write:

"The presence of the enzyme [which can synthesize methyl halides] in the" frosty ", a terrestrial plant that grows in abundance in California coastal soils, is an interesting observation that perhaps notes the need for an inspection of the activity of the methyl halide transferase in other species juicy that grow in environments rich in salt. Also noteworthy is the fact that the plant "Frosty" has a worldwide distribution. " [p, 162]

Dental Cream" destroy the ozone layer?

The other main ingredient is fluoride CFC ( F), which is also an alleged murderer of ozone and a super "greenhouse gas". (The fluoride in toothpaste and drinking water supply is not under threat but that threat is not inconceivable given the sentence imposed on CFCs).

Fluoride, like chlorine, is an abundant natural gas. The explosion of Tambora in 1815 introduced to air a minimum of 120 million tons of fluorine. At present production rates, this represents the equivalent of 486 years of global CFC production. Moreover, the passive emission of gases from volcanoes may be about 6 million tons annually, which is 24 times larger than the amount of fluoride in the global production of CFCs (that is 248,600 tons per year). See Table 1.2.

Three scientists, Robert B. Symonds, William I. Rose and Mark Reed, published a paper in the journal Nature (August 4, 1988) where the contribution to investigate the atmosphere of fluorine-containing volcanic gases and chlorine. After evaluating the evidence the authors draw conclusions contrary to the statements of Ozone Trends Panel. The Panel suggests that "photolysis of anthropogenic halocarbons in the stratosphere is the only major source of atmospheric HF (hydrogen fluoride)," they write on page 418.

However, "This study supports other work on the volcanoes that emit natural gas also emit significant amounts of HF, some of which are directly injected into the stratosphere. Therefore, the volcanoes should be considered as an important source of tropospheric and stratospheric HF. " Another source of fluoride in the atmosphere is sodium fluoride oceans. However, this source has not been fully investigated.

In an article written in November 1980 the journal Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, Richard Cadle said that apart from the volcano, "very little is known about most of the other sources of hydrogen fluoride" [p. 749]. estimates that 44,000 tons of fluorine are issued annually into the atmosphere by evaporation ocean, but it up to this figure by extrapolating from the information available for sodium chloride. There have been no systematic measurements, and the annual emission rate of fluoride can easily be ten to one hundred times larger. Table 1.2

SOURCES OF ATMOSPHERIC FLUORIDE
(annual tons)

6,044,000

	Volcanoes 6. 000,000
Seawater	44,000
Total natural sources
Fluorine on CFCs	248,000
Fluorine theoretically released by the alleged breach of the CFC 2480

Who Did It?

In all the apocalyptic stories is always lurking villain. According to F. Sherwood Rowland and other theorists, the scene of the destruction of ozone, the villain is the chlorine in CFCs. However, according to what we have seen in this chapter, Mother Nature produces the oceans and volcanoes, thousands of times more chlorine than CFCs. Why ignore Rowland and his co-thinkers such huge amounts of chlorine in nature? Is it because they are ignorant - or because they want to keep the public uninformed? As we shall see later, this kind of lying-by-omission is characteristic of an unparalleled scientific scandal in history. References

