sh!t fuel - ghastly price

[carlt]

If carl doesn't want his surname broadcast, then so be it. He is hardly anonymous. Likewise, kiki is easily found.

The reason i don't broadcast my surname is out of respect for the rest of my family, none of whom share my outspokenness and some of whom are associated with the waterways.

 

I don't refer to Swmbo's name, for the same reason.

 

I make no secret of my boats' names, the town I live in, my exact mooring locations and where my new boat is out of the water, having lumps knocked out of it.

 

If you want to find me I'm not hard to trace.

 

I am also quite proud with the fact that I am pretty unGooglable.

 

it is not an issue of great importance that it's kept a secret, nor is it of great importance that it be broadcast, on the internet, so I just don't do it.

[alan_fincher]

If you want to find me I'm not hard to trace.

 

I am also quite proud with the fact that I am pretty unGooglable.

Actually you have posted on at least one well known canal related site using your full surname, so, as you suggest you are an easy find.

 

I'll not out you further though!

[Pretty Funked Up]

aw bless....

 

grow up though eh??

 

No new material yet then!

 

as to the 60/40 split...

some boats have diesel fired central heating and use a high amount of fuel on heating, diesel powered bubble stove etc.

 

Red diesel is also inferior to white(derv) and at the moment white is £1.35 around here so bear that in mind.

 

Edit to add: white is £1.30/ltr if you buy 4litres of vodka

and as live aboards its very common to combine propulsion and generation in order to save money. You just try and work out the split on that! and is propulsion to go and get basic drinking water really a luxury to be taxed?

 

More edit: I've been doing loads of travelling recently and will put in 100 ltrs of white derv from tesco's soon which will balance it all out and everyone is happy, even the engine.

Edited September 2, 2011 by Pretty Funked Up

[carlt]

Actually you have posted on at least one well known canal related site using your full surname, so, as you suggest you are an easy find.

 

I'll not out you further though!

Just the one, actually.

 

Like I said, it's no state secret so, despite cursing myself, for slipping up, i haven't asked the site owner to delete it.

[alan_fincher]

Red diesel is also inferior to white(derv) and at the moment white is £1.35 around here so bear that in mind.

 

You keep repeating this in more than one thread, I think, but I still believe that since January 2011 it has no basis in fact.

 

Plenty of fact-sheets and information sheets on the internet make it fairly plain that most suppliers simply supply road diesel, (aka DERV), with a dye in it, to meet the ultra low sulphur requirements now required for gas pol, including "red".

 

Here is an example source.

 

The UK Gas Oil Supply

The oil industry has indicated that they expect to meet the requirement for gas oil to be sulphur free by January 2011 largely by supplying road diesel with a red marker dye added for use in mobile off road equipment. Road diesel is already sulphur free.

 

Because road diesel contains some biodiesel (up to 7%), much gas oil for off-road equipment is also likely to contain biodiesel by 1st January 2011. Biodiesel blends of up to 7% are compatible with existing off-road equipment engines provided good housekeeping arrangements have been adhered to in the storage of the fuel.

 

As you will see, it is precisely because it is road diesel, that must contain bio-diesel, that you now end up with the same amounts of bio-diesel in "red".

 

EDITED TO ADD: (Slight complexity here!...)

 

I am aware that certain canal outlets are claiming to sell "red" that is FAME free, although when challenged, few can promise that their suppliers can guarantee it, and many say it is impossible to guarantee it.

 

If you could reliably buy such a product, wouldn't that make it "better", rather than "worse" than road diesel (DERV), as when you buy the latter, you know it must contain bio-fuel ?

Edited September 3, 2011 by alan_fincher

[Ex- Member]

You keep repeating this in more than one thread, I think, but I still believe that since January 2011 it has no basis in fact.

 

Plenty of fact-sheets and information sheets on the internet make it fairly plain that most suppliers simply supply road diesel, (aka DERV), with a dye in it, to meet the ultra low sulphur requirements now required for gas pol, including "red".

 

Here is an example source.

