When Olympic sailing competitors complete their races this week, they won't be slipping over the sides of their boats to celebrate with a refreshing swim.

That's because Fushan Bay, on whose shore sits the Olympic sailing center at Qingdao, is home to a persistent growth of algae as green and dense as a golf course fairway.

The algae were so thick that 20,000 Chinese went out in a thousand small boats in July to clear the water of hundreds of thousands of pounds of the stuff. Otherwise the boats would have been stuck in the scum unable to sail, their keels and center- or dagger-boards snared in it. And because algae is such a champion grower, the cleaning iscontinuing every morning at dawn.

The algae, like the air over Beijing, expose China's disregard for the environmental impact of unbridled growth, often referred to as a "miracle" that supposedly lifted 400 million Chinese out of poverty. I say supposedly because I wonder if anyone can really verify that claim in a country that isn't even sure if its population is 1.3 billion or some other number.

Chinese leaders recognize all too well that their environmental sins don't play well with the rest of the world, so they've incorporated all kinds of advanced energy and water systems into the Olympic facilities, built for the staggering cost of $43 billion. The sailing center itself features a solar system for heating, cooling and hot water. But the green water is like an underarm sweat stain on someone trying to act cool: it reveals that untreated sewage is being dumped into rivers and coastal waters also polluted by contaminated run-off from farms and factories, according toThe New York Times.

Not that China is alone with this problem. International sailors who post comments at Sailing Anarchy refer to Port Klang, Malaysia, as having "the nastiest water on earth." One wrote about "sailing in sludge" when he raced at the New York Maritime Academy, located at the narrow end of Long Island Sound under the Whitestone Bridge between Long Island and the Bronx. It's also a fact that during the years that I've been living on Long Island, limited areas of the bays in western Long Island Sound have themselves had masses of growth during some summers that suffocated fish.

But here's the difference: activists on both sides of the Sound have been working for years to force both local governments and federal law makers to clean things up, and that's happening, if more slowly than it should be. There have been no low-oxygen episodes of any consequence in years now.

In China, official sources can say with a straight face that the algae growth is not the result of pollution but of increased rainfall and warmer water temperatures. No Chinese would dare contradict them, publicly at least, and certainly not now when we're all supposed to act like polite guests careful not to insult our hosts.

Well, ethically speaking, telling the truth trumps being polite when what's at stake is not only world opinion about the Chinese form of government, but also the exposure of its people to horrible pollution. So here's the truth about the algae bloom: it is present not just in the 19.3 square miles dedicated to the sailing competition, but also in a 5,000 square mile area of the Yellow Sea. That big an area would take in all of Long Island Sound and then some. As I sit at my desk on Long Island, I try to imagine that scene and recoil with horror.

Read more commentary by Frances Cerra Whittelsey on her blog, The Equalizer.

Comments (37)

1. Wasn't it HAPPY a while back who said we could see "big growth" if we just emulated the Chinese on regulations, like environmental regulations???

   Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 12:09pm

2. who cares?

   the tupperware is cheap!

   and garlic, too!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:10pm

3. i think the solution is not to mandate that the chinese (or other "countries") change their evil ways.

   WE have to change our trading practices and our monetary policy.

   the chinese are just making OUR stuff at an inflation-hiding price.

   WE were able to make this stuff here not too long ago.

   no, it wasn't skyrocketing wages.

   no, it wasn't stricter environmental standards.

   it was bad monetary policy. WE'VE inflated ourselves out of business.

   and our trade policies -- talk about sweeping under the rug!

   if a farmer i know is spraying like crazy or treating his workers crappily,

   I DON'T DO BUSINESS WITH HIM!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:17pm

4. but we blame the chinese,

   when most of these products are plasted with north american or european brand names.

   WE are the bosses.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:23pm

5. Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 12:09pm

   Let's poison our waters! Acid rain is good for you, it more effectively cleans off the dirt.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 12:31pm

6. Zero:

   the ocean is the ultimate solution.

   frank zappa.

   <<<<<<<>>>>>>>

   people seem to forget that we are made from the planet.

   dirty planet, dirty people.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:51pm

7. Frosty, you are a nice guy but you are not even close.

   Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 12:48pm

   well,

   i'm not even close because people like you don't give a fork about their brothers and sisters nor the planet they are made from.

   just another bower bird making his showy nest.....

