Newsgroup: it.scienza.ambiente
Titolo: AMBIENTE: legge finanziaria 2008 - no comment

  «1-bis. A decorrere dal 1º gennaio 2009,
nel regolamento di cui al comma 1, ai fini
del rilascio del permesso di costruire, deve
essere prevista, per gli edifici di nuova co-
struzione, l'installazione di impianti per la
produzione di energia elettrica da fonti rin-
novabili, in modo tale da garantire una pro-
duzione energetica non inferiore a 1 kW
per ciascuna unita abitativa, compatibilmente
con la realizzabilita' tecnica dell'intervento.
Per i fabbricati industriali, di estensione su-
perficiale non inferiore a 100 metri quadrati,
la produzione energetica minima e' di 5 kW».

 struzione,  ...
si l'ho visto ma che ne pensi?
A.

noquarter ha scritto:

Cosi' su due piedi mi vien da dire che solo delle menti
malate e perverse, degli idioti assoluti, privi di ogni
senso della convivenza civile, possono concepire l'obbligo
di produrre energia elettrica quanto e come vogliono loro,
in un modo completamente inefficiente, a spese mie.
Per il resto, mi par di capire che attualmente il tutto
viene a costare sui 7000 euro circa (
http://www.ecorete.it
),
per complessivi 9 metri quadrati.
Bisognerebbe fare due conti su quanti kwh produce all'anno
l'accrocchio, quando li produce e quanto vengono a costare.
Personalmente grazie ad un'oculata gestione dei miei
consumi, all'anno consumo sui 600KWh, per una spesa
complessiva di quanto sara', 180 euro a 30 centesimi il KWh?
Be' in una cinquantina d'anni ammortizzerei l'investimento
(bisogna contare che 7000 euro oggi sono molto di piu' di
180 euro per 38 anni, va fatto il calcolo di
attualizzazione) . Una genialata davvero.

 per complessivi 9 metri quadrati.
Be' c'e' quantomeno anche la cogenerazione.
Resta comunque assolutamente negativa la mia valutazione dal
punto di vista etico-politico. Ne verra' fuori un casino.
Non si vede come si possa obbligare a produrre 1KW di
energia a chi magari gia' per i cazzi suoi ne risparmia 5 o
piu'. Deve trattarsi chiaramente di deficienti seguaci della
malinterpretazione fascio-comunista di Machiavelli, "il fine
giustifica qualsiasi mezzo" (chi l'ha letto davvero, sa che
Machiavelli era un po' piu' complesso)

 attualizzazione) . Una genialata davvero.
Sono assolutamente daccordo, per tutti gli edifici, ma soprattutto
quelli di nuova costruzione sarebbe MOLTO piu' proficuo investire in
sistemi per il CONTENIMENTO energetico e NON per la produzione, non
c'e' niente di male nell' autoproduzione, chiunque, fatti i dovuti
calcoli, puo' investire in produzione di energia ma a RAGION VEDUTA e
nopn per OBBLIGO DI LEGGE! Quella deve essere lasciata alla facolta'
individuale tramite l' uso degli appositi incentivi...

 appositi incentivi...
Personalmente mi sono sforzato un po' e, superati terribili
drammi di coscienza iniziali ;), ho concluso che non c'e'
alcuna ragione per cui TUTTO cio' che riguarda queste cose
non debba essere lasciato alla facolta' individuale. Il
contrario e' demenziale ed *eticamente insostenibile*. E per
piacere smettiamola con questa pagliacciata degli incentivi,
se una cosa conviene non c'e bisogno di incentivarla, se non
conviene gli incentivi servono solo a gettare soldi in una
cosa che non conviene. Le persone sanno fare bene da sole i
conti di cosa gli conviene o no finche' non si intromette
un pacco di idioti costituito in assemblea legislativa, e in
ogni caso dei soldi loro e' giusto che decidano da se' cosa
fare.
Se lo stato vuole prescrivere e ordinare, benissimo, ma
allora paga lui. Questo e' un punto imprescindibile.
Il fatto che ai governanti non sia chiaro questo punto li
delegittima completamente, sono solo dei masnadieri
truffaldini autoproclamatesi capipopolo.
Cosi' non si va da nessuna parte.


