Ozone recovery to nix global warming in S.H. for decades

Posted: January 21, 2014 by tallbloke in Astrophysics, atmosphere, climate, cosmic rays, Natural Variation, ozone, sea ice, solar system dynamics

A new paper in the Royal Meteorological Soc quarterly a review paper finds that stratosperic ozone recovery in the southern hemisphere will have a strong effect on surface temperatures.

Review Article

Climate System Response to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion and Recovery

Michael Previdi1,*, Lorenzo M. Polvani1,2


We review what is presently known about the climate system response to stratospheric ozone depletion and its projected recovery, focusing on the responses of the atmosphere, ocean and cryosphere. Compared to well-mixed greenhouse gases (GHGs), the radiative forcing of climate due to observed stratospheric ozone loss is very small: in spite of this, recent trends in stratospheric ozone have caused profound changes in the Southern Hemisphere (SH) climate system, primarily by altering the tropospheric midlatitude jet, which is commonly described as a change in the Southern Annular Mode. Ozone depletion in the late twentieth century was the primary driver of the observed poleward shift of the jet during summer, which has been linked to changes in tropospheric and surface temperatures, clouds and cloud radiative effects, and precipitation at both middle and low latitudes.

It is emphasized, however, that not all aspects of the SH climate response to stratospheric ozone forcing can be understood in terms of changes in the midlatitude jet.The response of the Southern Ocean and sea ice to ozone depletion is currently a matter of debate. For the former, the debate is centered on the role of ocean eddies in possibly opposing wind-driven changes in the mean circulation. For the latter, the issue is reconciling the observed expansion of Antarctic sea ice extent during the satellite era with robust modeling evidence that the ice should melt as a result of stratospheric ozone depletion (and increases in GHGs).Despite lingering uncertainties, it has become clear that ozone depletion has been instrumental in driving SH climate change in recent decades. Similarly, ozone recovery will figure prominently in future climate change, with its impacts expected to largely cancel the impacts of increasing GHGs during the next half-century.

Paywalled paper here

  1. Brian H says:

    Sifting the rubble for a relevant role for Anthropogenic Change.

  2. tallbloke says:

    Unless ozone variation turns out to be driven by solar variation instead of hairspray.

  3. oldbrew says:

    The author of another paper about this said:

    “The climate in the Antarctic stratosphere has been completely controlled by CFCs and cosmic rays, with no CO2 impact. The change in global surface temperature after the removal of the solar effect has shown zero correlation with CO2 but a nearly perfect linear correlation with CFCs — a correlation coefficient as high as 0.97.”


  4. Stephen Richards says:

    Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish. How do these idiots ever get this cr&p published.

  5. Joe Lalonde says:


    I REALLY do feel your pain man!
    I have been trying to get scientists to even glance at the many areas of my own research.
    I became the most ignored person on the planet even when I generated the mapping of our planet velocities.
    I studied many, many areas to get a good grasp on our planets’ many different contributors to temperatures.
    Much of science has been corrupted.

  6. Richard111 says:

    It’s called PAL review.

  7. Roger Andrews says:

    A pdf version of the 79-page report is available at:

    columbia.edu [Google encoded tracking deleted –mod]

    Here’s an excerpt:

    “The impact of ozone depletion on the SH climate system begins in the Antarctic lower stratosphere, where a substantial springtime cooling of ~8 K has been observed over the last few decades of the twentieth century in response to the formation of the ozone hole (Figure 3). This cooling was the trigger for a series of atmospheric circulation changes, including a strengthening of the stratospheric polar vortex and tropospheric midlatitude jet, and a poleward shift of the tropospheric jet and Hadley cell. The changes in the tropospheric circulation, which are commonly described as a positive trend in the SAM, have been linked to changes in tropospheric and surface temperatures, clouds and cloud radiative effects, and precipitation. The seasonality of these climate changes in observations (with significant changes largely confined to austral summer) clearly suggests that they are primarily a response to stratospheric ozone depletion, rather than increases in GHGs. This conclusion is substantiated by very robust climate modeling results, based on a whole hierarchy of models.”

    “Very robust” climate modeling results? Hmmmm.

  8. A C Osborn says:

    Those 2 studies on CFCs have failed to consider that the CFCs/Ozone are following the Temperatures and not the other way around.
    What I find strange is that the CFC levels continued to decrease after the Montreal Protocol in 1987 but in 2013 the Southern Ozone hole looks as big as ever but slightly offset compared to the historical position.
    As they keep saying correlation is not causation.