• Steven R. Brantley, ed., 1990. "The Eruption of Volcano Redoute, A! aska, December 14, 1989 - August 31, 1990." U.S. Geological Service Circular i061.
• Richard D. Cadle, 1980. "A Comparison of Volcanic with Other Trace Gas Fluxes of Atmospheric Constituents," Review of Geophysics and Space Physics, vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 746-752
• Cassadeval TJ et al., 1990. "Emissions of Sulfur Dioxide Rates and Carbon Dioxide from Redoute Volcano, Alaska, During The 1989-1990 Eruptions." Paper presented at the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, CA (Dec 3-7).
• Chapman Conference, 1990. "Global Biomass Burning: Atmospheric, Climatic, and Biospheric Implications," Proceedings. Williamsburg, Va.. (March 19-23)
• P.J. Crutzen, L. Heidt, J. Krasnec, W. Pollock y W. Seiler, 1979. "Biomass Burning as a Source of Atmospheric Gases CO, H2, N2, NO, CH3CI, y COS, "Nature (Nov. 15), pp. 253-256 A.C.
• Delaney, J.P. Sheldovsky y W.H. Pollock, 1974. "Stratopspheric Aerosol: the Contribution from the Troposphere," Journal of Geophysical Research, (Dec. 20), vol. 79, No. 86, pp. 5646-5650.
• J.D. Devine, H. Sigurson y A.N. Davis, 1984. "Estimates of Sulphur ans Chlorine Yield to the Atmosphere From Volcanic Eruptions and Potencial Climatic Effects," Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 89, No. B7, pp. 6809-6825.
• S.D. Doiron, G.J.S, Bluth, C.C. Schnetzler, A.J. Krueger y L.S. Walter, 1991. "Transport of Cerro Hudson SO, Clouds," EOS (Nov. 5) pp. 481-491.
• E. Eriksson, 1959. "The Yearly Circulation of Chloride and Sulfur in Nature; Meteorological, Geochemical and Pedalogical Impiications," Tellus, vol. 2, No, 4 (Nov.), pp. 375-408
• · ·T.M. Gerlach, H.R. Westrich y T.J. Cassadeval, 1990. "High Sulfur and Chlorine Magma During the 1989-1990 Eruption of Redout Volcano, Alaska," Trabajo presentado en la reunión de Otoño de la American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, Ca. (Dic. 8-7).
• B.M. Goodman, 1984. "The Ciimatic Impact of Volcanic Activity." Tesis Doctoral, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisc.
• D. A. Johnston, 1980. 'Volcanic Contribution of Chlorine to the Stratosphere: More Significant to Ozone Than Previously Estimated?", Science, vol. 209 (Jul. 25), pp. 491-493
• W.W. Kellog, et al., 1972. "The Sulfur Cycle," Science, vol. 175 (Feb. 11), pp. 587-596.
• J.P. Kotra, D.L. Finnegan y W.H. Zoller, 1983. "El Chichón: Composition of Plume Gases and ParticIes," Science (Dic, 2), pp. 1018-1021.
• P.R. Kyle, K. Meeker y D. Finnegan, 1990, "Emission Rates of Sulfur Dioxide, Trace Gases and Metals from Mt. Erebus, Antarctica," Geophysiccsl Research Letters, vol. 17, (Nov.), pp. 2125-2128.
• B.G. Levi, 1988. "Ozone Depletion at the Poles: The Hole Story Emerges," Physics Today, vol. 41 (July), pp. 17-21.
• · ·W.G. Mankin y M.T. Coffey, 1984. "Increased Stratospheric Hydrogen Chloride in the EI Chichón Cloud," Science, vol. 226 (Oct. 12), pp. 170-172.
• L. McClelland, D. Lescinsky y M. Slaboda, 1991. Bulletin of the Global Volcanism Network, May, June, July and August).
• · ·R.J. McNeal, 1988. "Statement for Senate Hearings on the Implications of Global Climate Change" Presentado Sept. 20, pp, 800 ff de los registros de audiencias.
• R. Monatersky, 1991. "Pinatubo's Impact Spreads Around the Giobe," Science News (Aug. 81), p. 182.
• · ·N.C. Nash, 1991. "Volcano Ash is Smothering Vast Areas of Argentina." The New York Times, (Oct. 21).
• E.R. Reiter, 1975. "Stratospheric-Tropospheric Exchange Processes," Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 459-474.
• Reinholt Reiter, 1988. "Modification of the Stratospheric Ozone Profile After Acute Solar Events," Weather and Climate Responses to Solar Variations, ed. Billy M. McCormac. Boulder, Co.: Colorado Associated University Press,
• W.I. Rose, R.L. Chuan y P.R, Kyle, 1985. "Rate of Sulfur Dioxide Emission from Erebus Volcano, Antarctica, December 1983," Nature, Vol. 316 (Aug. 22), pp. 710-712.
• C.C. Schmetzler et al., 1990. "Satellite Measurements of Sulfur dioxide from Redouté the Eruptions of December, 1989. "Paper presented at the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, CA (Dec. 3-7)
• A. Setzer, 1989." Will Be The Rain Forest Gone in 10 to 15 Years. "(interview), 21st Century Scienee & Technology (Ene-Feb.), pp. 28-85.
• HB Singh, LJ Salas and RE Stiles, 1983." Methyl Halides in and Over the Eastern Pacific (40 ° N-32 ° S), "Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 88, No. C6 (April 1920), pp. 3684-3690.
• RB Symonds, WI Rose and MH Reed, 1988. "Contribution of CI- and F-bearing Gases to the Atmosphere by Volcanoes," Nature, vol. 334 (Aug. 4) pp. 415-418.
• D.C. Woods, R.L. Chuan y W.I. Rose, 1985. "Halite Particles injected into the Stratosphere by the 1982 El Chichón Eruption," Science, vol. 280 (Oct. 11), pp. 170-172.
• A.M. Wuosmaa L.P. Hager, 1990. "Methyl Chloride Transferasa: A Carbocation Route for Biosynthesis of Halometabolites," Science, vol. 249 (July, 18), pp. 160-162.

por Roger Maduro y Ralf Schauerhammer*
Traducción de Eduardo Ferreyra*
Source: Myths and Frauds