Time is Up!
Reading Test 39
The development of plastic
A.
During the nineteenth century, Europe became the birthplace of industrial rubber products, and the material quickly rose to prominence thanks to its many practical applications. Natural rubber was once widely used, but over the twentieth century a variety of new synthetic materials called plastics replaced it. As a chemical consisting of giant molecules bonded together from many smaller, simpler components, rubber is a polymer. The chemical industry produced a wide variety of plastics using the same bonding principle—polymerization.
B.
In the USA, a competition spurred the creation of the first plastic. In the 1860s, a reward of $10,000 was offered to anyone who could come up with a suitable substitute for ivory in billiard ball production. Ivory supplies were dwindling at the time. John Wesley Hyatt’s celluloid substance was the winning entry. Celluloid was created by dissolving cellulose, a plant-based carbohydrate, in a camphor-and-ethanol solution. Knife grips, snap-off cuffs, eyeglasses, and even photographic film were some of the first goods to use this novel material. No motion picture company would have been able to launch towards the tail end of the 19th century if not for celluloid.
C.
Celluloid is a thermoplastic because it can be repeatedly warmed to soften it and change its form. Leo Baekeland, a Belgian chemist working in the United States, created a new type of plastic in 1907 by triggering a reaction between phenol and formaldehyde. Bakelite was the first of the thermosets plastics, which can be cast and molded while hot but cannot be softened by heat and molded once they have set; Baekeland gave the material his name. Bakelite was impervious to water, acids, and moderate heat, and it also served as a good insulator. Due to its useful features, it was quickly used in the production of electrical components for automobiles, as well as switches and other domestic things like kettle handles.
D.
The search for more timely molecules that could be linked together to form polymers was soon undertaken by chemists. Thermoplastic polyethylene was first created in the 1930s by British chemists by polymerizing ethylene gas in a high-temperature, high-pressure environment. By the 1950s, polypropylene had emerged as a viable alternative. Bottles, pipelines, and plastic bags were all manufactured using both. PVC (polyvinyl chloride) is a strong, flame-retardant plastic that was created by substituting a hydrogen atom in ethylene with a chlorine atom, making it ideal for use in pipe and gutter systems. In addition, PVC may be made soft by including different chemicals, making it an acceptable rubber replacement for applications such as watertight apparel. PTFE, or Teflon, was a material that was very similar (polytetrafluoroethylene). As a result of its low coefficient of friction, it was found to be useful in applications such as bearings, rollers, and non-stick cookware. Created in Germany in the 1930s, polystyrene was a transparent plastic widely used in the packaging of food, household goods, and toys. The white, stiff foam known as expanded polystyrene was commonly used for both packing and insulation. Germany is also responsible for the development of polyurethanes, which have since found widespread usage as adhesives, coatings, and, in the form of rigid foams, insulation. All of these items are made from chemicals extracted from crude oil, and as such, share the same chemical composition: carbon and hydrogen as many polymers.
E.
Also in the 1930s, the first synthetic fiber, nylon, was developed. Wallace Carothers, an American scientist who later worked for the Du Pont Company, came up with the idea. He discovered that two chemicals, hexamethylenediamine, and adipic acid, could combine under certain conditions to make a polymer that could be pushed out of holes, stretched, and weaved like silk. Parachutes for the United States military during World War II were its first application. In the years following World War II, nylon gradually supplanted silk in the production of stockings. Other synthetic fibers followed suit, with Orlon, Acrilan, and Terylene joining the nylon family. Most clothing today is constructed from a combination of natural fibers like cotton and wool and man-made fibers that are more durable and require less maintenance.
F.
Plastic’s invincibility is its greatest strength. This feature has many drawbacks, though, as evidenced by the fact that even the most distant islands have beaches filled with plastic bottles that cannot be recycled or broken down. Not only are there many distinct kinds of plastic, but they’re typically all used in the same products, making recycling a complex process. To make plastics biodegradable, they can be reinforced with a substance like starch, which is then broken down by microbes. Bottles built from these materials must be kept in the dark so that they don’t decompose before they’re used, but they can be made to contain other materials that slowly decompose in sunlight.
This quiz is for logged in users only.
