Government CRT funding statement

[IanD]

28 minutes ago, peterboat said:

Wonder where they will get their hydrogen from? We have a hydrogen plant in Rotherham, one of the few in the country 

 

Apart from where they'll get it from (and how it will get to the boat) there's the usual question of "where does the energy to make it come from?" -- because even "green" hydrogen (meaning, using renewable energy) uses at least 2x as much renewable energy as just putting it straight into batteries, or any other more efficient form of energy storage.

 

But looked at the other way, the total energy/fuel requirements of boats on inland waterways are tiny in the big scheme of things (about 1% of that from cars IIRC), and it could well be easier/cheaper to provide hydrogen filling stations where diesel ones currently are (marinas etc) instead of a network of electric charging points all round the canals close enough together and with enough sockets to charge tens of thousands of electric boats.

 

Still, this is unlikely to happen without some kind of government subsidy, because apart from needing the hydrogen supply and distribution network the filling stations are expensive, and so is the hydrogen -- far more so than diesel, and the high manufacture/energy/distribution costs mean this is unlikely to ever get anywhere close to cost parity.

 

And that ignores the cost of fitting hydrogen/fuel cell/electric drive to boats, which has a similar problem to hybrid boats today (very high cost) -- plus retrofitting is difficult because hydrogen tanks need a *lot* more space than diesel. Like heat pumps in houses, the costs mean there's no incentive -- actually, a negative one -- for boaters to fit such a system, especially if the resulting running costs are higher than sticking with diesel.

 

This all looks like one of those ideas that's technically feasible (so the demonstrator will work) but without a properly thought-through plan on how to solve the hydrogen generation/distribution/cost/installation problems -- which will almost certainly need a big government subsidy. good luck with that given the current plan to reduce CART funding -- it'll never amount to anything... 😞

[magnetman]

One way to resolve the issue around canal boat propulsion systems is to just not have operable canals. Just a few big lakes full of boats never going anywhere. 

 

No need for diesel, hydrogen. elastic trickery or anything to turn a propeller. 

 

Job done planet saved. 

 

 

[David Mack]

50 minutes ago, Orwellian said:

CRT have no ability to control access to the towpaths. Many are public footpaths

Very few towpaths are designated as a public right of way on foot. BW resisted attempts to classify them as such since it restricts their ability to close them at short notice (and without local authority consent) for maintenance or other reasons.

Since CRT are now required to maintain public access on foot, there is no longer a reason to dedicate them as public footpaths.

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, magnetman said:

One way to resolve the issue around canal boat propulsion systems is to just not have operable canals. Just a few big lakes full of boats never going anywhere. 

 

No need for diesel, hydrogen. elastic trickery or anything to turn a propeller. 

 

Job done planet saved. 

 

 

But those lakes wouldn't be where the CMers want to live, what use is that?

 

Far better to keep the canals going useful places like into cities, but not bother with working locks/paddles, or engines on stationary CMer boats lining the towpaths. The NBTA would certainly be happy... 😉

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD

[Orwellian]

1 minute ago, David Mack said:

Since CRT are now required to maintain public access on foot, there is no longer a reason to dedicate them as public footpaths.

Only for as long as the funding agreement requires it. It is a contractual arrangement not a permanent change in the law.

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

18 minutes ago, IanD said:

 And that ignores the cost of fitting hydrogen/fuel cell/electric drive to boats, which has a similar problem to hybrid boats today (very high cost) -- plus retrofitting is difficult because hydrogen tanks need a *lot* more space than diesel. Like heat pumps in houses, the costs mean there's no incentive -- actually, a negative one -- for boaters to fit such a system, especially if the resulting running costs are higher than sticking with diesel.

As you say they will take a lot of space, looking at the tanks and rack they’re on.

 Imagine loosing the bedroom off your boat and moving it into the cabin, you wont have that much interior living space on a £250-300K boat, unless you go over 65ft plus. Would you pay that money for a cramped interior? 

[Jon57]

6 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

As you say they will take a lot of space, looking at the tanks and rack they’re on.

 Imagine loosing the bedroom off your boat and moving it into the cabin, you wont have that much interior living space on a £250-300K boat, unless you go over 65ft plus. Would you pay that money for a cramped interior? 

Who in their right mind would pay that kind of money to sit in a muddy ditch? South of France maybe. Solar powered of course.🥴

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

As you say they will take a lot of space, looking at the tanks and rack they’re on.

 Imagine loosing the bedroom off your boat and moving it into the cabin, you wont have that much interior living space on a £250-300K boat, unless you go over 65ft plus. Would you pay that money for a cramped interior? 

