White diesel on sale from January 1st

[DHutch]

Yeah, we have two gerrycans full of diesal in the storeroom which i have had since the fuel-strikes a few years ago.

- We keep them full, and rotate the contence every 6months or so, its only 2*20liters, but thats half a tank, enough to get about for a week or so.

 

 

Daniel

[Hairy-Neil]

The only practical difference with a narrowboat is the lack of gravity, that said, I do once recall seeing something that may overcome that problem, I think it was called a pump.

 

Slight problem there in that boat diesel tanks are designed to leave the last few gallons in the tank so the water and sh!t have somewhere to stay and cause no trouble. Having refloated a sunken narrowboat I can tell you that removing the water from the integral tank was nigh on impossible, pump or no pump, and that tank had a gravity feed to the engine. I've seen some boats with the feed through a stack pipe and no drain bung.......

[valrene9600]

They will no doubt have to do the same as we will and clean out their equipment. It is my belief our underhand leaders will set a target date when enforcement(tank dipping) will commence. They will pretend to be reasonable, when in reality they will put the practical problems of compliance onto suppliers first, followed by the end user. I would imagine that after the target date the jackboots will be in confiscating a few boats,as examples, to concentrate our minds.

 

I haven't spoken to my supplier but making a start in January wouldn't suprise me at all. The UK Gov's position is pretty clear on this and they no doubt presented a sham case to the EU. Anyone thinking they don't have implementation plans already in place is deluding themselves.

 

My guess is new supplies delivered after January 1st will be white, carrying the most duty they can possibly charge, red will gradually run out on the system, aiming for all white by June. [comment about the "bleating middle class boaters" which would rouse a cheer amongst many of their supporters.

b]The industry cost would be covered by boaters having to pay to have their tanks cleaned out(plus VAT for Gordon again).[/b]I believe we are all used by the labour spin machine here, at some point they will no doubt

"Boaters having to pay to have their tanks cleaned out" WHY!

When the diesel i get from a marina becomes white and more expensive i shall just carry on filling as before. I will keep all reciepts and gladly go to court if C&E try to say i have been buying red. I really do think that C&E will know if a tank has been regularly filled with red or its just a trace from previouse red use.

So much speculation about when, how much etc.

The boaters i feel most sorry for are those with diesel heating, they have to keep warm and costs will go up more than others. Boaters using deisel to charge batteries will see a small increase in costs. C/C s like myself will see the biggest increase, BUT we C/C s have the choice to carry on as before or stay longer in each place thus using less fuel.

[david and julie]

b]The industry cost would be covered by boaters having to pay to have their tanks cleaned out(plus VAT for Gordon again).[/b]I believe we are all used by the labour spin machine here, at some point they will no doubt

"Boaters having to pay to have their tanks cleaned out" WHY!

When the diesel i get from a marina becomes white and more expensive i shall just carry on filling as before. I will keep all reciepts and gladly go to court if C&E try to say i have been buying red. I really do think that C&E will know if a tank has been regularly filled with red or its just a trace from previouse red use.

So much speculation about when, how much etc.

You appear to have taken three parts from my post but only commented on one of them.

 

Lets just get one thing straight about HMG, Customs and for that matter the courts. Not one single one of them gives a toss about you, they are all in it for themselves. Take all the receipts you like to court it wouldn't make one iota of difference, they are all peeing in the same pot. They just want your money and will use any method they like to get it.

 

The only certain way of avoiding establishment abuse will be for you to remove all traces of red dye yourself. There is no way that customs are going to let people use the excuse that the red in their tanks is only residual, their prosecution systems couldn't work and they wouldn't be able too fleece you if that was the case.

 

Are you one of the old fashioned types who thought you were innocent until proven guilty?

[Hairy-Neil]

Are you one of the old fashioned types who thought you were innocent until proven guilty?

 

You old cynic you!

