C&RT say don't empty your compost toilet in our bins.

[tree monkey]

9 minutes ago, Alway Swilby said:

Even when less than a day old it is stirred and mixed up with the sawdust so it not like a freshly deposited turd ?

Photos we need photos...

 

Just to be clear, I am joking,  we don't need photos

[Chagall]

2 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Photos we need photos...

 

Just to be clear, I am joking,  we don't need photos

oh oh ...incoming! ...wait for it

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, Chagall said:

oh oh ...incoming! ...wait for it

 

 

 

[IanD]

46 minutes ago, Alway Swilby said:

Even if not composted it isn't just shit in a bag. It's 60% sawdust or some other desiccating material and 40% shit. There is no wee in there to make it smell. It has been sat in the bucket for 2 or 3 weeks and stirred regularly. It has had a fan running 24/7 drawing air over it and it is dry. It is absolutely nothing like the contents of a cassette or a pump out tank.

 

Our bucket is about 25 litres and lasts the two of us about three weeks. The end product when emptying it is dry due to the 60% sawdust, the stirring  and the constant airflow. It has a smell but it's not unpleasant, its an earthy sort of smell.

 

Our toilet is one of these: Separette Villa. Nowhere in the blurb does it mention the word composting @IanD.

 

We are now in the fortunate position of being able to take ours home and put it in a spare wheelie bin and mix it up with kitchen food waste. When we are out cruising we take the waste home (we have to spend one night at home every 60 days for the insurance). Prior to this when we were CC we did bag and bin and CRT saying that this was ok was a big factor in our decision to go down the dry toilet route.

When we were bagging and binning we never considered ourselves selfish. We were acting on advice given out by CRT in 2016.

 

 

I'm sure you didn't consider yourselves selfish, but you must have been perfectly aware that this is not how the solid waste was intended to be disposed of, regardless of the fact that CaRT said you could do this in 2016 -- in the next paragraph, immediately after they said you should compost it... ?

 

Now it's become a problem for CaRT (hence the change of advice) and the other 99% of boaters, arguing by the 1% that this should continue to be permitted -- which unlike some others I note you're not doing, credit where credit is due ? -- is selfish, by any definition of the word.

 

You're in the same unfortunate position as Peter -- doing the right thing, but likely to be clobbered due to the actions of those who aren't ?

 

Some blurb doesn't mention the "C" word, like it doesn't mention the "U" word or the "F" word, maybe to avoid offending delicate sensibilities. But the general term used in the industry -- especially marine, and in forums like this, and magazine articles -- is "composting toilet". I think that makes the intended use pretty clear, doesn't it?

Edited February 16, 2021 by IanD

[David Mack]

28 minutes ago, Midnight said:

I'm trying to keep up at the back but isn't it permissible to empty part composted poo in the Elsan?

 

But if the compost loo contents is 60% sawdust (or whatever), then the total volume to be disposed is 2.5 x the volume of poo. That will need a lot of water and will take a long time to wash down the elsan point. Which means some boaters will try to rush the process, and block the drain as a result.

[Chagall]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

 

Now it's become a problem for CaRT (hence the change of advice) and other boaters, arguing that this should continue to be permitted -- which unlike some others I note you're not doing, credit where credit is due ? -- is selfish, by any definition of the word.

 

 

Point of order, I suggest it could continue in a separate facility, you have given your reasons why this isn't a valid option, which are fair enough but other options have been  discussed and not just selfish individuals wanting it to continue as it was before C&RT shut the bins. 

[IanD]

17 minutes ago, Chagall said:

Yes, I wanted to know about that, if it was possible or if you needed to find 'parts' to tip down the elasan without having to tip a quantity of coir, sawdust in also. 

 

My concern is that now having no alternative those who do not compost will tip it into the elsan instead. Higher costs for C&RT to unblock elsans perhaps. 

If people do that -- or carry on binning it -- CaRT will effectively have no choice other than to ban them.

 

Owners do have an alternative -- compost it ?

 

[or if they can't -- replace it, like they had to do when sea toilets were banned]

Just now, Chagall said:

Point of order, I suggest it could continue in a separate facility, you have given your reasons why this isn't a valid option, which are fair enough but other options have been  discussed and not just selfish individuals wanting it to continue as it was before C&RT shut the bins. 

