Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface: Human and Environmental Health Implications

Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface: Human and Environmental Health Implications

http://www.nuclearplanet.com/uvc2.pdf

*Corresponding author: E-mail: mherndon@san.rr.com;

Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science

International

14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

ISSN: 2454-7352

Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to

Earth’s Surface: Human and Environmental Health

Implications

J. Marvin Herndon1*, Raymond D. Hoisington2 and Mark Whiteside3

1

Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive, San Diego, CA 92131, USA. 2

iRay SpectraMetrics, 2760 Adrian Street, Turlock, CA 95382, USA. 3

Florida Department of Health in Monroe County, 1100 Simonton Street, Key West, FL 33040, USA.

Authors’ contributions

This work was a joint effort between the authors that is part of an ongoing collaboration aimed at

providing scientific, medical, public health implications and evidence related to aerosolized coal fly

ash including its use in the near-daily, near-global covert geoengineering activity. Author JMH was

primary responsible for mineralogical and geophysical considerations. Author RDH was responsible

for solar spectral irradiance measurements. Author MW was primarily responsible for medical and

public health considerations. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Article Information

DOI: 10.9734/JGEESI/2018/40245

Editor(s):

(1) Wen-Cheng Liu, Department of Civil and Disaster Prevention Engineering, National United University, Taiwan and

Taiwan Typhoon and Flood Research Institute, National United University, Taipei, Taiwan.

(2) Masum A. Patwary, Geography and Environmental Science, Begum Rokeya University, Bangladesh.

Reviewers:

(1) Branko Vukovic, University of Osijek, Croatia.

(2) Mangset E. Williams, University of Jos, Nigeria.

(3) Sylvester Odiana, University of Benin, Nigeria.

(4) Noriah Bidin, Universiti Teknologi, Malaysia.

(5) Benjamin Chukwumah Anwadike, College of Education Warri, Nigeria.

Complete Peer review History: http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history/23870

Received 15th January 2018

Accepted 22nd March 2018

Published 28th March 2018

ABSTRACT

Aims: The dangerous portion of ultraviolet radiation is widely believed to be completely absorbed

by the atmosphere before reaching Earth’s surface. Our objective is to make multiple

measurements at Earth’s surface of the solar irradiance spectrum in the range 200-400 nm.

Methods: We made numerous measurements of the solar irradiance spectrum in the range 200-

400 nm at an elevation of 56 m with International Light Technologies ILT950UV Spectral

Radiometer mounted on a Meade LXD55 auto guider telescope tripod and mount assembly.

Original Research Article

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

2

Results: Our multifold measurements of solar irradiance spectra demonstrate conclusively that all

wavelengths in the spectral range 200-400 nm reach Earth’s surface, contrary to the widespread

perception that all UV-C and the majority of UV-B never reach the surface. We confirm the surface

UV-C measurements of D’Antoni et al. (2007) that were disputed, based on faulty computer model

calculations of atmospheric ozone, and thereafter ignored by the geoscience community.

Conclusions: The veracity of our data and D’Antoni et al. (2007)’s data call into question the

validity of atmospheric ozone models. Further, we call into question the simplistic supposition of the

Montreal Protocol that chloro-fluoro-hydrocarbons are the primary cause of ozone depletion, and

point to the very heavy burden of halogens introduced into the atmosphere by ongoing jet-sprayed

coal-fly-ash geoengineering. We demonstrate that satellite-based LISIRD solar spectra irradiance

at the top of the atmosphere is badly flawed with some regions of the spectrum being less intense

than measured at Earth’s surface. That calls into question any calculations made utilizing LISIRD

data. We provide introductory information on the devastating effects of UV-B and UV-C on humans,

phytoplankton, coral, insects and plants. These will be discussed in greater detail in subsequent

articles.

Keywords: Ultraviolet measurement; UV-C; UV-B; LISIRD; ozone depletion; ozone; ultraviolet

damage; ultraviolet harm.