A rigore TUTTI gli incentivi sarebbero da abolire, anche quelli sulla
rottamazione delle auto...
E altre forme di FAVORITISMI piu' o meno OCCULTI: gli inceneritori
GODONO degli stessi incentivi alle energie rinnovabili... perche' non
li aboliamo anche per loro poi vediamo se sono ancora CONVENIENTI?
Levando gli incentivi agli inceneritori altre forme di trattamento
diventerebbero immediatamente superconvenienti e senza alcun
incentivo...
In ogni caso E' comunque lo stato che paga ma alla fine siamo sempre
noi perche' allo stato i soldi non piovono dal cielo.
L' incentivo alle E rinnovabili deve pero' essere visto come una forma
di investimento dello stato ma NON centralizzato (non e' direttamente
lo stato che investe in impianti) bensi' differito tra la popolazione
e nel tempo: i soldi NON li danno subito ma via via che l' impianto
produce... l' investimento NON e' sconveniente in se, il problema
fondamentale e' che sono impianti che hanno un elevato costo INIZIALE,
nonostante le rese stiano percentualmente aumentando e la vita media
sia piuttosto lunga (mediamente intorno ai 30 anni, infatti esistono
ancora in funzione impianti fotovoltaici risalenti ai primi anni '70)
rimane il fatto che a produrre i componenti chiave degli impianti (il
silicio X le celle fotovoltaiche, inverter ecc.) sono ancora POCHE
aziende ed e' questo che fa lievitare i costi; gli impianti pero'
mediamente si ripagano tra i 6 e gli 8 anni per gli impianti di ultima
generazione (questi dati NON me li invento io ma le societa' di
leasing), il resto e' TUTTO GUADAGNO. I paletti che frenerebbero un
investimento senza incentivi sono quindi l' elevato costo iniziale e i
tempi di ammortamento che pero' tendono a diminuire con l' aumento
delle rese.
Esistono dei software molto validii che permettono di fare calcoli
molto indicativi anche se di massima come 
http://www.retscreen.net/
con i quali ti puoi rendere conto della validita' di un investimento
di questo tipo.
LO scopo di questo incentivo e' quello soprattutto di FAVORIRE la
crescita di aziende del settore in modo da abbassare i costi globali,
far crescere il mercato e la competitivita' delle aziende.
Gli incentivi avranno sicuramente un termine, per ora ci sono fino
alla fine del 2008 e forse anche del 2009, poi non e' detto... ma
intanto qualche effetto positivo lo stanno avendo perche' lo scorso
ottobre visitando i saloni espositivi della fiera di Roma (del
contesto del World Energy Conference) ho potuto constatare la crescita
di molte aziende che propongono prodotti dai prezzi sempre piu'
convenienti e dalle rese sempre piu' elevate.
TUTTI i processi innovativi ad elevato costo iniziale hanno bisogno di
una spinta STATALE... pensa alle TLC... Telecom e' societa'
privatizzata, ex pubblica nata dall' aggregazione di varie aziende
PRIVATE che avevano SIP come capofila: SIP sta per Societa'
Idroelettrica Piemontese che nei primi del '900 penso' di
diversificare investendo nel cablaggio telefonico ma si fermo' di
fronte agli elevatissimi costi di investimento iniziale a fronte di
ricavi certamente assicurati ma estremamente dialzionati nel tempo...
senza l' intervento statale adesso non saremmo qua' a discutere... non
oso pensare a che livello saremmo ancora...
Per non parlare delle autostrade... oggi la SPA che le controlal fa
affari d' oro... si ma su investimenti statali fatti con le NOSTRE
TASSE...
Come vedi esistono dei precedenti ben piu' illustri ma a te fanno
tanto schifo? Sputeresti nel piatto in cui mangi?

 cosa che non conviene.
Può darsi che tu abbia ragione sul caso specifico, anche se bisognerà
vedere bene quali saranno le norme di dettaglio.
Parlando in generale al di caso specifico, però, a volte  la "convenienza"
è data dall'abusare di risorse comuni anziché pagarle, e la "convenienza"
per un singolo individuo può non coincidere con la convenienza per la
collettività. Per fare un esempio estremo (ma reale): Se posso scaricare i
rifiuti nel fosso dietro l'angolo, dovrei fare così perché "mi conviene"?,
oppure scomodarmi ad andare fino alla discarica e pagare la tariffa di
smaltimento? Lo Stato mi dice che devo andare in discarica e pagare il
servizio, e non sversare nel vallone di notte. Per convincermi, può usare
diversi sistemi: un sistema è mettere una guardia per ogni prato e
minacciare sanzioni che chissà se si riuscirà ad applicare; un altro
sistema può essere incentivare i comportamenti "virtuosi" in modo che
l'abuso sia meno conveniente. Si tratta di verificare caso per caso qual è
il sistema che offre il miglior rapporto costi/benefici e scegliere
prammaticamente, senza troppi schemini ideologici da una parte o
dall'altra: e anche il liberismo può diventare ideologia, se lo si vuole
applicare a priori a qualsiasi situazione.
Per esempio, un'affermazione del genere mi pare ideologica, di principio, a
prescindere:
"Nel mondo reale le alternative sono sempre compatibili
con le risorse disponibili."

 statali fatti con le NOSTRE TASSE...
Le autostrade sono il tipico esempio di monopolio privato
che riesce a sussistere solo perche' protetto dalle leggi
dello stato. Lo stato e' molto bravo a proteggere i monopoli
privati, quand'anche non li crea (vedi privatizzazione
telecom fatta dal Prodi precedente), tanto poi mette un po'
di specchietti per le allodole chiamati antitrust a salvare
la facciata, anzi spesso a impedire al monopolista di fatto
telecom di diminuire le tariffe perche' altrimenti vengono
danneggiati i finti competitori che sono stati messi li'
apposta per prendere per il culo i destinatari del servizio,
che oltre a tutto alla fine, come forse anche te, in buona
fede, difendono lo stato di cose che li depreda.
I monopoli privati veri sono rarissimi, e di solito basati
su una vera capacita' di fornire ai clienti cio' che
vogliono al prezzo migliore. Il contrario che in italia.

 ancora...
Poche cose sono piu' tristi e malinconiche del vedere la
vittima, ignara, che ringrazia il proprio carnefice.

 telecomunicazioni credo pure, ma non ne sono certo.
Precisazione parziale, grazie se qualcuno controlla e
approfondisce: pare che la SIP "societa' elettrica
piemontese", colle sopravvenienze attive ricavate dalla
cessione forzosa del comparto elettrico per legge dello
stato (1962, governo Fanfani, area Moro, con appoggio
esterno socialista, che l'anno dopo sarebbe entrato al
governo), abbia assorbito (le) altre compagnie telefoniche.
Sembra pero' che il tutto, gia' all'inizio degli anni 60,
fosse comunque sotto il controllo dell'IRI, l'ente di stato
delle cosiddette Partecipazioni Statali, che suppongo
controllasse le sue industrie allo stesso modo delle attuali
municipalizzate, cioe' con partecipazione azionaria
maggioritaria in regime di diritto privato.
Come si spiega cio?
La SIP Telecom forse e' sempre stata di diritto
privato, anche perche' la telefonia si e' sviluppata
dopo la guerra, dopo il periodo del controllo statale
dell'economia di stampo fascista?
Se qualcuno ne sa o scopre di piu' sarebbe molto
interessante. Non ho ancora la connessione permanente, per
cui le ricerche in rete che posso fare sono necessariamente
parziali (e costose), dettate dalla fretta.
Un ottimo sito storico strapieno di informazioni e'
www.cronologia.it
 , fatto da uno stakanovista appassionato
di storia.

http://www.repubblica.it/2008/01/motori/motori-gennaio-2008/motori-addio-euro4/motori-addio-euro4.html?ref=mothpstr1
"le auto Euro4, se diesel senza filtro antiparticolato, [...] che i sindaci
bollano come "anti-ecologiche" sono poi ritenute "ecologiche" dallo Stato
che le ritiene talmente pulite da inserirle nel programma di incentivi
all'acquisto con rottamazione."

 all'acquisto con rottamazione."
Ognuno ha le sue idee. Io di folle trovo solo che si sia
obbligati per legge a delegare TUTTO a della gente che manco
si conosce (e quando la si conosce la si evita...)
Se vogliono, grazie al principio di maggioranza, possono
farci QUALSIASI cosa. Le garanzie sono solo formali e
fittizie, e comunque possono essere eliminate in ogni
momento a maggioranza (costituzione inclusa, puerile e
bambinesca com'e' poi...)
Accettato questo, di che ti stupisci?

 bambinesca com'e' poi...)
Alternative?

