We have a quite significant 300,000 fundraising gap to close by Friday, and we can't afford to come up short. Not with democracy itself on the line. If you can, please consider supporting Mother Jones' hard-hitting journalism with a year-end gift to help us keep charging hard in 2022. Whether you can spare $5, $50, or way more, everything helps and matters a great deal right now.

URGENT YEAR-END FUNDRAISING REQUEST : We have a significant $300,000 fundraising gap to close by Friday, and we can't afford to come up short. Not with democracy itself on the line. Whether you can spare $5, $50, or way more, this is an important time to support Mother Jones' hard-hitting journalism with a year-end gift.

This story was originally published by Undark. It appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

In the closing months of World War II, Americans talked nonstop about how and when the war would end, and about how life was about to change. Germany would fall soon, people agreed on that. Opinions varied on how much longer the war in the Pacific would go on.

Amid the geopolitical turmoil, a small number of people and newspapers chattered about the dawn of another new age. A subtle shift was about to change the fabric of people’s lives: cork was about to lose its dominance as a cornerstone of consumer manufacturing to a little-known synthetic substance called plastic.

In 1939, the future arrived at the World’s Fair in New York with the slogan, “The World of Tomorrow.” The fairground in Queens attracted 44 million people over two seasons, and two contenders laid claim to being the most modern industrial material: cork and plastic.

For decades, cork had been rising as the most flexible of materials; plastic was just an intriguing possibility. The manifold forms of cork products were featured everywhere, from an international Paris Exhibition to the fair in Queens, where the material was embedded in the Ford Motors roadway of the future.

Meanwhile, plastic made a promising debut, with visitors getting their first glimpse of nylon, Plexiglas, and Lucite. Souvenirs included colorful plastic (phenolic resin) pencil sharpeners molded in the form of the fair’s emblematic, obelisk-shaped Trylon building. Visitors also picked up celluloid badges and pen knives, and a Remington electric razor made of Bakelite, along with plastic ashtrays, pens, and coasters.

In the months after the fair, as US entry into the war became inevitable, the government grew concerned by American dependence on cork, which was obtained entirely from forests in Europe. The United States imported nearly half of the world’s production.

People in their 50s today remember when a bottle cap included a cork sliver insert to seal it. But in 1940, cork was in far more than bottle caps. It was the go-to industrial sealant used in car windshield glazing, insulation, refrigerated containers, engine gaskets, and airplanes. In defense, cork was crucial to tanks, trucks, bomber planes, and weapon systems. As the vulnerability for the supply of this all-purpose item became clear with the Nazi blockade of the Atlantic, the government put cork under “allotment,” or restricted use prioritized for defense. Information about cork supplies became subject to censorship.

In October 1941, the Commerce Department released a hefty report detailing the situation titled “Cork Goes to War.” Besides outlining the growing industrial use of cork, the report highlighted Hitler’s efforts to scoop up Europe’s cork harvests and the need for a systemic American response.

Part of that response was an intense research and development machine that ramped up the nascent synthetic industry to fill gaps in defense pipelines. Some were synthetics first developed by America’s enemies: chemists at Armstrong Cork, an industry leader, crafted new products using materials research from Germany. Many synthetics were developed during the mad scramble to replace organic items that the blockade made expensive. To pay for the research and offset rising materials costs, Armstrong trimmed employees’ use of items like carbon paper and paper clips; the company’s accountants noted 95,000 clips used per month in 1944, a 40 percent decline since the war’s start.

In 1944, a book titled “Plastic Horizons,” by B.H. Weil and Victor Anhorn, documented the promise of plastic. A chapter titled “Plastics in a World at War” opens with a paean to the blood toll of war. But then the authors trace how war bends science to its needs for new both deadly and life-saving items: Physicists turn to aircraft detection, chemists to explosives. “Nylon for stockings has become nylon for parachutes. Rubber for tires has almost vanished, and desperate measures are required to replace it with man-made elastics.” That section concludes, “Plastics have indeed gone to war.”

In one dramatic example, the authors describe how plastics came to neutralize Germany’s secret weapon: a magnetic mine designed to be laid on the ocean floor and detonated by the magnetic field surrounding any vessel that passed over it. To counteract that, Allied scientists created plastic-coated electric cables that wrapped around the ships’ hulls and “degaussed” them, rendering the mines ineffective. Thanks, polyvinyl chloride!