1. INTRODUCTION

Geoengineering may be defined as the

deliberate large-scale manipulation of the

planetary environment including, but not limited

to, dispersing particulate matter into the

atmosphere to alter climate [1]. Geoengineering

experiments, conducted by the U. S. military and

involving particulates emplaced into the

atmosphere, dates back to 1958 [2] and have

continually increased in intensity and geographic

range. In approximately the year 2010,

presumably through a secret international

agreement, jet-spraying of particulates into the

atmosphere became near-daily in intensity and

near-global in range. The covert aerial particulate

spraying was conducted without informed

consent of those breathing the contaminated air,

but with orchestrated false information, including

in the scientific literature [3,4].

The geoscience community and the United

Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change, IPCC, has misled the public and the

scientific community by not taking into account

the consequences of aerial particulate spraying

on climate [5]. Even those who study the

atmosphere do not mention the very-obvious

aerial spraying, Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Geoengineering aerosol particulate trails across the February 4, 2017 sky in SoddyDaisy,

TN (USA). With permission of David Tulis

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

3

The typical geoscience presentation of the case

for geoengineering is both simplistic and

incorrect: In the future it may be necessary to

place substances into the atmosphere to reflect

away a portion of incident sunlight, ‘sunshades

for the Earth’; to compensate for supposed global

warming presumably due to anthropogenic

greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide.

Placing particulate matter into the atmosphere

not only reflects away a portion of incident

sunlight, but also permits the particles to absorb

radiant solar energy and transfer it to the

atmosphere by molecular collisions.

Furthermore, emplaced particulate aerosols

retard infrared heat loss from Earth’s surface and

impede rainfall by preventing moisture droplets

from coalescing to become massive enough to

fall as rain. Eventually, the atmosphere becomes

so moisture-saturated that it results in abnormal

downpours, storms, and flooding. In short, the

aerial particulate emplacement has a net effect of

causing global warming and disrupting normal

hydrological cycles.

Moreover, as described below (and in

subsequent articles in this series), ongoing

geoengineering may be causing a disruption of

the ozone layer, endangering all life.

Though the geoscience community ignores the

aerosol particulate spraying, there are many

millions of ordinary citizens who harbor legitimate

concerns about that activity [6]. Some individuals

have taken rainwater samples and had them

analyzed by commercial laboratories. Usually

aluminum analyses have been requested;

sometimes aluminum and barium; and rarely,

aluminum, barium and strontium. We had rain

and snow samples analyzed for a greater

number of elements and showed that the

elements thus determined were consistent with

coal fly ash as the main aerosolized substance

used in ongoing geoengineering operations [7-

11].

When coal is burned by electric utilities the heavy

ash settles and the light ash, called coal fly ash

(CFA), forms and accumulates in the hot gases

above the burner. Unless trapped and

sequestered, the CFA exits the utilities’

smokestacks. Coal fly ash contains a

concentration of the toxic elements found in coal,

including arsenic, chromium, thallium, and

radioactive elements, to name a few. Coal fly ash

also contains environmentally harmful elements

such as mercury and chlorine. For public and

environmental health reasons CFA is typically

trapped and stored in Western nations.

Why would CFA be sprayed into the atmosphere

for geoengineering purposes? CFA is one of the

world’s largest industrial waste streams with

approximately 160 million tons generated

annually in the U.S. [12], and approximately 750

million tons generated annually worldwide [13].

Little additional processing is necessary for this

abundantly available and inexpensive waste

product to be utilized in aerosol geoengineering

operations as CFA particles typically form in the

size range 0.1 – 50 µm [14]. Worldwide

availability, low cost, and in-place production and

storage facilities at coal-burning utilities all

contribute to making CFA an attractive aerosol

geoengineering material. Though CFA is no

longer regulated as a hazardous waste by the

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, it is

nonetheless toxic to most biota and, as

discussed below, disrupts the atmospheric

integrity that makes life possible on Earth.

Life on Earth depends critically on natural

processes that shield it from the relentless

hazardous onslaught of solar radiation. The first

line of defense is the geomagnetic field that

deflects the brunt of the sun’s charged particles

safely around Earth [15]. Our atmosphere is the

second line of defense that protects life from

solar ultraviolet radiation. Plants and animals on

Earth are shielded from harmful solar radiation

by our planet's stratospheric ozone layer, which

is thought to form from the interaction of

ultraviolet radiation with O2, which is produced

and sustained by photosynthesizing organisms.

