SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the what's-green-and-smells-of-farts? dept.
After a week of trying to part with green tides in two outdoor swimming pools, Olympic officials over the weekend wrung out a fresh mea culpa and yet another explanation—neither of which were comforting.
According to officials, a local pool-maintenance worker mistakenly added 160 liters of hydrogen peroxide to the waters on August 5, which partially neutralized the chlorine used for disinfection. With chlorine disarmed, the officials said that "organic compounds"—i.e. algae and other microbes—were able to grow and turn the water a murky green in the subsequent days. The revelation appears to contradict officials' previous assurances that despite the emerald hue, which first appeared Tuesday, the waters were safe.
"Of course it's an embarrassment," Gustavo Nascimento, director of venue management for the Rio Olympics, told The New York Times . "We are hosting the Olympic Games, and athletes are here, so water is going to be an issue. We should have been better in fixing it quickly. We learned painful lessons the hard way."
Hydrogen peroxide is sometimes used in pools—often to de-chlorinate them. Basically, the chemical, a common household disinfectant, is a weak acid that reacts with chlorine and chlorine-containing compounds to release oxygen and form other chlorine-containing compounds. Those may not be good at disinfecting pools, but they still may be picked up by monitoring systems.
On Saturday, officials started draining and refilling one of the affected pools—the one used for synchronized swimming, a sport that requires underwater visibility. The 3,725,000-liter pool was refilled with water from a clean practice pool nearby. The diving pool, the first to turn green, is being filtered and treated to clean the waters.
By the end of last week, athletes and media reported that the waters had begun to irritate eyes and smell like farts.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday August 17 2016, @01:57PM
I'm aware of what that term meant 20 years ago. It's been decades since the break up of the USSR and applying the term in that fashion no longer makes any sense. Some of those countries have advanced quite a bit and some haven't. Not to mention the fact that with only the US standing, the whole idea of evaluating based upon which countries were and weren't allied decades ago is nonsensical.
India and Brazil are pretty similar in terms of development, but one was located in a region near one of the competing super powers and the other wasn't. I'm not sure how that's relevant to anything that's going on today.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @11:05PM
In other words, "no, I didn't know that, but let me try to pathetically save face by claiming I'm still right."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 18 2016, @12:52AM
Not really, it's just that those of us that have been outside of our parent's basement are aware that those classifications are no longer meaningful. You've got countries like Brazil that have done a huge amount of developing to the point where they're similar to countries like India and China. And you've got countries like Afghanistan that would be fortunate to be considered 3rd world. Even by 3rd world standards they've got issues.
What happens in 50 years when the 2nd world nations are as developed as the first world nations?