Trump On Hairspray And Ozone
For at the very least 5 years, Donald Trump has been making false claims about hairspray and its affect on the ozone layer. Most just lately, the possible 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 nations started phasing out the ozone-depleting substances in hairspray within the late 1980s, but these laws wouldn’t affect the standard of hairspray.
– He additionally stated using hairspray in his condo, “which is all sealed,” would forestall any ozone-depleting substances from escaping into the surroundings. But these chemicals would nonetheless make their manner out, multiple experts informed 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 started phasing out these chemicals after the signing of the Montreal Protocol in 1987. CFCs are potent ozone-depleting substances.
Within the place of CFCs, many countries 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 percent as potent at depleting ozone as CFCs, whereas HFCs are usually not regarded as ozone-depleting substances. Although nonetheless used in other varieties, 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 a minimum of three times. Back in 2011 in Sydney, he implied the “eight-inch concrete floors” and “eight-inch concrete walls” of Trump Tower would stop hairspray from “destroying the ozone that’s four hundred miles up in the air.” In December 2015, at a campaign rally in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, Trump also said he doesn’t “think anything gets out” of his “sealed” condominium when he uses hairspray.
On May 5, 2016, at a marketing campaign rally in Charleston, Trump implied that the regulations on hairspray and coal mining are each unwarranted. On the rally, an official from the West Virginia Coal Association endorsed Trump and introduced him with a hard hat. Trump tried on the hat, which prompted him to discuss his hair:
Trump, Might 5: Give me a little spray. … You know you’re not allowed to make use of hairspray anymore because it impacts the ozone, you recognize that, right I mentioned, you imply to inform me, cause you realize hairspray’s not like it was, it used to be real good. … In the present day you set 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 impacts the ozone layer “Yes.” I say no method folks. No means. No way. That’s like a variety of the principles and regulations you individuals have within the mines, right, it’s the same form of stuff.
We contacted Trump’s marketing campaign for comment, however it hasn’t responded. If someone does get again to us, we are going to replace this report accordingly. In the next sections, we’ll outline how and why many international locations agreed to phase out CFCs and substitute them with HCFCs and HFCs. We’ll also clarify why using hairspray inside wouldn’t stop ozone-depleting substances from reaching the atmosphere, as Trump claimed.
International locations Agree to Ban CFCs
First developed within the thirties underneath the commerce title Freon, CFCs had been initially assumed to be secure for the environment. Because of this, CFCs made their approach right into a slew of family objects, from the coolants utilized in refrigerators to Styrofoam to aerosols like hairspray.
But within the 1970s researchers started questioning the security of those chemicals. Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina, chemists at the College of California, Irvine on the time, discovered that CFCs were able to depleting the ozone layer — successful the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1995 for their work.
Then in the 1980s, scientists realized the ice particles in clouds over the Artic and Antarctic sped up the method Molina and Rowland initially discovered. Joseph Farman, a geophysicist at the British Antarctic Survey at the time, and researchers at NASA discovered a gap within the ozone layer above Antarctica that was roughly the dimensions of the United States.
How do CFCs deplete the ozone layer When a CFC molecule makes it to the stratosphere, photo voltaic radiation breaks it down, leaving behind a lone chlorine atom. The chlorine atom (Cl-) then reacts with an ozone molecule (O3), abandoning chlorine oxide (ClO) and oxygen (O2). In truth, Molina found that one chlorine atom could start a sequence reaction that may result in the break up of around 100,000 ozone molecules.
First off, a CFC molecule doesn’t have four hundred miles to travel to succeed in the ozone layer, as Trump claimed in 2011. About ninety percent of the ozone layer can be discovered between 6 to 10 miles above the earth’s surface, with the last 10 p.c of the ozone layer extending so far as 30 miles above the surface. The stratosphere spans 5.5 to 30 miles above the earth’s floor.
