The paradox of "thrifting," as delineated in the passage, lies in its unforeseen environmental repercussions. While thrift shopping is typically lauded for its perceived sustainability and eco-friendly ethos, the text underscores a potential environmental quandary associated with this practice. Specifically, it references a study commissioned by Patagonia which reveals that older garments, often sourced from second-hand outlets, have a propensity to shed more microfibers. These minuscule fibers can ultimately find their way into water bodies such as rivers and oceans, exacerbating microfiber pollution. Thus, the ostensibly eco-conscious act of thrift shopping, aimed at waste reduction, may inadvertently engender environmental challenges due to the shedding of microfibers during the laundering of aged clothing.
So, the correct option is (B): has created environmental problems.
Option C emerges as the accurate choice because the passage neither mentions nor implies that the British populace refrains from purchasing second-hand clothing. Instead, it delves into the obstacles concerning luxury brands and their reluctance to distribute their current season inventory globally at reduced prices. The rationale cited encompasses financial considerations (Option D), apprehensions regarding brand perception (Option A), and the aspiration to preserve the value of their merchandise (Option C). Hence, the passage does not attribute the sluggish acceptance of platforms like ThredUP in the UK to Britons' aversion to second-hand apparel.
So, the correct option is (C): the British don’t buy second-hand clothing.
The passage primarily advocates for sustainable shopping practices, particularly second-hand shopping, as a solution to mitigate the adverse environmental impact of the fashion industry. Additionally, it underscores the importance of consumers being conscientious about the environmental consequences of their clothing choices, advocating for the selection of durable items that minimize microfiber shedding.
While emphasizing the potential environmental downside of second-hand clothing due to microfiber pollution, the passage suggests that this issue could be mitigated if second-hand clothes were consistently of higher quality. By purchasing high-quality items that shed fewer fibers and last longer, consumers can address both microfiber pollution and the accumulation of excess garments in landfills. Therefore, Option C is correct.
Option A pertains more to the purchasing process rather than the characteristics of the clothing, thus it does not necessarily contradict the central idea of the passage.
Option B could potentially align with the sustainability objective and reinforce the central idea, thus it doesn't inherently undermine it.
Option D aligns with the central idea by advocating for reduced environmental harm through sustainable shopping practices.
So, the correct option is (C): second-hand stores sold only high-quality clothes.
Option B is the correct option because the passage underscores the environmental concerns linked with fast fashion, notably the wasteful disposal of garments in landfills. Contrary to the disposable and rapid turnover nature of fast fashion, a more sustainable and enduring approach is advocated, which corresponds with the concept of "slow fashion."
The passage implies that purchasing durable, high-quality items is a strategy to address the adverse environmental effects of the fashion industry. Consequently, 'slow fashion' can be inferred to denote clothing characterized by superior quality and longevity, advocating for a more sustainable and environmentally conscious approach to fashion consumption.
So, the correct option is (B): are of high quality and long lasting.
\(\text{The Politics of Change}\) | \(\text{The Change in Politics}\) | \(\text{Politics and Change:}\) A Global Perspective} |
In "The Politics of Change," political analyst Dr. Emily Harper examines the dynamics of social movements and their impact on policy reform. Through detailed case studies, she explores how grassroots organizations, protests, and advocacy campaigns shape public opinion and influence lawmakers. Dr. Harper provides insights into the strategies that successful movements employ and discusses the challenges they face in a complex political landscape. She discusses key strategies, such as coalition-building, media engagement, and the use of digital platforms to amplify voices. | This book by veteran journalist Mark Stevens investigates the shifting political landscape in the 21st century. Focusing on major elections, emerging political parties, and the role of social media, Stevens analyzes how technology and demographics are transforming political engagement and voter behaviour. Through interviews with political leaders, campaign strategists, and everyday voters, Stevens uncovers how demographic shifts and technological advancements are reshaping political discourse in urban areas. He analyzes the implications of these changes for traditional political institutions and explores how movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter have disrupted conventional narratives. | In this insightful work, international relations scholar Dr. Anika Patel presents a global analysis of political change across various regions. She explores the factors that drive political transitions, including economic shifts, cultural movements, and international influences. Dr. Patel emphasizes the interconnectedness of global politics and how local changes can have far-reaching implications. She analyzes various factors driving political transitions, including economic upheaval, cultural shifts, and the impact of globalization. She provides case studies from diverse regions, such as the Arab Spring, democratic movements in Latin America, and shifts in power in Asia. The book serves as a vital resource for understanding the complexities of political evolution in a rapidly changing world. |