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

[TheBiscuits]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

people who've installed composting toilets while ignoring the disposal rules

 

Er no, that's the point.  Those of us who have been doing exactly what CRT have told us to for over 5 years don't have useable toilets anymore based on one sentence in a boater's update.

 

Zero notice or warning, just a Damien copy and paste.

 

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Er no, that's the point.  Those of us who have been doing exactly what CRT have told us to for over 5 years don't have useable toilets anymore based on one sentence in a boater's update.

 

Zero notice or warning, just a Damien copy and paste.

 

 

 

Compounded by the fact there is currently no alternative what so ever for lot's of boaters,  

 

If they had provided proper facilities in advance then possibly fair enough, but they haven't.

[TheBiscuits]

13 minutes ago, IanD said:

Chucking large quantities of barely-processed human waste into the hedge or CaRT bins or down an Elsan point is clearly against the rules and always has been,

 

What processing do cassette toilet users do then?  Adding preservatives (formaldehyde) to reduce the rate of anaerobic decomposition doesn't really count.

[IanD]

15 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Er no, that's the point.  Those of us who have been doing exactly what CRT have told us to for over 5 years don't have useable toilets anymore based on one sentence in a boater's update.

 

Zero notice or warning, just a Damien copy and paste.

 

 

Sorry, let me rephrase that -- "while not disposing of the composting toilet waste as it is intended to be disposed".

 

It's clear what's *supposed* to be done with the solid waste, as all the promotional literature for these toilets clearly states -- composted properly over a period of about a year, then it can be used as compost. Hence the name ?

 

If people have been not doing this but disposing of partly-digested (or undigested) waste via CaRT facilities because CaRT said this was OK to do so -- because it is OK for them so long as only a few people do it -- and then CaRT decide this isn't OK any more because too many people are doing it or some of them are messing up CaRT's waste and Elsan facilities, it's difficult to see what their grounds for complaint are.

 

It's a bit like tax fiddles which people think are a bright idea even though they know they're not really kosher, then they get too popular and HMRC stamps down on them, and people complain because their tax bills go up.

Edited February 13, 2021 by IanD

[TheBiscuits]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

If people have been not doing this but disposing of partly-digested (or undigested) waste via CaRT facilities because CaRT said this was OK to do so -- because it is OK for them so long as only a few people do it -- and then CaRT decide this isn't OK any more because too many people are doing it or some of them are messing up waste and Elsan facilities, it's difficult to see what their grounds for complaint are.

 

The objection is not that CRT want to change their waste processing, it's that they have done so completely out of the blue late on a Friday.

 

Previous communications from CRT stated that they were looking at providing facilities for compost toilets.  Foolishly many of us assumed this meant nationally, not just one pilot site in London.  We also assumed they would get back to us with details, not just turn around and say we couldn't empty the loo anymore.

 

 

[IanD]

20 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

What processing do cassette toilet users do then?  Adding preservatives (formaldehyde) to reduce the rate of anaerobic decomposition doesn't really count.

The problem is that emptying weeks (or months...) worth of partly-digested solid waste from a composting toilet down the Elsan point puts far more solids into the system than emptying a cassette with a few days worth of liquid+solid excrement+water in it, and they're not diluted with a corresponding volume of water to help them flush away. Who then has to pay for dismantling the resulting poo-berg?

Edited February 13, 2021 by IanD

[ditchcrawler]

15 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

Compounded by the fact there is currently no alternative what so ever for lot's of boaters,  

 

If they had provided proper facilities in advance then possibly fair enough, but they haven't.

Should C&RT be providing these facilities, I already pay to clean and maintain elsan disposals I don't use and have to pay to empty my toilet tank, should I now also pay to install collection and treatment plants for what comes out of waterless toilets?

3 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

The objection is not that CRT want to change their waste processing, it's that they have done so completely out of the blue late on a Friday.

