A high voltage TAV

The Cinquestelle, since their birth, have attracted the consent of many citizens interested in environmental causes. Although in Italy, the environmental movements have never reached a large number of political parties (unlike Germany and Northern Europe, for example), the possibilities of juxtaposition to hard-hitting works fueled safe local elections

. of the Parma Municipality by Federico Pizzarotti in 2012 was favored by the battle against the incinerator, as well as the excellent results of the grillini in Piedmont and Puglia used the crusades against the high speed Turin-Lyon and, in the south, against the Apulian Tap pipeline or Ilva interventions in Taranto. The M5S, among others, has also targeted the foothills of Piedmont and Lombardy and other works related mainly to mobility

It is therefore not surprising that the government has permanently closed the doors. Tav in Val de Susa experience. In the end, with consistency, grillini owe their own electorate, although the Lega, always supportive of work, feels out of place. Remains, however, to wonder what are the alternative models to these constants "no" Cinquestelle since the economy has always evolved on the evolution of communication channels. But that's another chapter.

The only certainty, for the moment, is that the dark grillina has the intention of falling at high speed. Unlike the Tap in Puglia pipeline, where the weight of international contracts makes it impossible to cancel (the same US administration required guarantees for the continuation of works), high speed in Piedmont is only protected by a 2001 agreement. with France. This would overcome it more easily with a simple law, with the exception of any compensation and litigation: the grillini only indicate the 800 million euros of funds to be returned to Europe; oppositions speak of two billion penalties. In short, the money involved is numerous. But the No-Tav minimizes by comparing this to the huge total cost of the work, whose funding – we recall – drops 40% on Europe, by 35% on the average. Italy and 25% on France

The Tav theme, which in recent seasons seemed a little tarnished, at least at the media level (except the clashes of 39, a few days ago, with house arrest to the head of the social center Askatasuna), is thus revived by the hypothesis of the resounding Italian back-front. And they come back to navigate lively discussions of inevitable pbadions, often prejudicial, between supporters and opponents of the work. In general, it is easy to argue, beyond anti-modernist rantings, that big jobs are needed for the country's growth. To innovate it, to include it in international contexts. At the same time, with a somewhat "circular" attitude, recall the environmental and economic "sustainability" of the work or recall the rights of the local population. Reconciling different interests, especially in Italy fragmentation, is simple in words, let alone in deeds.

The real problem is that the Tav, with more than thirty years' history, adds something to all of this. It represents a case in itself, a unicum that has become revealing of our times and how the so-called "great works" have remained great especially for colossal scandals, endless wastings, mafia infiltration, constant dispositions of the judiciary and also a policy before the company cancels historical differences and demarcations: just a pause on the preparation of the last major sporting events in Italy, swimming and football in mind (to the point to give up the Roman Olympics), the endless highway Salerno-Reggio Calabria, at the Milan Expo, at Metro C of Rome, at the reconstruction after the earthquake, at the stadium of Capitol team with the arrests even before it begins to occur, all works full of serious incidents of maleficence. However, a significant increase – that all important work is going to court can not cripple an entire country. But the Tav, also for its diluted media burden over time, went beyond the essence and aspects of the specific local infrastructure to become a sort of school-case by national ideological debate: on the one hand, to recall the need of this irreconcilable ethical capitalism with the pharaonic investments in favor of the usual enterprises and results clearly unproductive in the logic of the privatization of the profits and the socialization of the losses; on the other, for the benefit of the so-called antagonistic world, becoming a kind of anti-system brand, precisely "No-Tav", on the distortions of development models related to the acquisition of major works.

Both sides of the same piece good to see, they mainly represent the defeat of politics. It is not a coincidence that the megaproject has found ideological and practical support, transversal and compact, renewed by all governments (even in opposition), from right to left, except for the slightest exception represented by solitary voices quickly fallen out of favor. The question of Tav began with great fanfare even in the distant present day 1984 with the Socialist Claudio Signorile to Transport, supported by Cirino Pomicino, Necci and Bernini. Despite having some critical voice in Claudio Burlando, at Transport in 1996, who denounced unjustified cost increases, but also in Franco Reviglio and Mario Schimberni, in their experiments at the Railways, for the rest was pushed to incredible species with the departure of the general contractor in 2002 at the request of Berlusconi. Alberto Statera wrote in La Repubblica on June 29, 2006: "The planning, financing, execution and management of the work entrusted to a general contractor of general contractors, as it always is the case in third world countries, without any cost controls, in a procurement and outsourcing system open to divisions and corruption, business and politics. "

This too has fertilized the soil of the Cinquestelle as an anti-system movement, guaranteeing its electoral fortunes.There is more to accentuate the disagreements, in the case of Tav, the lack of information and of Transparency should be remembered, perhaps more out of mischief than fate, very little digital data has emerged, among other things with a reliability to be demonstrated.The factual elements on economic costs are rare, where in a generic way one can only say that Billions of lira have become billions of euros.Environmental badyzes are lacking and often contradictory.Incomplete numbers on the trafficking of people and goods.Inadequate records on cost estimates, the only certainty is their lifting beyond belief Even more nebulous data on expected earnings

Paradoxically, to provide a solid information tool, the factions present in the field, especially those who oppose the work. For example, among the main sources of qualified documentation remains a collective book interesting about ten years ago, the provocative title "Overwhelmed by great voracity". The book collects contributions from skilled economists, engineers, geologists, physicists, chemists, climatologists, factory educators, and public procurement badysts. A range of experts demonstrates how much the complexity of the subject requires a plurality of very specific readings

The direction little open to comparison, or even very "militarized" by the managers of the work, has come to highlight the negative motivations. The project's anti-economics, in the book is argued by Claudio Cancelli of the Polytechnic University of Turin: not to lose money should guarantee not less than 40 thousand pbadengers a day (example provided by the Japanese Tokyo-Osaka), while in the Val di Susa about five thousand. The absurd increase in production costs has been documented by engineer Ivan Cicconi, who recently pbaded away. If we compare those of high speed in different countries, we find that Japan, Spain and France are around ten million euros per kilometer (9.3, respectively). 9.8 and 10.2) against 96.4 from the pond between Tav Bologna and Florence or 60.7 from Turin-Naples

The enormous volnus represented by the degree of insertion of Tav lines in the disastrous ordinary rail network in Italy compared to other European countries, including France, is reported by Andrea Debernardi of the Polinomia Engineering Company of Milan. And so on. Here, beyond the oppositions and slogans consumed as "essential work" or "opportunity not to be missed", which reappear punctually in those hours, it would be better to overcome this "wall against wall" that may lead us to the Worst solutions, it is a waste of resources facing the void. Serious, qualified and thorough studies, even without optimistic optimism, aimed at a cost-benefit badysis, including environmental ones, would be more useful for adapting the megaproject to the reality of the time, even removing the bitter image from a supermilitarized shipyard, becoming the symbol of a long war that recalls "fighters" from all over Italy, with the emblematic support of the writer Erri De Luca