Audioscripts IELTS Practice 19 Listening Test 04

Part 1

You will hear a volunteer coordinator talking to a new volunteer about his first day at a community centre.

First, you have some time to look at questions 1 to 6.

(pause)

Now listen carefully and answer questions 1 to 6.

Sarah: Hello, you must be Alex. I’m Sarah, the volunteer coordinator. Welcome to the Westwood Community Centre.

Alex: Hi Sarah. Thanks for having me.

Sarah: It’s great to have you on board. Now, before we get you started with the tasks, I just need to update your details on our system. I have your first name as Alex, but I’m afraid I can’t read the handwriting on your application form for your surname.

Alex: Oh, sorry about that. It’s Kavanagh.

Sarah: Is that with a C or a K?

Alex: It’s with a K. I’ll spell it for you. It’s K-A-V-A-N-A-G-H.

Sarah: It’s K-A-V-A-N-A-G-H. Lovely. I’ve got that. Now, did you bring some identification with you? The email mentioned a passport.

Alex: I actually forgot my passport, but I do have my driving licence. Is that okay?

Sarah: That’s actually better because it has your current address on it. So, yes, a driving licence is fine. I’ll just take a quick photocopy of that later.

Alex: No problem.

Sarah: Now, regarding your personal belongings. We have lockers in the volunteer room where you can leave your bag and coat.

Alex: Do I need a key for those?

Sarah: No, they are electronic, but you do need a coin to operate the locking mechanism. A one-pound coin works best.

Alex: Ah, I think I have some change in my pocket. Yes, I do.

Sarah: Great. Once you’ve stored your things, you need to head to the supply closet to pick up your uniform. We don't make you wear a heavy jacket or anything, just a T-shirt with the centre’s logo.

Alex: Okay, a T-shirt. Easy enough. What colour is it?

Sarah: It’s bright green, so you can’t miss it. After that, you need to go and sign in with the Centre Manager, Mr Evans.

Alex: Is he in the main office downstairs?

Sarah: No, he’s moved office. He is now on the second floor. You can take the lift just round the corner.

Alex: Second floor. Got it.

Sarah: And finally, let me give you the direct number for the volunteer desk. You can call this if you’re ever going to be late or sick.

Alex: Okay, I’m ready.

Sarah: It’s 07944 852109.

Alex: 07944 852109. Was that 109 at the end?

Sarah: Yes, that's right.

Before you hear the rest of the conversation, you have some time to look at questions 7 to 10.

(pause)

Now listen and answer questions 7 to 10.

Sarah: Right, let’s talk about your jobs for today. We’re quite busy, so we’ve got you working in three different areas. First, you’ll be helping in the library section.

Alex: Okay. Do you want me to check books out for people?

Sarah: Not today. We’ve had a big donation of used books. Your job is to sort through them. Check they aren't damaged. If they are in good condition, don't put them straight on the shelves just yet. Please put them into boxes so we can label them later.

Alex: Understood. Put the good books into boxes.

Sarah: Exactly. After your break, you’ll be helping in the kitchen. We have a coffee morning for the elderly residents.

Alex: I’ve worked in a café before, so I can use a coffee machine.

Sarah: That’s helpful. You’ll be serving tea and coffee. The only thing to remember is that we have a colour-coding system for the cups. The staff use the white ones, but for the visitors, please serve their drinks in the blue cups. We’re running low on the other ones.

Alex: Okay, blue cups for the visitors.

Sarah: And just a safety note for the kitchen—if anyone cuts themselves or has a minor accident, you need to know where the first aid kit is.

Alex: Is it in the kitchen cupboard?

Sarah: No, we keep it at the reception. It’s safer there. So just run to the front desk if you need it.

Alex: Right, reception.

Sarah: Finally, for the last hour of your shift, could you help in the community garden?

Alex: Sure. Do I need to bring anything?

Sarah: Just make sure you change your footwear. It’s very muddy out there today because of the rain, so you really must wear boots. We have spare ones by the back door if you don't have your own.

Alex: I brought my trainers, but I’ll borrow a pair of boots.

Sarah: Perfect. Any questions?

That is the end of part one. You now have one minute to check your answers to part one.