Second, a depleted ozone layer is no small matter. A weakened ozone layer leads to an increase in ultraviolet radiation, which then brings about higher charges of pores and skin most cancers, cataracts and immune system issues in human populations. Elevated UV radiation can also disrupt vital processes in plants and marine ecosystems.
The gravity of the issue prompted policymakers globally to signal the Montreal Protocol on Sept. 16, 1987. The agreement took effect on Jan. 1, 1989, and aimed to scale back the production and use of CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances. Nonetheless, the protocol has been amended six times to take into consideration new scientific information and speed up reductions in CFC and HCFC use. First signed by 46 international locations, 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, revealed a report that found actions “taken beneath the Montreal Protocol have led to decreases within 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 restoration of the ozone layer is “expected to happen earlier than midcentury in midlatitudes and the Arctic, and somewhat later for the Antarctic ozone hole.”
Briefly, the propellants used in hairspray and other substances, CFCs in particular, have been banned. But the chemicals that make hair stiff weren’t topic to those laws. And CFCs were banned for good reason, regardless of Trump’s implication. Rules carried out with the Montreal Protocol look like reversing the harm executed to the ozone layer by CFCs in hairspray and other substances.
HFCs: For Higher and For Worse
While hairspray not uses CFCs to propel the stiffening agent out of the can, it does use different chemicals as propellants which can be potent greenhouse gases — particularly HFCs.
In truth, the aforementioned 2014 report also discovered that “climate advantages of the Montreal Protocol might be significantly offset by projected emissions of HFCs used to replace” ozone-depleting substances.
Immediately HFC use (in hairspray and otherwise) “makes a small contribution” to greenhouse fuel emissions each year, clarify the report authors. However emissions from HFCs “are at present growing at a price of about 7% per year” and growing demand may lead to HFC emissions reaching ranges “nearly as excessive as the peak emission of CFCs” by 2050.
To be clear, CFCs are detrimental to the atmosphere for at the very least two reasons — they effectively deplete ozone and they are potent greenhouse gases. That’s, they contribute to world warming. HFCs, however, do not contribute to ozone depletion immediately and efficiently like CFCs. However they nonetheless negatively impression the local weather as greenhouse gases.
Margaret M. Hurwitz, an atmospheric scientist at NASA, and others discovered that HFCs could not directly contribute to ozone depletion by modifying atmospheric temperatures and circulation.
Talking about her Oct. 22, 2015, examine printed in Geophysical Research Letters, Hurwitz advised Phys.org that her outcomes don’t recommend “HFCs are an existential risk to the ozone layer.” Nonetheless, “HFCs are, actually, weak ozone-depleting substances,” she said.
Hurwitz additionally explained to us by email that “[p]er unit mass, CFC-eleven causes about 400 times extra depletion of the protective stratospheric ozone than the HFCs, whereas HCFC-22 causes eight instances more ozone depletion” than HFCs, for example. So the effect of HFCs on the ozone layer is considerably 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 electronic mail, “It was never the stiffening agent in the spray that triggered the problem [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 adjustments in hairspray high quality wouldn’t be a results of the alternative of CFCs with HFCs resulting from laws on the former.
Trump’s Not-So-Sealed House
We additionally requested Montzka whether using hairspray inside would forestall CFCs or HFCs from having an impact on the ozone layer compared with using it outside, as Trump claimed. “It makes completely no distinction!” he stated. If you spray these chemicals “inside your home or residence, it will ultimately make it exterior.”
“These gases cannot and are usually not confined to the kitchen or bedroom; they mix, diffuse, and are moved out of the local launch space to be transported all through the decrease atmosphere (over months) before they are transported upward to the stratosphere,” where the ozone layer is positioned, David Fahey, a physicist at NOAA, informed us in an e-mail.
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. oil for black hair This means Trump’s hairspray use over the years has either instantly (by means of CFCs) or indirectly (HFCs) contributed to the depletion of the ozone layer, albeit to a very small extent, regardless of what he has claimed.