 

Removing every trace of red die is nigh impossible, it would always be possible with the right equipment to tell if red diesel had ever been present as it gets into the pores of the metal itself. To eliminate it completely would involve a new tank, fuel lines, taps, lift pump, injection pump and injectors. With most boats these days having integral tanks you've a bill there for aproaching 10k in the worst example. I'll eat my hat if it comes to that......

Edited December 19, 2006 by Hairy-Neil

[Grasshopper]

Besides you are assuming that the people dipping your tank are honest. Given your level of paranoia, I'd have expected you to recognise how easily they can 'plant' a little red dye into your tank whilst they test it. You aren't going to escape that easily.

 

So all in all, I think that you might as well go and surrender yourself to the nearest police station now and get it over with. It will save all the anxiety of waiting for the knock at the door in the middle of the night.........

[Sir Nibble]

Still, look on the bright side, the eberspacher problem is solved.

[david and julie]

You old cynic you!

 

Removing every trace of red die is nigh impossible, it would always be possible with the right equipment to tell if red diesel had ever been present as it gets into the pores of the metal itself. To eliminate it completely would involve a new tank, fuel lines, taps, lift pump, injection pump and injectors. With most boats these days having integral tanks you've a bill there for aproaching 10k in the worst example. I'll eat my hat if it comes to that......

 

I'm a cynic for good reason. I was in the car breakdown/recovery industry for many years and regularly had these people marching in and dipping tanks. On one occasion, (we occupied a shared yard with 4 other companies) they came in, dipped every vehicle in the yard and found red in one van, so they closed the gate and wouldn't let any of us leave whilst the searched the van owners premises. We had people in broken down cars on the phone for hours and lost money as well as upsetting customers.

 

After about 3 hours of protestations they finally let us go about our work.

 

The van concerned was one with a cherry picker on the roof and was all above board, the customs people just didn't know the rules properly so kept all of us locked in, even though we were unconnected. This is why I knew about these vehicles being exempt in my earlier link.

 

When we asked for the name of their boss to make a complaint they just said do you want us here every week.

 

On another occasion a business associate was stopped,dipped and cleared. However, the vehicle he was towing(a paying job for for a motor auction)) was also dipped and red was found. He was on his own and had no idea the casualty vehicle had red in its tank.Despite this they cautioned him and also kept him for hours on end whilst they checked. It transpired the vehicle was a sweeper which had never left a large factory complex, so was also allowed to use red.

 

Shower of s**** the lot of them.

 

As regards draining down boats, to be quite frank, they couldn't care less if you did have to turn them upsidedown, they are not remotely interested in practical problems. Their remit is compliance and prosecution, ignorance or protestations about being unable to empty tanks will be seen as excuses. HMG wouldn't introduce this if they won't make money on it, it will be policed and probably in a heavy handed manner too.

 

Anyone who has had dealings with these people will know exactly what they are like.

[Theo]

Remove the red (by whatever means you wish). Flush out with white diesel and remove again. Finally fill with white diesel and fit new filters.

 

The above was the advice given by customs to the powered access industry when faced with a red/white problem.

http://www.ipaf.org/news_19.htm

 

The only practical difference with a narrowboat is the lack of gravity, that said, I do once recall seeing something that may overcome that problem, I think it was called a pump.

 

A lack of gravity on the canals! Help! I can see problems with working locks aand using the loo.

[carlt]

Are your modern engines so inefficient that this is such a hot issue. My day tank is 50 litres (approx). This will let me cruise for a fortnight, at £1 a litre this is £50 for a good holidays cruising. When the fit out is finished my main tank (about 500 litres) will be filled up with fuel oil from the local supplier in his wagon, at a convenient roadside mooring, to run the diesel heating and a diesel generator for electricity when the sun is on holiday. What is the problem. It's not nice paying more but it's not like we didn't have fair warning.

[magnetman]

Remove the red (by whatever means you wish). Flush out with white diesel and remove again. Finally fill with white diesel and fit new filters.

 

The above was the advice given by customs to the powered access industry when faced with a red/white problem.

http://www.ipaf.org/news_19.htm

 

The only practical difference with a narrowboat is the lack of gravity, that said, I do once recall seeing something that may overcome that problem, I think it was called a pump.