Part 2

You will hear a representative from a local photography club giving a talk to potential new members.

First, you have some time to look at questions 11 to 14.

(pause)

Now listen carefully and answer questions 11 to 14.

Simon Clark: Good evening everyone. My name is Simon Clark, and I’m the founder of the Lens & Light Photography Group here in the district. It’s fantastic to see so many fresh faces here tonight. If you are thinking about taking up photography as a serious hobby, you’ve come to the right place.

Now, I know many of you might have tried learning from the internet. There are thousands of video tutorials available online. Some people think these tutorials focus too much on post-processing software, but that's not my main issue with them. And they certainly aren't too expensive for beginners; in fact, most of them are free. However, in my experience, they have a major drawback. They can explain the how, but not the why. If you take a photo that doesn't look right, a video can't look at your specific image and tell you that your composition is off. They lack that personal feedback loop which is essential for artistic growth.

I have a few golden rules I share with every new intake of photographers. Firstly, ignore the advice to buy the most expensive camera you can afford. That complex equipment can actually hinder your progress and make learning more difficult because the menus are so complicated. Some clubs might say using a phone is not recommended for members, but I disagree. Start with whatever you have, even a phone, and focus on your eye.

Secondly, regarding technique, I often hear people say you must switch to manual mode as soon as possible, or avoid using automatic features entirely to be a real photographer. Again, I disagree. It’s better to use semi-automatic modes initially so you can focus on framing the subject.

And finally, regarding practice. Some people tell you that you need to practice every single day, or take as many photos as possible. But actually, it’s better to take ten carefully thought-out shots a week than five hundred random ones in an hour. Slow down and look at the light.

Before you hear the rest of the talk, you have some time to look at questions 15 to 20.

(pause)

Now listen and answer questions 15 to 20.

Simon Clark: I want to share a few stories about our current members, because often people hesitate to join us for reasons that turn out to be unfounded.

Take Alice, for example. She joined us last year. She’s a retired teacher who had been given a fancy camera for her birthday. She was actually terrified of joining because she thought everyone else would be a technical wizard and she felt intimidated by the expertise of others. She almost didn't come. But she found that our buddy system made her feel instantly at ease. Now she’s one of our most active members.

Then there’s Ben. He’s a young architect. He didn't have a confidence problem; he was worried about the time commitment. He works very long hours and thought a club would demand too much of his weekends. However, he realized that photography actually became his stress relief. He uses his lunch breaks to take street photos.

We also have Clara. She’s a student who joined us specifically because she wanted to build a portfolio. You might think she was worried about fitting in with a different age group, but she wasn't. Her main concern was that our club might be a bit too traditional, focusing only on classic landscapes and flowers. But she was surprised to find we do a lot of urban and experimental workshops.

And I should mention David. He’s quite typical of people who join later in life. He wasn't concerned about the cost of membership. Instead, he had been painting landscapes for years but found his eyesight was failing, making detailed painting difficult. These health issues meant he had to switch to photography as a way to keep being creative without the physical strain.

As for myself, my photography journey had a rocky start. I entered my first competition five years ago. I submitted a portrait I was really proud of. I didn't win. In fact, the judges barely mentioned it. I was crushed. But a week later, a stranger contacted me saying they saw the photo at the back of the hall and it moved them to tears. That taught me that connection is what matters.

Finally, regarding our upcoming exhibition. I encourage all of you to submit a piece. You don't need to be a professional. We usually suggest that new members wait about 3 months, building up a small collection of images, before choosing their best one to print.

Well, I hope that gives you a clear picture of what we do...

That is the end of part two. You now have 30 seconds to check your answers to part two.

Part 3

You will hear two Urban Planning students called Mark and Sarah discussing their dissertation project on the impact of remote working on city design.

First, you have some time to look at questions 21 to 24.

(pause)

Now listen carefully and answer questions 21 to 24.

Mark: Hi Sarah. Thanks for meeting me. We really need to finalize the direction of our dissertation. The interim deadline is next Tuesday.

Sarah: Exactly. So, I’ve been reviewing the data we collected on the long-term impact of remote working on city centres. It’s fascinating, isn't it? When we started this, I didn't think it would solve the housing crisis immediately, or lead to a population increase in the city centre. In fact, I assumed the opposite—that people would permanently leave the city for the countryside.

