Visit the Cellar!

The Cellar Image of the Day is just a section of a larger web community: bright folks talking about everything. The Cellar is the original coffeeshop with no coffee and no shop. Founded in 1990, The Cellar is one of the oldest communities on the net. Join us at the table if you like!

 
What's IotD?

The interesting, amazing, or mind-boggling images of our days.

IotD Stuff

ARCHIVES - over 13 years of IotD!
About IotD
RSS2
XML

Permalink Latest Image

Dec 11th, 2017: Halszka

Recent Images

Dec 10th, 2017: Tuturumuri School
Dec 9th, 2017: Stretchers
Dec 8th, 2017: Wounded Warrior
Dec 7th, 2017: Infamy
Dec 6th, 2017: MAREA
Dec 4th, 2017: Sad Reindeer
Dec 2nd, 2017: Biker Chicks

The CELLAR Tip Mug
Some folks who have noticed IotD

Neatorama
Worth1000
Mental Floss
Boing Boing
Switched
W3streams
GruntDoc's Blog
No Quarters
Making Light
darrenbarefoot.com
GromBlog
b3ta
Church of the Whale Penis
UniqueDaily.com
Sailor Coruscant
Projectionist

Link to us and we will try to find you after many months!

Common image haunts

Astro Pic of the Day
Earth Sci Pic of the Day
We Make Money Not Art
Spluch
ochevidec.net
Strange New Products
Geisha Asobi Blog
Cute animals blog (in Russian)
20minutos.es
Yahoo Most Emailed

Please avoid copyrighted images (or get permission) when posting!

Advertising

Philadelphia Pawn Shop
The best real estate agent in Montgomery County
The best T.38 Fax provider
Epps Beverages and Beer, Limerick, PA
Sal's Pizza, Elkins Park
Burholme Auto Body, Philadelphia
Coles Tobacco, Pottstown
ERM Auto Service, Glenside
Glenside Collision
Moorehead Catering, Trappe
Salon 153, Bala
Dominicks Auto Body, Phoenixville

   xoxoxoBruce  Thursday Jun 12 12:56 AM

June 12, 2008: Algae

From boston.com
A group of photographs to examine the state of our environment, on World Environment Day.


Quote:
Small fishing boats tied to the banks of the Chaohu lake, where a pollution-linked algae bloom has reappeared, in Hefei, eastern China's Anhui province on June 4, 2008. Algae blooms are common on many Chinese freshwater lakes and are chiefly caused by untreated sewage containing high concentrations of nitrogen, a main ingredient in detergents and fertilisers, as more than 70 percent of China's waterways and 90 percent of its underground water have been contaminated by pollution. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
It looks like they need a lot of black balls.


Imigo Jones  Thursday Jun 12 01:39 AM

C'mon, the Irish-Chinese have been doing this for years on St. Pan-rice Day.



Chengchow: Turning the Huang He (Yellow River) qīng



stevecrm  Thursday Jun 12 02:38 AM

After yesterdays thread about the black balls etc, the first picture in this thread is the same colour as my pool

Maybe they need some black balls out there



stevecrm  Thursday Jun 12 02:52 AM

Hands up who has a diesel vehicle??

How about bio-diesel produced from Algae

http://www.solixbiofuels.com/html/home.html



SPUCK  Thursday Jun 12 05:51 AM

Me! Me! I have two!

Hey wait a minute. Does this mean the Chinese will have all the algae diesel too??



touchnova  Thursday Jun 12 07:31 AM

Just Lubbly

...oh, but they're a developing nation, so it doesn't matter that they've polluted 90% of their underground water sources. Let's complain about those people in Minneapolis who idle for longer than 3 minutes...cause we're developed and all.



TheMercenary  Thursday Jun 12 08:20 AM

Ahhhhh.... China. The land of unregulated growth and destruction of their environment as they beg us to control green house gas while they build a new coal fired plant each week. Not surprising.



spudcon  Thursday Jun 12 10:55 AM

Green living gone wild.



glatt  Thursday Jun 12 10:58 AM

It's actually the exact opposite of green living.



