Bargebuilder

Even garden compost making is an art, you can't just bung whatever you want into a dustbin and expect compost after 6 months. It is very possible to create toilet compost, you just need to obey the same rules as you would for making good friable garden compost. Regularly add a variety of perhaps sawdust, peat, or even dry leaves. Use your poo stick to mix every 3 or 4 weeks and hey presto you too can have lovely roses!

Well.... I haven't tried it without the fan turned on, but if the smell that emerges from my vent were inside the bathroom it certainly wouldn't be ideal. Also, it is the dessicating process that reduces the volume, because 85% ish of deposits made is water, and it is the fan that draws out the moisture by lowering the moisture content of the air within the box. I would say that if your composter was in a drafty shed you could get away with not venting the box, but in a sealed boat you couldn't.

Being room sealed doesn't make a heater safer if there has been a gas leak for whatever reason anywhere in the living quarters of the boat. If it is not ignition protected, which I would be astonished if it was, the act of starting up the heater, a tiny spark from a switch or relay, might cause an explosion. I don't think that Wayne was asking about carbon monoxide poisoning, which is where room sealing counts. Not quite, because with a diesel heater, you can turn it on remotely without the fear of a gas explosion, because there would have been no need to leave the gas on!

The computer fan inside the toilet box sucks air out and to the outside via the ducting, thus creating a negative pressure inside the box that sucks air in from the room and prevents any smells from escaping to the inside of the boat. This constant exchange of air also contributes to the drying out process of the soon-to-be compost. There might be a slight smell if you were to put your nose to this vent, but no worse than sniffing the vent from a black tank and infinitely better than the stench that escapes during a pump-out.

I'm with you rusty. I've got a Taylors diesel heater on my boat, and even that doesn't take long to heat the cabin. Mind you, I wouldn't even turn my back on that, let alone leave it turned on whilst not on board.

Then Wayne's gas installation will be safe to be left on as is yours and mine. My gas is on in my absence, and it doesn't worry me that the fridge compressor cuts in and out all day, potentially creating an ignition spark, so if Wayne is a competent gas installer then he should be confident to remotely turn on his gas heater by sms.

Who is Wayne?

I only said that to make sure it was done safely by someone who knows what they are doing and how to get the boat through the BSS. I do my own work.

If I understand correctly, you would like to turn on your Propex remotely by sms, but are concerned about leaving the gas on at the bottle. Firstly, as already mentioned, you can use a gas detector that has the capability to turn off the gas supply from within the gas locker if it is triggered. If a leak occurred in your absence the gas would be isolated, so your sms remote control would not be able to start the heater. You could even use the detector to turn off your 12v supply by the use of a relay. Use a gas lighter with the flame extinguished to 'squirt' gas at the sensor to demonstrate that it works properly. If you like sms remotes, then get a detector that sends you a message alerting you to gas, flooding, break-ins, geo fence etc. Not something I would do, but you are probably younger than me and more 'switched on' to such technology. A problem with many gas detectors is that they gobble up a lot of battery power, so you would need a solar panel to replace the power consumed. I personally would run a single copper gas supply tube from the Propex to inside the gas locker with the only connection outside of the locker being the one where the pipe is connected to the heater. Inside the gas locker I would connect this copper tube to a bubble detector so that I could easily and regularly check that there are zero leaks. I would have no connections outside of my gas locker other than the one at the appliance. I prefer that any leaks are inside the gas locker which is drained over the side. I also refuse to use bulkhead connectors for the same reason. If you are on the inland waterways you will have to pay a certified gas engineer who will ensure that you conform to BSS requirements. I don't trust the reliability of gas detectors so I don't use one, however, I do have complete confidence in my gas installation and leave it turned on all of the time, even when I am not on board for a few days.

