But also remember the hysteria about ozone depletion, which served the interest of DuPont. It's a mystery how heavy halocarbon could reach stratosphere. Nevertheless, thanks to "environmental" activists, DuPont had become richer.
And while I’m sure some companies profited from prohibiting CFCs, stopping ozone depletion is one of the few things humanity has done with measurable effects. If a few companies made money from it that’s fine. It would be great if we could tie a profit motive to fixing climate change.
Halocarbons are heavier than air, they cannot travel up to stratosphere which is 10 to 50 km up in the air. Which is predicating information about why CFCs were bad.
If a few companies made money from it that’s fine. It would be great if we could tie a profit motive to fixing climate change.
Exactly. Both ozone depletion theory and current climate change theory are making rich countries richer and poor countries poorer. Which brings the question: maybe it's actually the point of these theories?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosphere
That includes the ozone layer.
Gases don't stratify in the lower atmosphere. Pure argon is heavier than oxygen and nitrogen, but it does not sink down from the atmosphere to form a concentrated surface layer. Neither do CFCs.