I think the chlorocarbon are mainly responsible for the ozone destruction, not the fluorocarbon, but anyway they are destroyed in the upper atmosphere and need a constant reintroduction. The point here is to use them as greenhouse gaz to warm the planet. A mixture of gaz such as the "Russel cocktail" (Red/Blue/Green Mars of Kim Stanley Robinson) like NH3, CO2, H20 vapor etc would be more efficient but is not readily vailable on Mars: CO2 and H20 are present but frozen and they need to be released by....heating them first. So its a vicious circle. On the other side, producing in situ a powerful greenhouse gaz like CF4 released in the martian atmosphere, is easyer, providing a source of fluor and carbon, this is why I associate here a carbon rich chondrous meteor and a fluorite concentration. A very little % of those flurocarbon gaz in the atmosphere would ignite the initial warming and trigger a kind of chain reaction of global warming by releasing the frozen CO2 first, then the H20 vapor etc. Any chemist here to correct me or to suggest some reaction protocol ? PS: too bad for the Reds.

The only problem with Chlorofluorocarbons, is that they break down slowly, and will have an effect for decades- on earth we've cut their use dramatically, but,the ones already in the atmosphere are still affecting it. Another thing, often not taken into account, are the short-term Greenhouse gases, like methane. Which have a large effect, and are extremely difficult to reduce. Methane is a particular problem, as it reacts with N3 (I think) and forms a potent Greenhouse Gas- and methane is a natural byproduct of digestion! (So, unless we stop cows/sheep etc, eating, how do we control it?)

Very nice Work !! dickbill my ranking is Exellent :-)

I have read of reseachers proposing that we COULD use chloroflourocarbons to "thicken up" the atmosphere in preparation for the "greening" of Mars.