Hi Tony, You are wise to question my logic, but: Anodes on a steel vessel should be spaced such that all the steel is protected and in my experience this is usually the case. The anode is more noble, so if the galvanic circuit is between the vessel and the pile, the galvanic action will be dominated by loss of aluminium or magnesium over steel, all the time that either is in the locality, even if the steel was uncoated, which of course, it wouldn't be. The weld between the stud and the anode would not have a significant effect because the current will be too tiny: Tiny increases in resistance would only be a significant factor at high currents. I would be horrified if there was a large potential difference between the pontoon and the boats hull. I was trying to keep this simple and I still insist that a few hours use of shore power could not possibly justify the cost of a gi or an si in terms of potential damage that might be done to the steel of the hull.

I did. Separator from littlehouse. Bucket, Oak toilet seat, compute fan, air ducting, duct outlet grill, all from eBay. Some pine tongue and groove all varnished up nicely for the containing box that was left over from cladding a shed. With wiring, hinges etc the total was a bit more than £100. I already had a solar panel to replace the power consumed from the battery, so the tiny fan can run almost silently, day and night, 365 days of the year. One tip - attach the fan to the inside of the box with a built-up bead of silicone mastic. Build up the silicone over a day or two so that it is 2cm thick and seat the fan into it. Don't use the screws provided as this will transmit some vibration. Let the silicone be the only point of attachment to the box so that any sound is almost totally eliminated. Also, look for a fairly good quality fan that is in itself quiet. Don't listen to the enthusiasts or the sceptics, it is cheap enough to try for yourself so you can make up your own mind.

If you are only connected to shore power for an hour or two occasionally, investing in a galvanic isolator is not economically justifiable. All it will do, if it is not faulty, is to prevent an insignificant amount of degradation to your anode. Your anode might be a tiny bit thinner when the time comes to replace it, but a few hours connected to shore power will not be enough to significantly reduce its useful life. If your anodes 'fiz' when you connect to shore power you should change marinas! Forget isolation transformers.: They are very expensive, can consume a significant amount of electricity just by being powered up and to avoid bringing shore power onto your vessel, should be mounted ashore. If they can be justified at all, it would only be by owners of boats that are frequently/permanently connected to shore power.

The simple answer to your original question is no, galvanic corrosion will not cause you a problem. GC is a slow process with these sorts of stray voltages, so even if your boat's 12v negative is bonded to your steel hull and to the earth from your shore power, so long as you are only connected to shore power for short periods, you won't notice any additional corrosion. In any event, it will be your anode that will 'dissolve' first, before your bronze propeller, stainless steer shaft or mild steel hull suffers.

Alan De Enfield above mentions that if a boat periodically moves from berth to berth in the same marina, it would not be subject to council tax, and yet mrsmelly says that he is aware of councils who insist that permanent liveaboards move from berth to berth in the same marina, and still charge them council tax. Are some councils demanding council tax from boaters when there own rules state that they should be exempt from such payments?

I would be astonished if they bothered. The regulations do not permit the introduction of sewage into the cut. Sewage is that which is transported in a sewer, ie faeces, urine, grey water (bath, washing machine, dish washer etc) in some cases surface water from drains and roof gutters. Boaters are allowed to flush some of the above sewage components into canals, so for a prosecution to stand up they would need to make the regulations much more specific. Would they go to all that trouble to penalise someone for introducing a relatively miniscule volume of an almost sterile fluid containing at worst possibly 50ppm of nitrate. Ones 1.2 litres of urine per day would be diluted almost beyond calculation rendering it entirely harmless to the environment. Even if every user of every boat on the cut always urinated over the side, it would not produce an algal bloom or make a measurable difference to pollution levels. In fact, run off from farmers fields is infinitely more damaging to river water. Not that I recommend it, because there are other regulations that do ban the practice.

Plus, any noxious gasses are sucked out from between your legs, so no more "I should leave it 5 minutes!" A bonus being that if your composter is in the shower room, the toilet's fan continuously extracts humidity, helping to keep windows condensation free, helping to dry the towels and keeping the whole room smelling sweeter and less 'musty'.