 

 

 

That is very true

[IanD]

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

The objection is not that CRT want to change their waste processing, it's that they have done so completely out of the blue late on a Friday.

 

Previous communications from CRT stated that they were looking at providing facilities for compost toilets.  Foolishly many of us assumed this meant nationally, not just one pilot site in London.  We also assumed they would get back to us with details, not just turn around and say we couldn't empty the loo anymore.

 

 

Which I agree completely is not acceptable -- anything that causes significant changes in people's lifestyles should be announced well in advance of any rule changes coming into force, to give people time to adapt (or object to the change and try and get it reversed).

 

But if you install a composting toilet knowing that you can't use it properly on the assumption that CaRT will provide facilities for disposing of the waste in the future, you're taking a risk in case this doesn't happen, or they change the rules, or change their mind.

 

Saying "there's no other way for some boaters to deal with their waste" ignores the question -- what did they do (that was legal) before composting toilets became available?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Should C&RT be providing these facilities, I already pay to clean and maintain elsan disposals I don't use and have to pay to empty my toilet tank, should I now also pay to install collection and treatment plants for what comes out of waterless toilets?

 

That wasn't my point.

 

The point was, saying you should do one thing one day and say you shouldn't be doing it the next, when there isn't an alternative.

 

What are these boaters suddenly expected  to do?

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Should C&RT be providing these facilities, I already pay to clean and maintain elsan disposals I don't use and have to pay to empty my toilet tank, should I now also pay to install collection and treatment plants for what comes out of waterless toilets?

That is very true

If people (understandably!) object to paying for and maintaining facilities they don't use, the obvious solution is for CaRT to charge the user.

 

Pump-out users already do this by paying £15 or so for a pumpout, so that means a similar charge (maybe smaller?) would be needed for compost toilet disposal, and maybe a smaller one still for Elsan disposal.

 

To avoid having to have poo-toll collectors at every waste disposal point, this could be done by a supplement to the license fee (and a discount for pump-out users?) depending on which kind of toilet you have fitted.

 

Be careful what you wish for... ?

[TheBiscuits]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

But if you install a composting toilet knowing that you can't use it properly on the assumption that CaRT will provide facilities for disposing of the waste in the future, you're taking a risk in case this doesn't happen, or they change the rules, or change their mind.

 

That's exactly my point though - we weren't assuming we were "getting away" with anything, we were following the guidance from both CRT and the EA.

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/library/141.pdf

 

Boater's Handbook

 

Page 60, top right hand side

 

 

We have been doing precisely what we were told to do with the waste and CRT were saying they were going to improve their handling facilities to deal with it better in the future.  This was being done as part of the London Mooring Strategy and has being going on for years.

 

Yes, in an ideal world I would place it all in a hot composting bin - I'd much prefer to do so than bag it and bin it.

[haggis]

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

If people (understandably!) object to paying for and maintaining facilities they don't use, the obvious solution is for CaRT to charge the user.

 

Pump-out users already do this by paying £15 or so for a pumpout, so that means a similar charge (maybe smaller?) would be needed for compost toilet disposal, and maybe a smaller one still for Elsan disposal.

 

To avoid having to have poo-toll collectors at every waste disposal point, this could be done by a supplement to the license fee (and a discount for pump-out users?) depending on which kind of toilet you have fitted.

 

Be careful what you wish for... ?

Good idea in principle but while I imagine the majority of Elsans are provided by C&RT I think most pump outs are provided by boatyards and coal boats so this idea would not be very fair on them.

 

haggis

[mrsmelly]

7 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

That's exactly my point though - we weren't assuming we were "getting away" with anything, we were following the guidance from both CRT and the EA.

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/library/141.pdf

 

Boater's Handbook

 

Page 60, top right hand side

 

 

We have been doing precisely what we were told to do with the waste and CRT were saying they were going to improve their handling facilities to deal with it better in the future.  This was being done as part of the London Mooring Strategy and has being going on for years.

