Production and consumption of ozone depleting substances

Production of ozone depleting substances (EEA-32), 1986-2011

Note: Production is defined under Article 1(5) of the Montreal Protocol as production minus the amount destroyed minus the amount entirely used as feedstock in the manufacture of other chemicals.

Data source:

• Ozone depleting substances data (UNEP - Ozone Secretariat) provided by United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

Downloads and more info

Consumption of ozone depleting substances (EEA-32), 1986-2011

Note: Consumption is defined as production plus imports minus exports of controlled substances under the Montreal Protocol.

Data source:

• Ozone depleting substances data (UNEP - Ozone Secretariat) provided by United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

Downloads and more info

Maximum ozone hole area in 2011

Note: False-color view of total ozone over the Antarctic pole. The purple and blue colors are where there is the least ozone, and the yellows and reds are where there is more ozone. Measured in 12 September 2011.

Data source:

• Ozone Hole Watch provided by NASA

Downloads and more info

Consumption and production of ozone-depleting substances has decreased significantly in the 32 EEA member countries, particularly in the first half of the 1990s. It is nowadays practically zero [1]. Before the UNEP Montreal Protocol was signed in 1987, the ODS production across the EEA member countries exceeded half a million ODP (ozone depletion potential) tonnes. Since 2007, ODS production has been negative [2]. ODS consumption in EEA member countries fall from approximately 423 000 ODP tonnes in 1986 to negative values in 2002 [3] (see Figures 1 and 2). Since 2002, values have been negative, except for years 2003 and 2006. The value in 2011 was approximately -1300 ODP tonnes.

Globally, the 1987 Montreal Protocol is widely recognised as one of the most successful multilateral environmental agreements to date. Its implementation has led to a decrease in the atmospheric burden of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) in the lower atmosphere and in the stratosphere. The schedule for the limitation and phase-out of production and consumption of ODS as defined in the Montreal Protocol is summarised in the Indicator Specification. 

According to the 2010 assessment reports from UNEP’s Scientific, Environmental and Technology and Economic Assessment Panels under the Montreal Protocol, ozone depletion also influences climate change since both ozone and the compounds responsible for its depletion are potent greenhouse gases. The implementation of the Montreal Protocol has therefore indirectly led to a stark reduction in emissions of these greenhouse gases, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are outside the remits of the UNFCCC’s Kyoto Protocol. The reduction in GWP-weighted ODS emissions expected as a result of compliance with the Montreal Protocol has been estimated globally at 10-12 Gt CO₂-eq per year in 2010 (Velders et al. 2007). In contrast, the reduction of greenhouse gases under the Kyoto Protocol (assuming full compliance by all developed countries) is estimated at 1-2 Gt CO₂-eq on average per year between 2008 and 2012, compared to base year emissions. The phasing out of climate-changing ODS under the Montreal Protocol has therefore avoided greenhouse gas emissions by an amount 5-6 times larger than the target of the Kyoto Protocol for 2008-2012.

UNEP’s Assessments also concluded there are various options to achieve a global recovery in the ozone layer (i.e. returning to pre-1980 levels). These include addressing the strong growth in the production and consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) in developing countries, and the immediate collection and safe disposal of large quantities of ODS contained in old equipment and buildings (the so-called ODS ‘banks’). Such ODS banks have a very significant ozone-depleting and global warming potential.

At the EU level, the Regulation on substances that deplete the ozone layer (1005/2009/EC as amended by 744/2010/EU), which in many aspects goes further than the Montreal Protocol, also brings forward the general production phase-out of HCFCs from 2020 to 2010.

The projected recovery of the ozone layer is sensitive to future levels of greenhouse gases and the associated changes in climate. Climate change will influence the exposure of all living organisms to UV-B radiation via changes in cloudiness, precipitation, and ice cover. In addition, the concentrations of HCFCs continue to increase in the atmosphere. Given these interlinkages, the international efforts to safeguard the earth’s climate (e.g. UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol) and protect the ozone layer (Montreal Protocol) can be mutually supportive. In 2007, governments from developed and developing countries agreed to freeze production of HCFCs in developing countries by 2013 and bring forward the final phase-out date of these chemicals by ten years in both developed and developing countries (Montreal/Nairobi, 22 September 2007). This has been referred to as a historic agreement to tackle the challenges of protecting the ozone layer and combating climate change at the same time. However, while HCFCs have largely replaced CFCs in both developed and developing countries, in many HCFC applications there is now a gradual replacement with hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which, although not ozone-depleting, are potent greenhouse gases. Therefore, growth in HFC use and emissions will offset at least part of the climate benefits already achieved by the Montreal Protocol (Velders et al., 2009).

The depth and area of the ozone hole over Antarctica remains, with  a larger depletion in 2011 compared to the one in 2009 and 2010 [4]. Between 7 September and 13 October of 2011, the average ozone-hole area reached 25 million square kilometres, with a daily maximum of 26 million square kilometres (Figure 3) - equivalent to about 6 times the territory of the EU. According to UNEP’s 2010 Assessment, failure to comply with the Montreal Protocol and the continuation of agreed exemptions could delay or even prevent the recovery of the ozone layer – with additional implications for climate change. 

The 2010 report by the Scientific Assessment Panel of the Montreal Protocol concludes the Antarctic ozone hole provides the most visible example of how ozone depletion affects surface climate, leading to important changes in surface temperature and wind patterns. Overall, there is stronger evidence of the effect of stratospheric ozone changes on the earth’s surface climate, and also of the effects of climate change on stratospheric ozone. Increasing abundances of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane are expected to significantly affect future stratospheric ozone through effects on temperature, winds, and chemistry. The report also highlights the substantial co-benefits between the protection of the ozone layer and climate change and presents a number of options for policy makers.

[1] Calculated production and/or consumption may be zero even if there is still production for feedstock uses (where ODS are entirely used in the manufactured of other chemicals), or for exports to countries where the ODS phase-out is not completed (see footnote 2).

[2] Production of ODS was negative for the years 2007 to 2011. Negative values are possible because ‘production’ is defined under Article 1(5) of the Montreal Protocol as production minus the amount destroyed minus the amount entirely used as feedstock in the manufacture of other chemicals. Therefore, calculated production may be negative if destroyed amounts and/or feedstocks (e.g. from a carry-over stock) exceed production. Consumption is defined as production plus imports minus exports of controlled substances under the Montreal Protocol. As with calculated production, the consumption of ODS can be negative, also because exports in any one year can exceed production and imports if ODS have been stockpiled.

[3] Consumption is defined as production plus imports minus exports of controlled substances under the Montreal Protocol. As with calculated production, the consumption of ODS can be negative.

[4] The ozone-hole area is determined from total ozone satellite measurements. It is defined to be that region of ozone values below 220 Dobson Units (DU) located south of 40°S.