The book got a glowing review in the New York Times, which noted that America was experiencing a chemical revolution.

Early plastics, as the book explained, covered a wide range of natural or semi-synthetics like celluloid and synthetic resins that could be molded with heat and pressure.

After the war, chronic shortages of common materials like rubber, cork, linseed oil, and paints forced chemists to scramble for substitutes, further speeding the embrace of plastics. Profitable bottling innovations included the LDPE squeeze bottle introduced by Monsanto in 1945, which paved the way for plastic bottles for soaps and shampoos, and the “Crowntainer,” a seamless metal cone-topped beer can.

There was also a shortage of tinplate for metal caps. Industry was quickly adapting to finding substitutes. Giles Cooke, the in-house chemist at one manufacturing leader, Crown Cork & Seal, was dabbling in research on synthetic resins for container sealants through the 1940s. In beverage bottling, cork’s quality remained unmatched. You could taste the difference between a cork-sealed bottle and one sealed with plastic. Recognizing that it would takes decades to replace cork as a sealant, Cooke and his colleagues hedged their bets with patents on both silicone film container liners and rubber hydrochloride.

In the end, “Plastic Horizons” undersold its subject. Its closing chapter hardly seems to anticipate the ubiquity of plastics we see today, along with its formidable waste problem. “In the future, plastics will supplement rather than supplant such traditional structural materials as metals, wood, and glass,” the authors wrote.

“There may be no Plastics Age, but that should discourage no one; applications will multiply with the years,” they continued. “Plastics are indeed versatile materials, and industry, with the help of science, will continue to add to their number and to improve their properties. Justifiable optimism is the order of the day, and the return of peace will enable the plastics industry to fulfill its promise of things to come.”

By 1946, the transition to plastics had reached a new threshold. That year, New York hosted a National Plastics Exposition, where for the first time, a range of strong, new materials and consumer products headed for American homes were on display. One observer noted, “the public are certainly steamed up on plastics.”

The World of Tomorrow indeed.

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from Mother Jones and our partners.

We came a lot closer to an overturned election last year than we ever knew. That's the Big Story right now: We could literally lose our democracy. And journalists had better start shouting it from the rooftops—because we could also help save it.

Light stuff, right? Mother Jones is not afraid to say we're part of the fight, as Monika Bauerlein writes in her unpacking of the war on democracy and how MoJo must shine a bright light on those trying to undermine it with everything we've got in 2022.

But we need your help to do it: December is the most important month of the year for bringing in the donations that fuel our reporting and we've got an urgent goal of raising $350,000 online by December 31. If you can right now, please join your fellow readers and support our hard-hitting nonprofit journalism with a year-end donation today.

We came a lot closer to an overturned election last year than we ever knew. That's the Big Story right now: We could literally lose our democracy. And journalists had better start shouting it from the rooftops—because we could also help save it.

Light stuff, right? Mother Jones is not afraid to say we're part of the fight, as Monika Bauerlein writes in her unpacking of the war on democracy and how MoJo must shine a bright light on those trying to undermine it with everything we've got in 2022.

But we need your help to do it: December is the most important month of the year for bringing in the donations that fuel our reporting and we've got an urgent goal of raising $350,000 online by December 31. If you can right now, please join your fellow readers and support our hard-hitting nonprofit journalism with a year-end donation today.

Nina Hamberg as told to Madison Pauly; Photos by Nina Hamberg

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from Mother Jones and our partners.

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Inexpensive, too! Subscribe today and get a full year of Mother Jones for just $12.

It's us but for your ears. Listen on Apple Podcasts.

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from Mother Jones and our partners.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Copyright © 2021 Mother Jones and the Foundation for National Progress. All Rights Reserved.Terms of Service Privacy Policy

Can you pitch in a few bucks to help fund Mother Jones' investigative journalism? We're a nonprofit (so it's tax-deductible), and reader support makes up about two-thirds of our budget.

We noticed you have an ad blocker on. Can you pitch in a few bucks to help fund Mother Jones' investigative journalism?

Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter.