philgoddard (asker) May 17, 2010:

Thank you all for your comments, which have confirmed me in my suspicion that the Italian doesn't make sense.

Alison MacG May 13, 2010:

Similar text In the following text, "una sola presenza annua" is clearly being used to contrast with "più di 300 milioni di presenze annue" as used in the preceding sentence. However, I think you could still argue that, having said "more than 300 million overnight stays per year", then the "per year" part is rather redundant when it comes to "one single overnight stay" (although you can still sort of see why it is there).

In Italia si calcolano più di 300 milioni di presenze annue in alberghi. Ne consegue un fortissimo impatto energetico. Una sola presenza annua in un hotel determina un consumo di circa 30 Kw ora. I consumi di una camera (di medie dimensioni) di un albergo, equivalgono ai consumi di un' appartamento di 80 mq.
http://www.ecoworldhotel.com/img/pdf/Requisiti_obbligatori_f...

Barbara Carrara May 13, 2010:

Could there be sth missing? Not an expert myself, but if you take a look at what's available on the Internet, it appears that the ratio is (consumption) kWh/sq.m
See for instance, http://www.risanamentoenergetico.com/sapere.htm, where the following info is provided, among others, 'Classe energetica A: < 30 Kwh/mq/anno (3 l. gasolio/mq annuo)'.
Just a thought.

Oliver Lawrence May 12, 2010:

I see your point, Phil kWh is of course an unit of energy. Just "energy", that is, not "energy per unit time". So "one overnight stay per year uses 30 kWh" doesn't make sense. "One overnight stay per year uses 30 kWh per year" does, but why not just say "one overnight stay uses 30 kWh" and be done with it..?