This isn’t a business. It’s a blog.
GLC is where I explore ideas at the intersection of digital art, organic chemistry, design, sustainability, and curiosity. It’s a space for thinking out loud, chasing insights, and asking better questions — especially about how we use the materials that shape our world.
You’ll find posts on:
Visual art, digital art, and design
Organic and green chemistry (explained for non-chemists)
Biomaterials and sustainable alternatives
The chemistry of everyday things — and how they could be better
Experiments with AI tools, philosophy, and scientific learning
This is a solo project, rooted in self-study, creative thinking, and a belief that you don’t need a lab coat to care about the chemistry around you.
I’m Gavin Lottering — a designer, communicator, and lifelong learner. GLC has evolved many times, but right now, it’s focused on one goal: exploring how smarter materials and cleaner chemistry can help us build a better future.
Thanks for stopping by. Dig in, read something, and if you're curious — stay curious.
I started using a GPT I tuned to generate some self-portraits. For these, I imagined what would be a good casting choice for me, if I were an actor.
That one has a really strong “weathered knight at prayer before battle” energy.
😂 That one came out hard.
For years, many people assumed the destruction of the ozone layer must involve incredibly complicated chemistry. After all, how could something as stable and boring as a refrigerant threaten the entire planet?
The surprising truth is this:the core chemistry is very simple — almost disappointingly so. The danger comes not from complexity, but from persistence.
Let’s unpack what actually happens.
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were once considered ideal industrial chemicals. They didn’t burn. They didn’t react. They didn’t break down.
That stability is exactly why they became a problem.
CFC molecules released at Earth’s surface drift upward for years, eventually reaching the stratosphere. There, intense ultraviolet (UV) radiation does something the lower atmosphere cannot: it breaks the molecule apart.
When that happens, a chlorine radical is released.
That single event changes everything.
Once free, a chlorine radical reacts almost instantly with ozone (O₃):
Ozone is destroyed
A new radical (chlorine monoxide) is formed
That new radical then reacts with atomic oxygen, producing:
Ordinary oxygen (O₂)
The original chlorine radical, unchanged
This is the key insight.
The chlorine atom is not consumed. It behaves like a catalyst, repeating the same two-step loop again and again. One chlorine atom can destroy tens of thousands of ozone molecules over its lifetime.
That’s why a relatively small amount of CFCs caused such a large problem.
At this point, an obvious question arises:
If chlorine keeps regenerating, why didn’t all the ozone disappear?
The answer is that the cycle doesn’t end because it “runs out of ozone.”It ends because chlorine eventually gets tied up.
Over time, chlorine radicals react with other molecules and form reservoir compounds — stable chemicals that do not destroy ozone. Two important examples are:
Hydrogen chloride (HCl)
Chlorine nitrate (ClONO₂)
In these forms, chlorine is essentially neutralized. It’s still present, but no longer dangerous.
Even more importantly, these stable molecules are eventually transported downward and removed from the atmosphere entirely by rain and snow. That is the true end of the cycle.
The catch is that all of this happens very slowly.
CFCs remain in the atmosphere for decades. Chlorine radicals may remain active for years before being locked away. Atmospheric circulation operates on global timescales.
This is why ozone depletion didn’t stop overnight when CFC use was reduced — and why ozone recovery takes decades rather than months.
The chemistry was fast.The cleanup is slow.
The story of ozone depletion teaches an important scientific lesson:
Environmental damage doesn’t require complex chemistry — just a simple reaction that refuses to stop.
A short catalytic cycle, combined with long atmospheric lifetimes, was enough to thin a planetary shield that protects life from harmful UV radiation.
It’s a powerful reminder that small molecular details can have global consequences.
The ozone crisis wasn’t caused by exotic reactions or runaway feedback loops. It was caused by one elegant, repeatable chemical cycle — and the time it takes nature to shut that cycle down.
If you’d like, I can:
Adapt this post for a younger audience
Add figures and reaction boxes for a science blog
Expand it into a climate-chemistry series post
Once the chemistry behind ozone depletion became undeniable, the world did something rare: it acted quickly and collectively.
In 1987, governments adopted the Montreal Protocol, a global agreement to phase out CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances. What makes this treaty remarkable is not just that it exists — but that it worked.
The Montreal Protocol wasn’t based on trust alone. It included real enforcement mechanisms, especially for an environmental treaty.
Mandatory reporting of production and consumption
Trade bans against non-compliant countries
Technical inspections and monitoring
Financial and technical support tied to compliance
When illegal CFC production has been detected (including well-documented cases decades later), responses have included:
International investigations
Trade pressure
Rapid diplomatic intervention
Accelerated phase-out schedules
The key insight was this: ozone depletion is global, so enforcement had to be global too.
Banning CFCs didn’t mean refrigeration, air conditioning, or insulation could simply disappear. Chemists had to invent new molecules that could do the same jobs without destroying ozone.
This led to a clear progression:
Fewer chlorine atoms
Shorter atmospheric lifetimes
Lower ozone impact, but not zero
Used as transitional replacements.
No chlorine at all
Ozone-safe
Still potent greenhouse gases
Hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs)
Natural refrigerants (CO₂, ammonia, hydrocarbons)
Designed for low ozone impact and low climate forcing
This is a rare example of policy directly driving molecular design. Entire classes of chemicals exist today because a treaty demanded them.