  9. Roger Andrews says:

    AC: Exactly. The same thought occurred to me 🙂

    The Montreal Protocol is hailed as a success but as far as I can determine the only thing it has succeeded in doing is replace CFCs with HFCs and other types of FCs. As you mention there has been no significant change in the Antarctic Ozone Hole since the Protocol was adopted 27 years ago. Models predict that it will be gone by 2040 or 2050, long after we’re dead, but I suspect that the hole has always been there and probably always will.

  10. DirkH says:

    O/T Weber vs. Maxwell. Weber electrodynamics, relativism, Gauss, Riemann. A cover-up.

  11. A C Osborn says:

    DirkH, that would actually fit a lot better on the Pattern Recognition in Physics Axed by Copernicus post as they are discussing Physics on there as well as the Copernicus problem.

  12. DirkH says:

    Good idea.

  13. ren says:

    I have a theory based on my observation that if cosmic rays are high for many years, as now, since 2005, the changes in ozone zone cumulative, by going in the high parts of the stratosphere with one pole of the Earth to the other.

  14. Konrad. says:

    “For example, ozone recovery is expected to mitigate a substantial portion of the Antarctic sea ice loss brought about by increasing GHGs over the next fifty years”

    Fifty years?

    That’s not kicking the can down the road, that’s firing it into orbit!

  15. Konrad. says:

    tallbloke says:
    January 21, 2014 at 8:08 am
    “Unless ozone variation turns out to be driven by solar variation instead of hairspray.”

    And therein is the problem with this little plan, the same problem as the BBCs “it’s the sun” escape strategy.

    If solar variation, either UV variance or modulation of GCRs, is the cause of flat or cooling temperatures, is it not logical to also look there for causes of late 20th century warming?

  16. A C Osborn says:

    One thing I would like to say about Konrad’s remark at January 22, 2014 at 12:49 am,
    I don’t think it is necessarily just one causal factor and is likely to be more than one where cyclic values meet in combined highs (hotter), combined equals (static) or combined lows (cooler). But of course polarity of highs and lows could be the opposite of my first list, it could be combined highs (cooler), combined equals (static) or combined lows (hotter).
    That makes the teasing out of the causal factors involved much more difficult to establish.
    Possibilities are
    Solar Radiation variability
    Solar Wind variability
    Dust cloud variability
    Cosmic Ray variability
    Planetary position/alignment variability
    to name but a few.

  17. Ned Nikolov says:

    Stratospheric ozone has absolutely noting to do with SH jet stream and climate! This idea is simply an extension of the absurd paradigm that atmospheric trace gases control global temperature. Resent analyses actually show that current models cannot explain the observed stratospheric cooling, see this 2012 paper by Thompson et al.:


  18. Ned,

    Stratospheric ozone creates the temperature inversion that starts at the tropopause.

    More ozone makes the stratosphere warmer and pushes the tropopause down whereas less ozone makes the stratosphere colder and allows the tropopause to rise.

    So, if one has different ozone effects above the equator and above the poles from solar influences the gradient of tropopause height between equator and poles must change.

    That is what allows the jets and climate zones to slide latitudinally beneath the tropopause.

    That latitudinal sliding allows the jets to become more zonal or meridional which then alters global cloudiness to affect the amount of solar energy able to affect the oceans.

    That Thompson paper recognises the ‘mystery’ that I have been alluding to for several years.

    That ‘mystery’ can be resolved by recognising that an active sun causes a reduction of ozone at higher levels and towards the poles whereas a quiet sun causes an increase in ozone at higher levels and towards the poles.

    The net result is to reverse the normally expected sign of the ozone response to solar variation in the stratosphere.

    The polar vortices (descending air in the stratosphere) provide a mechanism whereby the ozone response to solar changes at higher levels in the mesosphere and towards the poles is fed down into the stratosphere above the poles in order to make the stratosphere participate in the reverse sign effect in the mesosphere especially above the poles.

    That is the only way to get more meridional jets when the sun is quiet because one must have a warmer (more ozone) stratosphere above the poles in order to lower tropopause height at the poles relative to that at the equator and force incursions of cold polar air equatorward at the surface.

    Do you see ?

  19. ren says:

    Look for coverage can wave at an altitude of 30 km.

    You can see that changes in ozone decide on the polar vortex anomalies.

  20. ren says:

    Forecast polar vortex on 28 January.

  21. Alec, aka Daffy Duck says:

    I wasn’t aware the Ozone depletion and global temps correlated to global temps including the pivotal year of 1997 when temp stopped their slow rise an pivoted to the plateau :

    ” Ozone in the stratosphere, outside of the polar regions, stopped thinning in 1997…”

  22. […] establishment also blames the closing of the ozone hole for delaying the CO2 induced global warming that data […]