Trump On Hairspray And Ozone
For at the very least five years, Donald Trump has been making false claims about hairspray and its influence on the ozone layer. Most not too long ago, the likely Republican presidential nominee made feedback at a marketing campaign rally in West Virginia:
– Trump said “hairspray’s not like it used to be” as a result of chemicals in it that affect the ozone layer have been banned. Many international locations began phasing out the ozone-depleting substances in hairspray in the late 1980s, but these rules wouldn’t have an effect on the standard of hairspray.
– He also stated using hairspray in his condominium, “which is all sealed,” would forestall any ozone-depleting substances from escaping into the atmosphere. However these chemicals would still make their way out, multiple consultants advised us.
Hairspray is made up of chemicals that make hair stiff and a propellant. Hairspray and many other aerosols used chlorofluorocarbons as propellants till many major nations began phasing out these chemicals after the signing of the Montreal Protocol in 1987. CFCs are potent ozone-depleting substances.
In the place of CFCs, many nations began using hydrochlorofluorocarbons and hydrofluorocarbons as propellants in aerosols. CFCs, HCFCs and HFCs are all potent greenhouse gases. However HCFCs are about 5 p.c to 10 % as potent at depleting ozone as CFCs, while HFCs are generally not considered ozone-depleting substances. Though nonetheless utilized in other kinds, HCFCs have been phased out of aerosols in the United States in 1994, while HFCs still remain in use.
Trump has made claims about hairspray and the ozone layer at the least 3 times. Again in 2011 in Sydney, he implied the “eight-inch concrete floors” and “eight-inch concrete walls” of Trump Tower would prevent hairspray from “destroying the ozone that’s four hundred miles up in the air.” In December 2015, at a marketing campaign rally in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, Trump also mentioned he doesn’t “think anything gets out” of his “sealed” house when he uses hairspray.
On Could 5, 2016, at a campaign rally in Charleston, Trump implied that the laws on hairspray and coal mining are both unwarranted. On the rally, an official from the West Virginia Coal Association endorsed Trump and offered him with a hard hat. Trump tried on the hat, which prompted him to speak about his hair:
Trump, May 5: Give me a bit of spray. … You already know you’re not allowed to make use of hairspray anymore because it impacts the ozone, you realize that, right I stated, you imply to inform me, cause you recognize hairspray’s not like it was, it used to be real good. … Right this moment you put the hairspray on, it’s good for 12 minutes, right. … So if I take hairspray and i spray it in my apartment, which is all sealed, you’re telling me that affects the ozone layer “Yes.” I say no means people. No means. No means. That’s like a whole lot of the rules and regulations you people have within the mines, proper, it’s the identical type of stuff.
We contacted Trump’s campaign for remark, but it hasn’t responded. If somebody does get back to us, we are going to update this report accordingly. In the next sections, we’ll outline how and why many international locations agreed to part out CFCs and exchange them with HCFCs and HFCs. We’ll also clarify why using hairspray inside wouldn’t forestall ozone-depleting substances from reaching the environment, as Trump claimed.
International locations Agree to Ban CFCs
First developed within the 1930s under the trade name Freon, CFCs were originally assumed to be protected for the surroundings. For this reason, CFCs made their manner right into a slew of family objects, from the coolants utilized in refrigerators to Styrofoam to aerosols like hairspray.
But within the 1970s researchers began questioning the safety of those chemicals. Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina, chemists on the University of California, Irvine on the time, found that CFCs were capable of depleting the ozone layer — successful the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1995 for his or her work.
Then in the 1980s, scientists realized the ice particles in clouds over the Artic and Antarctic sped up the process Molina and Rowland initially found. Joseph Farman, a geophysicist on the British Antarctic Survey at the time, and researchers at NASA discovered a gap within the ozone layer above Antarctica that was roughly the scale of the United States.
How do CFCs deplete the ozone layer When a CFC molecule makes it to the stratosphere, solar radiation breaks it down, abandoning a lone chlorine atom. The chlorine atom (Cl-) then reacts with an ozone molecule (O3), leaving behind chlorine oxide (ClO) and oxygen (O2). Actually, Molina found that one chlorine atom may begin a chain reaction that will result in the break up of round 100,000 ozone molecules.
First off, a CFC molecule doesn’t have four hundred miles to journey to achieve the ozone layer, as Trump claimed in 2011. About ninety percent of the ozone layer could be found between 6 to 10 miles above the earth’s floor, with the last 10 percent of the ozone layer extending so far as 30 miles above the floor. The stratosphere spans 5.5 to 30 miles above the earth’s surface.
