Incinerating toilets

[Ampen Spekersohn]

Ok, I'm guessing there have already been hundreds of posts about bogs on boats. My first was a bucket in the engine room. I have to say, it was something of a reverse bird-puller. She was not impressed in the morning after the night before. Then Porta Potti. Great, having to re-examine the proceeds of everyone's diet for the last n days. Nah. Then pump-out, dump-thru style. Yuk, the stink! Then 'proper' pump-out, with a super-duper macerator toilet. Why do those things only have an outlet hole in the pan of about 1" diameter?? Come on, without getting too gross, a sizable deposit is not going to fit down there too easily!

Then on to the 'eco-friendly' composting bog. Great idea, but do you really want to have buckets of poo, in varying degrees of decay, dotted around your boat, like some weird Andy Warhol art effort?

Then there are all the issues about the availability of disposal facilities, be that 'Elsan' or dump-out. Plus the cost. Why can you never find a working pump-out facility when your tank is full to the brim?

There is only one answer, folks. Burn it. You will never seek out a pump-out or Elsan point ever again!! (I have the feeling that barbecued sausages will never quite be the same, though  )

If you are still in any doubt, watch this video: 

 

[Chewbacka]

Probably needs a massive inverter & battery bank to power it, or a very long shore cable

[MtB]

What an intensely annoying video. It doesn't even tell us anything useful, beyond the fact that burning pooh smells unbelievably awful.

And I suspect he was underplaying it.

I also find myself wondering how it copes with wee. I have a horrible feeling it heats it up and boils it away. This must smell equally foul.

[Ampen Spekersohn]

You can just imagine the scenario. Walker/cyclist/gongoozler: "WTF are you burning on your stove?" You: " You really don't want to know, mate!"

I can't imagine it smells worse than a week's worth of Porta-Potti contents,

Quote from Incinolet: "There is catalyst inside the INCINOLET toilets to eliminate odor.  There should never be anything worse than a slight smoky, paper-burning odor for a few minutes at the start of a cold cycle.  Be careful to terminate the vent line above head height, so you won’t even be aware of that."

Somehow, I cannot quite seem to resist the schoolboy fun of burning a turd on a bonfire.

Second thought... maybe you could feed the toilet flue into the engine exhaust. Then you could blow smoke rings with it.

 

[Starcoaster]

 

14 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

What an intensely annoying video. It doesn't even tell us anything useful, beyond the fact that burning pooh smells unbelievably awful.

And I suspect he was underplaying it.

I also find myself wondering how it copes with wee. I have a horrible feeling it heats it up and boils it away. This must smell equally foul.

What happens when you throw cat shit on the stove?

[MtB]

It makes a smell like an incinerating toilet!!!

[blackrose]

They've been about for years. I thought there were models that used gas for the incineration? I think the only electrical power would be for ignition and perhaps a fan so not such a huge power draw. The biggest drawback is the cost - several thousand quid.

[BruceinSanity]

3 hours ago, blackrose said:

They've been about for years. I thought there were models that used gas for the incineration? I think the only electrical power would be for ignition and perhaps a fan so not such a huge power draw. The biggest drawback is the cost - several thousand quid.

The one they were showing at Crick used gas, but burnt 110g of propane per 15 minute incineration cycle. Say ten uses of the bog per day, that's less than two weeks out of a 13kg cylinder at around £27 these days. They are said to be working on a diesel fired one which might be more practical.

[rusty69]

8 hours ago, Starcoaster said:

 

What happens when you throw cat shit on the stove?

You can't do that unless its fitted with a Catpoolytic converter. 

If you have a Morso, you can of course burn Bagder or Squirrel sh@t. 

ETA. Just noticed Morso once made a Lion. If you can get hold of Lion logs they should burn for hours! 

Edited July 11, 2017 by rusty69

[alan_fincher]

55 minutes ago, BruceinSanity said:

The one they were showing at Crick used gas, but burnt 110g of propane per 15 minute incineration cycle. Say ten uses of the bog per day, that's less than two weeks out of a 13kg cylinder at around £27 these days. They are said to be working on a diesel fired one which might be more practical.

This could be a useful bargaining point if you ever have to explain to HMRC why you are declaring so little of your diesel usage as "propulsion".

Forget "litres per hour" and think more of "dumps per litre".

[mross]

Incinolet needs a 20A supply at 240V.  Heater and fan operates for 75 minutes cycling on and off to keep temperature between 960F and 1,000F.  Imagine the noise at night!  That's going to hammer your batteries!

I think it will make you very unpopular if in a marina!

