134a Refrigerant

Jeff->Freon is a *compound*.

Nate->WRONG! "freon" is a brand.

=20

Perhaps giving his remarks the clarity of objectivity? Being an 'insider' hasn't done much for your grasp of the applicable science, Nate... he drew a picture of the molecule in ASCII, I thought that was pretty impressive! Perhaps he'll give us an explanation of partial pressures, or Boyle's Law next. Do the Carnot Cycle! __ Steve .

Exactly! The argon is in suspension... it has diffused into the atmosphere, just like the CFCs. __ Steve .

the CONCENTRATION isnt there.

fair enough.

Argon is heavier than air, right? So it should all fall out! There should be no argon in the upper atmosphere, where we find the Nitrogen Layer, the Helium Layer, etc... oh, you say this doesn't happen? Why not? CONCENTRATION, he says, like it means anything. If Freon falls, then argon falls. You can't measure a concentration unless the gas is mixed... the atmosphere is a mixed gas. We can go around again if you like... everyone here loves it. __ Steve .

so prove the presence and the source.

statement i=20

It's a mini-Repub convention! How to prove something to someone that doesn't want it proven to them... that's the big question. You can try cramming the knowlege into their heads... but it just bounces off. Their eye-holes just won't open up=20 enough to see... and their ear-holes shut at the first sound of an academic talking.

If wilful ignorance is a blessing, then you both are angels. We're not talking about global warming, where the jury is still out... this is CFC's and ozone, where the science is decades old and has influenced billions of dollars worth of decisions taken on the highest levels by bipartisan international legislation. That your brains refuse to accommodate this fact, and the science involved, is a telling indicator of where this nation is headed. =20 __ Steve .

I know someone who lives in suburbia has a difficult time understanding the natural world, but from my perspective, environmentalism is not a liberal/conservative pivot point. It is about conserving the environment so that my children and grandchildren can hunt, fish, hike, camp and perhaps through this, gain some measure of their place in the universe. I grew up in western Pennsylvania at a time when strip mining was destroying all the deer habitat and the acid run off from them destroyed most of the trout streams. Indiscriminant use of DDT wiped out most of the native large birds to the point where hunting turkey and duck were not worth the effort. From the top of a hill it was easy to mark the direction to Pittsburgh from the sooty gray plume. Now 35 years later, due in large measure to laws such as the clean air act and clean water act I see a marked change for the better. The deer herd has come back, as have the fisheries. This morning I saw over a dozen turkeys in my back yard and I have ducks living in my pond. For these reasons I have no problem with some portion of my tax dollars going to fund the EPA. Without them we would have one continuous Love Canal from coast to coast.

BTW, to answer your question in a manner that even the common layman can understand: Wind is responsible for atmospheric mixing. Think about it like a bottle of Italian salad dressing: In the cool quiet isolation of your refrigerator it separates. The heavy chunky bits settle to the bottom and the oil rises to the top. Shake it and it becomes a uniform mixture. This act of shaking is akin to the normal atmospheric turbulence called wind. Thermal kinetic energy imparts Brownian motion.

Main Entry: ozone layer Function: noun : an atmospheric layer at heights of about 20 to 30 miles (32 to 48 = kilometers) that is normally characterized by high ozone content which = blocks most solar ultraviolet radiation from entry into the lower = atmosphere=20

I'm not going to expect you to believe this stuff... you don't have a history of that. Here it is, nonetheless. __ Steve .

Stevie, I live in Silverton, CO, where the "insiders" are all insane, mentally retarded, or both. They don't even consider themselves subject to the laws of Colorado, which is libertarian by most people's standards. You appear to be the kind of guy who really enjoys beating his head against a wall. You should come up here and help me teach the local idiots some respect, with your vast knowledge and all...

Earle

__ Steve .

uniform composition (apart from water vapor) as described above. However, above about 100 km, the Earth's atmosphere begins to have a composition which varies with altitude. This is essentially because, in the absence of mixing, the density of a gas falls off exponentially with increasing altitude, but at a rate which depends on the molecular mass. Thus higher mass constituents, such as oxygen and nitrogen, fall off more quickly than lighter constituents such as helium, molecular hydrogen, and atomic hydrogen. Thus there is a layer, called the heterosphere, in which the earth's atmosphere has varying composition. As the altitude increases, the atmosphere is dominated successively by helium, molecular hydrogen, and atomic hydrogen. The precise altitude of the heterosphere and the layers it contains varies significantly with temperature.[2]

kilometers) that is normally characterized by high ozone content which blocks most solar ultraviolet radiation from entry into the lower atmosphere

Here are some measurements. CFC-11 at 20 miles altitude:

"Note that the profile is bimolal at low pressures indicating a possible contamination problem."

When one is talking about parts per trillion (ppt) then a "possible contamination problem" could account for the whole graph. I worked in a lab once, where a master's degree candidate's thesis research results were determined to be artifact. The degree granting process was rushed through, before anyone on the committee read the relevant articles, because "It is just a master's thesis". This is so much more important, a debate on Usenet, and you are obligated to be more careful.

"The gaps indicate regions where the pumps were turned off because of overheating." Or maybe gaps exist, because there was no detectable CFC-11 at those altitudes? I am afraid that this page doesn't show much, except for the presence of dots on a graph. Do you have any higher quality data?

Earle

Yea,I saw that low pressure out-gassing as well, but noted it disappeared at higher pressures as would be expected. How about the first science run:

NOW youre onto something. duponts patent runs out, immediately its "bad for the environment".

thanks for making my point stephen. heavier falls, lighter rises. :-)

bullseye earle. the enviro-whackos make this crap up as they go along and _always_ (in every link they publish) leave a way out for when theyre proven wrong.