 

I suppose its like this: several thick, very thick, planks about 9ft, for safety, across Somerton Lock, loads of lifting straps, get boat into lock, empty slowly and position planks across chamber with straps under boat, having previously taken dinghy and welding equipment below the lock, empty the lock, bottom gates open dinghy into the lock drill a hole in the bottom of the tank drain it and weld it up again. Repeat this process several times.

[Keeping Up]

Are your modern engines so inefficient that this is such a hot issue. My day tank is 50 litres (approx). This will let me cruise for a fortnight, at £1 a litre this is £50 for a good holidays cruising. When the fit out is finished my main tank (about 500 litres) will be filled up with fuel oil from the local supplier in his wagon, at a convenient roadside mooring, to run the diesel heating and a diesel generator for electricity when the sun is on holiday. What is the problem. It's not nice paying more but it's not like we didn't have fair warning.

People keep saying it's not much of a problem because we don't use much diesel. The magazines (WW for example) said IIRC it would cost the average boater an extra £35 a year. It makes me mad when I keep reading that, I do a lot of travelling and use up to 1500 litres a year, and the extra cost is really going to hurt! It won't hurt any less just because I got plenty of warning.

 

Allan

[carlt]

People keep saying it's not much of a problem because we don't use much diesel. The magazines (WW for example) said IIRC it would cost the average boater an extra £35 a year. It makes me mad when I keep reading that, I do a lot of travelling and use up to 1500 litres a year, and the extra cost is really going to hurt! It won't hurt any less just because I got plenty of warning.

 

Allan

 

but we are using a means of transport for leisure purposes. Why should we get a tax break just because we want it. I agree that if our govt raises the duty to the grossly overtaxed derv rates in this country then it is unfair. But the European taxation of transport fuels as a whole is far fairer than over here. If our govt raised boating taxes and reduced road fuel taxes to come into line with european levels then we'd nearly all be better off.

 

Don't blame the EU for this it is our govt's greed and incompetence that has brought us here.

Edited December 19, 2006 by carlt

[fender.]

but we are using a means of transport for leisure purposes.

 

Not all of us. Lots of people do not use it for leisure purposes - such as Hebridean islanders.

[carlt]

Not all of us. Lots of people do not use it for leisure purposes - such as Hebridean islanders.

My mistake I thought this was canal world, not hopping between scottish islands by SEA world.

 

The point I was trying to make was that leisure or getting from the hbrides to the mainland, we are using transport so why is that different to a driving holiday (or driving over the skye bridge). Tax breaks are there for a reason and 'I want cheap diesel for my boat because I want it' is not a good reason.

[magnetman]

My mistake I thought this was canal world, not hopping between scottish islands by SEA world.

 

The point I was trying to make was that leisure or getting from the hbrides to the mainland, we are using transport so why is that different to a driving holiday (or driving over the skye bridge). Tax breaks are there for a reason and 'I want cheap diesel for my boat because I want it' is not a good reason.

 

Out of interest, will this tax apply to ferries and fishermen and does it really apply to generation of electricity? Seems like it's going to cane a few rural cottages with a lister in the shed, and boaters electricity, which often comes from the main engine anyway.

I'm under the impression that electric supply is seen as an essential factor in terms of reasonable living standard.

[carlt]

Out of interest, will this tax apply to ferries and fishermen and does it really apply to generation of electricity? Seems like it's going to cane a few rural cottages with a lister in the shed, and boaters electricity, which often comes from the main engine anyway.

I'm under the impression that electric supply is seen as an essential factor in terms of reasonable living standard.

 

The tax does not apply to electricity or heating. Using the main engine for generating your electricity is an interesting one though. Definitely test case territory.

 

Im not positive but I think ferries pay tax on their fuel (though I imagine reedham ferry uses red) In fact doesn't reedham ferry use a stationary engine pulling the chain, so would be exempt?

[Mick and Pauline]

The tax does not apply to electricity or heating. Using the main engine for generating your electricity is an interesting one though. Definitely test case territory.

