mayalld

Perhaps being grumpy IS our hobby! BTW, I have had a phone call from CRT regarding my complaint. The Volunteer engagement co-ordinator fully agrees that the volunteers MUST ask first, and that the issues reported are not the way that volunteers are to act. He has details of those involved, and they will be spoken to.

NORTY STEP!

They are superb. Never tried their delivery, because I always drive to Stockport and collect. The web site is MUCH shinier than the premises!

There are two ways in which the service can be excellent; 1) You wish to use that service, and it is provided well. 2) You do not wish to use that service, and it is efficiently ascertained that it is not required. Otherwise, it is just the same as politely and efficiently helping old ladies across the road who wanted to be on the side where you found them

And there is the issue. They are supposed to ask, but asking means they could be told "no", and they really want to play with the locks, so it suits their ambitions for the day to not ask, and instead rely on you going out of your way to say no. Of course, saying no when they have already started means either shouting to them, which you don't want to do, or leaving the helm in a lock which you don't want to do, so refusing is rather difficult. What follows from that is that they assume consent, and very few people explicitly refuse, or complain (they may not have wanted help, but easier to say nothing now), so they justify to themselves that it is OK to do this. That is why it is important to challenge incorrect procedures.

You acquiesced to their actions. They have absolutely zero authority to require the lock to be done in a particular way. They have absolutely zero authority to even touch the lock without seeking your permission. If they didn't ask for permission, and you said nothing, you accepted the situation. You could have said "excuse me, I do not require your assistance, please leave the lock to me"

Well, if I were to see Birdseye at a lock dressed in blue, I would be unworried, because I actually know him, and know that he knows what he is doing, and isn't about to do anything without saying hi. Sadly, the overwhelming majority of volunteers that I encounter are not of his calibre.

Look, if you want a volunteer to help you, then it is entirely up to you. Your boat, your lock, your choice. If you are prepared to accept sub-optimal working of the lock as a price worth paying (including downright dangerous practices) for a less energetic life, or quicker passage, then nobody is trying to stop you. When I'm going through a lock (My boat, my lock, my choice), I don't consider what I get from the volunteer to be worth the cost in terms of creating danger, preventing me from taking much needed exercise, irritating me by issuing instructions when I go away to get away from such things, etc. etc. Quite apart from not wanting them interfering at all, I particular am not asking for them to be sociable. Passage through a lock is filled with potential hazards, which we avoid by NOT socialising in the process. Volunteers shouldn't be having a natter, but they must communicate. Boating is enjoyable, working locks is enjoyable, but you need your wits about you. You mention being told to stay on the boat, and you politely responding that you won't "if that's OK". My polite response is "No thank you, I will be working the lock". Whether it is OK with the volunteer or not doesn't enter into it. I do not need the volunteer's permission to work the lock myself, and I do not need him to agree to step aside. My main beef is volunteers imposing their help without a word. They must ask. The onus is not on the boater to countermand a preconception of consent (he is 70 feet away, I don't want to shout to him to stop, and I cannot safely walk to him to tell him "no" if he might just wind a paddle whilst I am making my way to him.

Because volunteers don't want to do things that might be useful. They want to play with locks.

What is actually slightly MORE irritating than volunteers doing something to "help" (when I have never sought their "help" and the "help" that they purport to provide is often not actually helpful) is the fact that when I dare say so, people pop up and berate me for being less than gracious to people who have given up their time to help me. According to the JWs at the door today, they too are there to help me, They too are giving up their time to do so. Their "help" is of no use to me. In both cases, the help offered is actually more about the putative helper's wants than about what I want. We are told that they are trained to offer help, yet repeatedly they impoise their assistance without asking. They are there for a day out because they enjoy operating locks. CRT clearly understand that there is a small army of people out there wanting to volunteer because they enjoy operating locks. Why can they not understand that a lot of boaters enjoy it too, Why can they not understand that for many boaters, introducing an additional body into the operation who isn't a part of the boat crew has one main effect; It means that the steerer doesn't know how the lock will be operated as he would with his own crew, and that passage through the lock now becomes more stressful because of having to watch a volunteer like a hawk rather than rely upon the symbiosis with his own crew who he KNOWS will do it right. Not really very good for a charity that is now all about welbeing.