 

No. A hybrid boat is also expensive (probably cheaper than a hydrogen one though...), but doesn't need much more space for the gubbins than a conventional diesel boat, maybe less than one with a cocooned onboard generator -- on mine everything (propulsion, batteries, all electrics, calorifier, boiler, generator, fuel tank, silencers...) is fitted under the stern deck, there's no "engineering" inside the cabin at all. No chance of this with hydrogen...

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

37 minutes ago, Jon57 said:

Who in their right mind would pay that kind of money to sit in a muddy ditch? South of France maybe. Solar powered of course.🥴

 There quite a few. Met one with a brand new electric boat the other week, thought himself something special, with his look and how he spoke, this view was also noticed by several other boaters that said hello to him and tried to engage. He looked like he was heading Leeds way, the name of the boat is the winning number in the card game Pontoon. But from other experiences with people buying these priced boats, it’s not the norm they’re quite chatty and not up their own ar$e. 

Edited July 19, 2023 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[IanD]

53 minutes ago, Jon57 said:

Who in their right mind would pay that kind of money to sit in a muddy ditch? South of France maybe. Solar powered of course.🥴

 

Of course that's the issue with *any* shiny new boat though, isn't it? If you don't think it's worth it then it's not, and vice versa -- but the green-eyed monster often seems to be involved too... 😉

 

FYI the cost difference between a conventional boat and a hybrid boat is considerably less than the cost difference between a "low-quality" hull/boatbuilder and a "high-quality" one, and lots of people on CWDF seem think that it's worth paying the extra for a "high-quality" one -- if you've got the money, of course. See above... 😉

 

P.S. No new boat *ever* makes financial sense for the same reason no new car does, if money is what matters buy a secondhand one.

[Jon57]

31 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

 There quite a few. Met one with a brand new electric boat the other week, thought himself something special, with his look and how he spoke, this view was also noticed by several other boaters that said hello to him and tried to engage. He looked like he was heading Leeds way, the name of the boat is the winning number in the card game Pontoon. But from other experiences with people buying these priced boats, it’s not the norm they’re quite chatty and not up their own ar$e. 

Twenty one.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

1 hour ago, Orwellian said:

Only for as long as the funding agreement requires it. It is a contractual arrangement not a permanent change in the law.

Not quite right. Goverment created a body called the Waterways Infrastucture Trust with CRT as its first and sole trustee. The trust settlement between the Secretary of State and CRT provides free pedestrian access in perpetuity. The current grant agreement simply reflects the trust settlement.

 

However, the trust settlement can be changed ...

[MtB]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

 

No. A hybrid boat is also expensive (probably cheaper than a hydrogen one though...), but doesn't need much more space for the gubbins than a conventional diesel boat, maybe less than one with a cocooned onboard generator -- on mine everything (propulsion, batteries, all electrics, calorifier, boiler, generator, fuel tank, silencers...) is fitted under the stern deck, there's no "engineering" inside the cabin at all. No chance of this with hydrogen...

 

Sounds to me like this could turn out to be a maintenance access nightmare, all that stuff crammed in together in one space!

 

I'm sure you will have thought about maintenance access properly but many boat builders don't. 

 

 

[IanD]

26 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Sounds to me like this could turn out to be a maintenance access nightmare, all that stuff crammed in together in one space!

 

I'm sure you will have thought about maintenance access properly but many boat builders don't. 

 

 

Yes, Ricky's quite paranoid about everything being accessible/maintainable (inside the boat too) -- it's why he shot some of my crazier ideas down in flames, and why some others have been toned down to make plans match reality... 😉

 

The (semi-trad) stern section is 9' long for this exact reason, not the shorter length I thought was feasible but was told wasn't if anything was to be accessible afterwards... 🙂

 

1 hour ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

 There quite a few. Met one with a brand new electric boat the other week, thought himself something special, with his look and how he spoke, this view was also noticed by several other boaters that said hello to him and tried to engage. He looked like he was heading Leeds way, the name of the boat is the winning number in the card game Pontoon. But from other experiences with people buying these priced boats, it’s not the norm they’re quite chatty and not up their own ar$e. 

 

Just because you can afford an expensive new boat (or car, or house...) doesn't automatically make you superior to anyone else, money doesn't work like that -- though some people think it does...

 

Some of the nicest people I've met have been very well-off, they don't have to worry about anything so can be nice to people, and say "thank-you" to people doing things for them, even low-paid people doing menial jobs.

