Jump to content

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


Featured Posts

1 hour ago, haggis said:

There are dry waste and bottle bins at some Elsans but they are misused. I can't see C&RT putting more effort into recycling when boaters  don't bother. 

 

haggis

But they do around here,  because they know what facilities are available, it's not beyond the wit of Biffa to remove the landfill bins and skips before they overflow, and its not beyond the wit of these 'compoopsters to

 

NEVER CONTAMINATE DRY WASTE

 

 ............       that is the message that should have been made clear instead of waffling about "double bagging".

 

Crisis management works in the short term, and I suppose all CRT admin and Board are in it for the short term.

Edited by LadyG
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of the intricacies of the solution, behavioural science tells us it's usually more effective to support and guide people towards change than it is to beat them over the head with the big stick of legislation, even if they're doing something wrong in the first place.

 

If the outcome you're after is the cessation of black bags of poo in the general waste, the process to actually make that happen is not going to happen overnight, regardless of what rules you put in place. Just making something illegal doesn't mean you've solved the problem, in many cases it just drives it underground where it becomes even harder to monitor.

  • Greenie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

Regardless of the intricacies of the solution, behavioural science tells us it's usually more effective to support and guide people towards change than it is to beat them over the head with the big stick of legislation, even if they're doing something wrong in the first place.

 

If the outcome you're after is the cessation of black bags of poo in the general waste, the process to actually make that happen is not going to happen overnight, regardless of what rules you put in place. Just making something illegal doesn't mean you've solved the problem, in many cases it just drives it underground where it becomes even harder to monitor.

General waste ', means stuff that may or may not be put on a picking line, it might have magnets to remove metals, but it also may be en route to incinerstor.

It's something from the 1990's, before sorting and recycling.

Landfill goes straight to landfill, it is ashes and wet waste.

Dry Waste will be picked, so must not be contaminated with wet waste.

If CRT are confused about waste management they should employ someone who is not confused to agree their contracts and to write to Boaters in the Boaters Handbook. They should not use Damian or some other media person.

 

General waste is not a thing  the CRT should be involved with.

 

Edited by LadyG
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

They are not meeting the Duty Of Care requirements that are imposed on all businesses that produce waste.

 

It is not a duty of care issue (which more relates to tort) but a legislative and contractual point.

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BrumBargee said:

Regardless of the intricacies of the solution, behavioural science tells us it's usually more effective to support and guide people towards change than it is to beat them over the head with the big stick of legislation, even if they're doing something wrong in the first place.

 

If the outcome you're after is the cessation of black bags of poo in the general waste, the process to actually make that happen is not going to happen overnight, regardless of what rules you put in place. Just making something illegal doesn't mean you've solved the problem, in many cases it just drives it underground where it becomes even harder to monitor.

Agreed with your behavioural comments, but guiding people tends to only work if they are willing to change, and it's clear that the people who are bagging and binning don't want to change -- and why should they want to, having been told it was OK by CaRT they've paid out to install a toilet that works really nicely for them, convenient and cheap and (mostly) non-smelly.

 

Note that I said "why should they want to change" not "why should they change" -- the answer to the second question is pretty clear and has been argued about ad infinitum on this thread.

 

If people don't want to change because it leaves them personally disadvantaged or less happy (even if it's better for society as a whole -- or in this case, the canals) then experience shows that no amount of asking nicely works, only a change in the law. And for this to work it has to be effective -- just saying "you mustn't do this" with no means of detecting/enforcing infringements is counterproductive, as you say it just drives things underground (or into a bin...).

 

Which is why any form of monitoring/checking to confirm that people do their poo disposal properly won't work, the culprits know they can always sneak out at night and dump the poo when nobody's looking, with no way to trace it back to them -- it's like the plague of fly tipping but with far less chance of being caught -- and at the moment no penalty even if you are.

 

So if you can't stop a problem like this by controlling the disposal of the waste, the only option is to prevent it being generated in the first place -- which means banning composting toilets on boats, one way or another. There just doesn't seem to be any other way of stopping bag'n'binning, either in the short term or the long term.

 

This would undoubtedly annoy the bag'n'binners, but they've been doing something unsustainable (and advised against, though not banned) and now the chickens have come home to roost, so sympathy for them is inevitably going to be limited -- as can be seen by many of the comments on this thread, though calling them idiots or stupid is going too far -- they're neither, they did what was best for them and were told at the time that it was OK. But it's not OK any more...