The problem is that nobody saying "an alternative solution could/should be found" has been able to come up with one that would work in practice and financially.

 

Wanting it to happen won't make it happen, any more than wishing for a unicorn to appear.

 

If anyone does have a workable (practical, costed) proposal, I'm sure CaRT (and CWDF) would love to hear it...

[Chagall]

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

If people do that -- or carry on binning it -- CaRT will effectively have no choice other than to ban them.

 

Owners do have an alternative -- compost it ?

 

[or if they can't -- replace it, like they had to do when sea toilets were banned]

Unless of course they CC as liveaboards and have no land. I accept that they knew the situation when they bought it, but like 'Alway Swilby' they might have expected the option to be available.   It would seem the only viable alternative for those who went to the expense is to now find a composting outlet that will take the offerings. 

 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Chagall
spelling...again!

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Chagall said:

Unless of course they CC as liveaboards and have no land. I accept that they knew the situation when the bought it, but like 'Alway Swilby' they might have expected the option to be available.   It would seem the only viable alternative for those who went to the expense is to now find a composting outlet that will take the offerings. 

And therein lies the problem -- there isn't such an outlet, and nobody has come up with a way that they could be provided across the network which works financially and logistically... ?

 

The obvious conclusion is that CC liveaboards with no land and no proper outlet for their waste shouldn't have a composting toilet. I'm sure the Foxes are going to be p*ssed off with this...

 

If you go back to the last century, the cheapest and easiest and least smelly toilet solution by far for the canal boat was a sea/freshwater flush toilet, flush it out into the cut and job's done ?

 

[I remember hiring boats using them -- no bloo, no filling tank, no pumpouts, just a nice clean flush like at home -- lovely for those inside the boat]

 

When CaRT banned the use of these so that people had to use more expensive, less convenient, more unpleasant solutions like Elsan/cassettes or pumpouts, boaters using sea toilets had to switch to some other solution (and pay to change) even if it was less nice for them, because it was better for the canal as a whole and other people not to have turds floating in the canal.

 

We now seem to be in exactly the same situation with composting toilets, except there are far fewer boaters using them so the overall pain of banning them is much less. Not for the 1% affected, but the 99% (and CaRT) end up better off as a result...

Edited February 16, 2021 by IanD

[Dyertribe]

I am surprised that there is such a conversation trying to justify those who spent their money on an item that was not fit for purpose.

If you don’t have facilities to compost the product of your toilet then you shouldn’t have fitted it!

If I bought a car that only runs on unicorn pee should I expect fuel manufacturers to provide me with this because I believed it was environmentally friendly?

[IanD]

7 minutes ago, Dyertribe said:

I am surprised that there is such a conversation trying to justify those who spent their money on an item that was not fit for purpose.

If you don’t have facilities to compost the product of your toilet then you shouldn’t have fitted it!

If I bought a car that only runs on unicorn pee should I expect fuel manufacturers to provide me with this because I believed it was environmentally friendly?

No, you bought a car which was intended to run on eco-friendly unicorn pee, but you found it would also run on polluting but cheap high-sulphur heavy fuel oil, and there wasn't a law stopping you doing that so that's exactly what you did... ?

 

Now "they" want to stop you doing this, you either don't see why you should have to pay for unicorn pee, or think that "they" should come up with a magic solution which "they" have to pay for.

Edited February 16, 2021 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

No, you bought a car which was intended to run on eco-friendly unicorn pee, but you found it would also run on polluting but cheap high-sulphur heavy fuel oil, and there wasn't a law stopping you doing that so that's exactly what you did... ?

 

And, once the 'loop-hole' was closed, you then expected all your local garages to put in the infrastructure and stock unicorn-juice.

[IanD]

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

 

And, once the 'loop-hole' was closed, you then expected all your local garages to put in the infrastructure and stock unicorn-juice.

For one customer per week...

[Chagall]

37 minutes ago, Dyertribe said:

I am surprised that there is such a conversation trying to justify those who spent their money on an item that was not fit for purpose.

If you don’t have facilities to compost the product of your toilet then you shouldn’t have fitted it!

If I bought a car that only runs on unicorn pee should I expect fuel manufacturers to provide me with this because I believed it was environmentally friendly?

