The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer is a global agreement to protect the Earth’s ozone layer by phasing out the chemicals that deplete it. This phase-out plan includes both the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances. The landmark agreement was signed in 1987 and entered into force in 1989.

The parties to the Protocol meet once a year to make decisions aimed at ensuring the successful implementation of the agreement. These include adjusting or amending the Protocol, which has been done six times since its creation. The most recent amendment, the Kigali Amendment, called for the phase-down of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in 2016. These HFCs were used as replacements for a batch of ozone-depleting substances eliminated by the original Montreal Protocol. Although they do not deplete the ozone layer, they are known to be powerful greenhouse gases and, thus, contributors to climate change.

The Montreal Protocol provided a set of practical, actionable tasks that were universally agreed on. The Protocol has successfully met its objectives thus far and continues to safeguard the ozone layer today. Thanks to the collaborative effort of nations around the world, the ozone layer is well on its way to recovery.

Decision VI/13: Assessment Panels

The Sixth Meeting of the Parties decided in Dec. VI/13 to request the Panels, as an inclusion in their ongoing work, to evaluate, without prejudice to Article 5 of the Montreal Protocol, the technical and economic feasibility, and the environmental, scientific, and economic implications for non-Article 5 countries, as well as Article 5 countries, bearing in mind Article 5, paragraph 1 bis, of the Copenhagen Amendment, of:

  1. The alternatives to hydrochlorofluorocarbons in so doing, the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel is requested to consider the ozone-depleting substance substitution potential of not-in-kind alternatives, in-kind alternatives, and alternative technologies. In assessing this matter, the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel should consider how available alternatives compare with hydrochlorofluorocarbons with respect to such factors as energy efficiency, total global warming impact, potential flammability, and toxicity, and the potential impacts on the effective use and phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons and halons; in time for consideration by the Open-ended Working Group at its eleventh meeting;
  2. Alternatives to methyl bromide, in time for consideration by the Open-ended Working Group at its eleventh meeting;

In considering these matters, the Scientific Assessment Panel shall consider, if possible, atmospheric chlorine and bromine loadings and their impact on ozone depletion. The Technology and Economic Assessment Panel and Scientific Assessment Panel evaluations shall be solely for the purpose of discussions by the Parties and shall in no way be construed as recommendations for action.