Healing the Ozone: A Story of Environmental Stewardship and International Cooperation

As we push through another November, many may feel a growing anxiety about the weather outside. 2023 marked the hottest year in recorded history, and 2024 saw the Northern Hemisphere’s hottest summer in nearly 2 centuries. An unseasonal North American heatwave stretched well into autumn, underscoring the urgency of climate change. Whether driven by human actions or not, climate shifts and extreme weather are a concern to all humans. This often brings a sense of powerlessness, resulting in either total denial or extreme alarm followed by deep despair. These emotional reactions are understandable, after all how can individuals like us ever hope to change the weather, much less the climate?

Still, there is reason to hope. Recent history offers us a powerful story that may bring a more optimistic perspective. Those who remember the late 20th century may recall the panic over the “hole in the ozone.” This global crisis sparked widespread alarm and calls for action, only to fade rather suddenly from public consciousness. Why this crisis seemed to evaporate from the news and pop-culture? The answer is quite simple, it is because we fixed it.

Governments, scientists, educators, conscientious consumers, and private industry around the globe joined forces. Through this coordinated effort, humanity reversed the greatest environmental crises of the late 20th century.  Yet, we don’t hear about this success nearly as much as we heard about the threat when the crisis was first discovered. But we should.

What is the Ozone Layer, and Why Does it Matter?

The ozone crisis occurred within the Earth’s atmosphere. Simply put, the atmosphere is a layer of gases surrounding the planet, in which all life is made possible. Scientist divide the atmosphere into 5 protective layers. The two lowest layers, known as the troposphere and stratosphere, are most relevant here. Most human activities happen within the troposphere, extending roughly 6 miles (10 km) above the surface. Above this, the stratosphere reaches 25 more miles (40 km) higher. Commercial airlines usually fly in the lowermost levels of the stratosphere, accounting for the vast majority of human interaction with it. However, something else goes on here that humanity long took for granted.

Ozone, a simple molecule formed by a trio of oxygen atoms, forms exclusively in the stratosphere, about 9–18 miles above Earth’s surface. This thin and essential “ozone layer” forms a barrier that shields life on or below the Earth’s surface from the harshness of space. Ozone is the thin blue line that protects us from extremely harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation. For most of recorded history, the ozone layer remained stable and unnoticed. Then in the 1970s, all that suddenly changed.

Discovering the Threat:

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were once thought to be harmless, and grew in popularity due to its non-toxic and non-flammable nature. CFCs started appearing in aerosol sprays and refrigerated coolants in the 1930s and became widely adopted over the course of the next few decades. Unfortunately, they were a silent and indirect killer with a lethal downside that nobody noticed for over a generation.

In 1974, chemists Mario Molina and Frank Sherwood Rowland of the University of California, Irvine, published the ““Rowland-Molina hypothesis,” warning that CFCs could destroy ozone in the stratosphere by releasing chlorine atoms. Initially they met with resistance from invested industries. DuPont’s chairman called the theory “science fiction” and “nonsense,” while the president of Precision Valve Corporation, even sent a letter to UC Irvine, protesting Rowland and Molina’s statements. Some skeptical scientists also questioned the initial findings, which is to be expected.

Resistance and skepticism, along with early projections suggesting minimal ozone loss (2-4%) over centuries, meant that CFCs continued to be widely used. Fortunately, international policymakers didn’t entirely ignore the issue. A 1977 global action plan called for continuous monitoring of ozone levels, solar radiation. They also continued to study health, ecological, and climate impacts of said radiation. These preparations turned out to be both wise and fortuitous.

In the early 1980s, British meteorologist Jonathan Shanklin of the British Antarctic Survey confirmed a sudden depletion of ozone over Antarctica. Dubbed the “ozone hole,” this shocking finding confirmed the worst fears of the Rowland-Molina hypothesis. Other scientists like Harvard’s James G. Anderson began adding to the evidence of harmful CFCs. As the evidence piled up, the gravity of the situation became undeniable.

