专题05 阅读理解之说明文10篇(第三期)-备战2024年高考英语名校模拟真题速递(北京专用)

备战2024年高考英语名校模拟真题速递(北京专用) 第三期 专题05 阅读理解之说明文10篇 （2024上·北京顺义·高三统考二模）Borders, departments, or issue areas all represent what systems analysts call system boundaries. System boundaries divide. the big, messy, interconnected world into smaller subsystems. This is useful, even necessary. Our minds and our collective governance systems would be stuck if we had to always consider all the connections of everything to everything else. But dividing systems into subsystems can sometimes break a natural cooperativity. For instance, a decarbonizing country will spend money in its energy and transportation sectors and save money in its health system. Decarbonization could be a win for the whole, but it might be experienced as a bother for particular subsystems. Donella Meadows, the early systems modeler, wrote that system boundaries are “lines in the mind, not in the world.” And that is actually good news. If departments, and disciplines are just ideas, then there is nothing immovable about them. We can make these borders less obvious and conduct partnerships across them. We can even redraw them to include more of what matters in a single project or investment. That’s the premise of multisolving—using one investment of time or effort to achieve several goals at once. For instance, Warm Up New Zealand (WUNZ) upgraded the energy efficiency of residential buildings and provided jobs in the building sector after a financial downturn. The project resulted in better health for residents, as well. That translated into health systems savings. Taken together, a 2011 study estimated that across all these benefits, the project saved $3. 90 for every $1 invested. Multisolving seems possible everywhere and like an obvious choice. Yet, it is very much the exception, not the rule. Why is multisolving still so rare when it has the nower to boost progress on some of the most urgent issues we face? Unfamiliarity stands in the way, as does an oft-unexamined assumption that making issues small