Enrico C ha scritto:

Drastica restrizione del diritto dello stato di disporre
della liberta' (ne fanno parte i soldi...) del cittadino.
Un po' alla volta, ovviamente.
Invertire la tendenza, almeno, cazzo!!! ;)

 Invertire la tendenza, almeno, cazzo!!! ;)
Richiesta ragionevole. Tra norme e balzelli, il cittadino non ne esce vivo.
Pero resta il "piccolo problema" di tutti quelli che delle disposizioni
dello Stato non tengono alcun conto, e in Italia forse sono la maggioranza.

 in Italia forse sono la maggioranza.
FANNO BENE!
Moralmente hanno tutte le ragioni.
Anche se molti non e' per ragioni morali che lo fanno (i
bastardi).
In questa gara a chi frega l'altro, lo stato, che e'
fisicamente il piu' forte, non dovrebbe comportarsi da
capobanda dei ladri. Il trio di terroristi fiscali
prodi-padoa-visco se vivessero in un paese di cittadinanza
dignitosa andrebbero da tempo in giro cosparsi di pece e piume.
Invito a riflettere sul fatto che nei paesi a comunismo
reale l'economia *reale*, quella che dava da mangiare alla
gente, era in buona parte sommersa, IN NERO. Chiediti come mai.

 incentivo...
[CUT]
Fai del casino sulla funzione ultima di questi impianti.
Gli inceneritori sono una tecnologia di trattamento dei rifiuti e 
debbono essere confrontati con le altre tecnologie deputate allo stesso 
scopo.
Gli inceneritori mettono sul piatto emissioni nell'ambiente concentrate 
in pochi processi ben identificabili e controllabili e *anche* la 
produzione di energia elettrica.
Il riciclaggio mette sul piatto il recupero di materia.
La convenienza fra l'uno e l'altro dovrebbe quindi essere valutata in 
base a un confronto di tipo tecnico/scientifico/ambientale (vedi analisi 
del ciclo di vita e via dicendo) e non solo economico, considerando 
anche che *il fine ultimo è il trattamento dei rifiuti*.
Visto che però mi sembri uno di quelli che guarda al soldo, la discarica 
abusiva allora forse fa per te, visto che presenta probabilmente i costi 
di gestione minori. I camorristi ci fanno i soldi a palate... e senza 
incentivi...
-- 
prady
Per contatti:
http://www.contactify.com/a1cd0

 
Credo intendesse che senza l'accettazione degli
inceneritori al godimento degli incentivi per la produzione
di energia eletttrica da fonti rinnovabili (che non so se
vale ancora) molti impianti diverrebbero meno convenienti e
si farebbe piu' riciclaggio.
Dubito onestamente.
C'e' da dire che bisognava dirglielo prima a chi li ha
costruiti, il quale spero avra' dei contratti pluriennali
che gli garantiranno il ritorno dell'investimento. Vabbe'
che perlopiu' si trattera' di societa' a capitale pubblico
per cui i soldi non saranno MAI un problema.
Sicuramente la discarica "abusiva" costerebbe di meno di una
gestita da un ente pubblico, se solo fosse fatta come si
deve e senza dare fastidio a nessuno ;) Non mi pare sia il
caso di Napoli... (del resto il fatto che sia "autorizzata"
non e' che di per se' da' sempre garanzia assoluta, di
cazzate nella storia ne sono state fatte molte di piu' e di
molto piu' grandi col timbro della legge, pensa alle guerre
ad esempio)

 ad esempio)
Io ho visitato la discarica di RU qui vicino a Bologna (registrata EMAS) 
e sembrava veramente ben gestita.
Detto ciò la discarica per definizione è il metodo meno conveniente per 
"trattare" i rifiuti. Non recuperi nulla e rilasci in atmosfera metano 
per un secolo.


as to his
temper, we expressed as gently as possible, he then declared it was
a general hospital, which it was not. He declared there were no
compulsory examinations, and that the Government had nothing to do
with examinations in any form. We thought it wisest not to give him
the information that we held at that time, and hold to the present
day,--dozens of papers of committment to the Lock Hospital for
compulsory examinations both in his own handwriting and in that of
the Protector. And some of these cases, as the records we have copied
show, were those of perfectly innocent girls, acknowledged to be
virgins, until assaulted by these abominable medical officials and
robbed of the fresh bloom of maidenly chastity.
The official spoke of the work of the Protectorate as "Rescue work,
and that only," in so far as it dealt with women. But it must be borne
in mind that the "Protector" of women and girls was likewise the
Registrar of brothels; and that the rules and regulations under the
Women and Girls' Protection Ordinance provided, in both Singapore and
Hong Kong, for every detail in the management of brothels, even to the
granting of a permit to keep a brothel, and the description of the
"duties" of brothel-keepers. Surely this part of the Protector's
work cannot be called "Rescue work," as we are accustomed to use the
phrase.
According to the Annual Report of the Protectorate for 1893, 1,183
women and 

