专题07 阅读理解之议论文10篇(第三期)-备战2024年高考英语名校模拟真题速递(新高考专用)

备战2024年高考英语名校模拟真题速递(新高考专用) 第三期 专题07 阅读理解之议论文10篇 （2024·湖北武汉·校联考二模）Recently, a coalition of business and advocacy groups from around Washington gathered to kick off a campaign to enact a carbon pricing program in the capital.Known as the Climate and Community Reinvestment Act of D．C．, the plan would place a new tax on all fossil fuels bought or sold, with the hope of ultimately discouraging the use of these polluting energy sources. The big-picture goal of this campaign is admirable: to address the ever-deepening crisis of climate chaos by dissuading the continued use of coal,oil and gas. But unfortunately, the approach —one based in a world of financial markets, trading schemes and encouraging new public revenue streams —is inherently flawed. Simply put, carbon pricing is a false solution to climate change and a distraction from real, effective climate solutions we must urgently pursue. To date, there is insufficient evidence to indicate that carbon taxes lower greenhouse gas emissions. In fact,the opposite is true. Recently Food & Water Watch reviewed the British Columbia carbon tax program, often cited by advocates as an example of success. From 2009(the first full year of the tax)to 2014, emissions from taxed sources grew by 4.3 percent.And in the seven years after the carbon tax took effect, total gasoline sales increased by 7.37 percent. Supporters of such plans like to focus on a deceivingly (貌似地) simple notion that increasing the price of a consumer good will automatically reduce its use. But this just isn’t the case when it comes to the purchase of necessities. People must heat their homes in winter, and they must commute to work, regardless of the cost. Those backing the D．C．carbon pricing plan like to note that revenue from the new tax would go toward investment in clean energy sources. But only 20 percent of the generated funds would be allocated in this manner. The rest would be shared out in tax breaks for businesses and rebates (退还款) for consumer