Clodfobble  Thursday Jun 12 05:56 PM

That particular green is very much alive.



sweetwater  Thursday Jun 12 07:44 PM

I thought Green Lake was in Seattle.



footfootfoot  Thursday Jun 12 09:31 PM

"Chaohu Lake... IS PEOPLE!!!



Gravdigr  Friday Jun 13 01:55 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by footfootfoot View Post
"Chaohu Lake... IS PEOPLE!!!
Big Soylent ha-has to you sir...


xoxoxoBruce  Friday Jun 13 03:55 PM

China may have the last laugh.

Quote:
As Boeing prepares for more biofuel test flights, the airframer is focusing its efforts on accelerating the development of algae-based energy sources. The rapidly growing raw material could potentially be converted into large amounts of fuel without taking away from food supplies. Algae does not reuire freshwater to thrive.
Boeing is focused on “next generation” alternatives fuels, not palm oil or ethanol-based fuels, as a company spokesman explains,“We saw a spike in rice prices. Those are things we don’t want to compete with.”

“[Algae] provides a lot of the good qualities that are needed to ensure that aviation biofuel needs are met in a sustainable way,” says Darrin Morgan, who oversees strategy development and execution for Boeing’s sustainable biofuels program. Morgan and Boeing director of environmental strategy Billy Glover will co-chair a steering committee of the Algal Biomass Organization, a nonprofit that promotes and advocates for the development of commercially viable transportation fuels.

In order to achieve that viability, Algae-based fuels need a supply chain Morgan says, adding such fuels are in the early stages of development. The organization aims to accelerate the development of such power sources. Having successfully completed its first part-biofuel powered flight, Virgin Atlantic is hoping a trial can be performed using algae as a biofuel source next year.

Boeing and Virgin Atlantic used a 20% mix composed of babassu oil and coconut oil on one of the carrier’s GE CF6-powered Boeing 747-400s on the test performed earlier this year. In the meantime, Jatropha-sourced biofuel will power the next Boeing test flight in partnership with Rolls-Royce. One RB211 engine will use the alternative fuel during an Air New Zealand Boeing 747-400 flight in the fourth quarter. Continental Airlines has not identified what type of fuel it will use in its test flight. In partnership with Boeing and GE Aviation, the demonstration will be in the first half of 2009 using a next-generation 737 with CFM International CFM56-7B engines.

Aside from proving that aircraft can run on biofuel, the test flight helped create demand from within the fuel supply chain, spurring the creation of new fuel types, Morgan says. “The fuel used in the [test] flight came about because we asked,” he says.



spudcon  Friday Jun 13 08:41 PM

So, next we'll be buying pollution products from China to fuel our economy. I'm assuming people in this country won't allow us to drill for our own pollution products?



newtimer  Saturday Jun 14 01:33 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
Ahhhhh.... China. The land of unregulated growth and destruction of their environment as they beg us to control green house gas while they build a new coal fired plant each week. Not surprising.
...and where the natives insist on cranking up their air-conditioners in the summer, while all the windows in the house are open for "fresh" air. But if we point out the lack of logic, then we're criticised for being intolerant of another culture and pushing our western views on a poor, developing nation!


SPUCK  Saturday Jun 14 05:25 AM

Great now even the airliners will smell like french fries..



Imigo Jones  Sunday Jun 15 02:22 PM

Qīng He

Happy Father's Day!
Over the weekend I watched The Fugitive with Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones. Afterwards we went downtown and had a beer.

I mean I watched the movie starring them. Part of the movie's action takes place in downtown Chicago on St. Patrick's Day , and a short establishing shot was very similar to this pic I posted the other day on page 1:

.

Right: Pic to fill space to right of pic under discussion

The river-dyeing boat was making the exact same curlicue, probably in front of the same bridge. Son of a gun--I'm going to fast-forward the tape and find that shot again. . . .

1. The main difference is that in the movie the river is already very green, so you don't totally get that it was the guys in the boat dyeing it and mixing it.

2. Also, in the pic the boat is stationary in the frame, whereas in the movie it is in motion.

3. In the pic the boat is just east of the State Street Bridge (we're looking west). In the movie the boat is just east of the Dearborn Avenue Bridge, the next bridge west in the pic.