The Science Behind the Damage: Understanding Ozone Depletion

Without the ozone layer, UV radiation would pour down at dangerous levels with dire and predictable results. Skin cancer rates, cataracts, and other health issues were expected to surge in humans. The damage to earth’s ecosystem was also easy to foresee. Agriculture, forests, and ecosystems would also suffer as the UV damage to plants would disrupt the food chain. Wildfires would erupt as plants died and temperatures rose. Marine life was not going to be safe either, especially species at the base of the food web, faced dire threats. Fish, crustaceans, and amphibians would experience widespread infertility and other health issues as even the deepest waters on the planet heated up. Finally, phytoplankton, the basis of the marine food chain, would also be threatened.

The evidence compelled scientists and policymakers to act swiftly and cooperatively. By 1984, Antarctic research stations were reporting around 30% less ozone in the atmosphere overhead than in recent history. With mounting evidence, the question was no longer whether the ozone layer was being depleted or CPCs were to blame. The new question was whether it was too late to turn back. Amazingly, the crisis sparked a response of unprecedented international cooperation.

Building Awareness,

The first step in tackling the crisis was building public awareness. Scientists held press conferences and used visual aids to communicate the dangers, reaching audiences worldwide. Non-profits and government agencies joined in.  Australia, which faced particular danger from their proximity to the Antarctic “ozone hole” kicked up their 1981 Slip! Slap! Slop! Campaign. Originally intended to inform public health by identifying the benefits of sunscreen, the campaign wove the ozone crises into their narrative surrounding the risks of UV exposure.

Greenpeace also engaged in dramatic awareness-raising tactics, such as attaching a “blue ribbon” to a DuPont water tower to “commend” its CFC production or displaying a giant pair of sunglasses on the Sydney Opera House to symbolize increased UV exposure. They also blocked Environment Canada’s Quebec offices with CFC-containing refrigerators, urging action. Elsewhere, Greenpeace sent lists of CFC products from Germany’s Hoechst to hospitals and doctors to increase accountability.

The World Wildlife Fund and other non-profit organizations also worked to spread awareness, albeit less dramatically. Common tactics included offering pamphlets, purchasing TV airtime for public service announcements, and holding press conferences. Educational institutions of all levels around the world began weaving ozone science into school curricula and airing public service announcements. Pop culture soon joined in, with shows like Captain Planet and the Planeteers educating a new generation on the seriousness of environmental issues, including ozone depletion, in a fun way.

These wide-reaching campaigns soon influenced consumer behavior. Educated customers began making informed choices, and opting for CFC-free products wherever possible. The invisible hand of the market began to tip the scale, urging the few stubborn companies still holding onto CFCs to abandon the harmful chemicals for environmentally friendlier alternatives. With public support growing, policymakers gained momentum to craft impactful environmental policies.

Global Mobilization: The Montreal Protocol as a Landmark Agreement

Scientists from around the world met first at the Vienna Convention of 1985, where further research and investigation was immediately called for. The research came almost immediately, later that year, from Johnathan Shanklin and other scientists publishing their collective findings. This led to a diplomatic convention with the Montreal Protocol being signed in 1987. As of 2008, it became, and remains, the sole successful UN protocol to be signed and ratified by every nation on Earth.

Participating nations agreed to work with their respective private industries to ban and phase out CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances wherever possible, and furthermore to make the process as reasonable, doable, and painless as possible. A combination of enforceable bans, timelines, and cost benefit-analysis provided a pathway forward for nations to meet the specific needs of their respective economic situations. A consistent dialogue between countries also made it easier to agree to a flexible framework of guidelines, allowing for amendments and adjustments to reduce emissions over time.