found free
from disease, and only 37 to be diseased; and during a similar
period in 1887-8, out of 103 women that were denounced, 101 were on
examination found free from disease and only two diseased. We can
judge from this of both the worthlessness of the measure for tracing
diseased women, and the mischievousness of the measure as an aid to
libertines in getting girls they are endeavoring to seduce so injured
in reputation that they can easily capture their prey.
As a sanitary measure, the Acts have invariably proved a failure, as
shown by honestly handled statistics. There have, to be sure, been
many doctors, some of high scientific qualifications, who have
produced statistics strongly tending to prove the sanitary benefits
of such measures on superficial survey. But these statistics have
afterwards been shown to be mistakenly handled or designedly
manipulated to make such a showing. This is not a medical book, and
any extended treatment of figures as to disease would be entirely out
of place in it, so we will content ourselves by saying that during
late years physicians of prominence from every part of the world have
assembled twice at Brussels for Conferences in regard to this matter.
These physicians are in large numbers Continental doctors, the very
ones who have had most to do in enforcing such measures. Each time
the number of opponents to the Contagious Diseases Acts has rapidly
increased, after listening to the testimony from all sides as to
their inutility; in fact, the whole force of opinion at each of these
Conferences, in 1899 and 1902, was against State Regulation, though
there was a division of opinion as to the substitute for it.
In 1903, the Minister of the Interior of France, the country where
these Acts originated, nominated an extra-Parliamentary Commission to
go thoroughly into these quest

such other employment as he
    may see fit.
    Such are the circumstances under which thousands of our fellow
    beings are annually brought to the labour market at Singapore, and
    it must be admitted that, to say the least of it, the system does
    not seem worthy of Western nineteenth century civilization. At the
    same time the extreme difficulty of controlling the 'depot and
    broker system,' or even of providing an efficient substitute for
    it, must be freely admitted. The system of Government contracts
    and inspection of immigrants has already done something toward
    ameliorating the condition of the coolie, and guarding him against
    illegal detention after his arrival at Singapore or Penang. Much
    more, however, remains to be done before the coolie trade will
    cease to be a reproach to the Straits Settlements, and it is
    doubtful whether any satisfactory reforms will be accomplished
    until the Chinese Government is moved in the matter with a view to
    checking the evil at the foun

lived in Singapore nearly thirty years. He said he
had disapproved of the Contagious Diseases Ordinance, when it was
in existence, but a good thing had grown out of it in the matter of
provisions for the "protection", of women. We asked, in reference to
his remark that the Protectorate was a Rescue Society, if it did not
look after men, too. He replied, "Oh yes, the coolies; all are brought
here, but the men go to the other side of the building; the women come
here." We asked if all the women came before him; he said, "Before the
Protector; but in his absence before me." We pondered on the thought
of this "rescue work" carried on by this particular Protector of whom
we had heard that he had been almost unspeakably vile from boyhood
up. He showed us a book which contained a list of all deck-passengers
coming to Singapore, who had been passed under review at the
Protectorate; they were listed by families. He then showed us a
separate list of women and girls who came alone, without families. He
had underscored with red ink the names of those in the list who had
gone into brothels. He said that suspicious cases either went to the
Protectorate Refuge, or those under whose charge they went to live
were obliged to give bonds or securities, 500 Mexican dollars was the
usual amount of the security in the cases recorded. He also showed us
the form of these bonds, both blank forms and some that had been made
out; these bonds required that the girls named therein should not be
removed from Singapore, and that the girls should be produced from
time to time at the Protectorate, upon demand of the Protector, and
within twenty-four hours. The bond was good for a specified time named
thereon. Then he showed us a book containing "_Warrants of Removal and
Detention to the Chinese Refuge_" for girls under sixteen years of
age. He also showed us little tickets (we had already seen them in a
brothel) and said these contained the number a

the imagination to think it a rose), was very "mild" and
"harmless," and that the adoption of purchased boys was a "religious"
duty, or at least, had a religious flavor about it, as practiced by
the Chinese. But as we have already said, that adoption in order to be
lawful in China must be the adoption of one of the same surname.
On October 27th, 1879, the Chief Justice, at an adjourned sitting
of the Court for the purpose, sentenced two more offenders, one for
kidnaping a boy, and the other for detaining a girl with intent to
sell her. In the first case the Judge said:
    "Received as you had been into the father's house in charity, you
    availed yourself of the opportunity to steal his child, and tried
    to sell the child openly, probably having hawked him from door to
    door. The sentence of the Court on you, Tang Atim, is that you be
    imprisoned and kept to hard labor for two years, and that you be
    kept in solitary confinement for a period of one week in every two
    months of your imprisonment."
Chan Achit, an old woman, convicted of having unlawfully detained a
female child of 11 years of age, with intent to sell her, was next
placed in the dock. His Lordship said:
    "The evidence in this case has shown the extraordinary extent to
    which, under cloak of China custom, the iniquity of dealing in
    children has extended. From the evidence, I have no doubt that a
    vagabond clansman to whom the father had occasionally given out of
    his penury had originated the crime in enti

and that the conditions necessary to these exceptions in their
    favor in the Chinese Criminal Code do not exist in Hong Kong,
    and that the penalties would apply, if in China, to all such
    transactions as I have denounced in Hong Kong, of that I have no
    doubt. Dr. Eitel's vindication is of a system as recognized in an
    express exception to the Penal Code in China proper, which may,
    for aught I know, work well in China. What I have said is that the
    practices in Hong Kong do not come within the cases which are only
    the exception to the penal enactments in the Chinese Code against
    all such bondage in China. I have never said ... that all buying
    and selling of children for adoption or domestic service is
    contrary to Chinese law. What I have said is that all such buying
    and selling of children as has come within my cognizance in Hong
    Kong is contrary to Chinese law; but I do think that buying and
    selling even for adoption and domestic servitude under the best
    circumstances, constitutes slavery; legal according to Chinese
    law, but illegal according to British law. Reference is made to
    Chinese gentlemen; I believe that not one of them has his 'house'
    in Hong Kong; the wife (small-footed) is kept at the family home
    in China. Each of them has his harem only in Hong Kong. There may
    be an exception to this rule, but I have never heard of any such
    exception. (I know of only one, of a Chinese gentleman, who, for
    certain reasons, was afraid to return to China.) ... I have not
    known a single case of adoption by a Chinaman in Hong Kong. They
    may exist in China proper, and possibly in Hong Kong ... They are
    not in China proper a sacred reli