OK; 1) Fuel cell cost is primarily driven by the use of precious metal catalysts. As significantly cheaper catalysts become available (and the development here is using iron catalysts instead of platinum), the cost of fuel cells will fall. 2) There isn't any actual evidence here. The main issue with fuel cells today is that Hydrogen production isn't clean. When fuel cells will come into their own is when hydrogen production shifts to electrolysis, using renewable energy. You ask "why not just use renewable energy". The answer is all about how to get that energy to the point of use. For fixed installations, that is simple. For moving ones, it is less so. Somehow, you have to take all that renewable energy, and store it for later use without being connected to the grid. You need to find a medium that is available, energy dense, capable of being transferred onboard rapidly, and at convenient intervals. Now, let us consider the options; Batteries - nope. They are energy dense, but there are issues around sufficient supply, and around speed of energy on-boarding, and around the provision of infrastructure that will conveniently allow boats to charge. Batteries plus solar - a little better, but doesn't fix the availability issues, and solar is never going to be the complete answer. Fuel cell - yes. A fuel cell is simply another battery chemistry. The big difference being that rather than recharge on board, the recharging happens on land, and you load the charge at suitable intervals. The technology isn't there yet, but it will be in a relatively short time,

You rather miss the point there isn't enough lithium in existence to make enough batteries to power all these cars battery technology is here now. It provides a power source now to allow development of the electrical drive train, but it will not scale ultimately fuel cell technology will need to work

He didn't bend it. It has just rotated about the bolt that fastens it to the engine

Where do you get the energy to electrolyse water? Well from exactly the same sources that you get energy to charge batteries. Energy storage and release is all about chemistry. You take electricity and force a chemical reaction, whether that be in a lead acid battery, Lithium battery or electrolysing water. You reverse the reaction, and electricity is produced. Hydrogen fuel cells are currently lagging because it is easier to mine lithium. When we see that the raw materials for lithium batteries isn't sufficiently abundant, and that fuel cells offer a resource that is only limited by the capacity for green primary generation, they will be the answer.

Took me nearly an hour of staring at the engine, cursing my luck, and rationalising "what could cause a fuel issue following an electrical issue?" My first thought was that I was short of volts, and that the electric lift pump wasn't working, but I still had 12.3 volts, so seemed unlikely. I did then get round to "must have kicked something". The giveaway was that it was possible to start the engine, albeit very smoky and rough, but any attempt to accelerate caused loads of smoke. This is dribbling injectors thought I! Why would injectors be dribbling? Too much fuel... back pressure in the line.

I have

They will certainly be available and suitable in the timescale that we talk about phasing out diesel engines.

Hydrogen fuel cells.

Well, it was an interesting read. It goes some way to address the issue that affects all electric vehicles, namely that those planning it know that they will charge up in the office car park and outside the garage of their gravelled drive, without thinking that for 90% of people that isn't an option. The other thing a bout all this electric malarkey is that it isn't saving the environment. It is destroying it in new ways, but not in this country, so that is OK. Ever looked at a Lithium Mine? Huge areas of once fertile land laid waste, Not sure how that helps the environment. And there just isn't enough of the stuff to meet the demand if we go all-electric. The reason that internal combustion engines are so ubiquitous is all to do with the viability of your energy source. A liquid energy source that can be onloaded in minutes and gives enough energy for weeks, as opposed to an energy source that takes hours to on-board, and lasts a day. The tractor idea is also impractical for another reason. Who is going to install all that infrastructure for a system that might take 20 years to be in common use. Existing boats won't work with it (they require the prop-wash to steer)

Best guess so far. He has kicked something in the engine 'ole. It isnt the fuel cock (that's well out of the way). Here's a close up He's caught the engine lifting eye which has rotated towards the stern and is pressing on the fuel return line. Too much fuel at the injectors

That much is true! No, the alternator spins uselessly. The issue was fixable easily, and without tools. It was unrelated to the alternator issue, but related to the engineer's inadvertent actions