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:54pm

8. "To explain these priviledges: under existing international rules, we in effect authorize any person or group holding effective power in a country – regardless of how they acquired or exercise it – to sell the country's resources and to dispose of the proceeds of such sales, to borrow in the country's name and thereby to impose debt service obligations upon it, to sign treaties on the country's behalf and thus to bind its present and future population, and to use state revenues to buy the means of internal repression.)"

   thomas pogge

   <<<<<<>>>>>>

   yay!

   and the garlic's cheap, too!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:57pm

9. jm,

   if you want to do business with the murderers,

   enjoy.

   karma's watching.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

10. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 12:48pm

    Are you sure about that? Or are you just guessing like everyone else who says they know anything about how the economy works? Can you cite evidence that completely deregulating industry and making them pay 0% in taxes and busting all the unions and letting them treat their employees like dirt is actually going to make the economy grow?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bower_bird#Mating_behaviour

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 1:01pm

12. caw! caw!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 1:01pm

13. Spring 2005: 30,000 villagers overturn buses, beat officials, and burn squad cars after police dismantle barricades set up by elderly protesters on a road to 13 polluting chemical plants.

    July 2005: Protesting a pharmaceutical plant, hundreds of residents of the booming factory province Zhejiang riot for three nights. "They are making poisonous chemicals for foreigners that the foreigners don't dare produce in their own countries," a demonstrator tells reporters. "It is better to die now, forcing them out, than to die of a slow suicide."

    December 2005: In the fishing village of Dongzhou, police kill up to 30 residents protesting a new coal-fired power plant.

    January 2006: During weeklong riots against preferential zoning for chemical and garment factories, 60 Guangdong Province villagers are injured and one--a 13-year-old girl--is killed by police toting automatic weapons and electric batons.

    Fall 2006: Villagers from seven Gansu Province towns protest for months against local zinc and iron smelters; half of the 5,000 villagers exhibit high levels of lead in their blood.

    June 2007: Up to 20,000 middle-class Chinese congregate outside the city government headquarters in Xiamen to protest a proposed chemical factory. The protesters were alerted by an anonymous cell phone text message (rumored to have been sent by Xiamen University professors and students). The city cracks down on anonymous web posting.

    July 2007: Farmers near Mount Emei in Sichuan Province block a highway, demanding $1.1 million in damages from an aluminum company they claim contaminated crops. Ten are injured and five detained when police clear the road.

    <<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

    hey, but the garlic's cheap. and i saved $12.63 on my new plasma t.v.!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 1:05pm

14. That became clear in April 2001, when a satellite photograph showed a vast, perfectly coiled cyclonic spiral of white clouds intertwined with brown dust plumes centered over Inner Mongolia. Joseph Prospero, a leading atmospheric researcher at the University of Miami, called it "the most remarkable dust-storm image that I have ever seen." Visibility soon dropped close to zero in Beijing and driving was nearly impossible. Satellites tracked the dust as it moved across eastern China, the Yellow Sea, Korea, the Russian coast from Vladivostok to the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Sea of Japan, and Japan itself. In less than a week, it crossed the Pacific Ocean, and produced thick haze as far east as Denver. High concentrations of dust were found as far away as Maine and Georgia and eventually in the Canary Islands off northwest Africa. Dan Jaffe, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington-Bothell, calculated that only a 20th of the storm's dust reached the United States, but that amount, 50,000 metric tons, was two and a half times as much as all U.S. sources typically produce in a day.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 1:07pm

15. that's right JM,

    sweep our inflation under the rug of dead chinese and dead rivers.

    but hey, the garlic's cheap!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 1:09pm

16. The first wave came in the early 1990s, when China was found to be dumping garlic on U.S. docks below cost. China was slapped with a hefty tariff, which kept the garlic at bay for a few years. But since 2001, imports of Chinese garlic have multiplied 15-fold, while California production has shrunk. Coursey thinks garlic is just the beginning.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 1:12pm

17. Here's where we definitely agree Zero. This is scary, and for good reason. It has very broad effects that spread out through the ocean system. Not that we're off the hook for this ourselves, despite what is doubtless good news for the waters around Long Island. The entire Gulf deadzone at the mouth of the Mississippi is essentially the same phenomenon, but with a more seasonal nature (but producing just as bad a result.)