 

Yes, in an ideal world I would place it all in a hot composting bin - I'd much prefer to do so than bag it and bin it.

Have a look at a cassette toilet system, they are ideal. Loads of places around the entire country to dispose of the waste, many of which are free. Very very quick and easy to do and a new system is hundreds of pounds less than most composting bogs. Google Thetford they do a range 

[IanD]

Just now, TheBiscuits said:

 

That's exactly my point though - we weren't assuming we were "getting away" with anything, we were following the guidance from both CRT and the EA.

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/library/141.pdf

 

Boater's Handbook

 

Page 60, top right hand side

 

 

We have been doing precisely what we were told to do with the waste and CRT were saying they were going to improve their handling facilities to deal with it better in the future.  This was being done as part of the London Mooring Strategy and has being going on for years.

 

Yes, in an ideal world I would place it all in a hot composting bin - I'd much prefer to do so than bag it and bin it.

Now with the unspoken CaRT subtexts:

 

"Composting toilets are intended to do just that -- make compost" -- absolutely, great green idea.

 

"If that's not what you're going to use the waste for or if you can't keep it stored until it's ready to use, it will still need to be disposed of at an Elsan..." -- you can do this for the moment, it's the least bad way of getting rid of it even though it's the wrong one, but don't bet on this carrying on in the future if too many people abuse the facilities in a way they're not designed for"

 

"CRT were saying they were going to improve their handling facilities to deal with it better in the future" -- assuming this doesn't cost so much that it becomes impractical, which it probably will do if widespread unless we charge people more.

 

If CaRT had previously announced a long-term (planned out and costed) "poo policy" on replacing environmentally-unfriendly pumpouts and Elsans with composting toilet waste facilities as part of their strategy and then changed their minds, people who had installed them would of course be entitled to kick up a fuss.

 

What's actually happened is that people have installed them assuming that they could either carry on disposing of the waste wrongly or that CaRT would spend a lot of money to do it for them legally in the future, and now CaRT appear to have had a change of heart (or looked at the cost and realised it's unsupportable).

 

Making such a change with little or no notice is definitely wrong.

 

 

[ditchcrawler]

22 minutes ago, IanD said:

If people (understandably!) object to paying for and maintaining facilities they don't use, the obvious solution is for CaRT to charge the user.

 

Pump-out users already do this by paying £15 or so for a pumpout, so that means a similar charge (maybe smaller?) would be needed for compost toilet disposal, and maybe a smaller one still for Elsan disposal.

 

To avoid having to have poo-toll collectors at every waste disposal point, this could be done by a supplement to the license fee (and a discount for pump-out users?) depending on which kind of toilet you have fitted.

 

Be careful what you wish for... ?

Or make pump outs free as well, we don't poo any more than bucket and chucket's

[IanD]

38 minutes ago, haggis said:

Good idea in principle but while I imagine the majority of Elsans are provided by C&RT I think most pump outs are provided by boatyards and coal boats so this idea would not be very fair on them.

 

haggis

I didn't mean pump-out users should no longer be charged. I meant that once you decide that poo generators should pay for disposal, at the moment the Elsan costs are paid for by everyone (including pump-out users) whether they use them or not, so if paying for them is then done via the license fees the cost for Elsan (and composing toilet?) users would have to go up and the fee for pumpout users should go down.

 

It's the usual hypothecated tax problem -- does everyone (society as a whole -- meaning boaters) pay whether they use something or not, or do only the users pay?

 

If installing disposal facilities for composting toilets is done by CaRT it will cost them, both to install and run them, and this is basically to do something that the toilet owners should be doing themselves but can't (or won't) so it's difficlut to see why other boaters should pay. As soon as you've done this (charging composting toilet users) they you've got hypothecated poo, and unless this also extends to those with other kinds of toilets there will be objections.