4. The still camera is way up, plus over a block away from the boat, probably shooting out a window in the 360 N. Michigan Building (SW corner of Wacker & Michigan; the building lines up with the river like this because of the northward bend in the river starting in the bottom left of the pic). The movie camera is right down on the State Street Bridge, less than a block away from the boat, and toward the bridge's north end (in the pic this is the nearest bridge, and toward that bridgetender's "house" at right, between us and Marina City).

5. Both shots are toward the west, but the movie shot starts by looking SW toward Dearborn & Wacker, then pans right, following the boat, to look almost straight W.

6. The boats are making almost the exact same curlicue, but in the movie the boat swings out farther to the right (north). Since the camera is near the N end of the State Street Bridge, it still doesn't pan right enough to show any buildings on the north bank of the river (notably in pic, Marina City).

7. While panning right, the movie camera also tilts up a bit, so the end of the movie shot and the pic both show the warehouses and smokestacks in the distance, past Wolf Point (where the North and South Branches of the Chicago River join to form the Main Stem).

8. The Fugitive was released in 1993. The pic isn't too new, either, because this Wolf Point vista (7) is now horribly blocked off by the blah, 38-story Riverbend Condominiums (built 2000-2002). It doesn't look like the Smith & Wollensky restaurant has been plopped down onto the Marina City plaza yet (mid-'90s?), either.



Been doing it since 1962; don't know when they started doing it at Chengchow (Zhčngzhōu).

To read all about dyeing the river and see three St. Paddy's Days' worth of pics, plus stuff on other Irish traditions in Chicago, this woman with a Chicago architecture blog is the hostess with the mostes':
http://lynnbecker.com/repeat/stpat/stpat.htm
http://lynnbecker.com/repeat/stpat/08stpat.htm



Imigo Jones  Sunday Jun 15 02:33 PM

You are correct, sirs

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary
Ahhhhh.... China. The land of unregulated growth and destruction of their environment as they beg us to control green house gas while they build a new coal fired plant each week. Not surprising.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtimer
...and where the natives insist on cranking up their air-conditioners in the summer, while all the windows in the house are open for "fresh" air.
Excerpts from a NY Times article (hence the font):

China Increases Lead as Biggest Carbon Dioxide Emitter
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
Published: June 14, 2008


China has clearly overtaken the United States as the world’s leading emitter of carbon dioxide, the main heat-trapping gas, a new study has found, its emissions increasing 8 percent in 2007. The Chinese increase accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the year’s global greenhouse gas emissions, the study found.

The report, released Friday by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, found that in 2007 China’s emissions were 14 percent higher than those of the United States. In the previous year’s annual study, the researchers found for the first time that China had become the world’s leading emitter, with carbon emissions 7 percent higher by volume than the United States in 2006. . . .

China is heavily dependent on coal and has seen its most rapid growth in some of the world’s most heavily polluting industrial sectors: cement, aluminum and plate glass. Twenty percent of China’s emissions come from its cement kilns, essential for its construction boom and likely to be working overtime this year amid preparations for the Olympics and rebuilding after last month’s devastating earthquake. . . .



Beijing, shrouded in smog on Friday, has heavy air pollution, as does much of the rest of China. (Guang Niu/Getty Images) [Looks fun to run in.]

The United States still has a vast lead in carbon dioxide emissions per person. The average American is responsible for 19.4 tons. Average emissions per person in Russia are 11.8 tons; in the European Union, 8.6 tons; China, 5.1 tons; and India, 1.8 tons. . . .

Eighty percent of the world’s coal demand comes from China, according to the International Energy Agency.



spudcon  Sunday Jun 15 04:10 PM

snip" The United States still has a vast lead in carbon dioxide emissions per person. The average American is responsible for 19.4 tons." snip
!9.4 tons per person per year? per minute, per lifetime? Is that CO2 counting exhalation? And who's been here measuring my CO2 anyway. If I can make 19.4 tons float in the atmosphere, I don't think we have an energy crisis anymore. I think this is just more nonsense, trying to make America look bad because we succeed more than any other system out there, and have been for 200 years.



wolf  Monday Jun 16 10:50 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imigo Jones View Post
1. The main difference is that in the movie the river is already very green, so you don't totally get that it was the guys in the boat dyeing it and mixing it.
If one is from Chicago, one knows exactly what the boat in the very green river means.