Second, a depleted ozone layer is no small matter. A weakened ozone layer leads to a rise in ultraviolet radiation, which then brings about greater rates of skin cancer, cataracts and immune system issues in human populations. Increased UV radiation may disrupt very important processes in plants and marine ecosystems.
The gravity of the problem prompted policymakers globally to signal the Montreal Protocol on Sept. 16, 1987. The agreement took impact on Jan. 1, 1989, and aimed to reduce the manufacturing and use of CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances. Nonetheless, the protocol has been amended six occasions to take into consideration new scientific information and accelerate reductions in CFC and HCFC use. First signed by 46 countries, the protocol now has close to 200 signatories, together with the United States.
In 2014, five worldwide entities, including the United Nations Environmental Program and NASA, published a report that found actions “taken beneath the Montreal Protocol have led to decreases in the atmospheric abundance of managed ozone-depleting substances (ODSs), and are enabling the return of the ozone layer towards 1980 ranges.” The truth is, the report states the recovery of the ozone layer is “expected to occur before midcentury in midlatitudes and the Arctic, and considerably later for the Antarctic ozone gap.”
Briefly, the propellants utilized in hairspray and other substances, CFCs particularly, have been banned. But the chemicals that make hair stiff weren’t topic to these laws. And CFCs had been banned for good reason, despite Trump’s implication. Laws implemented with the Montreal Protocol look like reversing the damage completed to the ozone layer by CFCs in hairspray and other substances.
HFCs: For Better and For Worse
While hairspray now not uses CFCs to propel the stiffening agent out of the can, it does use different chemicals as propellants which are potent greenhouse gases — particularly HFCs.
Actually, the aforementioned 2014 report also discovered that “climate advantages of the Montreal Protocol might be considerably offset by projected emissions of HFCs used to replace” ozone-depleting substances.
Right now HFC use (in hairspray and in any other case) “makes a small contribution” to greenhouse fuel emissions each year, explain the report authors. But emissions from HFCs “are at present growing at a price of about 7% per year” and growing demand might result in HFC emissions reaching levels “nearly as excessive because the peak emission of CFCs” by 2050.
To be clear, CFCs are detrimental to the setting for at the very least two causes — they efficiently deplete ozone and they are potent greenhouse gases. That is, they contribute to world warming. HFCs, alternatively, don’t contribute to ozone depletion straight and efficiently like CFCs. However they still negatively affect the local weather as greenhouse gases.
Margaret M. Hurwitz, an atmospheric scientist at NASA, and others discovered that HFCs could indirectly contribute to ozone depletion by modifying atmospheric temperatures and circulation.
Talking about her Oct. 22, 2015, study printed in Geophysical Analysis Letters, Hurwitz instructed Phys.org that her results don’t counsel “HFCs are an existential risk brazilian hair bundle deals with closure to the ozone layer.” Nonetheless, “HFCs are, actually, weak ozone-depleting substances,” she said.
Hurwitz also explained to us by email that “[p]er unit mass, CFC-eleven causes about four hundred times extra depletion of the protective stratospheric ozone than the HFCs, whereas HCFC-22 causes eight times more ozone depletion” than HFCs, for instance. So the effect of HFCs on the ozone layer is significantly lower than that of CFCs, however it’s not zero.
In addition, Steve Montzka, a chemist at the Nationwide Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, reiterated to us by email, “It was never the stiffening agent in the spray that induced the issue [with the ozone layer], it was the propellant.” We can’t touch upon whether “hairspray’s not prefer it used to be,” as Trump claimed. However we can say modifications in hairspray high quality wouldn’t be a results of the substitute of CFCs with HFCs as a result of rules on the former.
Trump’s Not-So-Sealed House
We additionally asked Montzka whether or not utilizing hairspray inside would forestall CFCs or HFCs from having an effect on the ozone layer compared with utilizing it outside, as Trump claimed. “It makes completely no distinction!” he mentioned. If you spray these chemicals “inside your own home or house, it’ll finally make it outdoors.”
“These gases can not and should not confined to the kitchen or bedroom; they combine, diffuse, and are moved out of the native release area to be transported throughout the lower environment (over months) earlier than they are transported upward to the stratosphere,” the place the ozone layer is situated, David Fahey, a physicist at NOAA, advised us in an email.
In sum, the “eight-inch concrete floors” and “eight-inch concrete walls” of Trump Tower wouldn’t stop the propellants in hairspray from reaching the ozone layer, which is 6 to 30 miles, not four hundred miles, above the earth’s floor. This implies Trump’s hairspray use over the years has both instantly (via CFCs) or not directly (HFCs) contributed to the depletion of the ozone layer, albeit to a very small extent, regardless of what he has claimed.