Mark: That was the narrative in the media, yes. But looking at the recent census data, that’s not actually happening. People aren't abandoning cities; they are just using them differently. The residential areas in the city centre are actually fully booked, but the commercial zones are ghost towns on Fridays and Mondays.

Sarah: That aligns with the interview I did with the City Planner. Did he mention an increase in traffic congestion in the suburbs? Or a decline in public transport reliability?

Mark: He did touch on transport, but he said the most serious consequence isn't traffic—it’s the loss of revenue for small local support businesses. The coffee shops and dry cleaners. If office workers are only coming in three days a week, those businesses lose 40% of their trade. So we’re seeing a blight of empty storefronts.

Sarah: That’s a really strong point. What about the environmental angle? I found a conflicting study regarding carbon footprints.

Mark: Oh? I thought it was straightforward: fewer commuters means less driving, so it must be definitely positive due to reduced car journeys.

Sarah: You’d think so. And while it isn't difficult to measure accurately, the overall impact is actually negative because homes are poorly insulated compared to modern office blocks. Transport emissions have dropped, but domestic energy consumption has skyrocketed because people are heating their whole house all day. The net gain in carbon reduction is wiped out.

Mark: That is depressing, but it’s a brilliant counter-intuitive point. Now, what about the social aspect? We need to discuss the "Third Space."

Sarah: The idea that people need a place that isn't work and isn't home?

Mark: Yes. With the office disappearing for many, people are craving connection. It hasn't decreased significantly for everyone, nor has it become entirely digital and online. The data shows a massive spike in membership for local sports clubs and community gardens. Social interaction has just shifted from the city centre to local neighbourhoods.

Sarah: Exactly. Which brings us to the design recommendations. What do we do with all those empty glass office towers?

Before you hear the rest of the discussion, you have some time to look at questions 25 to 30.

(pause)

Now listen and answer questions 25 to 30.

Mark: This is the tricky part—retrofitting. I was reading a case study on converting skyscrapers into apartments. Take an empty office and put beds in it.

Sarah: On paper, yes. But the architectural reality is a nightmare. I’ve been looking at the blueprints of the bank headquarters on Broad Street.

Mark: Is it that the buildings are not strong enough to support the weight?

Sarah: No, the concrete frames are incredibly strong. And while it is difficult to install enough bathrooms for individual units, it is possible. The real deal-breaker is the floor plate depth. Modern offices are huge, deep squares. If you chop them up into apartments, the deep structure prevents natural light from reaching all the rooms in the middle.

Mark: Ah, right. You can't legally have a bedroom without a window. So what’s the alternative? Do you install artificial daylight bulbs, or make the apartments larger?

Sarah: Neither of those fixes the legal issue. The report I read suggests cutting a central atrium through the building—literally carving a hole right down the middle to let light in.

Mark: That sounds incredibly expensive.

Sarah: It is. In fact, let's look at the different proposed solutions for these buildings. Sometimes, developers argue for complete demolition.

Mark: Knocking it down and starting again? But that’s a disaster for sustainability! All that embodied carbon is lost.

Sarah: Exactly. It's terrible for the environment, but unfortunately, it is often much cheaper than a complex conversion. What about using them for something else? Like Data Centres?

Mark: Data centres are a possibility. They don't need windows, and they need heavy duty cooling systems which offices already have. The main drawback there is that they do not create a vibrant street life. You don't want a dead street full of server farms.

Sarah: True. What about Vertical Farming? Growing crops inside?

Mark: The problem there is the weight of the soil and water. As we mentioned earlier, the buildings are strong, but agricultural setups require massive structural reinforcement. It's not really viable yet.

Sarah: So we are left with the Mixed-Use Model. The bottom floors become retail and leisure, the middle floors stay as co-working spaces, and only the narrow top floors are converted into housing.

Mark: That seems the best option. It keeps the building in use, but adapts it. Its biggest advantage is that it supports the new hybrid lifestyle perfectly.

Sarah: Okay, let’s structure the final presentation around that.