On numerous occasions the assertion has been

made that no UV-C radiation (100-290 nm)

reaches Earth’s surface [16-18]. Here we dispute

that assertion, using spectrometric

measurements that indicate the probable

debilitation of Earth’s biota caused by the levels

of UV-C radiation we recorded over the course of

one year.

Ozone (O3) and atmospheric oxygen (O2) are

widely thought to prevent over 90% of the UV-B

radiation (290-320 nm) and all of the UV-C

radiation (100-290 nm) from reaching Earth’s

surface. For the past three decades the

geoscience community has focused on ozone

depletion in connection with the so-called

Antarctic ‘ozone hole’, and held to the theory,

adopted by the 1987 Montreal Protocol, that

fluoro-chloro-hydrocarbons (CFCs) are primarily

responsible for the destruction of ozone through

atmospheric reactions that produce ozonedestroying

chlorine. Here we dispute that theory

and recommend that other sources for ozone 

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

4

depletion should be considered, notably including

CFA aerosol geoengineering.

2. METHODS

The experimental method employed pertains to

solar spectrometric irradiance measurements at

Earth’s surface. This is a new line of investigation

employing International Light Technologies

ILT950UV Spectral Radiometer with fractionalnanometer

resolution in the short-wavelength

portion of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum with stray

light rejection >99.7%. The initial order to

International Light Technologies specified that

solar radiation measurements were to be

performed with this unit, and that power levels to

be measured in µW/cm²/nm. International Light

Technologies provided all training, and feedback

analysis of initial data gathered to insure correct

measurement process. The ILT950UV Spectral

Radiometer was certified to ISO 17025.

The measurement process is as follows: The

sensor for the ILT950UV is attached to a bracket

located on the forward ring mount of the Meade

LXD55 auto guider telescope tripod and mount

assembly. The ILT950UV Spectral Radiometer is

form fitted with foam rubber and installed inside

the mount rings. The sensor and Radiometer are

attached via fiber optic cable. This telescope

mount is then set to the current latitude, oriented

true North, programmed with current date and

time, and then allowed to complete a calibration

sequence. Post completion of this calibration, Sol

is selected and entered. The telescope mount

automatically tracks to Sol, and provides an

accuracy of +/- 50 arc seconds relative to Sol.

This automatic tracking of Sol mitigates the

addition of “Sigma” phase error mathematical

corrections.

The ILT950UV is then attached to a laptop

computer with the software provided by

International Light Technologies. A USB cable is

attached from the laptop computer and the

ILT950UV. The assembly is shown in Fig. 2.

The International Light Technologies software

Program is initialized using “Administrator”

privileges to ensure primary communication via

the USB interface. The dark cap is installed over

the sensor on the telescope mount, and the

ILT950UV software calibration procedure begins

with selecting the calibration file supplied by

International Light Technologies, under the

“SETUP” function tab.

Fig. 2. Spectrometer system

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

5

Under the “ACQUIRE” tab, the Integration time is

set to 10 milliseconds, and the SCAN AVERAGE

is set to 100. The integration time is much like

setting the exposure level on a camera, and was

selected for “best fit” of high and low irradiance

levels, keeping within the dynamic range of the

radiometer. The SCAN AVERGE of 100 allows

higher repeatability.

Next, a “DARK SCAN” is performed with the dark

cap placed over the sensor, the ILT950UV “Dark

Scan” is selected under the “Acquire” tab, and

when complete responds with a “green” “DARK:

ON” (background color of the cell) indication at

the bottom center left of the computer display

notifying the user the dark reference is valid.

The dark cap over the sensor is removed, and

under the “Acquire” tab a “Reference Scan” is

selected, once complete the ILT950UV validates

with a “green” “REF: ON” indication at the bottom

center right of the computer display.

Once the Dark and Reference scans are

complete, the “Timeline” is selected under the

“Acquire” tab. Within the GUI that is displayed

there is a calendar and time start/stop setting,

the interval setting, and how the data is to be

exported to a file.

Solar position angles relative to the

measurement geophysical location determine the

length of the data recording session, with winter

months being the shortest of 3 to 4 hours, and

summer the longest with up to 6 hours.