 

If this happens the real victims will be the boaters composting properly, who if the ban extends to them will rightly be incensed that they have to rip out a toilet which is not only cheap and convenient but is greener than using the sewers. I'm sure many will blame CaRT, when they should really be blaming boaters like the vloggers who have encouraged people to install composting toilets and bag'n'bin. It would be nice to think that they should be able to get an exception if they can prove they're "doing it properly", but apart from the problems of administering this it would immediately open up the system to fraud by closet bag'n'binners who pretend they're composting while inspected, and then never compost again when they're not being watched.

 

If anyone can see a better solution that stops the bag'n'binning effectively then I'm sure everyone would like to know, but nobody has come up with one yet.

 

Another possibility is to somehow charge boaters with composting toilets extra, but this doesn't solve the problem of what to do with the waste if Biffa (or whoever) won't take it away -- and doesn't address the fundamental question of why boaters should be allowed to continue doing something that everybody knows in their heart of hearts is wrong, even if they won't admit it...

 

It's clear that there are legal obstacles to CaRT banning composting toilets, but I hope there is a way of doing it, like banning sea toilets on the canals (or pumping out into a hedge). Because if they can't ban them but can't get rid of the waste if they don't, do they have any option other than to remove the bins entirely?

 

P.S. Please don't just come back and say "they'll never do that" -- many similar bodies (e.g. councils, London Transport) have done precisely that in the past, though not usually because people were putting poo in their bins 😉

Edited by IanD
  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BrumBargee said:

Regardless of the intricacies of the solution, behavioural science tells us it's usually more effective to support and guide people towards change than it is to beat them over the head with the big stick of legislation, even if they're doing something wrong in the first place.

 

 

(aside)      Did it work for Smoking? 

There are always going to be a small number who can compost and put it on tbeir garden, no problem, other than a lot of faffing about.

The majority of folks who bought in to 'composting loos' were either innocents, or just did not think it through,. They will have to abandon their copostaloo.

The other lot, who are recalcitrant will just continue to  bin n bag, assuming it is cheaper / easier for them than a porta potti type solution.

 

 

 

Edited by LadyG
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LadyG said:

Did it work for Smoking?

If you mean did it reduce the amount of smokers? Absolutely, particularly the more casual smokers. But has it eradicated smoking? No, not at all.

 

If anything that was a good example of where a nudge was better than a big stick. Smoking wasn't banned, it was just restricted to designated areas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

If you mean did it reduce the amount of smokers? Absolutely, particularly the more casual smokers. But has it eradicated smoking? No, not at all.

 

If anything that was a good example of where a nudge was better than a big stick. Smoking wasn't banned, it was just restricted to designated areas.

Yes, by use of Laws, not by nudging, nudging did not work. The big stick worked to stop people smoking in workplaces, bars, cinemas, aeroplanes, trains, buses, etc 

It's now pretty much anti social as well.

Edited by LadyG
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, IanD said:

P.S. Please don't just come back and say "they'll never do that" -- many similar bodies (e.g. councils, London Transport) have done precisely that in the past, though not usually because people were putting poo in their bins 😉

 

They were removed I believe for security reasons.

 

Plus London Transport doesn't have people (legitimately) living on their system creating waste. That is a key difference and is simply not comparable nor are they 'similar' organisations.

 

So I will say again CRT will not remove their waste bins, not least because it would cause a massive increase in fly tipping on the towpath.

 

 

Edited by The Happy Nomad
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

If you mean did it reduce the amount of smokers? Absolutely, particularly the more casual smokers. But has it eradicated smoking? No, not at all.

 

If anything that was a good example of where a nudge was better than a big stick. Smoking wasn't banned, it was just restricted to designated areas.

Yeah, but emptying an ashtray into your bin doesn't result in the LA refusing to empty your dustbins... 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

Smoking wasn't banned, it was just restricted to designated areas.

 

 

Good example od what is needed :-

 

So, if composting toilets were to be banned on boats, but allowed to be installed in domestic situations, it would be just like smoking (banned in some areas and allowed in others)

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

If you mean did it reduce the amount of smokers? Absolutely, particularly the more casual smokers. But has it eradicated smoking? No, not at all.

 

If anything that was a good example of where a nudge was better than a big stick. Smoking wasn't banned, it was just restricted to designated areas.

It's funny how people keep coming up with analogies which don't work at all!

 

The earlier one was VHS/Betamax!! As if Betamax had been banned 😂

Edited by doratheexplorer
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

I think this discussion has become circular now. Nearly 30 pages!

 

Turns out there are 3 certainties in life: death, taxes and the narrowboat toilet debate 😆

It became circular about 25 pages ago.

  • Greenie 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

I think this discussion has become circular now. Nearly 30 pages!

 

Turns out there are 3 certainties in life: death, taxes and the narrowboat toilet debate 😆

 

 

I must admit when I saw your 1st post I thought what an apt name for someone new to this thread.

