Richard, It looks like UVI measurements at Invercargill remained almost unchanged from 1981 to 2006 while the average area of the Ozone hole increased and Dobson units decreased. That does not make sense but perhaps I don't understand the graphs and title descriptions.
It's because while ozone reductions are large in Antarctica during spring, everywhere else they are small (because of the success of the Montreal Protocol in limiting the damage).
Are you saying that ozone reductions over New Zealand are too small to have a significant effect on incidence of skin cancer? Is there no correlation between ozone depletion and incidence of skin cancer in New Zealand?
Richard, It looks like UVI measurements at Invercargill remained almost unchanged from 1981 to 2006 while the average area of the Ozone hole increased and Dobson units decreased. That does not make sense but perhaps I don't understand the graphs and title descriptions.
It's because while ozone reductions are large in Antarctica during spring, everywhere else they are small (because of the success of the Montreal Protocol in limiting the damage).
Are you saying that ozone reductions over New Zealand are too small to have a significant effect on incidence of skin cancer? Is there no correlation between ozone depletion and incidence of skin cancer in New Zealand?