These Invasive Species are Ruining the Retail Ecosystem
A
Invasive species often triumph as a result of good intentions gone wrong. Take Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), brought to Britain by enthusiastic Victorians gardeners who thought it an ornamental delight that doubled as cattle feed. But from just a scrap of root no bigger than a pea it could grow through tarmac, pavements, and brick walls. A century later, its spread is considered such a threat that planting or dumping knotweed is a crime, knotweed is so hated because it suffocates other plants, replacing them with an unproductive, leafy monotony. Then there is the Nile perch (Lates niloticus), brought one of the world’s worst invaders by conservationists. It is a freshwater fish that can grow to huge proportions. Again, with good intentions, it was introduced in 1954 to Lake Victoria, straddling Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda. Since then, it has helped push over 200 well-established local fish species to extinction. Like the Nile perch, the cane toad (Bufo marinus) eats almost anything it gets its mouth around. Introduced for pest control, it turned out to be noisy, fast spreading, and a greater pest itself.
B
As it is in nature, so it is in the economy. Big superstores and chain retailers were allowed to spread by planners, town councils, and governments in awe of big business. But then it started to go wrong. The chains became the economic equivalent of invasive species: hungry, indiscriminate, often antisocial and destructive. When no one was paying attention, the superstores and clones shops grew to dominate and suffocate the economic ecosystem, much as knotweed does. The drive pushed through planning regulations as easily as knotweed pushes through tarmac, devoured smaller and independent retailers with as much reflection as the Nile perch cleansed Lake Victoria of its fish. They were often introduced to provide a specific service but outgrew their habitats until their catch all soon could be heard on every street corner, forecourt, roundabout, and out of town shopping centre. Neither in balance, nor even a boom but cycle with other similar, local species could stop them. Nor can planning laws do much.
C
Natural scientists use a whole new term to describe the current epoch of comprehensive global human interference in ecosystems. Our time, they say, should be called the ‘Homogocene’ to describe the way that distinctiveness and difference are being eroded. A combination of the creep of invasive species and habitats destroyed by development is driving a mass extinction. The World Conservation Union warns that such an invasion leads to the irreversible loss of native biodiversity. Typical characteristics of an invasive species include the absence of predators, hardiness, and a generalist diet that can be found in many places and which gives it the ability to disrupt the ecosystem that is catastrophic for native species.
D
The big, centralised logistical operations of the supermarkets are likewise driving the homogenisation of business, shopping, eating, farming, food, the landscape, the environment, and our daily lives. In the process, Britain is being sucked into a vortex of US-style, chain-store-led clone retailing, both in towns and in soulless “big box” out-of-town shopping parks — what they call in the US, with its associated suburban sprawl, the “dead zone”. They are spreading in the way “invasive species” spread in nature, lacking checks and balances, killing off diversity and “native” (in other words, local) species. Tesco is not the only guilty party (think of McDonald’s, Starbucks, and Gap), but it is possibly the largest driving force. With around 2,000 stores in Britain, almost one third of the grocery market, and rapid international growth, city analysts believe the brand has the land and resources in place already to double its UK floor space. Can anything stop it?
E
Bear in mind these characteristics of an invasive species: the absence of predators (real commercial competition or effective regulators to hold them back); hardiness (the legions of corporate lawyers, financial leverage, and endless commercial cost cutting); and a generalist diet (supermarkets will sell virtually anything, and chain stores operate according to a common denominator). If you want diversity in your world rather than one kind of plant in your garden, one kind of fish in your lake and only one type of venomous, croaking toad under your shed, then you have to manage that outcome. When we garden, we hold back aggressive, opportunistic plants in order to keep space open for a celebration of variety and colour.
F
Like it or not (and it is something about which most policy makers and economists are in deep denial), weakly regulated markets give free rein to economic invasive species and hence tend towards monopoly. This is the great modern economic irony. Advocates of free markets argue against checks and balances to counter the power of big business, but in doing so ultimately destroy the possibility of markets that could meaningfully be called free, or, rather, “open”. They resist anti-monopoly regulation in the name of providing consumer choice, and in the process they ultimately destroy it. In some important ways, we are returning to an earlier phase of corporatism. Henry Ford told customers they could have any colour of car, as long as it was black. The scale and seriousness of Tesco’s ambition mean that, before long, unless we recognise what is happening and have regulators up to the job, one day we will be able to shop anywhere we like, as long as it is Tesco.
This quiz is for logged in users only.
Communicating Styles and Conflict
A.