Edited July 11, 2017 by mross

[Ampen Spekersohn]

4 hours ago, blackrose said:

The biggest drawback is the cost - several thousand quid.

The ones in the UK currently cost around £3,350. If you import the Incinolet from the US, it costs $1900 plus $400 shipping. Quite a saving and I think shipping could be got cheaper than that. But yes, this would be a long-term investment. Although a full macerator toilet/tank setup is going to cost over £1500, plus the work to install.

In terms of running costs, yes there is an expense. You need to run the engine to produce the leccy. But if you are running the engine anyway to move the boat, it would only be the additional fuel consumption caused by the extra load on the Travel Power. Power usage is rated typically at 1.5 to 2.10KWH to deal with the morning's business. Which really is in the realms of a diesel generator or engine-driven AC alternator. That power equates to around 3HP for an hour, coincidentally, about the same as a washing machine. What are we talking, 50p of diesel per day? Even if it worked out a £1 per day, that's only £7 a week, not far off what most people pay for pump-outs.

Diesel-fired units are already available, but they tend to be for bigger installations, for 12+ people. I can't see it makes much difference if you burn the diesel in the bog or the engine. It's just one more thing to go wrong.

But how much does a pump-out cost per dump? Some dump-through tanks are so small, they need pumping out once a week with two people on board. At £16 to £19 a time, that can get expensive, not to mention time-consuming. Yes, cassettes are free, but what do you do when they're full and there's no elsan in range? If you install a huge tank to reduce the frequency of pump-outs, you are taking up valuable storage space, which could surely be better used?

I see the biggest benefit being the freedom from maintenance and routine chores. No complicated toilets/pipework/pumps to clog up/jam/go wrong, no tanks/cassettes to empty, no compost to manage. And of course, if you get iced-in, you won't have the problems most other boat owners will have, just a feeling of smugness.

[Ampen Spekersohn]

25 minutes ago, mross said:

Incinolet needs a 20A supply at 240V.  Heater and fan operates for 75 minutes cycling on and off to keep temperature between 960F and 1,000F.  Imagine the noise at night!  That's going to hammer your batteries!

I think it will make you very unpopular if in a marina!

I think you have somewhat misinterpreted the technical data. The 20A feed applies to the US 120V version. Most importantly, the unit runs for 75 minutes after it's been activated following use. The heater element cuts in and out during the burn cycle to maintain the temperature at 600C. There should be no reason to use it during the night at all, as I think most people would make alternate arrangements to deal with urine. Using an incinerating loo purely to evaporate urine would indeed be expensive.

I would not see an incinerating loo as being appropriate for people frequenting a marina. For starters, most marinas have good land-based toilets, so you'd use them for No2's. This is more for genuine extended cruisers, who are going to run the engine a lot anyway and are more likely to suffer the 'no pump out in range' problem.

Also, I don't envisage running this off a battery/inverter setup. Even with an 800Ah battery bank, one cycle would deplete the batteries by around 25%. I don't think many people would run a washing machine from an inverter, so much the same applies with this.

One point which no-one has mentioned yet, is that a diesel engine works more efficiently with a decent load applied to it. 

[pete.i]

More to the point where on earth do the Yanks manage to find these juvenile presenters. They are all over Youtube, if you happen to watch that drivel. Oh yeah I forgot they put one in the White House enough said.

[mross]

11 minutes ago, Ampen Spekersohn said:

1/ diesel engine works more efficiently with a decent load applied to it.

2/ I think you have somewhat misinterpreted the technical data

 

1/ You can't reduce the engine consumption by increasing the load!

2/ According to the manual I linked to, the 240V model requires a 20A supply.  See page 4.

Edited July 11, 2017 by mross

[magictime]

8 hours ago, Ampen Spekersohn said:

Somehow, I cannot quite seem to resist the schoolboy fun of burning a turd on a bonfire.

Remind me never to invite you round for a barbecue.

10 minutes ago, Ampen Spekersohn said:

If you import the Incinolet from the US, it costs $1900 plus $400 shipping.

Plus 20% VAT on import, presumably.

12 minutes ago, Ampen Spekersohn said:

Power usage is rated typically at 1.5 to 2.10KWH to deal with the morning's business. Which really is in the realms of a diesel generator or engine-driven AC alternator. That power equates to around 3HP for an hour, coincidentally, about the same as a washing machine.