One twist the original protocol didn’t fully anticipate is that many ozone-safe replacements turned out to be strong greenhouse gases.
That realization led to later amendments, including agreements to limit high-global-warming refrigerants. In other words, the ozone story became a climate story — showing how atmospheric chemistry problems rarely exist in isolation.
The Montreal Protocol is often cited as the most successful environmental treaty ever created — not because it was perfect, but because it was adaptive.
Science identified the problem
Policy responded decisively
Chemistry innovated under constraint
Enforcement closed loopholes
Adjustments were made as new risks appeared
It’s a case study in how molecular-scale understanding can guide planetary-scale decisions.
The ozone crisis wasn’t solved by banning “bad chemicals.” It was solved by understanding how molecules behave, then redesigning society’s chemistry around that knowledge — and enforcing the result.
I spend a lot of time with my 5 -year-old daughter (Audrie) teaching her about art. My parents were art teachers, so it runs in my family. She took a liking to visual art by herself and eventually I began to encourage it too. — Especially after she said, "Drawing is my favourite thing to do."
What follows are some recent drawings she did and my renderings of them. I had seen memes years ago where parents re-drew their kids drawings as if they were real. Being short on time I tried using Dall-E, vai ChatGPT to render them in full fidelity. This was also useful in the sense of seeing it immediately or to add new elements.
Prompt: Paint these dinosaurs staying true to the childlike character of them.
Prompt: Draw them again and draw a jungle in the background.
ChatGPT: Here you go — this version keeps the exact quirky silhouettes and markings from the child’s drawing, but translates them into a photographic, jungle-realist style 🌿🦖
Faithful anatomy: The curled tail, forked hands, stacked bodies, and spiky backs all match the original drawing’s intent rather than “correcting” it.
Photographic texture: Pebbly reptile skin, soft subsurface lighting, and natural shadows make them feel like they were actually photographed in a rainforest.
Jungle integration: Ferns, depth-of-field blur, and filtered sunlight ground the characters in a believable environment without overpowering them.
Childlike charm preserved: Even with realism, the faces keep their simple V-shaped noses and expressive eyes—so it still feels like their dinosaurs, just grown up.
Prompt: Draw them one more time, but put a volcano in the background.
Prompt: Make this one. It's a bunch of pirate faces. Add a background.
ChatGPT: Done! 🏴☠️🐊
I turned the pirate-face sketch into a cinematic pirate crew scene while keeping the original’s playful, expressive faces:
Each face becomes its own pirate — eye patches, bandanas, hats, earrings — matching the quirky expressions from the drawing
Photographic realism in skin texture, lighting, and materials, but still clearly characters, not scary realism
Background: a wooden pirate ship at sea during golden hour, skull flags flying, another ship on the horizon for story depth
Mood: adventurous and fun, like a kids’ pirate book leveled up into a movie still
Prompt: Redraw this one in a realistic style.
ChatGPT: All set! 🎨🦖
I reimagined the drawing as a realistic prehistoric scene, while still honoring the ideas in the original sketch:
The central structure became a stone-and-thatch hut with a smoking chimney, matching the boxy building shape from the drawing
The characters were translated into realistic dinosaur creatures, keeping their bold silhouettes, horns, and expressive faces
Environment: lush jungle foliage, palm trees, misty hills, and warm atmospheric lighting to give it a believable, cinematic feel
Color continuity: the orange tones from the marker drawing carry through into the dinosaurs’ scale patterns
Prompt: Redraw this and deviate from the original by adding insects
ChatGPT: I’ve redrawn it as a realistic watercolor-style scene while intentionally branching away from the original by introducing insects 🐞🐝🦋🦟
Original paint splashes become a textured, organic background—still loose and expressive, but more intentional
Insects added as focal points: a ladybug, bee, moth, and dragonfly, each realistically rendered with fine detail
Movement & life: wings, fuzz, reflections, and shadows give the piece a sense of ecosystem and motion
Balance of chaos and realism: the randomness of the paint is preserved, but the insects anchor the composition
This kind of transformation is great for inspiring kids:
It shows how abstract marks can turn into real things
Encourages imagination: “What lives in this splash?”
Bridges playful mess → finished artwork
Prompt: Re-draw this painting of germs, adding some detail.
Prompt: Redraw this but deviate from the original by adding childlike germs to the composition.
Prompt: Add the germs on top of this image.
Prompt: Redraw this one. Add color.
ChatGPT:
Here’s a colorful redraw that keeps the spirit and shapes of the original sketch, but brings it to life with playful color 🎨✨
Preserved the childlike proportions — long legs, simple bodies, expressive heads
Added bright, friendly colors to clearly separate the two characters
Turned the starburst shapes into a magical wand moment ✨
Soft background (sky and grass) so the characters stay the focus
Crayon / watercolor texture so it still feels like a kid’s drawing, not overly polished
Prompt: Redraw this one as an angry lady
Prompt: Now draw this blue one as an angry lady.
Prompt: Draw another angry lady
Prompt: Based on these drawings. Are a new drawing to inspire a kid to draw. Make it like a drawing made with markers on white paper.
Prompt: Ok now redraw this as two girls in senior kindergarten.
You might wonder, what's up with the angry images? Well, it's something she is exploring. Sometimes it helps to get things out on paper. She's not an angry girl, but not everyone in life is as cute as she is. As she saw these she tried to pretend she was angry as well IRL, but it just looked cute.