Since the time of Hippocrates (460–370 B.C.), people have tried to comprehend others by categorising them based on personality type or temperament. According to Hippocrates, there are four separate bodily fluids that affect four different temperamental subtypes. 500 years later, Galen expanded on his ideas. Although we no longer think that the success is determined by bodily fluids, that predominance in our systems, there are many self-assessment techniques available today that connect to the fundamental descriptions given by Galen.
B.
Self-evaluation is the criteria which is used to determine one’s own values. The style that people use to learn, communicate, handle conflict or other characteristics of an individual will help to depersonalise conflict affiliation between two or more people. Loss of self occurs when you realise that others are not trying to be difficult but instead, they require different or more information than you do. They don’t mean to be rude, they are so attentive to the task they overlook welcoming others. They would like to work smart and fast but they don’t want to jeopardise the working relationship. They were aware of their work but it would be done correctly when required information is collected, which takes time to gather.
C.
Hippocrates and later Galen have been determined to summarise personality with four basic temperaments Sanguine (is capable of talking to new friends like they are known for a long time), Melancholic (almost always deep in thought). Choleric (they are ambitious, brave and proud, but they can also be violent) Phlegmatic (slow to warm up to others but will make friends fairly easily). These temperaments were developed centuries ago and they were still somewhat adapted, you could update the wording. Nowadays, they translate into the four fairly common communication styles described below.
The sanguine person would have the capability to talk with an unknown person like they were already close friends. They also have a spirited style of communication. These people speak with expression. They often speak very fast and also invest their time, emotion and energy in their communication. They can easily give an example story to their talk. It may or may not explain the point which they are trying to make. Because of their enthusiasm, they’re great team motivators. They are always concerned about the people and their relationship. They usually focus on the bigger picture and their high level of energy comes at a strong time, which means sometimes they miss details or the correct order of things. These people find lots of conflict and differences of opinion and love to engage in spirited discussion. They love change, they are constantly looking for something more exciting and adventurous.
D.
The phlegmatic person and preserving-translates into the technical or systematic communication style. This style of communication mainly focused on reality and technical details. These types of people are very much focused on their task, they have an orderly methodical way of approaching, and they do not focus on people, emotions or concerns. They also focus on the required details to accomplish a task. Sometimes the details flood out the big picture and focus needs to be brought back to the context of the task. These sorts of people always treat facts as a front and to make decisions and they are uncomfortable with the conflict. They need time to adapt to the change and need to understand both the logic of it and the steps involved.
E.
The melancholic persons who are soft-hearted and oriented toward doing things for others translate into considerate or sympathetic communication style. This style of people is focused on people and relationships. They seem to be good listeners and do things for other people, even sometimes they do to the people who harm to themselves. They want to put in for others’ opinions and make sure everyone is comfortable with whatever is required to get the job done. Sometimes this focus on others can distract from the task at hand, because they are so focused on others’ needs and smoothing over issues, they do not like conflict. People believe that change menaces the level, you can change make people feel tense, because of this people with the same communication style, like phlegmatic people, would make some time to accept the situation and change themselves to adapt to it.
F.
The choleric temperament people have a bold and direct style of communication. These people are brief in their communication – the fewer words the better. People with this style are overactive and they love to be involved in many activities at one time. They are focused on tasks and outcomes and often forget that the people involved in carrying out the task have needs. They don’t do detailed studies on the work they are doing so they underestimate the time which could take for that. They are so direct, they often look forceful and can be very intimidating to others. They always welcome someone to challenge them. But people with other styles are scared to do so. They can also handle changes better.
H.
A well-functioning team should have all these types of communicating styles for true effectiveness. All teams should focus on the tasks as well as on the relationship to achieve those tasks. They need a big-picture perspective of the context of their work, and they need the details to be identified and taken care of for success. We all also have aspects of each style within us. Some of us can easily move from one style to another and we can easily adapt our style to that situation, with focus on tasks or relationships. For others it is difficult, their dominant style is very evident, and they feel it is more challenging to tackle the situation from the perspective of another style. The work environment can influence communication styles either by the type of work that is required or by the predominance of one style reflected in that environment. Some people use one style at work and another style at home.
The above information about communication style is that we have the ability to develop flexibility in our styles. The greater the flexibility we have the more skilled we usually are at handling possible and actual conflicts. Usually, it is relevant to do so. We feel shy, either because it is important or because there are incentives in our surroundings to encourage it. The key is we should be flexible with our communication style. ‘Whether you think you can or you can’t, you’re right!’ by Henry Ford. Communication styles and conflict reading questions
This quiz is for logged in users only.