 

 

 

As you will see, it is precisely because it is road diesel, that must contain bio-diesel, that you now end up with the same amounts of bio-diesel in "red".

 

EDITED TO ADD: (Slight complexity here!...)

 

I am aware that certain canal outlets are claiming to sell "red" that is FAME free, although when challenged, few can promise that their suppliers can guarantee it, and many say it is impossible to guarantee it.

 

If you could reliably buy such a product, wouldn't that make it "better", rather than "worse" than road diesel (DERV), as when you buy the latter, you know it must contain bio-fuel ?

 

I found the same or similar on the internet also. It's interesting as it gives a bit more info with regards to the effects of the new diesel on equipment previously run on Red.

 

 

The New Fuel Legislation in 2011

The new EU directive 2009/30/EC means that 'gas oil' (red diesel) is now almost sulphur free, and will also contain up to 7% bio-diesel.

 

This low sulphur red diesel containing bio-diesel is a better solvent than current diesel and it will loosen deposits that have built up inside diesel tanks and fuel lines. If not correctly filtered this can block up vehicle filters and possibly damage engines.

 

Storage tank filters and vehicle filters now containing the loosened deposits should be replaced soon after the changeover, and spare filters stocked. Filters may need changing several times over in the first few months, depending on the age and condition of the tank.

 

 

New Fuel Shelf Life & Planning Your Storage

The shelf life of the new fuel is considerably less (as it is more prone to oxidation), which may lead to filter blockages. Ideally fuel stocks should be turned over in six months or less.

 

Check when your fuel supplier changes from summer to winter grade fuel (usually at the end of October) and ensure that you do not end up with a tank full of summer grade for the winter as this will 'wax' as temperatures drop.

 

A large, high capacity fuel filter fitted to your storage tank will potentially mean fewer problems will occur further down the line, so consider fitting one or upgrading.

 

Bio-diesels can contain up to 25 times more water than petroleum diesel, and is a perfect habitat for microbial growth. The bacteria that feed on the fuel breaks down the carbon chains, which reduces the combustible properties.

 

Storage tanks that have large amounts of dormant fuel due to their shape or design, are more prone to bacterial growth. This should be take into consideration when upgrading your fuel storage equipment.

 

 

I also note on the other thread where a diesel purchase was made from a marina the purchaser complained of problems, I wonder weather this newer fuel will cause other boaters problems with diesel filtration.

ETA Shelf life could also have implications.

 

 

Edited September 3, 2011 by Julynian

[sebrof]

That's a fair point BSP - but you have had the sense not to choose a user name that is your surname reversed, that is unless it actually is - gniddupgnirtseulb.

 

If somebody needs or wants true anonymity then they need to be a bit smarter.

 

Dear Nitram,

 

Had I wished to be anonymous, I would not have chosen the username I have, nor would I have disclosed my boat name, etc..

 

But I have no objection to other people choosing to be totally anonymous, just so long as they don't defame others so seriously that legal action might be called for.

 

CarlT was outrageously rude in a recent thread, but I doubt if the object of his venom would think of suing him.

[carlt]

 

CarlT was outrageously rude in a recent thread, but I doubt if the object of his venom would think of suing him.

What utter rubbish.

 

Could you point me to the particular post please?

[sebrof]

What utter rubbish.

 

Could you point me to the particular post please?

 

You know perfectly well what I was referring to. Furthermore, there were several posts, not one.

 

I have to say that when I saw the massed ranks of sanctimonious humbugs calling down calling down fire and brimstone on the hapless Nina, I was reminded of certain passages in the Bible. For example: "Whosoever be without sin, let him cast the first stone".

 

It was frankly, a most unedifying spectacle. Like the witch-finders of Salem, the righteous members of this forum marched out to find a devil, and then exorcised it.

 

In the 17th Century, the thugs and chancers sought witches. Now "racists" (whatever they are) have become the new witches. It just needs one moron to shout "Racist!", and all the other nasty lemmings take up the cry, just as their forbears did when they heard the word witch. The word "racist" is so powerful that it triggers a Pavlovian response in those with the brains of dogs.