Imigo Jones  Tuesday Jun 17 06:01 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by spudcon View Post
snip" The United States still has a vast lead in carbon dioxide emissions per person. The average American is responsible for 19.4 tons." snip
!9.4 tons per person per year? per minute, per lifetime? Is that CO2 counting exhalation? And who's been here measuring my CO2 anyway. If I can make 19.4 tons float in the atmosphere, I don't think we have an energy crisis anymore. I think this is just more nonsense, trying to make America look bad because we succeed more than any other system out there, and have been for 200 years.
Since the thrust of the article was on annual national totals, spudcon, it might be assumed that the per capita figures were annual, too, but that sure seems like a lot. I don't disagree that much of the world likes to do what they can "to make America look bad because we succeed," but let's see what the numbers seem to mean:
19.4 tons/year = 38,800 pounds / 365.25 days = 106.23 pounds/day

Since this is carbon dioxide, not pounds of solid coal equivalent or something, it seems preposterously high. Let's see what the figures would mean if applied to an 80-year lifetime:
19.4 tons / lifetime = 38,800 pounds / 80 years = 485 pounds/year = 1.33 pounds/day

That seems more like it--good catch, spudcon. (I wanted to give you a gold star, but the closest thing in the smiley list is the Vietnamese flag.)



It's be nice if the Times appended a clarification to the online article sometime soon.

I sure wouldn't doubt, though, that relative to the other nations listed, the U.S. per cap average is really, really high, as suggested by the numbers, lifetime or whatever. Much of this production represents an amazing benefit to the whole world, and the rest of the world doesn't seem to say, "I love you," enough. They might be grudgingly thinking it every now and then, like when another pop tart springs out into the world from Disney like Athena from the head of Zeus.



A star is born--from the minds of Imagineers--to benefit an impressed mankind.

Still, it'd be nice to hear those three little words every now and then.

Maybe they do try to tell us, but our "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" chant drowns out their tender, attractively accented whispers. One has to admit, in any case, that a lot of American production and consumption is a colossal, screeching waste of, of, everything. I hate to see a jillion rampantly materialistic Chinese surpassing that as a whole, or start to approach it per capita.


HungLikeJesus  Tuesday Jun 17 06:29 PM

That data seems to be tons/person/year.

Here's CO2 emissions data for about 40 countries for 2002, along with GNP per capita.




spudcon  Tuesday Jun 17 09:42 PM

So, HLJ, how does that graph have credibility, given what Imigo computed of 106.23 pounds per day per American. That figure will be higher yet, if you consider children too young to have access to CO2 emitting equipment. But still, even 106+lbs a day is ridiclous.



xoxoxoBruce  Tuesday Jun 17 11:48 PM

It's not what you personally produce. It's your share of all the power plant's output, your share of all the motor vehicles, trains and planes, your share of all the concrete production and construction. It adds up to nearly 20 tons per person, per year.



glatt  Wednesday Jun 18 09:45 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
your share of all the concrete production and construction.
We all know China has a lot of construction going on, but check out this graph of concrete use in 2007 by country. This is not per capita, but overall. Based on this data.


onetrack  Wednesday Jun 18 10:56 AM

I've never had it fully explained to me yet (but maybe Al Gore can produce the explanation - he does that well, with glib answers for most things that are difficult to explain) .. how Carbon Dioxide, which is a heavier-than-air gas .. can climb to sufficient stratospheric heights, and in sufficient quantities, to act as a global warming agent .. ??

Note the simple explanation on the following site .. and I quote ..

CO2 gas is 1.5 times as heavy as air, thus if released to the air it will concentrate at low elevations.

http://www.uigi.com/carbondioxide.html (it's towards the bottom of the first text box ..)

Now, I notice on the following, MI university, glib GW site .. no mention ANYWHERE of Carbon Dioxide being 1.5 times as heavy as air .. and concentrating at LOW ELEVATIONS .. ??