 

Im not positive but I think ferries pay tax on their fuel (though I imagine reedham ferry uses red) In fact doesn't reedham ferry use a stationary engine pulling the chain, so would be exempt?

 

Hi Carlt,

 

Yes, if the fuel used in ferries is red diesel it will be classed as commercial use. So along with fishermen they will continue to use red diesel at the present tax level, no change for them.

 

M&P.

[miles beyond]

but we are using a means of transport for leisure purposes. Why should we get a tax break just because we want it. I agree that if our govt raises the duty to the grossly overtaxed derv rates in this country then it is unfair. But the European taxation of transport fuels as a whole is far fairer than over here. If our govt raised boating taxes and reduced road fuel taxes to come into line with european levels then we'd nearly all be better off.

 

Don't blame the EU for this it is our govt's greed and incompetence that has brought us here.

 

Why do you believe road fuel is grossly overtaxed? Does that tax cover the cost of road maintenance, the cost to the NHS of 3,500 deaths and 14,000 serious maimings per annum, the cost of the environmental damage, the cost of scrapping old vehicles. I don't think so. Not anywhere near.

 

Argue for a sensible transport policy and I'd agree with you. Don't even begin to compare boat use with road transport. Totally daft.

[carlt]

Why do you believe road fuel is grossly overtaxed? Does that tax cover the cost of road maintenance, the cost to the NHS of 3,500 deaths and 14,000 serious maimings per annum, the cost of the environmental damage, the cost of scrapping old vehicles. I don't think so. Not anywhere near.

 

Argue for a sensible transport policy and I'd agree with you. Don't even begin to compare boat use with road transport. Totally daft.

 

If road tax and fuel tax was ring fenced then yes, it would pay for the whole of the road network to be maintained and the costs to the NHS for the car crashes. You wouldn't even need the road maintenance money in council tax. The enviromental damage is proportional to the amount of fuel used ( and hence, tax paid) so if you can put a cash figure on enviromental damage then yes, it pays more than boating. The cost of scrapping cars is more than covered by steel prices and recycling parts, otherwise the scrap man wouldn't be paying £30 for each car brought to him. If road tax and fuel tax was fair then France (notorious for high taxation) would not have scrapped road tax and their fuel tax would be as high as ours.

 

By the way, I was a highways inspector for Northants County Council responsible for the inspection and maintenance of the roads in Daventry district. My annual budget was £3m, a fraction of the revenue raised through taxing all the vehicles and fuel in my area.

Edited December 19, 2006 by carlt

[david and julie]

Why do you believe road fuel is grossly overtaxed? Does that tax cover the cost of road maintenance, the cost to the NHS of 3,500 deaths and 14,000 serious maimings per annum, the cost of the environmental damage, the cost of scrapping old vehicles. I don't think so. Not anywhere near.

 

Argue for a sensible transport policy and I'd agree with you. Don't even begin to compare boat use with road transport. Totally daft.

 

The deaths and maimings you quote. Do they include, for example, pedestrians walking out in road without looking or cyclists who fall off when no other vehicle is involved? In short, you present these figures as if they are all attributable to motorists when many won't be, they just happened on the road, so are bunched together to suit those like you who use them as justifcation for overtaxation.

 

Does the cost to the NHS include the money taken from insurance companies when the NHS send them bills?

 

People are arguing for better transport systems but these arguments are falling on deaf ears in government. They have backtracked on promissed spending for local trams and bus routes etc in many major cities, preferring road charging instead, because that way they win both ways.

 

Is a new vehicle better or worse for the environment? the gov is forcing many old, but otherwise good, vehicles of the road because new one produce slightly less emissions. Do you think they take the emissions used in production (of the new ones) into account?