had been expended to give it a fine
appearance. We were soon ushered into the presence of the man who held
the same relation to the work at Singapore that John Lee holds, or at
least held the last we knew, at Hong Kong. Will you believe us, when
we tell you that to our amazement it was that same white-haired old
man to whom we had been introduced at the church gathering as such an
active Christian, "working along much the same lines as ourselves, and
at the head and front of every good work in the Colony?" To be sure we
had heard the name of this Inspector, but we had never in our remotest
conception connected it with the man the Doctor had introduced to us.
Concealing our surprise we sat down for a few moment's interview. The
man knew his lesson "like a book." We could have prompted him, had he
made a mistake in reciting it, from the State documents which we had
with us,--the same from which we have compiled the chapters of this
little book. "The work of the Protectorate is really rescue work, _and
that only_." He had lived in Singapore nearly thirty years. He said he


registration applicable to domestic servants and strangers in
    family houses. It would be a good thing if Sir John Smale would
    place at the disposal of the Government (as I believe he has never
    yet done) any facts connected with the brothel system or the
    domestic servitude of which he possesses any real knowledge."
This letter gives us some conception of the almost insuperable
difficulties Sir John Smale had to encounter in his endeavor to put
down slavery, for not a case could come up in the Superior Court for
conviction on the Judge's information, of course, for that would
be assuming both prosecuting and judicial powers, and the men who
occupied in turn that office, during Sir John Smale's incumbency,
refused to act in unison with him, and this Attorney General's
language betrays hot prejudice, lack of candor as regarded the facts,
and insolence toward Sir John Smale.
The Attorney General has a fling at the Chief Justice as
"impracticable," yet the only practical suggestion that the former
makes in his letter as to how to meet the conditions he seems to have
taken from Sir John Smale's own words upon which he was asked to
express an opinion. The Chief Justice had said:
    "I think the evils complained of might be lessened,--(1) By a
    better registration of the inmates of brothels, and by frequently
    bringing them before persons to whom they might freely speak as to
    their position and wishes, and by such authoritative interference
    with the brothel-keepers as should keep them well in f

administered by the mistresses of slaves in America.
    No. 2. "One day I was playing in the street near my home in
    Canton, and a man kidnaped me. He said: 'Come with me; your mother
    told me to take you to buy something for her, and you are to take
    it back.' I have never seen my father and mother since. In 3 or 4
    days I was taken to the Hong Kong steamer. I dared not cry on the
    street, but on board the steamer I cried very much. The kidnaper
    said: 'Don't you cry, or you will have the policeman after you,
    and they'll take you off to the foreign devils' prison.' At Hong
    Kong he sold me to a woman, and after staying at her house a few
    days she brought me to California. I had a yellow paper given me,
    but I don't know what it was. The woman told me I must say I was
    born in California. I came here last winter. I am 11 years old.
    I don't remember the name of the steamer. The woman sold me to
    another woman. I had to work as cook, and nurse her little
    bound-footed child, who was strapped to my back to carry. The
    child I carried was 9 years old; and I was 11. My mistress was
    very cruel. Often she took off all my clo

evils I have
    denounced, as they affect the moral status of the Colony, in order
    that some remedy may be applied to them.... I am informed that His
    Excellency the Governor has been unable to obtain the opinion of
    the Attorney-General on the points raised." ...
It is impossible not to feel that this neglect on the part of someone
at Hong Kong to forward the Chief Justice's letters until the first of
these was a year old (for they were actually sent in August, 1881),
was a designed obstruction of his endeavors to set himself in the
correct light, and to enlighten the Christian public of Great Britain
as to the abuses existing at Hong Kong.
In this letter expressing regret at the delay of his letters, he
speaks of convictions of eight more cases of kidnaping, and "almost
unprecedented brutal assaults on bought children." "Considering the
special waste of life in brothel life, and the general want of new
importations to keep up the bondage class of 20,000 in this Colony,
the cases of kidnaping detected cannot be one-half of one per cent of
the children and women kidnaped."
    "Two cases of brutal treatment of young girls by purchasers, their
    pocket-mothers, one little girl having had her leg broken by
    beating her, and the other having been shockingly and indecently
    burnt,--both probably weakened for life,--illustrate the cruel
    passions which ownership in human beings engenders here, as it
    ever has done elsewhere. In a case now before the magistrate, the
    evidence tends to show that a girl thirteen y

a brothel, when I saw him in the
    passageway, asked me if I wished to come to the Mission, and I
    said 'Yes.' My mistress had gone out into the next room, leaving
    her daughter and another slave girl in the room. I said I would go
    at once, and he brought me. I am very glad to live here and lead a
    good life."
    No. 3. The rescuer was requested to meet a girl at the corner of
    Stockton and Jackson streets. She did so. K---- Y---- was comely
    and refined looking. She had been sold into a brothel at a tender
    age. When about 22 she met a young Chinese man who wished to marry
    her, and he paid down $600 for her, promising $1,400 more in time.
    Another man objected to the sale, because the girl had mortgaged
    herself to him for $600. Through the Mission the girl was released
    from her bondage, and remained at the Mission one year and then
    married the first man, and they left San Francisco and resided for
    a time in an inland town. Here an effort was made to kill her in
    her own garden one evening. Her husband brought her back to San
    Francisco, and later she went back to China.
    No. 4. Came from a brothel on Spofford alley. She was occasionally
    allowed to attend the (Chinese) theatre. One evening when at the
    theatre she had word conveyed to the Mission to come get her
    immediately. The rescuer