Global Warming Horror .. http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/greenhouse.htm

Maybe I missed something in science class?? .. maybe it was when I was asleep?? .. or maybe when it was I was too busy admiring how shapely, and how long, the legs were, on Miss Snorks .. ??



glatt  Wednesday Jun 18 11:32 AM

Air gets mixed up by wind.

See the "Cloud Wake" IOTD.



spudcon  Wednesday Jun 18 02:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
It's not what you personally produce. It's your share of all the power plant's output, your share of all the motor vehicles, trains and planes, your share of all the concrete production and construction. It adds up to nearly 20 tons per person, per year.
I think I see how this works. We(theUS) put 20 tons of CO2 per year per capita in tha atmosphere, while China, which has a very huge population, are, for the moment, is charge with only 2 tons per year per capita. What about the actual readings per country?


spudcon  Wednesday Jun 18 03:01 PM

I was correct, according to Wikipedia.
Until recently the United States was the largest emitter of carbon dioxide emissions.[1] According to preliminary estimates China has been the top emitter since 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions



Imigo Jones  Thursday Jun 19 12:51 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by spudcon View Post
We(theUS) put 20 tons of CO2 per year per capita in tha atmosphere, while China, which has a very huge population, are, for the moment, is charge with only 2 tons per year per capita.
spud, from the Times article I was excerpting above:
The average American is responsible for 19.4 tons. Average emissions per person in Russia are 11.8 tons; in the European Union, 8.6 tons; China, 5.1 tons; and India, 1.8 tons. . . . [Earlier] In 2007 China’s emissions were 14 percent higher than those of the United States.

You engineers might smirk, but I like simple "story problems" to recast the numbers . . . :
1
Chinese population / U.S. pop. = 1,322 million (2007 est.) / 301 mil = 4.39
Chinese per cap emissions (tons) / U.S. = 5.1 /19.4 = 0.2629
Pop. ratio X per cap emissions ratio = 4.39 X 0.2629
= 1.15, or close to "14 percent higher" in article

2
(Chinese pop. X per cap emissions) / (U.S. pop. X per cap)
= (1,322 mil X 5.1 tons)/(301 mil X 19.4 tons)
= 6,742.2 million tons / 6,014.0 mil tons
= 1.12, or close to the "14 percent higher" of the article.
Quote:
CO2 gas is 1.5 times as heavy as air
Even at 1.5 times as heavy as air, it's hard to fathom that each American is "responsible" for 106 pounds per day. I don't disbelieve it--it's just astounding. I totally understand that this is the average of all industrial processes, construction, transportation that occurs--still just astounding!

[Future side research project: How much CO2 per day does the average adult produce simply from respiration? Is it even 1 pound?]

But 106 pounds a day. Really, somebody's wasting a lot of fossil fuels, building stuff, etc. in a way that I would not approve and would never make use of. [Yahoo email smiley with halo not available for linking anymore.] This is not counting distant roadways, schools, and such for the common good. Speaking of cooking with concrete, not sure that all dams (China's, infamously) are really for the common good. Air Force One and presidential candidates criss-crossing the country every week or every day--take a train, you wasteful egomaniacs!



"Lincoln leaves for Washington, D.C., from Springfield, Illinois" (larger version)


HungLikeJesus  Thursday Jun 19 01:21 PM

Every gallon of gasoline burned produces about 20 pounds of CO2.
From here.

CO2 from electricity production varies based on the fuel source. For wind, solar, and even biomass, the CO2 is essentially zero, once the equipment is operating (though there is CO2 generated in the manufacture and installation of the equipment).

Electricity produced from natural gas creates less CO2 than electricity produced from coal (because coal has more carbon per unit of energy).

According to Wikipedia:

Quote:
... Since the useful energy output of coal is about 30% of the 6.67 kW·h/kg(coal), we can say about 2 kW·h/kg(coal) of energy is produced. Since 1 kg coal roughly translates as 1.83 kg of CO2, we can say that using electricity from coal produces CO2 at a rate of about 0.915 kg/(kW·h), or about 0.254 kg/MJ.