The “Timeline” is set and the interval is set to 2

seconds. This provides a complete spectral scan

from 200 to 450 nanometers every 2 seconds,

and results in 1,854 data points gathered from

200 to 450nm in 1 scan, to be repeated every 2

seconds.

The “Export as Excel file” button is selected with

“TimelineBY_” preceding the date and time code

information of each filename used.

Once the “Start” and “Stop” entries are made, the

“Begin” button is activated which starts the

Spectral Radiometer scans.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The two curves in Fig. 3 present typical

examples of the spectrometric data obtained

using the ILT950UV in the manner described

above at 10:49a local time on June 17, 2017

(black curve) at location (37.517783, -

120.856783), elevation 56 m and at 12:21p local

time on January 20, 2018 (red curve) at the

same location. Clearly the spectral irradiances

extend throughout the entire ultraviolet (UV)

spectrum (200–400 nm) shown. Generally, for

purposes of discussion the UV spectrum is

divided into three parts, UV-A, UV-B, and UV-C,

although some variation exists in wavelength

specifications of those divisions. Here we use

vertical dashed lines to indicate one set of

divisions.

Fig. 3. Examples of our solar spectral

irradiance measurements

There are widespread assertions in the medical,

public health, and geoscience literature that no

UV-C reaches the surface and only a portion of

the UV-B does so [18-22]. Fig. 4 shows our solar

spectral irradiance measurements from Fig. 3

together with two solar irradiance spectra

measured at latitudes 38°S (green curve) and

38°N (pink curve) as reported in 2002 [23]. Close

inspection of the figure reveals that the 38°S

green curve has higher resolution than the 38°N

pink curve, but, more importantly, our red and

black curves have even higher resolution than

the 38°S green curve. Our higher resolution is

particularly important when one notices the major

difference in those curves: All of our UV-B and all

of our UV-C measurements are non-zero, quite

unlike the widespread and incorrect assumption

[18-22].

For more than four decades, the geoscience

community has increasingly functioned on the

basis of committee/political standards rather than

long-held scientific standards [24]. When an

important contradiction arises in science,

scientists have an obligation to attempt to

ascertain the veracity of the contradiction and, if

warranted, to correct the contradicted former

understanding.

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

6

Fig. 4. Comparison of our solar spectral

irradiance measurements with those of

Diffey [22]

D’Antoni et al. [25] published spectral irradiance

measurements made on two mountain slopes in

Tierra del Fuego, Argentina with elevations

ranging 245-655 m. All of their published results

showed detected radiation in the UV-C region.

Fig. 5 compares our measured solar spectral

irradiance measurements from Fig. 3 with

published spectral irradiance measurements of

D’Antoni et al. [25].

Fig. 5. Comparison of our solar spectrometric

measurements with those of D’Antoni et al.

[25]. Note the commonality of shape of the

curves in the UV-C region of the spectrum

In Fig. 5 we provide confirmatory evidence of the

veracity of D’Antoni et al. (2007)’s

measurements, which in turn confirms our own

measurements. Independently, solar UV-C

radiation was detected at Earth’s surface using a

fundamentally different methodology, employing

a KCl:Eu2+ dosimeter [26,27]. That independent

detection of UV-C irradiance stands as evidence

that our UV-C measurements and D’Antoni et al.

(2007)’s UV-C measurements were not the result

of spurious spectrometer-generated artifacts.

The manufacturer of the spectrometer used by

D’Antoni et al., USB 4000, at the time claimed

maximum sensitivity in the range 250-400 nm

and provided no calibration data for shorter

wavelengths. The manufacturer of the

spectrometer we used, ILT950UV, claims

accuracy of ± 20% in the range 200-350 nm and

± 10% in the range 350-400 nm. After making the

2018 measurements, shown in Fig. 5, the

ILT950UV was returned to the manufacturer for

calibration where it was received within

manufacture’s tolerance specifications of original,

new equipment calibration.

Flint et al. [28] published a response to D’Antoni

et al. [25] in which they claimed the

measurements were without merit, to which

D’Antoni et al. [29] replied. Flint et al. asserted,

without supporting spectral measurements, that

ozone model calculations ruled out UV-C

reaching Earth’s surface, therefore the

spectrometer must have been defective. Based

upon the data shown in Fig. 5, clearly those

model calculations of atmospheric ozone were

wrong.

