Jump to content

Composting toilet waste disposal in CaRT bins


IanD

Composting toilet waste disposal in CaRT bins  

88 members have voted

  1. 1. Should CaRT continue to allow non-composted human waste from composting toilets to be disposed of in their waste bins (previous CaRT policy) or ban it (updated CaRT policy)?

    • Yes, they should continue to allow this in future
      16
    • No, this should be prohibited in future
      57
    • I don't care
      15


Featured Posts

19 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

I've come to the conclusion they should not be called separating or composting toilets, they should be called divisive toilets.

 

It seems to have ended the cassette/pumpout debate though, so that's a plus.

'cos vloggers say composting is newer and more modern and betterer, innit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

OK guys. My last post on the subject. I do not want to argue about this topic. Both sides have put their views.

I have a professional interest in waste recycling. I work for a company that works closely to waste management companies. I know how they make their money. I have had a conversation over the last few days that tells me that at least one waste management company is not wanting dog poo in their bins and has told a marina not far from here to stop. All councils in this country accept this waste in domestic bins in this way. However being 'commercial', they have the power to say no.

The discussion on the CWDF on the topic has raised the issue. It has made others aware of dog poo in bins. That has resulted in the conversation I referred to earlier. I know waste management companies. I strongly suggest we stop this discussion - nothing to do with winning or loosing. I do not have a dog. I do not put poo in bins. However continued discussion will only lead to claim and counter claim that will ultimately lead to severe restrictions on where you can dispose of dog poo.

I asked IanD yesterday if we could let this die down and he agreed that penalty for not doing so could have a wider issue. I have contacted the mods who dont see an issue. AlandeE obviously doesnt care less about wanting to discuss dog poo - yet risks something that I guess many many will be concerned about.

I will not post again as I dont want to see a huge number of people disadvantaged. If they are then blame it on AlandeE, Athy and Magie Patrick who dont see it as an issue. It may already be too late

That seems a massive diversion tactic to shift any blame if you want my opinion! Quite the U turn!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, IanD said:

Read the results...

 

In any vote -- or even a recent referendum -- only the votes of those who vote count ?

 

I did read the results, clearly you didnt. Some (11) voted 'dont care' so their vote does count. Which is why I referred to them. 

 

50 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

No doubt the 'dumping in the bins should continue' voters  will 'claim' the 'don't care' vote, the same as the Brexit remainers tried to claim the '30%' of CBA to vote as a vote to remain.

 

 

Or in Ian's case just ignore the ones who specifically voted 'don't care'. 

Edited by The Happy Nomad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

I did read the results, clearly you didnt. Some (11) voted 'dont care' so their vote does count. Which is why referred to them. 

 

 

Or in Ian's case just ignore the ones who specifically voted 'don't care'. 

Yes the "don't care's" do count in a way, they're the equivalent of voting "abstain" in an election. This option was there because Dora claimed that 90% of boaters didn't care either way -- well the poll result is currently at 18%...

 

So on current numbers 82% do care, and the poo-baggers are outnumbered 6:1 by those who think they should stop, which is what CaRT have said. That's a massive boater vote of confidence in favour of CaRT's rule change.

 

Anyone who didn't vote at all isn't counted, just like every other election in history. Nobody can say how the non-voters might have voted, so they don't count.

 

People should draw their own conclusions about how these numbers align with the claims made by the poo-baggers on this and other threads.

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IanD said:

Yes the "don't care's" do count in a way, they're the equivalent of "abstain" in an election. This option was really there because Dora claimed that 90% of boaters didn't care either way -- well the poll result is currently at 18%...

 

So on current numbers 82% do care, and the poo-baggers are outnumbered 6:1 by those who think they should stop, just as CaRT have said.

 

Anyone who didn't vote at all isn't counted, just like every other election in history. Nobody can say how the non-voters might have voted, so they don't count.

 

People should draw their own conclusions about how these numbers align with the claims made by the poo-baggers on this and other threads.

 

Yippeeeee.....you must be absolutely ecstatic.  ??

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by The Happy Nomad
Appalling spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

The homepage says there are 29786 members on this site.

 

There are more than 11 "don't cares" ...

Of those who voted and expressed an opinion, 82% cared. Is that better?

 

I could just as well claim that more than 29000 members agreed with me. There's no evidence either way. Maybe they didn't read the poll. Maybe they do care but couldn't be arsed to vote. Maybe they really *don't* care -- who knows.

 

It's how all elections or polls work -- you can only take notice of the votes that are cast, not the ones that aren't.

 

Anyway the 82% isn't what matters, it's the 6:1 that is important.

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you ask me there's some unpleasant crowing and chest beating going on here.

I don't think uncomposted waste should go in the bins but Bob's responses have been rational, consistent, generally polite and well researched, I also know more about waste management than I did before

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, IanD said:

Of those who voted and expressed an opinion, 82% cared. Is that better?

 

I could just as well claim that more than 29000 members agreed with me. There's no evidence either way. Maybe they didn't read the poll. Maybe they do care but couldn't be arsed to vote. Maybe they really *don't* care -- who knows.

