home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3 / NN_1993_3.iso / spool / sci / environm / 14876 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1993-01-28  |  1.1 KB
  1. Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ukma!cs.widener.edu!dsinc!ub!galileo.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!dietz
  2. From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
  3. Newsgroups: sci.environment
  4. Subject: Re: Another ozone question
  5. Message-ID: <1993Jan27.015316.13546@cs.rochester.edu>
  6. Date: 27 Jan 93 01:53:16 GMT
  7. References: <1k3fo2INN29k@gap.caltech.edu> <1993Jan26.173513.1@cubldr.colorado.edu> <1993Jan26.175921.1@cubldr.colorado.edu>
  8. Organization: University of Rochester
  9. Lines: 14
  10.  
  11. In article <1993Jan26.175921.1@cubldr.colorado.edu> parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson) writes:
  12.  
  13. > Whoa - that's a peculiar image there, oxygen diffusing upwards on a
  14. > billion-year time scale? I meant that the concentration of oxygen in
  15. > the atmosphere increased very slowly. 
  16.  
  17. But is this true?  The characteristic time for the oxygen in the
  18. atmosphere to be regenerated (by burial of organic matter in seafloor
  19. sediments) is currently a few million years.  After the dissolved
  20. reduced metals in the ocean had been oxidized, why couldn't the oxygen
  21. content of the atmosphere increase on a similar timescale?
  22.  
  23.     Paul F. Dietz
  24.     dietz@cs.rochester.edu
  25.