Models are not science, they are computer

programs that typically begin with a known end

result and achieve that end result by making

selective assumptions and parameter choices.

During the last four decades computer-model

calculations have burgeoned. It is far easier to

make models than to make basic scientific

discoveries, and it is the latter, not the former,

that are fundamental to scientific progress [30].

In science when a discovery is made that

contradicts current understanding, scientists

have the responsibility to attempt to refute the

discovery beyond reasonable doubt. If unable to

do so, the implications of the new discovery

should be discussed in the scientific literature.

The discovery by D’Antoni et al. (2007) of UV-C

radiation reaching Earth’s surface should have

been the subject of intense investigation by

NASA for two reasons, one scientific and one

ethical.: Despite the implication of NASA’s 2007

findings for atmospheric science and despite

their profound implications for human and

environmental health, NASA failed to conduct a

follow-up investigation. D’Antoni’s retirement

from NASA shortly after publication was not a

factor as the second author has remained

employed by NASA. This inaction begs the

question: Is NASA complicit in a covert global

activity, such as military ‘national-defense’ aerial 

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

7

jet-spraying of toxic coal fly ash that poses

serious risks to life on Earth?

Our solar spectral measurements and those of

D’Antoni et al. (2007) should be repeated

objectively and independently throughout the

world, throughout ranges of elevations and

latitudes and longitudes and atmospheric

conditions. Independent scientists can make

these measurements since the apparatus we

used is commercially available at relatively lowcost

(< US$ 10,000.).

In Fig. 6 we show our Earth surface solar

spectral irradiance data from Fig. 3 compared

with LISIRD satellite-derived solar spectral

irradiance at the top of the atmosphere [31],

indicated by the green curve for each of the two

dates which are coincident. With satellite-data

sets such as this it is difficult to know whether the

data is raw or altered based upon models or

assumptions. Clearly, there is a problem when

the measured ground-level solar UV-C irradiance

exceeds that at the top-of-atmosphere.

Fig. 6. Comparison of our UV solar spectral

irradiance with NASA’s LISIRD satellitederived

solar spectral irradiance at the top of

the atmosphere [31]

The consensus-approved, model-driven solar

irradiance storyline is badly flawed with regard to

ozone viability and perceived threats to ozone

depletion. UV-C and all of UV-B radiation reach

Earth’s surface where they pose potentially

serious environmental and human health

problems. The Montreal Protocol prohibition of

CFCs does not begin to address the lifethreatening

problems posed by other sources of

ozone-destroying chemicals. Table 1 shows the

range of halogen compositions of coal fly ash

(CFA). Covert geoengineering that jet-sprays

massive quantities of ultra-fine CFA places vast

amounts of chlorine, bromine, fluorine and iodine

into the atmosphere all of which can deplete

ozone. Potentially other substances in CFA

aerosols, including nano-particulates, might

adversely affect atmospheric ozone.

Ultraviolet radiation is the most harmful and

genotoxic component of the solar radiation

spectrum. The mutagenicity and lethal action of

sunlight exhibit two maxima, both in the UV

region of the spectrum. This is because DNA

bases can directly absorb incident UV photons of

certain wavelengths. Solar radiation can give

rise to cellular DNA damage by either (1) direct

excitation of DNA (UV-B and UV-C) or (2)

indirect mechanisms that involve excitation of

other cellular chromophobes acting as

endogenous photosensitizers (UV-A) [33]. The

direct excitation of DNA generates predominantly

cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers and

photoproducts, which are of principal importance

for the cytotoxic, mutagenic, and carcinogenic

effects of short-wave UV radiation (UV-B and

UV-C) [34]. Some of the most hazardous UV

radiations have wavelengths between 240 and

300 nm. In this range, the wavelength with the

minimum TLV (threshold limit value), or most

hazardous, is around 270 nm [35].

UV-B radiation is a global stressor with

potentially far-reaching ecological impacts. A

meta-analysis of UV radiation on marine and

freshwater organisms found large negative (but

variable) effects of UV-B on survival and growth

of organisms that crossed life histories, trophic

groups, habitats, and life history stages [36]. In

phytoplankton and zooplankton, increased levels

of UV-B can affect photosynthesis, decrease

growth and metabolic rates, impair nitrogen

assimilation, impair motility, and bleach

photopigments [37]. Extreme UV-B radiation is

damaging to coral reef communities and

associated with coral bleaching processes [38].