This estimate compares favourably with the U.S. Energy Information Agency's 1999 report on CO2 emissions for energy generation, which quotes a specific emission rate of 950 g CO2/(kW·h). By comparison, generation from oil in the U.S. was 890 g CO2/(kW·h), while natural gas was 600 g CO2/(kW·h). Estimates for specific emission from nuclear power, hydro, and wind energy vary, but are about 100 times lower. See environmental effects of nuclear power for estimates.
...
So, for every kWh of electricity used, between 1.3 and 2.1 pound of CO2 is produced, unless the electricity is from renewable sources.

For a typical household use of 29 kWh/day, this results in production of 38 to 61 lb of CO2 per household per day.

Natural gas or oil used for space heating also produces CO2.

There are, of course, a lot of other sources of CO2, but this helps put the 106 lb/person per day into perspective.

Here is a chart showing sources of CO2 production in the US in 2005. From here.




Flint  Thursday Jun 19 01:45 PM

Algae?



SPUCK  Friday Jun 20 05:54 AM

[quote=HungLikeJesus;463720]Every gallon of gasoline burned produces about 20 pounds of CO2.
From here.

Explain how you create 20lbs of CO2 from 6.5 lbs of gasoline?



spudcon  Friday Jun 20 08:00 AM

Having read all the above, and thank you Imigo for doing the math, it's obvious that humankind is producing vast amounts of CO2. A lot of that is wasteful uses, such as politicians and celebrities using private jets to criss cross the world for selfish purposes. Having said that, has anyone ever measured how much CO2(not to mention other poisonous gasses) is produced by one average volcano? I would guess one volcano per year would trump all of mankind's production per year. Of course, there are usually more than one volcano per year spewing pollution into the air, sometimes much higher amounts than the average. Am I right?



Clodfobble  Friday Jun 20 08:16 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUCK
Explain how you create 20lbs of CO2 from 6.5 lbs of gasoline?
Burning gasoline is a combustion reaction. It takes oxygen molecules from the air.


glatt  Friday Jun 20 08:56 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by spudcon View Post
I would guess one volcano per year would trump all of mankind's production per year. Of course, there are usually more than one volcano per year spewing pollution into the air, sometimes much higher amounts than the average. Am I right?
Sorry, but no. That's a myth that has been circulating for a while. The CO2 emissions from volcanoes is a drop in the bucket compared with the emissions from human activities.

Here's a good article on the topic, found on the US Geological Survey's web page.
Quote:
Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value.
Edit: And just to have the numbers posted, volcanoes produce approximately 200 million tonnes of CO2 per year, while mankind produces about 26.8 billion tonnes (in 2003.) Even the largest eruption in recent times, Pinatubo in the Philippines, produced between 42 and 234 million tons of CO2. (1, 2) so even that year, volcanoes didn't come anywhere near producing the CO2 that mankind did.


HungLikeJesus  Friday Jun 20 10:07 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUCK View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by HungLikeJesus View Post
Every gallon of gasoline burned produces about 20 pounds of CO2.
From here.
Explain how you create 20lbs of CO2 from 6.5 lbs of gasoline?
Yes.


Happy Monkey  Friday Jun 20 10:54 AM

In addition to the binding of oxygen, mentioned in the original link, the per-capita CO2 production from that gallon of gas adds the production and transportation of that gallon of gas. So 20lb is the lower limit.



Happy Monkey  Friday Jun 20 11:02 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt View Post
Edit: And just to have the numbers posted, volcanoes produce approximately 200 million tonnes of CO2 per year, while mankind produces about 26.8 billion tonnes (in 2003.) Even the largest eruption in recent times, Pinatubo in the Philippines, produced between 42 and 234 million tons of CO2. (1, 2) so even that year, volcanoes didn't come anywhere near producing the CO2 that mankind did.
Heck, even if the myth were true, it would hardly be a worthy argument. Volcanos' contributions aren't increasing exponentially like mankind's are.


spudcon  Saturday Jun 21 12:36 AM

OK



Imigo Jones  Tuesday Jul 1 01:31 PM

Chinese algae in "NY Times"

This morning's online Times has an article on Chinese algae. Excerpts follow, then a link to the entire article:

To Save Olympic Sailing Races, China Fights Algae



A barge at Qingdao, site of the Olympic sailing regatta in August, was surrounded by algae last week. The Chinese have begun a huge cleanup effort. (EyePress, via Associated Press)

By JIM YARDLEY
Published: July 1, 2008

BEIJING — With less than six weeks before it plays host to the Olympic sailing regatta, the city of Qingdao, China, has mobilized thousands of people and an armada of small boats to clean up an algal bloom choking the coastline and threatening to impede the competition.