 

And having labelled somebody a racist, there is no further argument, or discussion. No need for evidence either, the victim has been branded and now has the status of a leper, or a Jew in former times.

 

It must make you feel very virtuous, having found somebody so morally inferior to yourself. But I do wonder how a Mandela, or a Ghandi, would have responded to Nina. I doubt if they would have exhibited such hatred and venom.

[carlt]

You know perfectly well what I was referring to. Furthermore, there were several posts, not one.

Ahh...the bigot!

 

I have no need, nor desire, to prove anything to you, so I won't bother, but should it be necessary, in a courtroom, there are plenty of posts in that thread, that I could use to convince a jury that my comments were fact, not slander/libel (I can never remember which it is, regarding the internet).

 

As I said "What utter rubbish!" something you are proving yourself to be something of a prolific producer of.

[Guest]

Dear Nitram,

 

Genius...

 

I was 7 years old when I last heard that...thanks for the memories...

[Ex- Member]

Ahh...the bigot!

 

I have no need, nor desire, to prove anything to you, so I won't bother, but should it be necessary, in a courtroom, there are plenty of posts in that thread, that I could use to convince a jury that my comments were fact, not slander/libel (I can never remember which it is, regarding the internet).

 

As I said "What utter rubbish!" something you are proving yourself to be something of a prolific producer of.

 

Have to agree

 

I know on other forums at the very least the Africans comment would have been removed and the poster at minimum be warned.

 

People posting such tripe as ninac did should expect what ever is thrown back at them and I'm only too happy to respond to such tripe as many others did.

 

What I feel is far more worrying is that the people coming out in defence of this person having publishing such bigoted and racist views, It could reasonably lead myself and others to conclude that the people defending her are of the same views.

 

And having labelled somebody a racist, there is no further argument, or discussion. No need for evidence either, the victim has been branded and now has the status of a leper, or a Jew in former times.

 

If you read her posts you know damned well the evidence is there. Her status comes about from what she posted. No one called her a racist until she made a racist comment.

 

Having read a few of your posts now, it's clear carl't is pretty much spot on.

Edited September 4, 2011 by Julynian

[Bob18]

Hmm.

A lot of folks either don't realise, or accept, that the 60/40 split is based on guidance from the HMRC.

 

If it were not for this concession, which was won by the combine forces of the likes of RBOA, IWA etc, we would be paying a 100/0 split on all fuel put into any tank that is used to provide fuel for propulsion purposes. That is we would be paying the same fuel duty as is charged on road fuel. Instead, with the 60/40 split we get a discounted rate, not an increased rate as some think. We pay "full" tax on 60% of the fuel we buy, and (vastly) reduced heating rate tax on the other 40%.

Of course if you really are only using the fuel in your tank to provide your domestic needs, then you can (and should) get your fuel at the "domestic" rate. And naturally if you only ever use your fuel to propel your boat, never to charge your domestic batteries, or use excess heat to heat the boat then you really should declare that and pay full duty on all your fuel...

[Scholar Gypsy]

See the item in IWA newsletter today about possible EU infraction proceedings:

 

http://www.waterways.org.uk/campaigns/news/bulletins/iwa_bulletin_september_2011#red

[GUMPY]

Take the word possible out of that sentence the proceedings started on the 17th June

[dor]

A lot of folks either don't realise, or accept, that the 60/40 split is based on guidance from the HMRC.

 

If it were not for this concession, which was won by the combine forces of the likes of RBOA, IWA etc, we would be paying a 100/0 split on all fuel put into any tank that is used to provide fuel for propulsion purposes.

 

I understood that the concession was to make the cost of the fuel less than supermarket white, which because of buying power would be significantly cheaper than red. This would encourage a lot of people to collect in jerry cans and the risk of pollution that would ensue due to spilt diesel was very high.

 

I've seen two cases of diesel spills in the last couple of weeks both resulting from people trying to fill their tanks from jerry cans so the risk is very real.

Edited September 5, 2011 by dor