Corals accidentally exposed to UV-C showed

gastrodermal cell death and necrosis resulting in

the release of intracellular zoo-xanthellae into the

gastrovascular canals and water column, likely

resulting in a bleaching effect [39].

Enhanced UV-B radiation reduces genome

stability in plants [40]. Enhanced UV radiation

affects trees by direct action and modification of

their biological/chemical environment (Fig. 7). A

recent study documents that high UV-B intensity

leads to defective pollen development in conifers

and decreased reproductive success or even

sterilization [41].

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

8

Table 1. Range of halogen element compositions of CFA [32]

Chlorine

µg/g

Bromine

µg/g

Fluorine

µg/g

Iodine

µg/g

13 – 25,000 0.3 – 670 0.4 – 624 0.1 – 200

Fig. 7. July 21, 2017 photo of tree in New York, NY (USA) showing UV burn and concomitant

fungal growth on sun-exposed side

The toxicity of UV-C (100-280 nm) is well known.

UV-C irradiation has lethal effects on insects and

microorganisms [42,43]. UV-C radiation induces

programmed cell death, or apoptosis, in plant

cells [44]. In a controlled study, numerous

ultrastructural changes and associated cell

damage were shown in mole rat kidney tissue

cells irradiated with artificially produced UV-C

radiation [45]. Medical students accidentally

exposed for 90 minutes to UV-C radiation from a

germicidal lamp all suffered reversible

photokeratitis, and skin damage to the face,

scalp, and neck [46].

4. CONCLUSION

Measurement of solar irradiance spectra in the

range 200-400 nm demonstrates conclusively

that all wavelengths in that spectral range reach

Earth’s surface, contrary to the widespread

perception that all UV-C and the majority of UV-B

never reaches the surface. We confirm the 2007 

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

9

surface UV-C measurements of D’Antoni et al.

(2007) that were disputed, based on faulty

computer model calculations of atmospheric

ozone, and thereafter ignored by the geoscience

community. The veracity of D’Antoni et al.

(2007)’s data call into question the validity of

atmospheric ozone models. Further, we call into

question the simplistic supposition of the

Montreal Protocol that CFCs are the primary

cause of ozone depletion, and point to the very

heavy burden of halogens introduced into the

atmosphere by ongoing jet-sprayed coal-fly-ash

geoengineering. We demonstrate that LISIRD

solar spectra irradiance at the top of the

atmosphere is badly flawed with some regions of

the spectrum being less intense than measured

at Earth’s surface. That calls into question any

calculations made utilizing LISIRD data. We

provided introductory information on the

devastating effects of UV-B and UV-C on

humans, phytoplankton, coral, insects and

plants. These will be discussed in greater detail

in subsequent articles.

AUTHORS’ ETHICAL STATEMENT

The authors hold that technical, scientific,

medical, and public health representations made

in the scientific literature in general, including this

particular journal, should be and are truthful and

accurate to the greatest extent possible, and

should serve to the highest degree possible to

protect the health and well-being of humanity and

Earth’s natural environment.

ETHICAL APPROVAL

As per institutional requirements ethical approval

has been collected and preserved by the

authors.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Dr. Hector L. D’Antoni for sharing the

raw data from his important 2007 report on

measurement of solar UV-C radiation at Earth’s

surface. We are grateful to Environmental

Voices and its donors for providing funds for

laboratory and publication fees. We thank

GeoengineeringWatch for locating an individual

whose gift, along with other contributions, in part

made possible the UV-C detection system.

COMPETING INTERESTS

Authors have declared that no competing

interests exist.

REFERENCES

1. Shepherd J, Caldeira K, Cox P, Haigh J,

Keith D, Launder B, et al. Geoengineering

the Climate: Science, Governance and

Uncertainty 2009. Royal Society: London.

2. Available:http://www.nuclearplanet.com/19

58evidence.pdf

(Accessed March 10, 2018)

3. Shearer C, West M, Caldeira K, Davis SJ.

Quantifying expert consensus against the

existence of a secret large-scale

atmospheric spraying program. Environ

Res Lett. 2016;11(8):p. 084011.