    I took a look at the area of Qingdao using Google Earth and the images are quite revealing. The GE images are from 12/07 and show the residue of a major algae bloom. Even scarier is the Yellow Sea north of Qingdao. Center you GE on 38*30' N, 120* E at about 1000km altitude. The entire end of the Yellow Sea is in full algae bloom and the size of it is beyond description. The main bloom is about 175 miles in diameter, with other (relatively) smaller blooms along all the coasts of northern China. There's another bloom just as large north of Shanghai. This is the real effects of what the Chinese economies have produced.

    Posted by Stwriley at 08/13/2008 @ 1:43pm

18. When they realize how easy it is to convert algae into green crude... the tune around here will change.

    Posted by ttr at 08/13/2008 @ 2:12pm

19. actually,

    oil is algae. it's solar energy.

    cut out the middleplant!

    THE SUN. IT'S HOT.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 2:20pm

20. Posted by Stwriley at 08/13/2008 @ 1:43pm

    eek!

    don't forget lake erie.

    the dead zones have come back.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 2:24pm

21. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 1:41pm

    but hey, the garlic's cheap!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 2:25pm

22. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 1:41pm

    First of all let me put my view on this. Corporations exist to make a profit. They will do whatever necessary to make the biggest profit. If corporations existed to make products, then they would make the best product possible and places like McDonalds would not exist. Profit is the key to corporations not the product they are making. Therefore the corporations who take a less moral stance WILL treat their employees like dirt and WILL cut corners. It had been proven time and time again yet people still ignore it. The Pinto, Asbestos lining, Lead paint, toys that are toxic, the lawn dart. All of these things suffered from people trying to make a profit and cutting corners in testing.

    Workers being treated like slaves shows what you get if no one steps in to say anything. You like to say that employees can always go somewhere else but why do I see people being treated like crap but taking it? You make it sound easy to just leave your job for somewhere else. But when you have kids and your job is your only source of health insurance you can't just leave to find a more fair boss because you NEED your job to survive. Realistically most people can't just leave their job.

    Also, what the hell is a widget? I have always wondered and never known.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 2:56pm

23. boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink! boink!

    but hey, the garlic's cheap.

    who cares if it's irrigated with sewage.....

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 3:00pm

24. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 3:07pm

    But that's the problem there are many other products that because they don't kill ENOUGH people are never reported on. I mean that's the science of recall. If a default in a product isn't pronounced enough for it to become less profitable then they don't bother recalling the product.

    By your very argument that companies are neither moral or immoral you prove my point that profit is God. Think about it this way. Robots are with morals. If you program them to do a task it will do that task to the best of it's abilities no matter what gets in it's way. So it has no care for human life, environment or anything else. It want's to complete it's task. That's what it is to lack a moral structure all together. So by your very argument since a company is without moral it and it's task is to make the maximum amount of final profit then it will do anything it can to make that profit.

    You need only look to history. Look what corporations did when they were unregulated. Killed union organizers. Used child labors. Machinery that maimed and killed employees. Black lung in coal mines. What did it take to stop these companies from these less than virtuous actions? Government regulation. OSHA, Environmental safety regulations to stop us from setting our lakes on fire. Look to history to see what happens when you let corporations do what they want without any government regulation. THAT has been done before and it didn't work so well.

    The question for me is how do you balance a strong economy without giving up morality. How do you make maximum profit through the most moral framework possible.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 3:29pm

25. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 3:12p

    Also, you never explained what a widget was.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/13/2008 @ 3:30pm

26. "who cares if it's irrigated with sewage.....

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 3:00pm '

    Visit a farm..out their it is called fertilizer or naturalk recycling

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 3:14pm

    industrial sewage, jm.

    mmmmmmmm.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 3:41pm

27. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/13/2008 @ 12:38pm

    Actually, HAPP, don't remember anything said about "trade-offs"...

    but glad to see you ADMIT that "Yes, there would be trade-offs for more production and 'prosperity'...YES, it would poison the water and air!"

    Now...would you FAVOR a "Chinese" model of environmental policy here in the US?

    If not, then where do you come down on Governmental control over the environment?

    (Jump in too, MAASCH on both questions)

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 3:45pm

28. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 3:07pm

    "But that's the problem there are many other products that because they don't kill ENOUGH people are never reported on. I mean that's the science of recall. If a default in a product isn't pronounced enough for it to become less profitable then they don't bother recalling the product..."

    http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/07/13

    if you google it, it pops up about a dozen times....on all different sorts of websites...it is scary how little regard bush has for human life....

    they also don't say only LIBERALs or CONSERVATIVES or REDSTATERS etc...neocons will devalue ALL of us...so they don't have to enforce environmental law using cost/benefit analysis.....write your congressperson and complain....

