The Global warming or rising of the Earth’s temperature and changes in the ocean is still a big issue and controversy. As believed by many, greenhouse effect or the gases produced by human activities such as burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide, deforestation and the most argued chlorofluorocarbon or CFCs are doing the essential part of destroying the ozone layer that brings more heat or causes warming and extreme weather changes. The Arctic and Antarctic which are greatly affected by the global warming suffer more and more each day causing glacier retreats and species extinction.
The stratospheric ozone or the good ozone layer as noted by Mario Molina, one of the scientists who identified the CFC’s risk to our ozone. Many argued and question the existence of the Antartic ozone hole even it is vividly obvious through climate change and extreme weather. But what is CFC? in mid 1980’s, chlorofluorocarbon or CFC was found to be an organic compound used for airconditioners’ freon, refrigerants, aerosol and propellants such as hair sprays and in solvents. Earlier, a scientist conducted a case study about the harmful effects of CFC on the environment proved that there is no significant danger in both Arctic and Antarctic.
The damage or ozone hole was discovered by scientists Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina. They pointed out after they made another research that the low reactivity of CFC makes the most destructive effect on our stratosphere causing ozone loss. Acording to these scientists, it is quite obvious that climate change is one the most recognizable hazardous effect of Chlorofluorocarbon on the environment. People may not be equally affected by the issue, as discussed by Susan Solomon, it is not as simple as acquiring skin cancer but rather the problem which scientists are trying to resolve is more serious as climate change and ozone loss or damage.
The biggest hindrance for public support is more of an economic issue. CFCs contributors such as few manufacturers and areas of economy were responsible for the ozone pollutants. Although, arguments were raised whether who were contributing the most to the problem, the people who are alive and may have contributed a little through daily activities and those who are in-charge of businesses using CFCs instead of thinking of a substitute and sacrifice a little. Scientists would still want to demand understanding and consider the process used in Science not just by the political view. Due to different concerns on the issue, Science, as part of the case study made by Rowland and Molina are being doubted and questioned even if they do not lack evidence for theatening effect of CFCs not only to the climate but the impact on everyone in the future.
These scientists proving the harmful effects of CFCs on environment not to mention the obvious results in climate change and dicovery of ozone hole would want to pursue the fight for ozone loss prevention and believes that they have to encourage public support and policymakers action against the threat of CFCs to the climate and stratospheric ozone before it is too late for all of us.