ABSTRACT
In May 1985, a team of British scientists stunned the world with an article in Nature magazine that reported a remarkable 40-percent loss of stratospheric ozone over Antarctica between September and October 1984. Despite extensive research on the subject, no such precipitous decline had been predicted by the atmospheric models the scientists relied on. Indeed, the ozone losses were so unexpected that the investigators at first suspected instrument error and delayed the release of the data. But subsequent satellite readings confirmed the presence of this massive ozone "holenwhich covered an area the size of the continental United States. The findings revealed that during the Antarctic spring, ozone levels were becoming low enough to present serious risk of cancer, cataracts, and other health problems in New Zealand and other southern c0untries.l
When the "ozone hole" revelations hit the headlines, international negotiations aimed at limiting the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the chemicals suspected of thinning Earth's protective ozone layer, were well under
way-but badly stalemated. Scientists had warned for years that without international action, depletion of the ozone layer would increase the intensity of ultraviolet (UV) radiation and cause millions of additional skin cancer cases, sharply diminish agricultural yields, and kill aquatic organisms. But industry leaders had persuaded governments that the cost of replacing the chemicals was too high.2
