Problem: Given the question: I read this background article the other day: Alkali, or Alkaline, soils are clay soils with high pH (> 8.5), a poor soil structure and a low infiltration capacity. Often they have a hard calcareous layer at 0.5 to 1 metre depth. Alkali soils owe their unfavorable physico-chemical properties mainly to the dominating presence of sodium carbonate, which causes the soil to swell[1] and difficult to clarify/settle. They derive their name from the alkali metal group of elements, to which sodium belongs, and which can induce basicity. Sometimes these soils are also referred to as alkaline sodic soils. Alkaline soils are basic, but not all basic soils are alkaline.  I am facing a new situation today: Two brothers have a piece of land each, situated 2 miles from each other. Jim's land is not very fertile because it has clay soil with a high pH, while Bob's land has very fertile soil and has a good productivity on it.  Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which of the two pieces of land is more alkaline?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Jim's


Problem: Given the question: I read this background article the other day: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. Its rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk.  I am facing a new situation today: Russian research spent most of their time in Antarctica to study the loss of ozone in the atmosphere. The Canadian team went north of the Polar Circle, close to the North Pole to do the same thing. They spent several months there. The Canadian team didn't find any ozone holes at the North Pole.  Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which team was more exposed to eye cataracts?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Russian


Problem: Given the question: I read this background article the other day: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. Its rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk.  I am facing a new situation today: Planet Y and planet X were two inhabited planets in a nearby solar system. People from Planet X were living in harmony with nature, and didn't hurt the environment in any way. People on planet Y generated lots of air pollution, and destroyed their ozone layer by using inappropriate substances.  Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which planet has more chlorine gases in their atmosphere?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
