|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ENVIRONMENT-MEXICO:
Nobel Laureate
Has an Equation for Optimism
Diego
Cevallos*
MEXICO CITY, (Tierramérica)
- Air quality, climate change
and the ozone layer are
variables in an equation that
humans have been toying with, so
much so that we have endangered
our very future, Mexican
scientist Mario Molina, 1995
winner of the Nobel Prize for
Chemistry, said in a
conversation with Tierramérica.
But there are reasons for
optimism, says Molina, who after
achieving fame for discovering
that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
damage the ozone layer in the
Earth's stratosphere, has worked
on a programme to improve air
quality in Mexico City.
He argues that in around 10
years, the Mexican capital,
today one of the most polluted
mega-cities in the world, could
have ''very clean'' air.
The scientist says his
prediction could come true if
there is commitment and effort
-- elements he believes played a
key role in the relative success
of the 1987 Montreal Protocol,
in which the international
community accepted the challenge
to halt the destruction of the
ozone layer. Despite alarmist
reports, says Molina, there is
no going back on the road
towards the recovery of the
ozone layer.
Q: Scientists from Cambridge
University expressed alarm in
April at the European Union's
meeting on geophysics, held in
Austria, because according to
their studies the thinning of
the ozone layer had reached its
worst point. They talk about
continued destruction. Is it
true? If so, what has gone
wrong?
A: Year to year, there is great
variability in the so-called
ozone hole, as there is in many
other climate-related areas. The
hole is not expanding in a
continuous way, and it is clear
that the emissions of industrial
compounds that hurt the ozone
layer are diminishing. The
problem has basically been
resolved through the Montreal
Protocol (which set timelines
for reducing the use of CFCs and
other ozone-depleting
substances), although we have to
continue to work hard, because
there are substances like methyl
bromide that have not yet been
totally eliminated, as is the
case of some halons, which are
still being emitted. We know we
have to wait approximately two
decades before the ozone layer
begins to recover, and from one
year to the next the thinning
could increase or decrease
without that being an important
indication of the status of the
problem, which the Montreal
Protocol has dealt with
irreversibly and effectively.
Q: The temporary widening of the
hole, then, is related to the
phenomenon of climate change
(global warming as a result of
emissions of ''greenhouse''
gases)?
A: One of the things that make
it difficult to say with
precision when the stratospheric
ozone layer will be restored is
the connection between this
problem and the fact that we are
altering the climate (with
greenhouse gas emissions). It is
possible that this recovery will
be delayed because climate
change affects it, in a way that
is difficult to understand, but
very real.
Q: In that relationship, does
air quality -- an area that
you're working in now -- play a
role?
A: Yes, there are important
connections between ozone,
climate change and air quality.
They are elements of a delicate
equation. What we are doing in
Mexico City is attack the air
quality problem, and some of the
measures also are beneficial in
relation to climate change. For
example, improving the
efficiency of transportation
reduces emissions of carbon
dioxide, which is the leading
greenhouse gas, but also
emission of other substances
that affect air quality and
human health.
Q: You have recommended changes
in the formula of the gasoline
consumed in Mexico,
modernisation of vehicles and an
overhaul of the public
transportation system, among
other measures. Will they solve
the problem of intense air
pollution?
A: Indeed they will. If there is
an effort and commitment, in
around 10 years Mexico City will
have very clean air. That
prediction might sound overly
optimistic, when there are so
many other connected problems,
but it can be done and there are
examples that confirm this, like
the U.S. city of Los Angeles. In
these matters, and in others
related to climate change, Latin
America and the developing world
have not yet adopted very clear
measures, but the experience of
Mexico will be a good example of
what can be done.
Q: What is your view for the
future when there are countries
like the United States that
resist adopting strong
commitments for fighting climate
change?
A: It is a difficult and risky
future. There are very big
challenges, and the use of
fossil fuels is linked to
economic development. That is
why close collaboration between
industrialised and developing
countries is essential, in part
because it is the former that
have polluted the air. As for
the United States, I think that
country's individual states and
researchers are making great
efforts to attack the problems
of ozone depletion, climate
change and air quality, but the
current government (of President
George W. Bush) is opposed to
anything that involves
international commitments --
which is a shame.
(* Originally published May 28
by Latin American newspapers
that are part of the
Tierramérica network.
Tierramérica is a specialised
news service produced by IPS
with the backing of the United
Nations Development Programme
and the United Nations
Environment Programme.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
