R12--how bad is it really?
Eagle, I hate to take exception to your statements, as you are fairly wise on Jeeps, but.....
I remember reading an article in "Machine Design" magazine, a trade mag. for mech. engrs., about 5 years ago, on the topic of ozone depletion due to chlorinated flourocarbons (CFC's, aka FREON).
Among the things they noted:
1. the ozone layer has only been measured for thickness/density since about 1947. From 1947 until 1969, it was INCREASING. From 1969 until about 1990, it was diminishing, but not to a level any lower than that measured in 1947. The point of this is that we don't have enough data for a long enough time to say with absolute certainty that the ozone layer is lessened solely because of CFC's.
2. CFC's are heavier than air, so they tend to settle, not rise to where the ozone is located. It is assumed that "atmospheric stirring" is what causes the CFC's to get up by the ozone, but no one has built a model that is VERIFIED to show such stirring occurs. It was all conjecture and theory as of the time of the article, and may still be, for all I know.
3. When the "CFC destroys ozone" theory was put forth in the mid-1980's, one key fact was NOT known--that SEAWATER absorbs a lot of CFC's. Now as to whether it absorbs and holds enough to neutralize the possible effects of atmospheric stirring, has yet to be analyzed.
My point here is that what is taken for gospel is not so clearly absolutely incontrovertable fact. I suspect that part of the reason that we see so little about the flaws in the assumptions made when R12 was restricted was due to the fact that a number of high ranking officials in various agencies and governments would loose face by admitting to making judgements based on limited facts.