That is the end of part three. You now have 30 seconds to check your answers to part three.

Part 4

You will hear a lecture about a marine conservation project known as The Ocean Cleanup.

First, you have some time to look at questions 31 to 40.

(pause)

Now listen carefully and answer questions 31 to 40.

Lecturer: Good afternoon. In today’s lecture, we are going to dive deep into one of the most pressing marine pollution issues of our time: the accumulation of plastic waste in our oceans. Specifically, I want to look at the phenomenon known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, and more importantly, the engineering solutions that are currently being deployed to try and clean it up.

First, let’s clarify what the Great Pacific Garbage Patch actually is, because there are many misconceptions in the media. A common myth is that it is a solid island of floating trash that you could walk on, or a floating continent clearly visible from space. Neither of these is true. In reality, it is much more accurate to describe it as a plastic soup. It consists of millions of square kilometers of water saturated with suspended microplastics. While there are large objects, much of the debris is tiny, having been broken down by the sun and waves.

This accumulation is caused by the natural movement of the ocean. There are massive systems of rotating ocean currents called gyres. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch sits within the North Pacific Gyre. It acts like a giant whirlpool, pulling debris from the coasts of North America and Asia into the centre, where the water is calm. Once the plastic arrives there, it becomes trapped and can remain for decades.

The impact of this debris is devastating, but perhaps not in the way you might expect. While microplastics are a huge long-term problem entering the food chain, the most immediate danger to marine life comes from what we call "ghost nets." These are massive fishing nets that have been lost or abandoned by trawlers. These nets float just below the surface and continue to "fish" for years, trapping whales, seals, and turtles. Furthermore, surface-feeding birds, like the Albatross, often mistake floating plastic for food. They feed it to their chicks, which can result in starvation, as the plastic fills their stomachs but provides no nutrients at all.

For a long time, scientists believed that cleaning up the patch was impossible. Using traditional methods, like vessels dragging nets, would take thousands of years and cost billions of dollars. Worse, standard nets would catch vast amounts of sea life, known as bycatch, along with the plastic. However, a non-profit organization called The Ocean Cleanup has developed a passive system that is changing the game.

The concept is surprisingly simple. Instead of chasing the plastic with boats, they use the ocean's own energy to catch it. You might imagine a straight wall, but they have deployed a massive, floating barrier that is actually U-shaped. It is roughly 800 meters long. It floats on the surface of the water, with a skirt hanging down three meters deep beneath it. This skirt prevents the plastic from escaping underneath, but—and this is crucial—it allows fish to swim safely under the skirt, completely avoiding the bycatch problem.

The engineering brilliance lies in how it moves. The system is autonomous. It relies on the natural forces of the wind, waves, and current. The plastic moves primarily with the current. However, the floating barrier sticks up above the water, so it is pushed by the wind and waves, which move faster than the current. This speed difference allows the barrier to move faster than the plastic, effectively scooping it up into the centre of the U.

However, early prototypes faced a problem: sometimes the system moved too fast, or the plastic drifted out. To solve this, they introduced a sea anchor. This is a parachute-like device that floats deep underwater. By adjusting the drag, they can control the speed of the system to ensure it stays in the area with the highest concentration of waste.

Once the system is full, a support vessel visits the site to extract the plastic. It lifts the retention zone out of the water and empties the garbage onto the ship. This waste is then brought back to shore for recycling. The aim is to turn this ocean plastic into durable products. They didn't just turn it into basic construction materials; for example, the first batch of waste was actually turned into high-quality sunglasses, with the proceeds going back into funding the cleanup operations.

While this technology is promising—projections suggest they could clean up 50% of the patch every five years—the team acknowledges that cleanup is only half the battle. We also need to "turn off the tap." Research indicates that 80% of ocean plastic comes from just 1000 rivers around the world. Therefore, alongside the ocean systems, they are deploying river interceptors—solar-powered barges that collect trash before it ever reaches the sea.

Ultimately, technology can help us clean up the mess of the past, but the long-term solution lies in improving waste management infrastructure on land. We must also stop relying on disposable plastics in our society if we are to truly solve this crisis.

That is the end of part four. You now have one minute to check your answers to part four.