3 resultados para Património Material

em CiencIPCA - Instituto Politécnico do Cávado e do Ave, Portugal


Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Diz o art. 224º do Código Penal português (CP): “1 - Quem, tendo-lhe sido confiado, por lei ou por acto jurídico, o encargo de dispor de interesses patrimoniais alheios ou de os administrar ou fiscalizar, causar a esses interesses, intencionalmente e com grave violação dos deveres que lhe incumbem, prejuízo patrimonial importante é punido com pena de prisão até 3 anos ou com pena de multa. § 2 - A tentativa é punível. § 3 - O procedimento criminal depende de queixa. § 4 – É correspondentemente aplicável o disposto nos n.os 2 e 3 do artigo 206.º e na alínea a) do n.º 1 do artigo 207º. Redacção da Lei nº 19/2013, de 21/2 – vigente a partir de 23/3/13. Referem, por um lado, os n.os 2 e 3 do artigo 206º: “Restituição ou reparação: (…) 2 - Quando a coisa furtada ou ilegitimamente apropriada for restituída, ou tiver lugar a reparação integral do prejuízo causado, sem dano ilegítimo de terceiro, até ao início da audiência de julgamento em 1ª instância, a pena é especialmente atenuada. § 3 - Se a restituição ou a reparação forem parciais, a pena pode ser especialmente atenuada”. § Says the art. 224 of the Portuguese Penal Code (PC): "1 - Who, having been entrusted by law or legal act, the disposal charge of other people's property interests or to manage or supervise, cause to those interests, intentionally and with serious breach of his duties, important material damage is punished with imprisonment up to three years or a fine. § 2 - The attempt is punishable. § 3 - The criminal proceedings on a complaint. § 4 - It is accordingly applicable the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 206 and paragraph a) of paragraph 1 of Article 207. Wording of Law No. 19/2013, of 21/2 - effective from 03.23.13. Refer on the one hand, paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 206: "Restitution or repair: (...) 2 - When the stolen or illegally appropriate thing is restored, or have rise to full compensation for financial loss, no illegitimate damage Third, until the beginning of the trial, in 1st instance, the penalty is mitigated. § 3 - If the refund or repair are partial, the penalty can be mitigated. "

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Purpose Achieving sustainability by rethinking products, services and strategies is an enormous challenge currently laid upon the economic sector, in which materials selection plays a critical role. In this context, the present work describes an environmental and economic life cycle analysis of a structural product, comparing two possible material alternatives. The product chosen is a storage tank, presently manufactured in stainless steel (SST) or in a glass fibre reinforced polymer composite (CST). The overall goal of the study is to identify environmental and economic strong and weak points related to the life cycle of the two material alternatives. The consequential win-win or trade-off situations will be identified via a Life Cycle Assessment/Life Cycle Costing (LCA/LCC) integrated model. Methods The LCA/LCC integrated model used consists in applying the LCA methodology to the product system, incorporating, in parallel, its results into the LCC study, namely those of the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) and the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). Results In both the SST and CST systems the most significant life cycle phase is the raw materials production, in which the most significant environmental burdens correspond to the Fossil fuels and Respiratory inorganics categories. The LCA/LCC integrated analysis shows that the CST has globally a preferable environmental and economic profile, as its impacts are lower than those of the SST in all life cycle stages. Both the internal and external costs are lower, the former resulting mainly from the composite material being significantly less expensive than stainless steel. This therefore represents a full win-win situation. As a consequence, the study clearly indicates that using a thermoset composite material to manufacture storage tanks is environmentally and economically desirable. However, it was also evident that the environmental performance of the CST could be improved by altering its End-of-Life stage. Conclusions The results of the present work provide enlightening insights into the synergies between the environmental and the economic performance of a structural product made with alternative materials. Further, they provide conclusive evidence to support the integration of environmental and economic life cycle analysis in the product development processes of a manufacturing company, or in some cases even in its procurement practices.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Este trabalho tem por objetivos analisar o disposto no POCAL (1999), na NICSP nº 17 do IPSASB (2006c), e na opinião de diversos autores, quanto ao reconhecimento dos bens do património, histórico, artístico e cultural (BPHAC); bem como, verificar se poderão existir problemas inerentes ao reconhecimento destes bens, na sub-região Minho-Lima, ultrapassáveis com a adoção das NICSP em Portugal. Do estudo efetuado, concluímos que o POCAL (1999) não apresenta os requisitos para o reconhecimento dos ativos. A NICSP nº 17 (IPSASB, 2006c) refere que, se a entidade reconhecer esses elementos como ativos, deve observar os requisitos para o reconhecimento dos ativos fixos tangíveis mencionados nessa norma. Atendendo também a que alguns dos municípios portugueses sentem dificuldades no reconhecimento dos bens do património, histórico, artístico e cultural, concluímos que adotar um novo Sistema de Normalização Contabilística aplicável à Administração Pública (SNCAP), assente nas NICSP, poderá ser a solução para ultrapassar tais dificuldades e garantir alguma comparabilidade da informação.