Mike Todd

You are not the first to ask . . . ! and https://narrowboatworld.com/3674-another-marina-rejected

I only used the very generic Laws of Physics not the so called Classical laws, which almost by definition , are an imperfect description - as indeed are all if them. It is a common philosophical error to assert that any Law controls behaviour. Any scientific law is a distillation of observations, they simply describe how things behave.

Of course that statement is true, but only in the sense that 'laws of physics' apply universally, there is no class distinction. However, they impact differently depending on the circumstances. AFAIK, most heat in domestic 'radiators' is dispersed around a room by convection. (I don't know about the very small distance from the surface of the radiator and the room air - is guess that is conduction). The nearest to radiation heating that I know is that favoured a few decades back for the space heating of churches - ie high level electric bars designed to maximise the amount of the energy emitted as radiation. The idea was that they only heated where it was needed rathe than the enormous cavern that comprises most traditional church/chapel buildings. The problem has been that they are indeed very focussed and you only have to move a few inches sideways to go from toast to iced tea. In addition they do not create in human bodies a feeling of being warm and, as a result, feel unsatisfactory. But they are cheap (ie less expensive) to install and to run, so long as you ignore cost/benefit!

And could not be thinner . . .

Somewhat stylised (and impractical) canal!

Physics?

Last autumn there was another spillage of something that spread on the surface. It was surprising just how many miles it spread, from somewhere in Southall to Bulls Bridge and even for a short distance up the Grand Union. A bird charity was checking near where we first saw the spillage but it seems otherwise not too much harm to wildlife (if there is any left in that stretch!)

I think that was common generally - even originally with the Anderton Lift - certainly also o the Bude Canal and, I think, Foxton.

To avoid confusion with SPAD = special political adviser??? One is useful the other is not!

We used to do that (before we bought current boat and moved base) - and place reasonably accessible from Cornwall (where were once lived) could only be relied on with a 12 months mooring so we have not been able to do that for a while. I only picked up v recently that this mode is becoming much more difficult - alas! Still (head in sand) it is unlikely to affect us . . . I hope not - but in any case the surcharge is for 'boaters without a home mooring', not boaters cc'ing.

I am not an expert on HS2 (although I suspect people in 10 - 20 years will rue the planning of the past year) but a quick Google look indicates that there will be an additional station on the Elizabeth Line, which is adjacent to Old Oak Common) which will give good links out both west and east (tough if you insist on living in Dulwich!) Also there is a strong possibility of re-connecting to the Acton-Northolt line with further connectivity for the suburbs out towards the Chilterns. In any case, North Acton is only 500 m away, if a proper pedestrian link is provided. It looks like it will be much the same distance as the HS2 - Moor Street walk. Whilst the whole situation is a mess, it does not help to over-state the case.

I have met quite a number of boaters without a home mooring who spend the whole time on the long pound above Caen Hill, never doing a lock, but are doing so entirely legitimately.

You have to give insurance details to get a licence.

Happened to us at Alvechurch last autumn when we were stuck because of the landslip. They were helpful in finding a s[pace not needed for a couple of weeks but when the date for re-opening became clearer we were able to get the last space at another marina close by. Airlines have over-booked for a log time but they do have the obligation to get you to your destination - I once had a long taxi ride as a result (not a lack of seats but they had miscalculated on loads!) In the case of a marina mooring, the boater's obligation is to have a mooring that is available throughout the duration of the licence (ie no use have one for a few days whilst licence is renewed!) If the suggested practice became commonplace then it might well be that CaRT brought a case against a marina on the basis that be accepting a moorer they had a duty to check the type of licence - ours certainly already check on licences as well as insurance and BSS.

They may have bought it but it does not appear in the cited article

There were two lock pix in the original article - this is the first which is correctly described as Lock 1 at Galgate - ie on the Glasson Arm just after the junction. The second was supposed to be at Tarleton but actually the first lock where the Rufford connects to the main L&L. It should have been the lock onto the tidal river.

Methinks you are confused: in the political ghetto two incompatible statements can be held incompatibly even though neither are true.

Why should you if you know you are in the right!

Airbnb Holiday property rentals company from their website

On this forum it would be better to refer to Airbnb to avoid confusion with ABNB a reputable boat broker (or perhaps you were trying to amplify such conflation!)

That is what you always get when you transfer the cost of a service from the public sector onto individual service users. 'sitting'? - CCers, never! As well as finding a mooring whose owner agrees with the business usage.

It is the surcharge rate that is going up, not the actual licence fee (as the underlying base rate may also increase)

And also does not seem to understand that, for licensing purposes, continuous cruising is not relevant - the criterion is whether or not there is a home mooring. Whether you comply with the moving rules for the type of licence that you hold can only be determined after the event - hence why CaRT have a convoluted process for denying a licence to non (or insufficient) movers.

Twas this I was referring to: as is 2x10 litre cans if you already have 11+litres on board the boat, I assumed that the 11+ on board meant in the tank but I see from later posts that it probably did not.

Small point on your examples - the text cited does seem to exclude fuel in the permanent tank.