in
    rare cases indeed, in which the conditions of clanship and other
    stringent conditions are precisely complied with; and they have
    as much to do with the necessities of the poor, and no more, than
    would be the case in England or Ireland in the time of a famine.
    These Chinese gentlemen say that the children are well cared for.
    If girls eligible for marriage or concubinage, they are sold for
    that, and form a profitable investment to a Chinese gentleman.
    If not so eligible, they are sold for any, even the worst
    purpose,--brothels, according to my experience in the Criminal
    Courts of Hong Kong. If the former, it may be that they do well;
    but if the latter, no slavery is worse. This as to females. And
    as to males, the purchaser holds them until they can redeem
    themselves, and, according to my experience, generally never.
    Again, the Chinese gentlemen allege that if the adoptive parent or
    master does not do his duty the actual parents have their remedy.
    The answer is, so far as Hong Kong is concerned, the far greater
    number of actual parents are far away in China, have entirely lost
    sight of the child, and are far too poor to seek a remedy in Hong
    Kong. They would have a remedy, if they were present and knew it,
    but they do not know that there is a remedy. They had their remedy
    from the first in China proper. Well, a remedy in the Mandarin
    Court, where the longest purse prevails, and into which a poor man
    seldom dares to enter a complaint."
    "Lastly, it is said that the lot of these children is far happier
    than if they had been left to their

custom is tolerated,
    and both alike or neither must be claimed as sanctioned by
    Governor Elliott's proclamation. All remedies which ever existed
    by common law or by statute in England up to 1845 against
    ownership of human beings, against every form of slavery, extend
    by their own proper force and authority to Hong Kong; and, if
    that were not enough, all English laws applicable to Hong Kong,
    including those against ownership in human beings, were by express
    Ordinances 6 of 1845, and 12 of 1873, embodied into the laws
    of Hong Kong, whilst the worst forms of slavery are especially
    punished by Ordinance 4 of 1865, and 2 of 1875. I am bound by
    my most solemn obligations to enforce all these laws. I must,
    therefore, without fear, favour or affection, discharge this duty
    to the best of my ability."
CHAPTER 10.
NOT FALLEN--BUT ENSLAVED.
The Report of the Commission affords the following instructive
account of the difference in the moral and social status between the
prostitute of the East and West:
    "In approaching the subject of prostitution, as it is found in
    Hong Kong at the present day, it is absolutely necessary for a
    full and just comprehension of it, to keep in mind two distinct
    considerations. One is the almost total identity of the who

ordered her to open the street door. If
she recognized him as an officer she would not have dared refuse. The
inspector and the interpreter went up the stairs, but encountered
folding doors half way up, locked across the stairs. The Inspector
managed to get over them and unlock them from the inside, and on they
went, and paused to listen beneath the trap door. They did not hear
A-Kan's voice, and did not know whether he was there. They had only
the conjecture of the woman across the street to proceed upon,
nevertheless they had forced their way into this private abode
occupied by women, knowing nothing whatever about the place, whether
it was respectable or not. At this moment Mrs. Lau heard voices of men
on her stairs, and said in alarm to A-Kan, "The inspector is coming,
looking for you, isn't he?" A-Kan said "Yes." Then Tai Yau threw
herself at the feet of A-Kan and begged for mercy, saying: "I was
arrested before and fined a hundred dollars. I sold my son to pay the
fine, and you must not say anything now." He sanctimoniously shook his
head, as though weighing his 

are supported by capitalists. Mr. Lister speaks of them as 'a
    horrible race of cruel women, cruel to the last degree, who use an
    ingenious form of torture, which they call prevention of sleep,'
    which he describes in detail.... It seems that although the
    Brothel Ordinances did not call into being this 'horrible,'
    'cruel,' and 'haughty' race of women, they have armed them with
    obvious powers, which they would not otherwise have possessed,
    and there is consequently reason to apprehend that Government
    supervision accentuates in some respects rather than relieves the
    hardships of the servitude of the inmates."
The records furnish many instances to prove that the Registrar
General's Department was not operated with the least idea of relieving
the slave from her bondage. These are culled from the court records.
We will condense some of them.
    1. Three sisters were brought by their foster-mother from Macao
    to Hong Kong, on the promise of a feast; they were taken to the
    house of an old brothel-keeper, to whom the foster-mother sold the
    girls, receiving ten dollars apiece for them, to bind the bargain,
    and she went away, leaving the girls with this old woman, who
    began immediately to urge them to become prostitutes; they cried
    and refused, asking to be allowed to go to their foster-mother who
    had brought them up,--not suspecting that they had been already
    sold by her into shameful slavery. The old woman locked them up,
    and beat one of the girls, who had resisted her cruel fate. Their
    meals were all taken into the room where they were kept close
    prisoners from that time. Brought into court, the foster-mother
    was set at liberty, although the history was fully set forth, and
    the old woman declared: "She pledged the girls in my house, by
    receiving thirty dollars from me.... I have a witness who saw the
    money paid." The brothel-keeper was convicted only 

miserably ... in the prosecution of their employment."
    4th, That it is "by no choice of their own" that they prosecute
    their employment, and "are subjected to such treatment."
    5th, That they have "an urgent claim upon the active protection of
    Government."
    6th, That the service to which these slaves are doomed, through
    "no choice of their own," is the most degraded to which a slave
    could possibly be reduced, i.e., "prostitution."
When Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote "Uncle Tom's Cabin," she sounded
the note of doom for slavery in the United States. After that, slavery
became intolerable. Many have remarked on the fact that the book
should have so stirred the conscience of the Christian world, when
there are depicted in it so many even engaging features and admirable
persons, woven into the story of wrong. Her pen did not seem to make
slavery appear always and altogether black. But there was the fate of
"Uncle Tom," and the picture of "Cassie," captive of "Legree." It was
not what slavery always was, but _what it might be_--the terrible
possibilities, that aroused the conscience of Christendom, and made
the perpetuation of African slavery an impossibility to Americans.
The master _might_ choose to use his power over the slave for the
indulgence of 

