Montreal Protocol

The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of a number of substances believed to be responsible for ozone depletion. The treaty was opened for signature on September 16, 1987 and entered into force on January 1, 1989. Since then, it has undergone five revisions, in 1990 (London), 1992 (Copenhagen), 1995 (Vienna), 1997 (Montreal), and 1999 (Beijing). Due to its widespread adoption and implementation it has been hailed as an example of exceptional international cooperation with Kofi Annan quoted as saying it is "Perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date...".

The Montreal Protocol should not be confused with the Montreal Convention governing compensation for air disasters.

Terms and purpose

The treaty is structured around several groups of halogenated hydrocarbons that have been shown to play a role in ozone depletion. For each group, the treaty provides a timetable on which the production of those substances must be phased out and eventually eliminated.

The stated purpose of the treaty is that the signatory states:

...Recognizing that world-wide emissions of certain substances can significantly deplete and otherwise modify the ozone layer in a manner that is likely to result in adverse effects on human health and the environment, ... Determined to protect the ozone layer by taking precautionary measures to control equitably total global emissions of substances that deplete it, with the ultimate objective of their elimination on the basis of developments in scientific knowledge ... Acknowledging that special provision is required to meet the needs of developing countries...

shall accept a series of stepped limits on CFC use and production, including:

from 1991 to 1992 its levels of consumption and production of the controlled substances in Group I of Annex A do not exceed 150 per cent of its calculated levels of production and consumption of those substances in 1986;

from 1994 its calculated level of consumption and production of the controlled substances in Group I of Annex A does not exceed, annually, twenty-five per cent of its calculated level of consumption and production in 1986.

from 1996 its calculated level of consumption and production of the controlled substances in Group I of Annex A does not exceed zero.

There is a slower phase-out (to zero by 2010) of other substances (halon 1211, 1301, 2402; CFCs 13, 111, 112, etc) and some chemicals get individual attention (Carbon tetrachloride; 1,1,1-trichloroethane). The phasing-out of the less active HCFCs started only in 1996 and will go on till a complete phasing-out is achieved in 2030.

There are a few exceptions for "essential uses", where no acceptable substitutes have been found (for example, in the metered dose inhalers commonly used to treat asthma and other respiratory problems). The full terms are available from ^*.

The substances in Group I of Annex A are:

CFCl₃ (CFC-11)
CF₂Cl₂ (CFC-12)
C₂F₃Cl₃ (CFC-113)
C₂F₄Cl₂(CFC-114)
C₂F₅Cl (CFC-115)

Scientific Background

In 1973 Chemists Frank Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina, at the University of California-Irvine, began studying the impacts of CFCs in the earth's atmosphere. They discovered that CFC molecules were stable enough to remain in the atmosphere until they got up into the middle of the stratosphere where they would finally (after an average of 50-100 years for two common CFCs) be broken down by ultraviolet radiation releasing a chlorine atom. Rowland and Molina then proposed that these chlorine atoms might be expected to cause the breakdown of large amounts of ozone (O₃) in the stratosphere. Their argument was based upon an analogy to recent work by Paul J. Crutzen and Harold Johnston, which had shown that nitric oxide (NO) could catalyze the destruction of ozone. (Several other scientists, including Ralph Cicerone, Richard Stolarski, Michael McElroy, and Steven Wofsy had independently proposed that chlorine could catalyze ozone loss, but none had realized that CFCs were a potentially large source of chlorine.) Crutzen, Molina and Rowland were awarded the 1995 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for their work on this problem.

The environmental consequence of this discovery was that, since stratospheric ozone absorbs most of the ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation reaching the surface of the planet, depletion of the ozone layer by CFCs would lead to an in increase in UV-B radiation at the surface, resulting in an increase in skin cancer and other impacts such as damage to crops and to marine phytoplankton.

After publishing their privotal paper in June 1974, Rowland and Molina testified at a hearing before the U.S. House of Representatives in December, 1974. As a result significant funding was made available to study various aspects of the problem and to confirm the initial findings. In 1976 the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report that confirmed the scientific credibility of the ozone depletion hypothesis. NAS continued to publish assessments of related science for the next decade.

The provisions of the Protocol include the requirement that the Parties to the Protocol base their future decisions on the current scientific, environmental, technical, and economic information that is assessed through panels drawn from the worldwide expert communities. To provide that input to the decision-making process, advances in understanding on these topics were assessed in 1989, 1991, 1994, 1998 and 2002 in a series of reports entitled Scientific assessment of ozone depletion.

Developing Countries

The Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol provides funds to help developing countries to phase out the use of ozone-depleting substances (ODS). ODS are used in refrigeration, foam extrusion, industrial cleaning, fire safety and fumigation.

The Multilateral Fund was the first financial mechanism to be created under an international treaty. It embodies the principle agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 that countries have a common but differentiated responsibility to protect and manage the global commons.

The Fund is managed by an Executive Committee with an equal representation of seven industrialized and seven Article 5 countries which are elected annually by a Meeting of the Parties. The Committee reports annually to the Meeting of the Parties on its operations.

Up to 20 percent of the contributions of contributing Parties can also be delivered through their bilateral agencies in the form of eligible projects and activities.

The Fund is replenished on a three-year basis by the donors. Pledges amount to US$ 2.1 billion over the period 1991 to 2005. Funds are used, for example, to finance the conversion of existing manufacturing processes, train personnel, pay royalties and patent rights on new technologies, and establish national Ozone Offices.

Parties

At present, 189 nations have become party to the Montreal Protocol (see external link below). Those 6 that are not as of March 2005 are Andorra, Equatorial Guinea, Iraq, San Marino, Timor Leste and Vatican City.

Impact

Since the Montreal Protocol came into effect, the atmospheric concentrations of the most important chlorofluorocarbons and related chlorinated hydrocarbons have either leveled off or decreased ^*. Halon concentrations have continued to increase, as the halons presently stored in fire extinguishers are released, but their rate of increase has slowed and their abundances are expected to begin to decline by about 2020. Also, the concentration of the HCFCs increased drastically at least partly due to the fact that for many uses CFCs (e.g. used as solvents or refrigerating agents) were substituted with HCFCs. While there have been reports of attempts by individuals to circumvent the ban, e.g. by smuggling CFCs from undeveloped to developed nations, the overall level of compliance has been high. In consequence, the Montreal Protocol is often characterized as the most successful international environmental agreement to date.

References

(referred to as Ozone Layer Protection)

Benedick, Richard E. (1991). Ozone Diplomacy. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-65001-8 (Ambassador Benedick was the Chief U.S. Negotiator at the meetings that resulted in the Protocol.)

Litfin, Karen T. (1994). Ozone Discourse. Columbia University Press. ISBN 0231081375

External links

The Parties involved
The Montreal Protocol
THE CFC-OZONE PUZZLE:Environmental Science in the Global Arena by F.Sherwood Rowland and Mario J.Molina
The Indispensable Element in the MONTREAL OZONE PROTOCOL by Richard Benedick
The evolution of policy responses to stratospheric ozone depletion by P. M. Morrisette, Natural Resources Journal 29: 793-820 (1989).
Has the Montreal Protocol been successful in reducing ozone-depleting gases in the atmosphere? (NOAA Aeronomy Lab)
Doomsday Déjà vu: Ozone Depletion's Lessons for Global Warming by Ben Lieberman

Gourt Home::Gourt :: Montreal Protocol