 

It's how all elections or polls work -- you can only take notice of the votes that are cast, not the ones that aren't.

 

Anyway the 82% isn't what matters, it's the 6:1 that is important.

Sensible users of polls do take note of the abstainers as it, if extensive, can be  warning about taking the for-against result at face value. You can be sure that when the impact arrives, many of the abstainers will actually have a strong view and life can take a very unexpected turn as a result. Understanding why people abstained can be very important. It may also give a clue that, if the question changes only slightly, there could be  a very different outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/03/2021 at 18:32, Jerra said:

It would be interesting to know the general opinion of "composting Loo" owners on the following.

 

1.  If there was a cost to dispose of the "product" how much would you expect to pay?

 

2.  What volume would you expect to be able to dispose of for that fee?

Answering in reverse order...we empty the poo bucket a couple of times a year into a toilet point. Slowly, adding plenty of water. If we’re on board a lot, it goes home to compost. So to answer no1, why would we expect to pay anything more than cassette emptiers? Actually thanks for bringing this up, I’d like a rebate please as we use much less of everything.

 

The wee bucket goes in a loo if we pass one (!) or on a patch of nettles or suchlike. 
 

Other than supermarket wrappings, we hardly touch black bins, nearly all is recycled, often we have to take it home to do so. There should be much more recycling bins, you can have half my rebate for that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

If you ask me there's some unpleasant crowing and chest beating going on here.

I don't think uncomposted waste should go in the bins but Bob's responses have been rational, consistent, generally polite and well researched, I also know more about waste management than I did before

If you think that presenting facts which show that claims made (and re-made, and still being made) were wrong is crowing and chest-beating, you have some funny ideas.

 

"Alternative facts" are a plague on the internet today, and should be challenged. That's what keeps happening here. If people keep coming back with the same "alternative facts", they shouldn't expect them to go unchallenged. No matter how many times Trump claims he won the election, it's still not true.

 

Bob's detailed facts about the legal and commercial facts of waste disposal have indeed been rational and informative, and he deserves credit for that.

 

That's not what he is being challenged about, it's his claims about how non-nasty poo-in-a-bag is, and his comparison of it with nappies (not backed up by the facts) and dog poo -- which is what he claims is now causing him to try and shut down discussions about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/03/2021 at 19:17, haggis said:

Well, I have a dog and I don't put dog poo bags in the general waste bins. I keep them on the front deck of the boat till I find a poo bin and pop them in. I find there are enough dog poo bins beside the canal.( Often near locks where I am off the boat anyway)  and it is no great hassle to dispose of the poo bags properly. I find the thought of dog  poo in general waste bins nearly as offensive as human poo  in the bins. 

I think most responsible dog owners will use dog poo bins rather than general waste ones.

 

Haggis

So who puts all the tree decorations up then? Cat owners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Sensible users of polls do take note of the abstainers as it, if extensive, can be  warning about taking the for-against result at face value. You can be sure that when the impact arrives, many of the abstainers will actually have a strong view and life can take a very unexpected turn as a result. Understanding why people abstained can be very important. It may also give a clue that, if the question changes only slightly, there could be  a very different outcome.

Correct -- about 1/6 of the people who voted abstained. Since the split of the remainder was so unequal (6:1) there's no conceivable way that the abstainers who voted can change the result.

 

As to what the people who didn't vote think, it would be great to know but they didn't vote.

 

Any time somebody loses a vote -- especially if the result is close -- they claim that they'd have won if only some of the non-voters had voted. And that might well be true, if the result is close.

 

Here it's not even close. Nowhere near.

 

And you're right that the question makes a difference, which is why I was *very* careful (after being told off!) not to make it an approve/disapprove of poo-baggers or their morals/motives or whether a canalwide network of compost stations should be put in place or whether there's a legal way of banning it...

 

The argument is all about CaRT's proposed rule change, so the poll asked exactly that -- this is precisely what the rules say before and after the change, do you think the old rule should stand or the new one, or don't care?

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, IanD said:

That's not what he is being challenged about,

 

Add in the fact that he quotes the legislation stating "max 7kg in one tiger-striped bag per bin for offensive waste" and then states there are no laws covering it is simply nothing more than inconsistently applying 'facts that suit the argument'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, droshky said:

So who puts all the tree decorations up then? Cat owners?

Maybe save discussions about dog poo tree decorations and whether the poo fairy exists for another thread?

 

Otherwise Dr.Bob will accuse us all of potentially ruining the lives of dog-owning boaters by talking about it too much on this one ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

If you think that presenting facts which show that claims made (and re-made, and still being made) were wrong is crowing and chest-beating, you have some funny ideas.

 

"Alternative facts" are a plague on the internet today, and should be challenged. That's what keeps happening here. If people keep coming back with the same "alternative facts", they shouldn't expect them to go unchallenged. No matter how many times Trump claims he won the election, it's still not true.

 

Bob's detailed facts about the legal and commercial facts of waste disposal have indeed been rational and informative, and he deserves credit for that.

 

That's not what he is being challenged about, it's his claims about how non-nasty poo-in-a-bag is, and his comparison of it with nappies (not backed up by the facts) and dog poo -- which is what he claims is now causing him to try and shut down discussions about it.