Exactly! Many (most?) people wouldn't have a 'proper' washing machine on a boat without shore power, and (as I understand it) those that do would typically only want to run it once or twice a week, probably while cruising. The sort of power consumption you're talking about sounds massive in boat-y terms; it's what you might expect a 400W solar array to provide in the height of summer, say. If it's such a non-issue to generate an 'extra' 2kWh of power a day, on top of a typical boat's basic requirements for lighting, fridge, pumps, TV etc., why does nobody fit an electric hob and oven on a boat?

[MtB]

I think you would need something insane like a Gardner 4LK with an 8.8KVA genny on it, like this!

 

[Alan de Enfield]

32 minutes ago, magictime said:

 

Plus 20% VAT on import, presumably.

 

 

Any goods valued over £15 have to have VAT charged on them.

The VAT is also applied to the shipping cost - then of course you have to add import duty.

You either go to the 'docks' to fetch it, or pay the carriers surcharges for 'handling the VAT & Duty' (ie even the Post Office charge the recipient £8 handling fee for collecting the VAT payment, and you have to go o0 the Post Office to pay the VAT & the fees & that's just for a 'small parcel' under 2kg)

You need to make 'alternative arrangements' for the Urine - so what - just pour it in the cut ?

By the time you have purchased it, paid to have it installed and paid £1 a day in fuel costs I can see no commercial benefit.

 

I'll keep my cassette and sea-toilet thank you.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Alan de Enfield

[Ampen Spekersohn]

25 minutes ago, magictime said:

If it's such a non-issue to generate an 'extra' 2kWh of power a day, on top of a typical boat's basic requirements for lighting, fridge, pumps, TV etc., why does nobody fit an electric hob and oven on a boat?

Some people are indeed heading that way. Hybrid Marine are producing boat systems with large 48V traction battery banks, the engine runs part of the time with the motor running as a generator, then you switch to electric power for some cruising. With a big enough battery bank, you can indeed go all-electric. The technology is still in its infancy really, but not doubt will improve.

This is an interesting read, particularly regarding diesel engines operating at peak efficiency: http://www.hybrid-marine.co.uk/10.html

[Ampen Spekersohn]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

You need to make 'alternative arrangements' for the Urine - so what - just pour it in the cut ?

I imagine that most people with a briefcase toilet do this anyway! (And probably a lot of those who don't want to fill up their pump-out tank too quickly.) There have been a lot of previous comments about peeing in the sink, shower, or out through a hole in the side! Is there anyone out there who has never  taken a slash over the stern, or in a convenient hedge?

[MtB]

On 11/07/2017 at 10:25, Ampen Spekersohn said:

I imagine that most people with a briefcase toilet do this anyway! (And probably a lot of those who don't want to fill up their pump-out tank too quickly.) There have been a lot of previous comments about peeing in the sink, shower, or out through a hole in the side! Is there anyone out there who has never  taken a slash over the stern, or in a convenient hedge?

 

Of course we have, but admitting it on here can be a mistake!

(I haven't, obviously.)

I often wonder what sort of toilet arrangement fish, voles, otters, rats, ducks, swans etc have too, to avoid polluting the water.

[Ampen Spekersohn]

8 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

I often wonder what sort of toilet arrangement fish, voles, otters, rats, ducks, swans etc have too, to avoid polluting the water.

Not forgetting cattle who frequent the water's edge.

[Ampen Spekersohn]

1 hour ago, mross said:

1/ You can't reduce the engine consumption by increasing the load!

Increasing the load will of course increase fuel consumption. What I said was, diesel engine efficiency  increases with increased load. That's how they are designed to work. Any manufacturer's power graph will illustrate that. In other words, doubling the power output will not necessarily double the fuel consumption. So in principle, it's better to run a diesel engine for a shorter time under a heavy load, than for a long time with a light load.

[Alan de Enfield]

10 minutes ago, Ampen Spekersohn said:

In other words, doubling the power output will not necessarily double the fuel consumption

An interesting observation - let me give you the figures for my engine :

At 1000rpm I am using 1.6 Litres per hour of fuel and the engine is generating 8.6hp

If I double the 'power output' (well as near as the figures allow) I get :

At 1300rpm I am using 3.5 litres per hour of fuel and the engine is generating 17.9hp

So increasing power by 108%, increases fuel consumption by 119% - so it is more economical to run the engines at the lowest RPM -

But wait a moment he says - what about higher outputs- so lets double it again.

At 1700rpm I am using 7.8 litres per hour of fuel and the engine is generating 39.3hp

This time by increasing power output 120% I have increased fuel consumption by 123%

[mross]

And the point I was trying to make was that chasing 'efficiency' on its own is the wrong way to save money, you need to reduce  power consumption.  It's better to run at half power and lose a little efficiency.  Also efficiency will peak at peak torque, not max power.