[miles beyond]

If road tax and fuel tax was ring fenced then yes, it would pay for the whole of the road network to be maintained and the costs to the NHS for the car crashes. You wouldn't even need the road maintenance money in council tax. The enviromental damage is proportional to the amount of fuel used ( and hence, tax paid) so if you can put a cash figure on enviromental damage then yes, it pays more than boating. The cost of scrapping cars is more than covered by steel prices and recycling parts, otherwise the scrap man wouldn't be paying £30 for each car brought to him. If road tax and fuel tax was fair then France (notorious for high taxation) would not have scrapped road tax and their fuel tax would be as high as ours.

 

By the way, I was a highways inspector for Northants County Council responsible for the inspection and maintenance of the roads in Daventry district. My annual budget was £3m, a fraction of the revenue raised through taxing all the vehicles and fuel in my area.

 

Interesting, but other studies demonstrate that motorists are quite heavily subsidised in fact. Have a look at this - one of many studies that contradict your views: http://www.transport2000.org.uk/learningzo...fing-Petrol.htm

[carlt]

Is a new vehicle better or worse for the environment? the gov is forcing many old, but otherwise good, vehicles of the road because new one produce slightly less emissions. Do you think they take the emissions used in production (of the new ones) into account?

 

I drive a 40 year old Land rover and a thirty year old mk1 cavalier. Each time I MOT them I ask the examiner to give them the emissions test (even though they are exempt). Each year they both pass the old '90s levels, and the cav (apart from being the funkiest car on the road) passes the modern levels. Apparently, I can run my car for at least 10 years before the enviromental cost of a new car being built is reached. By my reckoning considering new cars are replaced every 3 years, usually, my car is over 3 times as green as the greenest new car. Bring back the rolling classic car tax exemption, then we can all keep old cars on the road.

 

If reliability is a concern then:

join the RAC (not the aa their '4th emergency service' ad is an insult to the RNLI, coastguard, cave & mountain rescue and others)

Pay someone to maintain it or learn yourself. It's far easier and cheaper to maintain an old car (unless you're into computers bigtime) and if you drive a classic and break down it's not long before a queue of enthusiasts forms to help you.

Edited December 20, 2006 by carlt

[miles beyond]

The deaths and maimings you quote. Do they include, for example, pedestrians walking out in road without looking or cyclists who fall off when no other vehicle is involved? In short, you present these figures as if they are all attributable to motorists when many won't be, they just happened on the road, so are bunched together to suit those like you who use them as justifcation for overtaxation.

 

Does the cost to the NHS include the money taken from insurance companies when the NHS send them bills?

 

People are arguing for better transport systems but these arguments are falling on deaf ears in government. They have backtracked on promissed spending for local trams and bus routes etc in many major cities, preferring road charging instead, because that way they win both ways.

 

Is a new vehicle better or worse for the environment? the gov is forcing many old, but otherwise good, vehicles of the road because new one produce slightly less emissions. Do you think they take the emissions used in production (of the new ones) into account?

 

They wouldn't have been injured were it not for the motor vehicle is the point, not whose fault it was.

 

Them money taken from insurance companies is our money! It is reflected in the cost of the premia we pay. Unless you know a way of getting free insurance. Do let me know. In many accidents it is impossible for the NHS to recoup any of their costs. And waht about the cost of the indirect health effects of motoring. It is interesting that asthma rates have soared in areas where there is serious regular traffic congestion - one in nine children in London now I read recently. Attributable to low level ozone and particulates generated by vehicle emissions.

 

The new car old car argument has been comprehensively debunked. It is urban myth to suggest that it is more polluting to purchase a newer more fuel efficient and scrap the older ones. The energy consumed in manufacture is a minuscule proportion of the carbon emissions in a modern car's life (subject to it not being written off early of course). If you hunt around on the web you will find studies and reputable research to give you more detailed facts and figures.

 

It would be a wonderful world if motoring was a harmless activity. It isn't, and we have to address it rather than burying our heads in the sand.

[magnetman]

...if you drive a classic and break down it's not long before a queue of enthusiasts forms to help you.

 

And they probably know how the car actually WORKS and how to get it going rather than how to operate a hydraulic towing unit. This is the best reason to have a good, proper car I've heard and I like it.