4. Tingley D, Wagner G. Solar

geoengineering and the chemtrails

conspiracy on social media. Palgrave

Communications. 2017;3(1):12.

5. Herndon JM. An open letter to members of

AGU, EGU, and IPCC alleging promotion

of fake science at the expense of human

and environmental health and comments

on AGU draft geoengineering position

statement. New Concepts in Global

Tectonics Journal. 2017;5(3):413-6.

6. Available:http://wwwnuclearplanetcom/web

sites.pdf

(Accessed March 10, 2018)

7. Herndon JM. Aluminum poisoning of

humanity and Earth's biota by clandestine

geoengineering activity: Implications for

India. Curr Sci. 2015;108(12):2173-7.

8. Herndon JM. Obtaining evidence of coal fly

ash content in weather modification

(geoengineering) through analyses of postaerosol

spraying rainwater and solid

substances. Ind J Sci Res and Tech. 2016;

4(1):30-6.

9. Herndon JM. Adverse agricultural

consequences of weather modification.

AGRIVITA Journal of Agricultural Science.

2016;38(3):213-21.

10. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Further

evidence of coal fly ash utilization in

tropospheric geoengineering: Implications

on human and environmental health. J

Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2017;9(1):

1-8.

11. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Contamination

of the biosphere with mercury: Another

potential consequence of on-going climate

manipulation using aerosolized coal fly ash

J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2017;13(1):

1-11.

12. Yao Z, Ji X, Sarker P, Tang J, Ge L, Xia M,

et al. A comprehensive review on the 

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

10

applications of coal fly ash. Earth-Science

Reviews. 2015;141:105-21.

13. Izquierdo M, Querol X. Leaching behavior

of elements from coal combustion fly ash:

An overview. Int J Coal Geol. 2012;94:54-

66.

14. Chen Y, Shah N, Huggins F, Huffman G,

Dozier A. Characterization of ultrafine coal

fly ash particles by energy filtered TEM.

Journal of Microscopy. 2005;217(3):225-

34.

15. Parker E. Interaction of the solar wind with

the geomagnetic field. The Physics of

Fluids. 1958;1(3):171-87.

16. Frederick J, Snell H, Haywood E. Solar

ultraviolet radiation at the earth's surface.

Photochemistry and Photobiology. 1989;

50(4):443-50.

17. Pinedo-Vega JL, Ríos-Martínez C,

Navarro-Solís DJ, Dávila-Rangel JI,

Mireles-García F, Saucedo-Anaya SA, et

al. Attenuation of UV-C Solar Radiation as

a Function of Altitude (0≤ z≤ 100 km):

Rayleigh Diffusion and Photo Dissociation

of O2 Influence. Atmospheric and Climate

Sciences. 2017;7(04):540.

18. Wilson BD, Moon S, Armstrong F.

Comprehensive review of ultraviolet

radiation and the current status on

sunscreens. The Journal of clinical and

aesthetic dermatology. 2012;5(9):18.

19. Seebode C, Lehmann J, Emmert S.

Photocarcinogenesis and skin cancer

prevention strategies. Anticancer research.

2016;36(3):1371-8.

20. Stapleton AE. Ultraviolet radiation and

plants: Burning questions. The Plant Cell.

1992;4(11):1353.

21. Available:https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyout

h/skincancer/pdf/qa.pdf

22. Available:http://www.who.int/uv/faq/whatisu

v/en/index2.html

23. Diffey BL. Sources and measurement of

ultraviolet radiation. Methods. 2002;28(1):

4-13.

24. Herndon JM. Corruption of Science in

America. The Dot Connector; 2011.

Available:http://www.nuclearplanet.com/cor

ruption.pdf

25. D'Antoni H, Rothschild L, Schultz C,

Burgess S, Skiles J. Extreme

environments in the forests of Ushuaia,

Argentina. Geophysical Research Letters.

2007;34(22).

26. Córdoba C, Munoz J, Cachorro V, de

Carcer IA, Cussó F, Jaque F. The

detection of solar ultraviolet-C radiation

using KCl:Eu2+ thermoluminescence

dosemeters. Journal of Physics D: Applied

Physics. 1997;30(21):3024.