 

But also some of the nastiest people I've met have been rich entitled a*seholes who think their money means they can ride roughshod over other people and treat them like sh*t, especially anyone serving or working for them.

 

There are nice people and complete sh*ts in all walks of life -- rich or poor, management, politicians, car drivers, boaters...

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD

[Midnight]

For those who believe there's no need for a change at the top. The buck needs to stop somewhere!

https://www.narrowboatworld.com/14702-official-stoppages-2022-23

[IanD]

36 minutes ago, Midnight said:

For those who believe there's no need for a change at the top. The buck needs to stop somewhere!

https://www.narrowboatworld.com/14702-official-stoppages-2022-23

 

Please explain how you think a "change at the top" -- presumably the "smarter management" you referred to earlier, winner of this week's "Buzzword Bingo" prize -- is going to magically improve things, with no more money (or worse, even less money) to pay for actually fixing the canals.

 

Preferably without mentioning blue signs and bonuses, which will make bugger-all difference for reasons explained several times... 😉

 

And without making any personal attacks this time, try and stick to actual facts and real solutions not imaginary ones... 🙂

 

It makes about as much sense as saying "The NHS is going down the toilet, let's sack *all* the top managers, that'll show 'em where the buck stops!" -- yeah, great idea, let's get rid of everyone who has a clue about how the NHS works and replace them with new people who don't, to divert attention away from the real reason for the problems which is INSUFFICIENT FUNDING 😞 😞 😞

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD

[Tonka]

15 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Please explain how you think a "change at the top" -- presumably the "smarter management" you referred to earlier, winner of this week's "Buzzword Bingo" prize -- is going to magically improve things, with no more money (or worse, even less money) to pay for actually fixing the canals.

 

Preferably without mentioning blue signs and bonuses, which will make bugger-all difference for reasons explained several times... 😉

 

And without making any personal attacks this time, try and stick to actual facts and real solutions not imaginary ones... 🙂

 

It makes about as much sense as saying "The NHS is going down the toilet, let's sack *all* the top managers, that'll show 'em where the buck stops!" -- yeah, great idea, let's get rid of everyone who has a clue about how the NHS works and replace them with new people who don't, to divert attention away from the real reason for the problems which is INSUFFICIENT FUNDING 😞 😞 😞

If Mrs ian_d keeps spending all her house keeping money that you give her do you just keep giving her more money every week or/and do you sit down with her and go through her spending and point out where she can make savings.

I wouldn't mind betting you do bit of both, in that give her a bit more and have a chat with her.

I think this is what midnight is referring to

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Tonka said:

If Mrs ian_d keeps spending all her house keeping money that you give her do you just keep giving her more money every week or/and do you sit down with her and go through her spending and point out where she can make savings.

I wouldn't mind betting you do bit of both, in that give her a bit more and have a chat with her.

I think this is what midnight is referring to

Making savings sounds great. What savings do you (or midnight) think CART could make which would make a significant difference to canal maintenance? And why could these only be made by new management? Don't forget that tens of millions of pounds would be needed to make a significant difference, not a few pennies (or blue signs) found down the back of the sofa... 😉

 

This is exactly the same blame culture and buzzwords that the government uses with the NHS -- "more agile management", "efficiency improvements", "new technology" -- none of which makes a blind bit of difference when the real problem is that you haven't got enough nurses, doctors or hospital beds, but makes it look like *something* is being done, and provides a scapegoat when nothing gets better. Sack the top brass, wait until the replacements find they're in exactly the same hole, rinse and repeat.

 

Doesn't actually fix the problem (not enough money), but makes it look like the government is really *trying* to, and is being held back only by resistance from incompetent managers... 😞

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD

[Tonka]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

Making savings sounds great. What savings do you (or midnight) think CART could make which would make a significant difference to canal maintenance? And why could these only be made by new management? Don't forget that tens of millions of pounds would be needed to make a significant difference... 😉

 

This is exactly the same blame culture and buzzwords that the government uses with the NHS -- "more agile management", "efficiency improvements", "new technology" -- none of which makes a blind bit of difference when the real problem is that you haven't got enough nurses, doctors or hospital beds, but makes it look like *something* is being done, and provides a scapegoat when nothing gets better. Sack the top brass, wait until the replacements find they're in exactly the same hole, rinse and repeat.

 

Doesn't actually fix the problem (not enough money), but makes it look like the government is really *trying* to, and is being held back only by resistance from incompetent managers... 😞

How many executives in CRT are being paid more then the Prime Minister. 