Local officials have begun an intense effort to clean up the algae by mid-July. News reports estimate as many as 20,000 people have either volunteered or been ordered to participate in the operation
[I'm guessing been ordered], while 1,000 boats are scooping algae out of the Yellow Sea. . . .

Algae blooms now affect more than 5,000 square miles of seawater, Xinhua reported.

“We will make all our efforts to finish this job,” said a propaganda official in Qingdao, who asked not to be named because of the political delicacy of the issue
[also because Beijing is cracking down on propaganda officials who misspeak, terminating them--with a bullet to the back of the head after a show trial]. “Now, forces from the entire province have become involved.” He said ships and boats have been dispatched from two other coastal cities, Rizhao and Yantai, to help haul away the algae.

Yuan Zhiping, an official with the Qingdao Olympic Sailing Committee, said Sunday that the government would try to block algae from floating into the Olympic sailing area by installing in the sea a fenced perimeter more than 30 miles long.
[See "Bigger Europe" thread.] . . .

The massive outbreak comes with some sailing teams already in Qingdao preparing for the Olympics. Photographs in the Australian news media showed an Australian team seemingly stuck in a carpet of algae during a training run. [Or so it seemed, relative to an American team training nearby. Whoops U.S.A.! U.S.A.! :p ] . . .

Air quality remains a serious concern in Beijing. On Tuesday the city will begin removing 300,000 high-polluting vehicles, mostly trucks, from local roads. Later in July the city will institute temporary restrictions to remove half of all motor vehicles from the streets.

But air quality remains such a large problem that officials are also preparing contingency plans that could force factories across much of northern China to close temporarily if conditions warrant.
[Great. First gas prices, then food prices. Now Wally World prices.]

Full article



SPUCK  Wednesday Jul 2 06:09 AM

hahaha

Would they prevent the phosphate pollution that is enabling the algae bloom?? NoooOOOOooo. Instead they just run out and pick up all the algae..



spudcon  Wednesday Jul 2 06:34 AM

It's an unnatural resource.



Imigo Jones  Tuesday Jul 22 11:54 AM

Olympic algae update

China Says Algae Cleared for Sailing

By EDWARD WONG
Published: July 16, 2008

BEIJING — Olympic athletes competing in waters off the east coast of China can literally expect smooth sailing in August, a Chinese official said Tuesday.

The official, Lin Hong, said from the coastal city of Qingdao that efforts to clean up large amounts of green algae had been successful. Barriers have been erected to keep the algae from infiltrating waters where Olympic sailing events will be held, said Ms. Lin, spokeswoman for the Qingdao Emergency Center on Algae Disposal.

Photos posted on sohu.com, a popular Chinese Web portal, showed waters supposedly around Qingdao devoid of algae. . . .

Ms. Lin said that by Sunday, there was no trace of algae in the waters designated for Olympic events. By 3:30 p.m. Monday, she said, volunteers and workers had cleared a total of 419,000 tons of algae from the water and 333,000 tons from the seashore.
It was unclear what caused the algae to bloom around Qingdao.


Full article



Dumplings boiled in algae juice

"Helix algae juice boiled dumplings.Spirulina contains protein and amino acid 65%, 20% carbohydrate, lipid 5%, 7% and 3%, mineral water, In the area of nutrition than any other animals, plants, grains and other foods are more comprehensive, effective, FAO recommended in the 21st Century 'in the best food.' WHO describes as a '21st century the best of health products' "



Your reply here?

The Cellar Image of the Day is just a section of a larger web community: a bunch of interesting folks talking about everything. Add your two cents to IotD by joining the Cellar.