ted. The stratospheric ozone problem was out of sight and out of mind, as far as the public consciousness was concerned, few people seemed concerned about the possibility of ozone losses. Nevertheless, studies of stratospheric ozone loss continued, and in the late 1970s the EPA planned to ban non-aerosol use of CFCs and halons. In addition, other federal agencies were analyzing data and developing reports on the ozone depleting effects of various halogens. Since studies during the late 1970s and early 1980s suggested that the ozone layer might not be in as a great a danger as once believed. One report from the National Academy of Sciences, indicated that human and naturally produced compounds, such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen oxides, in the atmosphere could help to slow down the depletion of ozone, and might even raise the ozone level in the stratosphere one percent by the next century.CFC manufacturers have argued as well that a freeze or cutback in U.S. production of CFCs will make little difference unless there is a worldwide restriction on the chemicals. Many other nations not only make wide use of CFCs but some have increased production of these chemicals for a variety of purposes. U.S. manufacturers do not want to be singled out for cutbacks while industries in other parts of the world continue to enjoy profits from products that contain CFCs.While policies to control ozone-depleting chemicals and greenhouse gases were swinging in and out of favor in the United States, directors of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) called for worldwide restriction of CFC use. Along with the United States, Japan, and Western European countries, including Britain, West Germany, and France, are major producers and the Soviet Union have been increasing their CFC use during the latter part of the 1980s.The next step would be convincing the participating nations to sign a protocol or a draft for a treaty that would regulate use o...