_slavery_.' All the advocates of this domestic slavery
from that time have called the noxious weed by the sweeter name.
Governor Hennessey asked the opinion of others of his officials. One
Acting Police Magistrate replied 'When the servant girls (or slaves
girls, as some prefer to term them) in the families in this Colony are
contented with their lot, and their parents do not claim them, the
police cannot be expected to interfere.' Another said 'Buying and
selling children by the Chinese has been considered a harmless
proceeding, its only effect being to place the purchaser under a legal
and moral obligation to provide for the child until the seller chose
to repudiate the bargain, which he could always do under English law.'
The Attorney General, Mr. O'Malley, when asked (at a later period) his
opinion as to the utterances Sir John Smale had made from time to time
on the subject of slavery, replied to the Governor
    "With regard to Sir John Smale's observation, I know that
    difficulties national, social, official and financial beset the
    Government in reference to the special questions I have raised,
    I have only to observe that I have never heard of those
    difficulties. My own impression is that the respectable parts
    of the community, Chinese as well as European, including the
    Government and the police, are fully alive to the brothel and
    domestic servitude systems, and as well informed as Sir John Smale
    himself as to the real facts. One would suppose from the tone
    of his pamphlet that he stood alone in his perception and
    denunciation of evil. But I believe the fact is that the Executive
    and the community generally are quite as anx

among the natives, in the following
well-deserved thrust at the weak point in the armor of the British
officials:
    "The office of the Registrar-General was charged with the
    superintendence of prostitutes and the licensing of brothels
    and similar affairs. But _from 80 to 90 per cent of all these
    prostitutes in Hong Kong were brought into these brothels by
    purchase, as is well known to everybody_. If buying and selling is
    a matter of a criminal character, the proper thing would be, first
    of all, to abolish this evil (brothel slavery). But how comes
    it that since the first establishment of the Colony down to the
    present day the same old practice prevails in these licensed
    brothels, and has never been forbidden or abolished?"
This was a center shot, and calculated to weaken the hands of at
least the guilty officials. What could they say? Were the officials
prepared, since the report of the Commission a few months before had
made public the scandals connected with the licensing and inspection
of brothels, to set about reforming the abuses by radical measures?
Certainly the Chief Justice was. He did everything in his power to
abolish slavery _as slavery_, not simply to abolish slavery when
unconnected with brothels. But subsequent history seems to indicate
that, from this point on, the British officials were ready to
compromise with the Chinese merchants, and the testimony from this
time forward was well

this building is approached through "Washington
Place," an alley, at the entrance of which one encounters a sign, "No
White Men Admitted Here, Only Chinese." This notice, which has been
put up at the entrance of Oriental brothels in Chinatown, has been
ordered by the Chief of Police, it is claimed, to prohibit Americans
associating with Orientals in vice, so as to prevent demoralization
and race quarrels. We do not dispute the motive, but the _effect_
is, that those who would work for the rescue of slaves are kept at a
distance, and no one who is likely to make a complaint against abuses
and law-breaking can approach the place without permission from
the police, which gives ample opportunity for getting everything
objectionable out of sight. As far as prevention of the commingling
of the different races is concerned, that may be hindered at certain
points, but American men are on the inside track here, as to making
money through these slaves. The building has been erected and is
owned by Americans, and one man of European name is a partner in the
immediate management of the place. On our first visit to this building
we were informed on reliable information that there were 125 Japanese
and over 50 Chinese girls in the place, and 100 more were expec

native community, which
    induced him, when quitting the Supreme Court, to take a hopeful
    view of the future of this important subject.'"
CHAPTER 12.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE ANSWERS HIS OPPONENTS.
The Acting Attorney General at the time of Sir John Smale's first
pronouncement against slavery had suggested to Governor Hennessy that
Sir John Smale's statements should be sent to London to the Secretary
of State for the Colonies; and he and other advisers recommended that
no prosecutions in connection with "adoption" and "domestic servitude"
should be instituted, pending the receipt of instructions from the
Home Government. The Chief Justice concurred in these views, and also
suggested that the Chinese be told that no prosecutions as to the past
should take place, but that in future, in every case where _buying and
selling_ occurred in connection with adoption or domestic service, the
Government would undoubtedly prosecute.
The replies that came from the Secretary of State indicated scant
sympathy with Sir John Smale's position. His action was likely to
disturb the system of regulation of vice at Hong Kong, and these
health measures were in high repute with that official at London. He
could not sympathize with the Governor's view that laws securing the
freedom of the women were to be executed, whatever the result to the
brothel system. He wrote in reply as though Sir John Smal

-seven miles in
circumference," and when Great Britain took possession its inhabitants
were limited to "a few fishermen and cottagers."
The Tankas helped the British in many ways in waging these wars, and
when peace was established went to live with them on the island. This
action on the part of these "river people" is significant as showing
as much or more attachment to the foreigner than to the other classes
of Chinese. There seems always to be less conscience in wronging
an alien people than in injuring a people to whom one is closely
attached, and this sense of estrangement from other Chinese may
account to some extent for the facility with which this aboriginal
people engaged, a little later, in the trade in women and girls
brought from the mainland to meet the demands of profligate
foreigners.
Sir Charles Elliott, Governor of Hong Kong, wishing to attract Chinese
immigration to the island, issued, on February 1st and 2nd, 1841, two
proclamations in the name of the Queen, to the effect that there would
be no interference with the free exercise on the part of the Chinese
of their religious rites, ceremonies and social customs, "pending Her
Majesty's pleasure."
Following the custom of all Oriental people, to whom marriage is a
trade in the persons of women, when the Tankas saw that the foreigners
had come to that distant part almost universally without wife or
family, they offered to sell them women and girls, and the British
seem to have purchased them at first, but afterwards they modified the
practice to merely paying a monthly stipend. All slavery throughout
British possessions had been prohibited only a few years before the
settlement of Hong Kong, in 1833, when 20,000,000 pounds had been
distributed by England as a boon to slave-holders.
Hong Kong's first Legislative Council was held in 1844, and its first
ordinance was an anti-slavery measure in the form of an attempt to
define the law relating to slavery. It was a long p