 

In an ideal world CaRT would pay for all the facilities (and maintenance) that boaters want, presumably funded by the Government -- which actually means non-boaters, so be careful they don't object. In reality they have a limited budget which doesn't even cover essential network maintenance, and if they diverted a chunk of this to effectively subsidise composting toilet owners (leaving less for everything else) there would be howls of protest from everybody else.

Edited February 13, 2021 by IanD
typo

[TheBiscuits]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

If CaRT had previously announced a long-term (planned out and costed) [policy]

 

  I see what you did there!  It would make a nice change after nine years ...

 

 

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

What's actually happened is that people have installed them assuming that they could either carry on disposing of the waste wrongly

 

Again, exactly as instructed by both CRT and the Environment Agency.  I agree it's not the best possible way to do it, but it is what we have been told to do for years. 

 

Forum opinion or the Environment Agency, hmm who should I listen to?

 

 

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

Making such a change with little or no notice is definitely wrong.

 

I suspect this isn't the last we have heard on this topic. 

 

The fecal matter will be hitting the air circulation device ...

 

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Or make pump outs free as well, we don't poo any more than bucket and chucket's

True, but I bet the cost of running a pumpout facility and disposing of the waste is much higher.

 

Why not make everything on the canals free, then nobody has to pay for anything?

 

Except via taxes of course, which are mainly paid by non-boaters becasue there are far more of them, and few millionaires live on a narrowboat. Some might then say this is an undeserved subsidy to the feckless boating poor... ?

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Or make pump outs free as well, we don't poo any more than bucket and chucket's

 

The infrastructure and maintenace costs of a pump-out system are much higher than just having a toilet bowl running into the sewer.

 

The law allows C&RT to charge for services additional to navigation. There is no reason why this should not encompass all forms of waste disposal.

 

Section 43(3) of the Transport Act 1962 ("the 1962 Act") provides "... the [British Waterways Board and the Strategic Rail Authority] shall have power to demand, take and recover [or waive] such charges for their services and facilities, and to make the use of those services and facilities subject to such terms and conditions, as they think fit."

 

Section 43(8) of the 1962 Act provides "The services and facilities referred to in subsection (3) of this section included, in the case of British Waterways Board, the use of any inland waterway owned or managed by them by any ship or boat".

 

•  

[IanD]

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

  I see what you did there!  It would make a nice change after nine years ...

 

 

 

Again, exactly as instructed by both CRT and the Environment Agency.  I agree it's not the best possible way to do it, but it is what we have been told to do for years. 

 

Forum opinion or the Environment Agency, hmm who should I listen to?

 

 

 

I suspect this isn't the last we have heard on this topic. 

 

The fecal matter will be hitting the air circulation device ...

 

It's not just forum opinion; everyone who installed a composting toilet and then chucked it (as CaRT said) instead of composting it properly (as clearly intended) must have known in their heart of hearts that they weren't doing "the right thing" (i.e. being Green and environmentally friendly), they were doing what was convenient for them. Nothing wrong with that, people do it all the time, but it makes it difficult to object when they get "found out" ?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The infrastructure and maintenace costs of a pump-out system are much higher than just having a toilet bowl running into the sewer.

 

Some of course do need their holding tank emptying, I think from memory Castleford's does. But in the main I would say yes that is correct.

 

Some pump outs also require manning too with associated costs that entails.

[IanD]

13 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The infrastructure and maintenace costs of a pump-out system are much higher than just having a toilet bowl running into the sewer.

 

The law allows C&RT to charge for services additional to navigation. There is no reason why this should not encompass all forms of waste disposal.

 

Section 43(3) of the Transport Act 1962 ("the 1962 Act") provides "... the [British Waterways Board and the Strategic Rail Authority] shall have power to demand, take and recover [or waive] such charges for their services and facilities, and to make the use of those services and facilities subject to such terms and conditions, as they think fit."

 

Section 43(8) of the 1962 Act provides "The services and facilities referred to in subsection (3) of this section included, in the case of British Waterways Board, the use of any inland waterway owned or managed by them by any ship or boat".

