Jump to content

‘ Ban on wood burners threatens British boat-dwellers with winter freeze’


Bobbybass

Featured Posts

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

The low-cost ones used in most boats (Webasto, Eberspacher etc) are also notoriously unreliable (though the newer ones are apparently better),

I wouldn't say either of those brands are low cost.

Folks used to have regular issues with them but I think most of that changed when we changed to ULS diesel a few years ago.

A diesel heater uses little current once it gets started . I run mine of full power only and if it gets too hot switch it off or open a window,.

 

10 minutes ago, IanD said:

I never said boats *need* a solid fuel stove, just that many *have* them because they're the cheapest form of heating -- especially burning scavenged wood -- and need no battery power.

 

You did say it was hard to switch away from wood burners  .

Its not hard . But its not cheap.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I wouldn't say either of those brands are low cost.

Folks used to have regular issues with them but I think most of that changed when we changed to ULS diesel a few years ago.

A diesel heater uses little current once it gets started . I run mine of full power only and if it gets too hot switch it off or open a window,.

 

You did say it was hard to switch away from wood burners  .

Its not hard . But its not cheap.

 

We used to do the same with the Webasto diesel heater on NC. Only ever used it on full power as the thermostat on it was rubbish. We would open the windows to cool it down a bit which always seemed wasteful.

 

The thermostat on our Truma gas heater on the van is far more accurate and regulates the temperature well which obviously reduces the gas consumption to just what is needed rather than using too much and then opening windows to cool off.

 

It runs far quieter as well. The ticking diesel pump on the Webasto used to drive us nuts. Nothing we tried made it quieter. It resonated through the boat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I wouldn't say either of those brands are low cost.

Folks used to have regular issues with them but I think most of that changed when we changed to ULS diesel a few years ago.

A diesel heater uses little current once it gets started . I run mine of full power only and if it gets too hot switch it off or open a window,.

 

You did say it was hard to switch away from wood burners  .

Its not hard . But its not cheap.

 

They're expensive compared to the non-approved Chinese cheapies, but cheap compared to pressure-jet diesel boilers.

 

It's hard if you can't afford it (like many boaters?), which was my point... 😉

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The oriental planes in the derelict pleasure garden at the estate are about 150 yars old and very large so they shed branches quite often. Hard wood which is rather difficult to split but it burns like a dream. 

 

Lovely stuff. 

 

I have an anxiety problem so the idea of not being able to burn wood is driving me to drink. 

 

Hopefully these silly smoke control areas won't grow like tumbleweed out to the country areas. 

 

I bet they will. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, magnetman said:

The oriental planes in the derelict pleasure garden at the estate are about 150 yars old and very large so they shed branches quite often. Hard wood which is rather difficult to split but it burns like a dream. 

 

Lovely stuff. 

 

I have an anxiety problem so the idea of not being able to burn wood is driving me to drink. 

 

Hopefully these silly smoke control areas won't grow like tumbleweed out to the country areas. 

 

I bet they will. 

 

 

There's no health justification for banning woodburners in the countryside, and many people there in houses as well as boats rely on them, so extending smoke control there makes no sense -- few or no plus points, lots of minus points.

 

Doesn't mean a stupid or party-driven government won't do it though, like many other things which make no sense... 😞

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wondering if local authorities might ban it as a way of 'achieving' their climate change objectives and massaging some figures related to how green they are. 

 

Maybe not as most councillors probably have nice wood fires in their comfy houses. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robtheplod said:

Not sure what the problem is, just tax it all. Great example is ULEZ as you pay £12.50 and its not a problem anymore!

But does nothing to reduce emissions as the recent study in Birmingham showed that the ULEZ had only made a tiny difference to the level of emissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rob-M said:

But does nothing to reduce emissions as the recent study in Birmingham showed that the ULEZ had only made a tiny difference to the level of emissions.

https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-02/Inner London ULEZ One Year Report - final.pdf suggests otherwise, at least in  London. Maybe it is the case that the stricter the scheme, the greater the results (surprise!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I need to drive into the ULEZ, I still do and pay the charge. 

 

Like a lot of people with ten year old vehicles, it makes no sense to spend £30k on a new vehicle to save the occasional £12.50. 