27. de Cárcer IA, Dántoni H, Barboza-Flores

M, Correcher V, Jaque F. KCl: Eu2+

as a solar UV-C radiation dosimeter.

Optically stimulated luminescence and

thermoluminescence analyses. Journal of

Rare Earths. 2009;27(4):579-83.

28. Flint SD, Ballaré CL, Caldwell MM,

McKenzie RL. Comment on “Extreme

environments in the forests of Ushuaia,

Argentina” by Hector D'Antoni et al.

Geophysical Research Letters. 2008;

35(13).

29. D'Antoni HL, Rothschild LJ, Skiles J. Reply

to comment by Stephan D. Flint et al.

on “Extreme environments in the forests

of Ushuaia, Argentina”. Geophysical

Research Letters. 2008;35(13).

30. Herndon JM. Geodynamic Basis of Heat

Transport in the Earth. Curr Sci. 2011;

101(11):1440-50.

31. LISIRD Data Systems Group, 2017, LASP

Interactive Solar Irradiance Dataset,

Available:http://lasp.colorado.edu/lisird/lya/

32. NRC. Trace-element Geochemistry of Coal

Resource Development Related to

Environmental Quality and Health: National

Academy Press; 1980.

33. Ravanat JL, Douki T, Cadet J. Direct and

indirect effects of UV radiation on DNA and

its components. Journal of Photochemistry

and Photobiology B: Biology. 2001;63(1):

88-102.

34. Kielbassa C, Roza L, Epe B. Wavelength

dependence of oxidative DNA damage

induced by UV and visible light.

Carcinogenesis. 1997;18(4):811-6.

35. Available:http://www2.lbl.gov/ehs/safety/nir

/ultraviolet_radiation.shtml

36. Bancroft BA, Baker NJ, Blaustein AR.

Effects of UVB radiation on marine and

freshwater organisms: A synthesis through

meta‐analysis. Ecology Letters. 2007;

10(4):332-45.

37. El‐Sayed SZ, Van Dijken GL,

Gonzalez‐Rodas G. Effects of ultraviolet

radiation on marine ecosystems.

International Journal of Environmental

Studies. 1996;51(3):199-216.

38. Lyons M, Aas P, Pakulski J, Van

Waasbergen L, Miller RV, Mitchell D, et al.

DNA damage induced by ultraviolet

radiation in coral-reef microbial

communities. Marine Biology. 1998;130(3):

537-43.

Herndon et al.; JGEESI, 14(2): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JGEESI.40245

11

39. Basti D, Bricknell I, Beane D, Bouchard D.

Recovery from a near-lethal exposure to

ultraviolet-C radiation in a scleractinian

coral. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology.

2009;101(1):43-8.

40. Ries G, Heller W, Puchta H, Sandermann

H, Seidlitz HK, Hohn B. Elevated UV-B

radiation reduces genome stability in

plants. Nature. 2000;406(6791):98.

41. Benca JP, Duijnstee IA, Looy CV. UV-B–

induced forest sterility: Implications of

ozone shield failure in Earth’s largest

extinction. Science Advances. 2018;4(2):

e1700618.

42. Hori M, Shibuya K, Sato M, Saito Y. Lethal

effects of short-wavelength visible light on

insects. Scientific Reports. 2014;4:7383.

43. Reed NG. The history of ultraviolet

germicidal irradiation for air disinfection.

Public health reports. 2010;125(1):15-27.

44. Danon A, Gallois P. UV‐C radiation

induces apoptotic‐like changes in

Arabidopsis thaliana. FEBS Letters. 1998;

437(1-2):131-6.

45. Türker H, Yel M. Effects of ultraviolet

radiation on mole rats kidney: A

histopathologic and ultrastructural study.

Journal of Radiation Research and Applied

Sciences. 2014;7(2):182-7.

46. Trevisan A, Piovesan S, Leonardi A,

Bertocco M, Nicolosi P, Pelizzo MG, et al.

Unusual High Exposure to Ultraviolet‐C

Radiation. Photochemistry and

Photobiology. 2006;82(4):1077-9.

_________________________________________________________________________________ © 2018 Herndon et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:

The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:

http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history/23870