 

•  

Absolutely agreed, but then you get the same "chicken and egg" problem as charging points for electric boats, which means the numbers don't add up until there are a lot of them.

 

Imagine that CaRT did install all those wonderful composting toilet waste disposal facilities, then divided the cost by the number of boats with composting toilets and the number of times per year they dumped their waste and how much they dumped, and decided the users should pay not everybody else.

 

"Certainly sir, you can dispose of your waste here. We have to weigh it first, and the cost is £20 per kg. That'll be £150, thank you very much."

 

Like electric boat chargers, the way to avoid this would be to have a properly thought-out environmentally-friendly policy to switch all canal boats to electric power (and heat-pump heating) with composting toilets, and invest in the infrastructure to do this. Once a large number of boats have switched the "I'm not paying for what I don't use" problem goes away. CaRT could even sell the compost and make money from it.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath while CaRT sorted out either the electric problem or the poo problem though... ?

Edited February 13, 2021 by IanD

[Mike Todd]

30 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

Some of course do need their holding tank emptying, I think from memory Castleford's does. But in the main I would say yes that is correct.

 

Some pump outs also require manning too with associated costs that entails.

But is it not the pump out equipment itself that is the problem. Expensive to install and is forever going wrong - I think I read somewhere that CaRT make a loss on them when the high maintenance costs are factored in - especially the unmanned ones. The problem seems to lie in their use by boaters rather than trained staff. Disposal of the stuff that is pumped out is not difficult as there are plenty of well-organised cess pit emptying firms.

 

Perhaps the answer with the composting disposal is to encourage or enable the fuel boats to offer the service - some do near London with cassette emptying, I believe. May be offer to subsidise the installation of a composting 'bin' on fuel boats could kick start the market - or even some of the marinas. Cannot be beyond the wit of clever people - especially as the only real cost to the provider is the time for storage. Once fully composted the disposal is not difficult. Afte4 all, that is what effectively has happened with pump outs, many/most of which are private commercial services.

[David Mack]

31 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The law allows C&RT to charge for services additional to navigation. There is no reason why this should not encompass all forms of waste disposal.

 

Section 43(3) of the Transport Act 1962 ("the 1962 Act") provides "... the [British Waterways Board and the Strategic Rail Authority] shall have power to demand, take and recover [or waive] such charges for their services and facilities, and to make the use of those services and facilities subject to such terms and conditions, as they think fit."

But there is no obligation on CRT to provide any such services, only a power to charge for those they do provide.

Nobody expects CRT to provide our diesel, gas or coal. We are happy to buy these from boatyards, fuel boats or land-based suppliers, and similarly to pay for pump outs. So why do we expect CRT to provide free facilities for rubbish disposal, elsan bucket/cassette contents disposal, supply of fresh water etc. (And why on earth is CRT in the business of providing showers at some sanitary stations?) On other waterways it is much more common to pay for these facilities at boatyards.

The compost toilet advocates have told us that the volume of waste is much reduced and it is inoffensive. So why can't the vast majority of such boaters keep the stuff on board for the duration of a trip, and then take it home for disposal?  Doesn't help the liveaboards much in the immediate future, but if there is a demand to take partly composted poo, then it is likely that commercial operators will respond to the opportunity (and charge, as they do for pumpouts).

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

If people (understandably!) object to paying for and maintaining facilities they don't use, the obvious solution is for CaRT to charge the user.

 

Pump-out users already do this by paying £15 or so for a pumpout, so that means a similar charge (maybe smaller?) would be needed for compost toilet disposal, and maybe a smaller one still for Elsan disposal.

 

To avoid having to have poo-toll collectors at every waste disposal point, this could be done by a supplement to the license fee (and a discount for pump-out users?) depending on which kind of toilet you have fitted.

 

Be careful what you wish for... ?

I've got a tank, do I get a discount. Not that I use pumpout, but, I've got a tank.