 

As someone on Facebook acerbically commented, "Sadiq Khan says ULEZ is to reduce deaths of the elderly and vulnerable from vehicle pollution, but if the vehicle owner pays Sadiq £12.50, the elderly and vulnerable can go f*** themselves."

 

The correct solution to the problem to ban the polluting vehicles. Not just charge them to pollute. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw an X reg Honda C90 at Canary wharf yesterday. I guess its over 40 now so no ULEZ. 

 

Clever ! Running like clockwork as they always do. 

 

 

 

If it had been a D reg its £12.50 a day. 

 

Of course your 2018 Bentley Bentayga V8 diesel pays nought. 

 

Funny system innit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MtB said:

If I need to drive into the ULEZ, I still do and pay the charge. 

 

Like a lot of people with ten year old vehicles, it makes no sense to spend £30k on a new vehicle to save the occasional £12.50. 

 

As someone on Facebook acerbically commented, "Sadiq Khan says ULEZ is to reduce deaths of the elderly and vulnerable from vehicle pollution, but if the vehicle owner pays Sadiq £12.50, the elderly and vulnerable can go f*** themselves."

 

The correct solution to the problem to ban the polluting vehicles. Not just charge them to pollute. 

 

 

True in theory, but this would cause a lot more hardship to those who can't afford to immediately replace their existing vehicle. We shouldn't reject the good because it's not perfect -- charging to enter the ULEZ is a strong encouragement to people to drive compliant cars, but it doesn't force them to get rid of them immediately. I expect the cost will increase year by year to encourage them even more -- in fact the ULEZ charge in London is pretty low, it's far higher is many places in Europe -- EUR80 springs to mind...

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, magnetman said:

Lots of fun if and when boats get added to the ULEZ. 

 

Boat safety records engine detail so it would be easy enough to find out if they are euro wotsit compliant...

 

 

Number of diesel-powered canal boats that are ULEZ compliant : zero.

 

To meet Euro 6 standards you need a modern electronically managed common-rail diesel with DPF. AFAIK nobody is fitting canal boats with these, or has any plan to... 😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or take the diesel out and put an electric motor in it. 

 

Most boats which have a 'move day' every 14 days could probably manage on electric propulsion. 

Edited by magnetman
typo and removed odd Garibaldi incident
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Number of diesel-powered canal boats that are ULEZ compliant : zero.

 

To meet Euro 6 standards you need a modern electronically managed common-rail diesel with DPF. AFAIK nobody is fitting canal boats with these, or has any plan to... 😞

or 4 of Rolls Royce Trent engine's as fitted to an A380 as they are allowed at Heathrow. Also because London Heathrow Airport is private land then you can have any old vehicle and dont need road tax or MOT

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tonka said:

or 4 of Rolls Royce Trent engine's as fitted to an A380 as they are allowed at Heathrow. Also because London Heathrow Airport is private land then you can have any old vehicle and dont need road tax or MOT

Not many canals in Heathrow Airport though... 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tonka said:

or 4 of Rolls Royce Trent engine's as fitted to an A380 as they are allowed at Heathrow. Also because London Heathrow Airport is private land then you can have any old vehicle and dont need road tax or MOT

Good point. Canals are not publicly owned. Didn't think of that. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Its interesting to consider that the Environment Act, which also updated the Clean Air Act, was able to apply laws to chimneys on boats. 

 

Is it actually possible for the ULEZ to be extended to boats given the land ownership question,? 

 

I think but am not sure that the canal land belongs to CRT so is privately owned property. 

 

 

Perhaps ULEZ could be applied to the Thames as it is a public highway but not to canals as they are private. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

 

 

Its interesting to consider that the Environment Act, which also updated the Clean Air Act, was able to apply laws to chimneys on boats. 

 

Is it actually possible for the ULEZ to be extended to boats given the land ownership question,? 

 

I think but am not sure that the canal land belongs to CRT so is privately owned property. 

 

 

yes but most chimneys are privately owned

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is it true you could run a great big smokey old diesel generator in your garden in central London because it is on private property? 

 

 

 

 

But you can't use a non approved wood burner to heat your home. 

 

Hmm. Something odd there. 

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.