Not sure where the alternative facts thing came from, although I agree with the general point, but the thread has been full of opinion and supposition, very few actual facts at all and those facts have been debated to death.

 

There has been very little actual informed discussion and for whatever reason Bob has decided to back away from the thread, followed by snide digs by some of those remaining.

 

To be clear I think it's a retrograde step, but then I think our recycling efforts in this country are abysmal and we shouldn't be complicating the issue by adding a new waste stream but the thread has proved nothing and the poll is fairly pointless when you consider the numbers voting and the general tone of the thread, it was odds on the direction it would go

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

Maybe save discussions about dog poo tree decorations and whether the poo fairy exists for another thread?

 

Otherwise Dr.Bob will accuse us all of potentially ruining the lives of dog-owning boaters by talking about it too much on this one ?

 

Exactly what TM was talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, droshky said:

Answering in reverse order...we empty the poo bucket a couple of times a year into a toilet point. Slowly, adding plenty of water. If we’re on board a lot, it goes home to compost. So to answer no1, why would we expect to pay anything more than cassette emptiers? Actually thanks for bringing this up, I’d like a rebate please as we use much less of everything.

 

The wee bucket goes in a loo if we pass one (!) or on a patch of nettles or suchlike. 
 

Other than supermarket wrappings, we hardly touch black bins, nearly all is recycled, often we have to take it home to do so. There should be much more recycling bins, you can have half my rebate for that!

As it seems dry toilets are a definite danger with regard to blocking drains and not everybody is as conscientious as you I am interested in a solution.   Long term everyone using elsan points/toilets will I think cause chaos.   This may lead to some being closed and will certainly cause long term expense for CRT.

 

Keeping in mind a solution will have to be found as I doubt CRT/waste carriers will accept the status quo going on for ever, what do you suggest? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Not sure where the alternative facts thing came from, although I agree with the general point, but the thread has been full of opinion and supposition, very few actual facts at all and those facts have been debated to death.

 

There has been very little actual informed discussion and for whatever reason Bob has decided to back away from the thread, followed by snide digs by some of those remaining.

 

To be clear I think it's a retrograde step, but then I think our recycling efforts in this country are abysmal and we shouldn't be complicating the issue by adding a new waste stream but the thread has proved nothing and the poll is fairly pointless when you consider the numbers voting and the general tone of the thread, it was odds on the direction it would go

Is the poll pointless because you don't believe what people voted for, or because you don't like the result? Any suggestions about a better way to find out what boaters think?

 

The digs at Bob are not snide (meaning, crafty or hidden), they're straight-out challenging him on the facts. Yes he knows a lot about waste disposal, but his claims about the fragrance of bagged poo and how it's no worse than nappies are frankly ridiculous and factually wrong -- but he ignored that. His attempt to persuade people that bagged poo should be allowed because dog poo is worse has backfired badly. Now he not only wants us to stop talking about this -- having banged on about it for page after page -- but he's now trying to blame everyone else, when he was the one that pushed the dog poo issue onto peoples radar.

 

My sympathy for him vanished when he played the blame card.

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IanD said:

In other words, the poll is pointless because not enough people voted (and it didn't go the way you hoped) -- is that what you're saying?

 

The digs at Bob are not snide (meaning, crafty or hidden), they're straight-out challenging him on the facts. Yes he knows a lot about waste disposal, but his claims about the fragrance of bagged poo and how it's no worse than nappies are frankly ridiculous. His attempt to persuade people that bagged poo should be allowed because dog poo is worse has backfired badly. Now he not only wants us to stop talking about this -- having banged on about it for page after page -- but he's now trying to blame everyone else when he was the one that pushed the dog poo issue onto peoples radar.

 

My sympathy for him vanished when he played the blame card.

How often do I have to say...

 

I don't think dumping untreated waste in bins is a good idea.

 

The poll was obviously going to go the way it did, Bob was about the only person on here offering any support for the idea, the number of people who voted was tiny, it was almost a forgone conclusion.

 

This is obviously only my opinion but Bob has done a damn site more in presenting his case in a convincing and rational manner than anyone else here and I still disagree with his actually point on the legitimacy/ethics of dumping waste in the general bins

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jerra said:

As it seems dry toilets are a definite danger with regard to blocking drains and not everybody is as conscientious as you I am interested in a solution.   Long term everyone using elsan points/toilets will I think cause chaos.   This may lead to some being closed and will certainly cause long term expense for CRT.

 

Keeping in mind a solution will have to be found as I doubt CRT/waste carriers will accept the status quo going on for ever, what do you suggest? 

I can imagine that careless dumping into small Elsan points would be problematic. Most of these would be in marinas and (comparatively) easily monitored.
 

Have you any evidence that specifically composters are in crt units becoming a cause of blockages? As opposed to the usual culprits of nappies, wet wipes, sts, cooking fat, and random rubbish, can we fairly be described as a “definite danger”?

 

A factor that hasn’t been mentioned much is that if you have any of the other systems, when you gotta go, you gotta go. We can wait till we get to an appropriate facility 

Link to comment
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.