Montreal Protocol and Ozone Layer

What was the main point made by Molina and Roland in their 1975 paper?

• CFCs are harmless to the environment.

• CFCs have a long lifespan and harm the ozone layer.

• CFCs are beneficial to the ozone layer.

• CFCs have a short lifespan.

Why was it challenging to communicate the dangers of CFCs to the public?

• CFCs were beneficial for health.

• CFCs were invisible and had long-term effects.

• CFCs caused immediate health issues.

• CFCs were visible and easy to detect.

What was the purpose of the international assessment led by NASA?

• To promote the use of CFCs.

• To assess the state of the ozone layer globally.

• To ban all scientific research on ozone.

• To increase the production of CFCs.

What was the Montreal Protocol?

• A protocol to promote the use of CFCs in industries.

• A treaty to ban all international cooperation.

• An agreement to protect the ozone layer by reducing CFCs.

• A treaty to increase CFC production.

What role did international cooperation play in addressing ozone depletion?

• It hindered the efforts to protect the ozone layer.

• It was crucial for the success of the Montreal Protocol.

• It had no impact on the efforts to protect the ozone layer.

• It led to increased CFC production.

What did the Antarctic experiments in 1987 reveal?

• CFCs had no effect on the ozone layer.

• Human activities had a clear impact on the ozone layer.

• CFCs were beneficial to the ozone layer.

• The ozone layer was unaffected by human activities.

How did the DuPont company respond to the scientific findings on CFCs?

• They acknowledged the findings and supported the Montreal Protocol.

• They ignored the findings.

• They denied any impact of CFCs on the ozone layer.

• They increased CFC production.

What was the outcome of the Montreal Protocol?

• It increased the use of CFCs.

• It successfully reduced CFC emissions.

• It failed to address ozone depletion.

• It had no impact on the ozone layer.

What is the key lesson from the intersection of science and public policy?

• Science and policy should remain separate.

• Public policy should be based on sound scientific evidence.

• Science should be ignored in policy-making.

• Policy should be based on public opinion alone.

What parallel is drawn between the ozone issue and climate change?

• Both require international cooperation and scientific evidence.

• Both are not influenced by public policy.

• Both require ignoring scientific evidence.

• Both issues are unrelated to human activities.