Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the evaluation of ozone depletion potentials

Solomon, S., Mills, M., Heidt, L. E., Pollock, W. H., Tuck, A. F.·1992·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

Observations of methane, CFC‐11, and ozone losses are used along with insights from models and observations regarding interrelationships between tracers to develop a semi‐empirical framework for evaluating global ozone depletion potentials. Direct measurements of some hydrochlorofluorocarbons including HCFC‐22 in the Arctic lower stratosphere are also used to evaluate the local ozone depletion potentials there. This approach assumes that all of the observed ozone destruction in the contemporary atmosphere is due to chlorine and that the depletion is proportional to the local relative chlorine release. It is shown that the global ozone depletion potentials for compounds with relatively long stratospheric lifetimes such as HCFC‐22 and HCFC‐142b are likely to be larger than those generally predicted by gas phase chemical models, due largely to the importance of lower stratospheric ozone losses that are not simulated in gas phase studies. The analysis presented suggests that the globally averaged efficiency for ozone depletion by HCFC‐22 is as much as a factor of 2 larger than some gas phase model estimates. For compounds with short stratospheric lifetimes such as (CCl 4). and (CH 3 CCl 3), on the other hand, gas phase models likely overestimate the ozone depletion potentials for the present‐day stratosphere. Observations of polar ozone loss and reactive halogen radical abundances also imply that the globally averaged ozone depletion potentials for brominated species for the contemporary stratosphere could be as much as 1.5–3 times greater than some gas phase model predictions, depending upon lower stratospheric loss processes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/91jd02613

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Metadata

Authors
Solomon, S., Mills, M., Heidt, L. E., Pollock, W. H., & Tuck, A. F.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
1992-01-20
Volume
97
Issue
D1
Pages
825-842
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2019391402
Cited by
167
References
1
FWCI
6.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On the evaluation of ozone depletion potentials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/91jd02613
The paper
Solomon, S., Mills, M., Heidt, L. E., Pollock, W. H., & Tuck, A. F. (1992). On the evaluation of ozone depletion potentials. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/91jd02613

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.