The Road to Recovery: Successes and Ongoing Efforts

Signs of success gave reason to hope from the beginning, though the efforts have not been without obstacles. For example, Australia’s Black Summer proved both a symptom and a setback. In 2019, in which wildfires engulfed 42 million acres of land, destroyed thousands of buildings, and killed dozens of people and 3 billion animals. As if that were not enough, the fires sent a titanic smoke cloud into the stratosphere over the southern hemisphere. The Canadian Space Agency reported that the influx of smoke particles from the Australian fires disrupted with chemical processes of the ozone creation. The damage only amounted to a 1% decrease in Ozone production, but it was not previously suspected that wildfires could have any effect at all.

Regardless, after years of international cooperation and adherence to the Montreal Protocol, the ozone layer shows promising signs of recovery. Recent studies by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) indicate that the Antarctic ozone hole has gradually diminished, with projections suggesting a full recovery by the mid-21st century if current measures continue. Thanks to these reductions in harmful emissions, the ozone layer is expected to reach pre-1980 levels by around 2060, a milestone that underscores the effectiveness of science-driven policy. A recent study also indicates that without the Montreal Protocol’s CFC ban, plants, vegetation, and soil would have absorbed and stored significantly less carbon. This reduced carbon storage capacity could have contributed to an additional 0.5–1.0 degrees Celsius of global warming.

As of 2021, 99% of CFCs have been phased out of industrial production. The global shift away from CFCs prompted industries to innovate. Many companies initially viewed the restrictions as an economic threat, yet they eventually adapted by developing CFC alternatives. Some industries even used this transition as an opportunity to implement sustainable practices more broadly, finding ways to align environmental stewardship with profitability. This balance of economic growth and environmental health illustrates that industries can thrive under well-designed environmental regulations.

The Montreal Protocol’s evolution didn’t stop at CFCs; it expanded to address new environmental threats as they arose. The Kigali Amendment, adopted in 2016, mandates a global phasedown of HFCs, substances developed as CFC substitutes but later discovered to contribute significantly to climate warming. This extension has reaffirmed the global commitment to environmental health and demonstrates that adaptive policies are critical in responding to evolving scientific insights.

Lessons for Today’s Environmental Challenges

The Montreal Protocol stands as a blueprint for addressing climate change, proving that international cooperation, grounded in scientific consensus, can produce effective environmental solutions. Tackling climate change on a similar scale requires a unified approach, as well as a commitment from countries and industries to meet defined goals. The Protocol’s success demonstrates that environmental action need not be a zero-sum game; rather, it can offer mutual benefits to the planet and global economies.

The ozone recovery journey showed that tackling environmental issues requires three key elements: proactive policy, technological innovation, and strong public support. Effective policies create the regulatory framework for change, while innovation allows industries to meet environmental goals with less economic disruption. Meanwhile, public support amplifies these efforts, driving consumers to adopt more sustainable behaviors and encouraging companies to respond with eco-friendly products. This trio—policy, innovation, and public backing—forms a replicable model for tackling issues like carbon emissions, biodiversity loss, and pollution.

The Montreal Protocol’s framework could be applied to other pressing environmental challenges. Issues like plastic pollution, deforestation, and renewable energy adoption also demand coordinated international responses. A Protocol-inspired model, focused on flexible guidelines, technological innovation, and gradual phasing of harmful practices, could help address these crises in a structured way.

A Legacy of Hope and Stewardship

The recovery of the ozone layer demonstrates what humanity can accomplish through unity, resilience, and environmental responsibility. This success is not only a scientific achievement but also an inspiring reminder that even the most daunting global challenges can be overcome when we unite for a common purpose. The Montreal Protocol offers a blueprint for addressing current crises such as climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss. As we tackle these issues, the story of the ozone’s recovery serves as a hopeful reminder of the power of collective action and the impact we can have when individuals, communities, and governments work together toward a sustainable future.

One final point worth making here is that this achievement should be celebrated, not downplayed. The closing of the hole in the Ozone should be shouted from the rooftops with the same enthusiasm as the alarm that sounded when the crises was first discovered. If we do not celebrate the fruits of our efforts, we will be less inclined to take necessary action against future problems. In short, let the entire world feel good about this, because it is worth feeling good about.