 

Then I noticed it wasn't "BumBargee"

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

I must admit when I saw your 1st post I thought what an apt name for someone new to this thread.

 

Then I noticed it wasn't "BumBargee"

Only at weekends 😉

  • Greenie 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BrumBargee said:

I think this discussion has become circular now. Nearly 30 pages!

 

Turns out there are 3 certainties in life: death, taxes and the narrowboat toilet debate 😆

At least it gave everyone something to do during lockdown...

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tacet said:

It is not a duty of care issue (which more relates to tort) but a legislative and contractual point.

 

 

 

According to the .Gov website on management of waste, the waste producers (C&RT in this instance) have a duty of care :

 

If you care to read up the full details, rather than just extracts, it can be found here Waste duty of care: code of practice - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

 

 

This Code applies to you if you import, produce, carry, keep, treat, dispose of or, as a dealer or broker have control of, certain waste in England or Wales.

Failure to comply with the duty of care is an offence with no upper limit on the courts’ power to fine. In some instances a fixed penalty notice may be issued for failure to comply with the duty of care in place of prosecution. The Code is admissible as evidence in legal proceedings for Section 34(1) offences and its rules must be taken into account where relevant to questions raised in the case.

 

2.1 Duty of care: who it applies to

The duty of care applies to anyone who imports, produces, carries, keeps, treats, disposes of, or are a dealer or broker that has control of, controlled waste (referred to below for the purpose of this Code as a “waste holder”).

Waste holders are a:

  • waste producer – any person whose activities produce waste. This includes private sector businesses such as shops, offices, factories and tradespersons (e.g. electricians, builders, glaziers and plumbers) and public sector services such as schools, hospitals and prisons, as well as charities and voluntary and community groups.

2.3 Waste holders: what your duty of care does not apply to

  • sewage, sludge or septic tank sludge where it is supplied, managed or used in the ways described in regulation 3 of the Controlled Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2012

 

To save you searching, section 3 of the 2012 regulations state :

 

(2) The following waste (where it is Directive waste) is not to be treated as household waste, industrial waste or commercial waste for the purposes of Part 2 of the Act—

(a)sewage, sludge or septic tank sludge which is treated, kept or disposed of (otherwise than by means of mobile plant) within the curtilage of a sewage treatment works as an integral part of the operation of those works;

(b)sludge which is supplied or used in accordance with the Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989;

(c)septic tank sludge which is used on agricultural land within the meaning of those Regulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another from Facebook

 

Thought this might be a useful update to folks who have or are considering getting composting loos.
I contacted the CRT as we are in the process of becoming CC’ers and have been looking for a back up loo for our pump out. I have always liked the composting loo solution and was concerned with what appeared to be recent changes in policy on disposal of solid waste. I may be wrong, it might have already been policy but unenforced when composting loos were few and far between.
Ihave posted a section of both my enquiry and the CRT response below.
Enquiry
Having read the recent release regarding composting waste disposal I was wondering whether the CRT have any likely timescale for the introduction of suitable disposal points for composted waste? I’m considering a composting toilet as an option but want to be sure I have somewhere to get rid of the waste.
Response
Hello Rick, thank you so much for bearing with us. I am so sorry for our delay in updating you. My colleague had passed on your suggestion but I'm afraid no timeframes can be provided at this time. The team will continue their considerations on the subject but, as there is no statutory duty on the Trust to provide customer service facilities and we are working with extremely reduced resources, this is not likely to be a quick fix.
As soon as there are news on the matter, these are likely to be transmitted through our Boater's Update but, in the meantime, if you are looking at a composting toilet, you would have to also look into how you could keep the waste on the boat for 12 months while it decomposes or, for alternative waste facilities away from the waterways.
I hope you understand but please contact back if there is anything else we can do for you.
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

It's funny how people keep coming up with analogies which don't work at all!

 

The earlier one was VHS/Betamax!! As if Betamax had been banned 😂

No one else picked up on it @doratheexplorer, sometimes I think I am wasting my time on here. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just recieved this months Waterways World. There's a three page article on toilets. Guess what it says you should do with the waste from your composting toilet?

 

No doubt they will be publishing a correction next month

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jerra said:

Did you expand the quoted text?   One of the drawbacks of the new forum set up is if you intersperse replies in a long post the post looks as if you have just quoted

It's a bit hit and miss, but if you hit return a couple of times in the middle of quoted text it often splits the quote...

10 hours ago, Jerra said:

and not added anything.

...like this. There must be a rule about why it sometimes works and other times not. Perhaps someone knows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.