This is a discussion forum, not just about those who have the majority opinion being the only valid opinion and believed to be the correct one.   I am not a great debater, nor do I have full knowledge of the topic but I doggedly continue and research in between times because discussion is about changing views and those entrenched views being open to an alternative or at least educating those who want to know. 

 

Edit to add:  Im wiser now than I was at the beginning of this topic, I had been on the edge of purchasing a dry toilet just for the indoor benefits and transporting, cassettes are heavy!   Now this situation has developed and arguments for and against have been put forward then on the whole Im glad I didn't buy one last week!   But I do have a great deal of sympathy for those who did! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Chagall
less wordy, but not really!

[Alway Swilby]

8 minutes ago, Dyertribe said:

I am surprised that there is such a conversation trying to justify those who spent their money on an item that was not fit for purpose.

If you don’t have facilities to compost the product of your toilet then you shouldn’t have fitted it!

If I bought a car that only runs on unicorn pee should I expect fuel manufacturers to provide me with this because I believed it was environmentally friendly?

But one of the points is that according to CRT it was fit for purpose until last Friday. We thought long and hard about which toilet to have in our new boat in 2016. A big factor in our decision to go with a waterless one was that CRT said it was ok to use their bins. I feel we are going round in circles here. It nothing like running a car on unicorn wee because that doesn't exist. The permission from CRT to use the bins did exist. I'm getting fed up of people on here calling me irresponsible.

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Alway Swilby said:

But one of the points is that according to CRT it was fit for purpose until last Friday. We thought long and hard about which toilet to have in our new boat in 2016. A big factor in our decision to go with a waterless one was that CRT said it was ok to use their bins. I feel we are going round in circles here. It nothing like running a car on unicorn wee because that doesn't exist. The permission from CRT to use the bins did exist. I'm getting fed up of people on here calling me irresponsible.

I was very careful to credit you with doing the right thing -- you're not the cause of this problem, but you'll probably get caught in the backlash.

 

Nobody argues that CaRT did say it was allowed to bag it and bin it; however given that the previous paragraph in the advice to boaters said that it should be composted, it should have been clear that you were taking a risk that permission to bin it could be withdrawn in the future.

 

You interpreted the advice in the way that suited you, but there was clearly no legal guarantee that this change wouldn't happen -- and as somebody said earlier, it should have been obvious that if lots of compost boaters took the bin option this wasn't something sustainable in the long-term from CaRTs point of view. Hindsight is wonderful, but the writing was always on the wall (or at least, in the previous paragraph).

 

As I keep saying, this is *exactly* the sea toilet issue all over again, except with far fewer people affected. If you'd bought a new boat 5 years before the sea toilet ban and installed one as the nicest option (because it was) I'm sure you'd be aggrieved when CaRT changed the rules and banned them (and the resulting floaters), but you wouldn't have any legal recourse to carry on dropping turds into the canal (because CaRT didn't say in their T&Cs that this freedom was guaranteed), you'd have to fit a new toilet.

 

Being a victim of a change of circumstances intended to "clean up" the canals is unfortunate, but it's difficult to argue that the pollution should be allowed to continue to benefit the (very) few over the (very) many...

[haggis]

1 hour ago, frahkn said:

I am telling you that I empty the solids every three weeks, at that stage the material is not dry and odourless; its very similar to one year old leaf mould. That is slightly damp (squeezing it would not generate any liquid), smelling like leaf mould and inoffensive to handle (i.e. put in another container). 

 

I promise you that this is the case even though I have no dog in the ring because I don't ever throw the material away.

 

Obviously I'm not able to confirm that this is the position for everybody with such a toilet but I (modestly) assume that my "output" is similar to everyone else's.

Thank you for the info. To me that was one of the missing bits in my knowledge of composting toilets.

 

haggis

[redwing]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Being a victim of a change of circumstances intended to "clean up" the canals is unfortunate, but it's difficult to argue that the pollution should be allowed to continue to benefit the (very) few over the (very) many...

 

Like solid fuel stoves ?

[doratheexplorer]

10 minutes ago, IanD said:

I was very careful to credit you with doing the right thing -- you're not the cause of this problem, but you'll probably get caught in the backlash.