One could cover a lot of miles (litres of fuel) for the cost of a marina berth for a narrowboat. This thread, of course, originated because of a marina proprietor who was complaining, not about continuous cruisers, but those who purport to be such, but in practice hog short term moorings or just move short distances, up and down the same stretch of waterway. I doubt that anyone has any problem whatever with genuine continuous cruisers. There is no shortage of unrestricted canalside against which they could moor for periods not exceeding two weeks before moving on.

The 'littlehouse.co' website describes in detail how to build the same thing yourself from parts available from them or eBay for around £100, depending on how much you want to spend on the airtight housing. It takes just a few hours of simple diy. For this small investment in time and money, try it and see if it suits you. Every loo has its pros and cons and some people get on better with some than with others. After years of problems, smells and the huge costs of buying and running a macerator, I wouldn't give up my 'composter'.

Exactly my point: Marina operators are accepting liveaboards, sometimes against the wishes of their local councils, and allowing them to avoid paying council tax by exploiting the fact that if they all play musical berths every few months, they can't be taxed like 'haza' on his C&RT residential berth.

Not exactly "reserved for", as I know several people who have approached the council, offered to pay council tax and now do so. Indeed for some it is financially beneficial, as their council tax is paid and other 'benefits' also, including marina fees, for those who are elegible under the 'benefits' system. I also know of a marina where council officials turned up with a policeman demanding information on possible residents and to see evidence of primary residences. It may be more of a case of the council would love this additional revenue stream if only they could find a way to tap into it.

That would be a strange interpretation of the law: There are very strict rules governing percentage reductions in council tax. Also, council tax is payable on the 'plot' on which one is resident, not a vessel which may or may not move between berths (plots). Residents of marinas, by regularly moving berths are 'demonstrating' that have no right to remain on a particular berth, and therefore that the 'plot' on which their boat sits cannot be classified as a place of residence and be rated for council tax. Once a plot of land/property is banded for council tax, it remains so and is quite difficult to then re-classify, meaning that subsequent occupiers would also have to pay the tax and also the landlord would have to pay the tax during periods between occupancy. Not only do marinas not want their berths banded for council tax, but most aren't keen on giving berth holders rights as residential tenants with security of tenure etc. I wonder what percentage of all liveaboards pay council tax, many marina proprietors being complicit in those who should, being able to avoid it. Just highlighting the hypocrisy of marina operators who criticise continuous moorers for flouting the regulations.

I was chatting to a boater by a water point near to a certain long, narrow, Tunnel, who proudly told me that he had lived on his 48hr mooring for years. He even pointed proudly to a impressively welded up canalside green box and said that he had, during the hours of darkness, for two full years, enjoyed a free 240v power supply: The welding was as a result of him eventually being caught. He also said that he hadn't paid for a licence for two years! Boaters who abuse the system must surely be tiny in number, aren't they? If what I am regularly told is true, marina owners aren't without fault either. Apparently, it is common for marinas to allow boaters to live aboard their vessels even though the authorities have refused them permission for liveaboard berths. Sometimes they even charge a premium for these 'illegal' residential moorings. Some are happy to document a 'fictional' home address whilst knowing full well that the boat owner is on board full time. Some insist that liveaboard berth holders move moorings within their marina every few months in order to get around the restrictions placed on them by the local council. I'll bet that if the 'continuous moorers' which annoy such marina owners so much were to apply for a berth in their establishment, they would find them a spot without too many questions.

Once you know the additional cost of an extra 2mm, you will be able to decide if the extra is worth it for you. Thickness is only one factor that will affect the final cost, as dry dock/lifting and labour will remain the same irrespective of plate thickness.

Because, a surveyor will offer what is in his professional opinion 'best' advice. The over-plate is, as far as the surveyor is concerned, the ONLY plate, and if you were in the market for a brand new narrowboat, would you specify a 6mm bottom plate? 6mm doesn't give you much 'leeway' for oxidation or galvanic corrosion, so reducing steel thickness is life limiting and may reduce resale value. Could it be that 6mm is commonly used to save money?