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Tonka said:

How many executives in CRT are being paid more then the Prime Minister. 

I don't know -- do you? What's their total pay, as a fraction of the CART budget? How much do you *think* they should be paid? If this is much less than similar posts in comparable businesses/charities, where do you think you're going to get competent managers from to replace them?

 

(and it has to be said, there hasn't been much evidence of competent PMs recently, it's almost as if you pay peanuts and you get monkeys...)

 

I'd be surprised if it was possible to save more than a few hundred thousand quid by "slashing top executives pay/bonuses" at CART -- which sounds like a lot, but it's a fraction of a percent of the budget. Might make you feel good, but does it *do* any good -- how competent are the (lower-paid) people who replace them?

 

Same thing with blue signs and encouraging the public to use towpaths -- saving maybe a few hundred grand a year (peanuts compared to the budget) in exchange for a risk that the government will slash millions off the CART grant because it's not engaging with the public (instead of 35000 boaters) seems like a *really* bad idea to me, however much some boaters hate the blue signs...

 

There's too much emotional knee-jerk response going on here and not enough proper thinking about what will actually make a difference... 😞

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD

[Tonka]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

I don't know -- do you? What's their total pay, as a fraction of the CART budget? How much do you *think* they should be paid? If this is much less than similar posts in comparable businesses/charities, where do you think you're going to get competent managers from to replace them?

 

I'd be surprised if it was possible to save more than a few hundred thousand quid by slashing "top executives" pay/bonuses at CART -- which sound like a lot, but it's a fraction of a percent of the budget. Might make you feel good, but does it *do* any good -- how competent are the (lower-paid) people who replace them?

 

Same thing with blue signs and encouraging the public to use towpaths -- saving maybe a few hundred grand a year (peanuts compared to the budget) in exchange for a risk that the government will slash millions off the CART grant because it's not engaging with the public (instead of 35000 boaters) seems like a *really* bad idea to me, however much some boaters hate the blue signs...

And what idea have you come up. 

Beg for more from the government 

 

How much housekeeping does Mrs Ian_d get

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, Tonka said:

And what idea have you come up. 

Beg for more from the government 

 

How much housekeeping does Mrs Ian_d get

Yes. Because the canals are a valuable part of the UKs infrastructure and national heritage, which by their own figures provide a large recreational benefit to "the people". And if you follow the Tory principle (see railways etc) that the users (boaters) should pay instead of general taxation (the government), the license fee would have to be at least 5x what it is now -- or 10x after this drives half the boats off the canals. Is that *your* idea?

 

None of your business -- but then my house doesn't seem to be broken like the canals are... 🙂

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD

[Guest]

Just now, IanD said:

Yes. Because the canals are a valuable part of the UKs infrastructure and national heritage, which by their own figures provide a large benefit to "the people".

 

None of your business -- but then my house doesn't seem to be broken like the canals are... 🙂

 

But you admit to giving Mrs D house keeping?

 

How 1960's...🤣🤣🤣

[Jon57]

11 minutes ago, IanD said:

I don't know -- do you? What's their total pay, as a fraction of the CART budget? How much do you *think* they should be paid? If this is much less than similar posts in comparable businesses/charities, where do you think you're going to get competent managers from to replace them?

 

I'd be surprised if it was possible to save more than a few hundred thousand quid by slashing "top executives" pay/bonuses at CART -- which sound like a lot, but it's a fraction of a percent of the budget. Might make you feel good, but does it *do* any good -- how competent are the (lower-paid) people who replace them?

 

Same thing with blue signs and encouraging the public to use towpaths -- saving maybe a few hundred grand a year (peanuts compared to the budget) in exchange for a risk that the government will slash millions off the grant because you're not engaging with the public (instead of 35000 boaters) seems like a *really* bad idea to me, however much some boaters hate the blue signs...

Few hundred grand savings from blue signs ? How many broken paddles would that fix . Any figures or pie in the sky. Mum used to say look after the pennies the pound would take care of them self’s 

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, Jon57 said:

Few hundred grand savings from blue signs ? How many broken paddles would that fix . Any figures or pie in the sky. Mum used to say look after the pennies the pound would take care of them self’s 

Except looking after the pennies won't fix an income gap of millions of pounds, as I'm sure your mum would have told you.

 

If you don't understand why a few hundred grand will make no significant difference to an organisation with a budget of a few hundred million, there's no point discussing this with you -- especially when you consider the likely negative consequences of such a saving, which I've pointed out but you've ignored... 😞

Edited July 19, 2023 by IanD