    Posted by jrs112 at 08/13/2008 @ 3:48pm

29. "...for it is true that some immoral people will locate cynanide manufacturing plants next to schools...and we should deal with him/her succinctly."----Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 3:47pm

    So you WOULD support the Government intervening in a free market venture that potentially puts the public health at risk? (after all, the Cyanide Co guys will claim that their factory is perfectly safe with a "low probability" of contaminating the kids, right?)

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 4:03pm

30. Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 4:21pm

    But WHAT "degree", JOHN?

    You want to ban cyanide manufacture near schools...what about banning an oil derrick, if studies showed that exposure to petroleum vapors caused long-term (not short-term) respiratory problems in children exposed?

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 8:46pm

31. However, if we have depression-era levels of joblessness, I'd say, the Environment be damned....---Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/13/2008 @ 4:54pm

    So, given our LOW unemployment, you'd favor STRONG environmental regulation, right???

    Posted by Maskdelta at 08/13/2008 @ 8:48pm

32. I am not against regulations...they are neccesary...regs keep consumers and working enviroments under control..for it is true that some immoral people will locate cynanide manufacturing plants next to schools...and we should deal with him/her succinctly.

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/13/2008 @ 3:47pm

    FINALLY!!!!!

    a straight and somewhat logical answer.

    god bless you mask.

    i've been asking these guys day after day and NOT ONE has come out against dioxin.

    yes, JM,

    regulations are a good idea.

    FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 9:58pm

33. FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    this has been very, very annoying.

    ponti says he loves the country air,

    lvliberty says he truly loves god's creation,

    happy says he loves to go camping,

    and jm's so proud of his trees,

    yet when i ask them if it's o.k. to regulate arsenic,

    they tell me i hate freedom and i want to raise their taxes.

    it makes no sense whatsoever.

    maybe it's something in the unregulated water.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/13/2008 @ 10:03pm

34. i don't have any ambition to feel "moral superior".

    i want to enjoy a clean planet.

    i'm not here long and i want it to be worthwhile.

    answer the question:

    should mercury be regulated?

    yes or no?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 08/14/2008 @ 01:59am

35. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/14/2008 @ 12:37am

    Hmm. Proof that you don't care about the country just your party? Shows a dislike or America like all those damn leftists.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/14/2008 @ 05:54am

36. It's like your push for higher income taxes or SS taxes on income above $250k, they affect Blue, `rich' coastal states more and we in the `poor' red states, will get back more than whatever add'l taxes you push up. Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/14/2008 @ 12:37am

    And then what, these poor red states you speak of, who will be doing so well under this hypothetical system of taking money from richer states, will be waiting with insidious anticipation for the first opportunity to reverse this. "Ah ha, now the rich will be rich again! Take that lefties!"

    Posted by truthNjoyr at 08/14/2008 @ 08:11am

37. So, JM - you should read up on unions in this country before you make these kinds of uninformed, sweeping statements about Labor. People died to get us the 40 hour work week, no child labor, weekends off, sick leave, vacation leave, the list goes on. I would say your non-union business, and you, are probably one of the very few that treat don't treat their employees "like dirt" and brava to you for that. Question for you: what would you do if your employees came to you and told you that they wanted to unionize? Your answer will probably be the "proof" in what you say about yourself as an employer.

    And for that person in the "red" state who likes to term those of us on the coasts in "blue" states tree-huggers: If there were more of us tree huggers in this country, our environment would be in a lot better shape than it is now.

    "Secondly, union busting is not an issue...most industrys today that are unionised are not competetive, so if a company is unionised and not competetive even after other costs cut, then the industry will fail or find a cheaper labor source...the global economy, along with the unions behavior itsef has lead to the demise of manufacturing unions...the only place unions thrive is in non competetive service areas like govt, TSA, Public Schools, et al. Most jobs created and existing are in small business and are not unionised..and most small business, like mine, do not treat employees like dirt, for I need their expertise, skills, talents as much as they need to work in a company that is thriving, not continuious training of new employess ..so our goals are symbiotic, not combative."

    Posted by fiona33 at 08/14/2008 @ 6:16pm