must, therefore, have been an advertisement of
    their shame.
    "A curious musical instrument was brought--somewhat like a
    dulcimer--on which two of the girls played in succession, singing
    in a high, monotonous way.
    "From here we went to the first place visited the night previous,
    on the opposite corner of the same block. There was quite an
    excitement here when we came in. Two men and two girls were
    playing on native instruments--one of the men on a sort of fiddle,
    and the other on a rude guitar; the girls, one striking, in sharp
    staccato fashion, a wooden perforated bowl inverted on a standard
    or post, and the other a kind of cymbal; they were singing in the
    same shrill, monotonous way we had heard before. We counted eight
    girls here. There was a piece of unpainted tin or zinc, about
    eight by twelve inches, set upon the table toward one end, with
    a list of fifty names on it, and a Chinese man, who talked fair
    English, explained it thus: 'These are the names of singing and
    dancing girls who co

prosecute the case in spite of all
its difficulties (which are largely imaginary on the part of lukewarm
officials), then the girl must be returned to the master she has
informed against, to be in his power for him to vent his wrath upon
her. A case in point occurred in Oakland only a few months ago, and we
had a chance to interview the girl. The Captain of Police went through
the brothels of Oakland's Chinatown, accompanied by some missionary
ladies, in order to discover if possible any girls who would
acknowledge that they wished to come away. Every girl was questioned,
in the absence of the keepers, and not one, or perhaps only one, said
she wished to come away. There were some one hundred and fifty Chinese
slave girls in Oakland at this time, and one might say they all had a
chance to escape, and of their own will chose to remain. But was that
the truth? Not at all; the result did not prove at all that one, and
only one wished to come away. It proved merely that only one was
inspired with sufficient confidence and courage, after her long,
hard experience with foreigners, to _say what she wished._ It is the
universal testimony of all the girls who 

 all'acquisto con rottamazione."
Non mi sembrano affatto folli. Gli incentivi vengono dati per la Fiat e
quindi coprono ciň che la Fiat produce. Vabbé, l'80% dei contributi va in
Germania e Francia, ma chi se ne frega? Pur di dare una mano ai parenti di
Caracciolo (l'editore di Espresso e Repubblica) ed alle banche che, se non
acquistano i BOT siamo nella bratta, cosa non si farebbe?
La follia sta nel fatto che il Governo dovrebbe far funzionare ciň che č di
sua competenza: scuole, ospedali, tribunali, Esercito e Polizia e non
intromettersi in settori dove non puň che far danni, anche se non fosse
corrotto e schifoso.
Invece...

sistemi per il CONTENIMENTO energetico e NON per la produzione, non
Questi ci sono già, non ti preoccupare, nessuna pena ci è stata
risparmiata quando si vuol costruire. Ho provato a a costruire e ogni
giorno l'architetta veniva a sottopormi materiale d a firmare, credo
ormai di avere una rmadio di cartoffie. Una volta mi è cascato
l'occhio su una consulenza dell'istituto metereologico di non so dove,
costatomi una bella cifra, con le giornate di pioggia e di sole nella
mia zona, ecc. 
Ho chiesto per cos'era, e mi è stato detto che a seconda dle clima era
obbligatorio un certo tipo di isolamento.
Io  l'avrei fatto comunque, non sono per lo spreco, anche se alla fine
si dimostrerà piu' costoso di quello che avrei speso per il
riscaldamento un po' meno efficiente ma la burocrazia non ha
tralasciato niente. Neanche la consulenza dei metereologi :-)
ciao
M

 mia zona, ecc. 
Non ci sono delle tabelle già pronte, con i dati zona per zona?

 approfondisce:
Da quello che so, la telefonia interurbana a lunga distanza (all'inizio
mediante centralino, in seguito la teleselezione automatica - col prefisso
0 - entro in funzione a fasi dal 1965 al 1970 quando divenne definitiva su
tutto il territorio nazionale) e sempre stata statalizzata (nel 1925 il
fascismo istitui l'ASST, Azienda di Stato per i Servizi Telefonici). L'ASST
e stata sciolta nel 1994 fondendola in Telecom Italia.
La telefonia locale inizialmente (la telefonia nasce nel 1877) fu privata
tramite concessioni, poi fu nazionalizzata credo nel 1907, riprivatizzata
nel 1923 (fase liberista del governo Mussolini, quando non era ancora
dittatore e si appoggiava a popolari e liberali) quando fu assegnata a sei
compagnie telefoniche:
- STIPEL (Societa Telefonica Interregionale Piemonte E Lombardia)
privata di proprieta della SIP (idroelettica piemontese)
- TELVE (Telefonia delle Venezie), privata
- TIMO (Telefoni Italia Medio Orientale), privata acquisita dalla SIP nel
1926 esercitava in Emilia Romagna, Marche, Umbria (tranne Orvieto)
- TETI (Telefonica Tirrena), privata di proprieta in parte dei Pirelli,
esercitava in Liguria, Toscana, Lazio, Sardegna e Orvieto
- SET (Societa Esercizi Telefonici), privata esercitava nel Sud e in Sicilia
Nel 1933 l'IRI assorbe la SIP in fallimento (scorporandone la STIPEL e
lasciando alla SIP solo l'elettricita), fonda la STET assegnandole STIPEL,
TELVE, TIMO (anche queste ultime assorbite in quanto praticamente fallite)
mentre restano private TETI e SET. Queste ultime vengono acquisite dall'IRI
nel 1957, a quel punto tutta la telefonia e in mano allo Stato anche se non
per legge (a differenza dell'energia elettrica).
Nel 1964 STIPEL, TELVE, TIMO, TETI, SET vengono fuse nella SIP (gia di
proprieta statale tramite l'IRI) che deve cedere all'ENEL l'esercizio
dell'elettricita.
A differenza dell'ENEL che era un vero e proprio ente pubblico (fino al 1992
quando viene trasformato in SpA con il 100% delle azioni di proprieta del
Tesoro), la SIP e una societa per azioni che pero e posseduta al 100% dalla
STET (a sua volta SpA di diritto privato posseduta al 64% dall'IRI).
La SIP e la STET si fondono poi (insieme all'ASST) in Telecom Italia nel
1994, poi privatizzata a partire dal 1997.