 

Nobody argues that CaRT did say it was allowed to bag it and bin it; however given that the previous paragraph in the advice to boaters said that it should be composted, it should have been clear that you were taking a risk that permission to bin it could be withdrawn in the future.  These leaps of logic are becoming increasingly ridiculous.  Nothing was clear about this previously, but any permission could be withdrawn, including the permission to go boating at all  Would you use the same logic if boating was banned, and you'd just bought a boat.

 

You interpreted the advice in the way that suited you, but there was clearly no legal guarantee that this change wouldn't happen -- and as somebody said earlier, it should have been obvious that if lots of compost boaters took the bin option this wasn't something sustainable in the long-term from CaRTs point of view. Hindsight is wonderful, but the writing was always on the wall (or at least, in the previous paragraph). No.  No it wasn't, and in truth, it still isn't.

 

As I keep saying, this is *exactly* the sea toilet issue all over again, (except it isn't like that at all) except with far fewer people affected. If you'd bought a new boat 5 years before the sea toilet ban and installed one as the nicest option (because it was) I'm sure you'd be aggrieved when CaRT changed the rules and banned them (and the resulting floaters), but you wouldn't have any legal recourse to carry on dropping turds into the canal (because CaRT didn't say in their T&Cs that this freedom was guaranteed), you'd have to fit a new toilet.

 

Being a victim of a change of circumstances intended to "clean up" the canals is unfortunate, but it's difficult to argue that the pollution should be allowed to continue to benefit the (very) few over the (very) many... You still haven't provided a shred of evidence that using a waterless toilet is inherently any worse (pollution, hygiene) than other methods.  What you're doing (repeatedly) is stating opinion as fact. 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, redwing said:

 

Like solid fuel stoves ?

 

Almost certainly, a ban will be coming soon.

It'll start in London and other major cities and then become universal.

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

You still haven't provided a shred of evidence that CORRECTLY using a waterless toilet is inherently any worse (pollution, hygiene) than other methods.  What you're doing (repeatedly) is stating opinion as fact. 

 

 

I've amended that for you, to which I think no one would disagree.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[doratheexplorer]

5 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Almost certainly, a ban will be coming soon.

It'll start in London and other major cities and then become universal.

Doubtful.  Just a ban on the sale of certain new stoves.

Edited February 16, 2021 by doratheexplorer

[GUMPY]

3 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Doubtful.  At worst there may be a ban on the sale of certain new stoves.

There is or will be very soon a ban on suppying/burning certain types of fuel in domestic premisis.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Loddon

[LadyG]

39 minutes ago, Alway Swilby said:

But one of the points is that according to CRT it was fit for purpose until last Friday. We thought long and hard about which toilet to have in our new boat in 2016. A big factor in our decision to go with a waterless one was that CRT said it was ok to use their bins. I feel we are going round in circles here. It nothing like running a car on unicorn wee because that doesn't exist. The permission from CRT to use the bins did exist. I'm getting fed up of people on here calling me irresponsible.

I don't think the forumites are getting at you in particular, perhaps you were naive, and had no idea of the potential problems of  bio hazardous waste. You put your faith in a committee of non scientific personnel who promised you facilities which they could not provide in the long term. 

They have now suggested you try to compost on board, then take the compost to a facility which does not exist, don't worry about it, at the moment. The CRT will be having quite a few zoom conferences over this one.

You could ask for a copy of their contract with Biffa.

You could ask what composting facilities are planned for London.  

Ask if this is covered by the remit of the Freedom of Information Act. 

Good luck. 

Edited February 16, 2021 by LadyG

[doratheexplorer]

2 minutes ago, Loddon said:

There is or will be very soon a ban on suppying/burning certain types of fuel.

House Coal was originally supposed to be banned by now.  My local coal supplier is still offering it though.  Date pushed back I guess.

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by doratheexplorer

[Chagall]

3 minutes ago, LadyG said:

I don't think the forumites are getting at you in particular, perhaps you were naive, and had no idea of the potential problems of  bio hazardous waste. You put your faith in a committee of non scientific personnel who promised you facilities which they could not provide in the long term. 

....and at risk of receiving patronising statements like this. ^^^   ?

 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Chagall
^^^ removal of doubt