Jump to content

London Mayor has found the solution for London overcrowding


Midnight

Featured Posts

Sorry but this is on Narrowboatworld
London Mayor wants powers to control boat emissions

A more balanced view
https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/sadiq-says-government-must-give-him-more-powers

Isn't this the same London Mayor who want a third runway at Heathrow? That'll bugger up his emissions policy although he'll claim it's something like a carbon trade-off or re-balancing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also appears to be blind to the fact that most of the NOx emissions are from gas burning boilers...

When are the next mayoral elections in London?  Perhaps he can be disposed of before it gets too silly there :P

I left the GLA region in '99, a smart move I think.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ratkatcher said:

He also appears to be blind to the fact that most of the NOx emissions are from gas burning boilers...

Petrol engined vehicles also produce significant amounts of NOx,  almost as much as Euro6 diesels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, jake_crew said:

Then theres the 50 million tons of particulates, CO2 and NOx from all the diesel powered equipment cutting the Crossrail tunnels.

Who to blame for that.

84% of the diesel powered construction plant used on Crossrail already meets the new standards proposed by the Mayor even though, legally, they have no requirement to do so.

Plant deep in the tunnels  is normally powered by electricity.

George

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Detling said:

How much  nox does a jumbo emit as it takes off, ground level and upwind of London.

 

Yes but thats all irrelevant. Scrotey itinerant boaters should not be allowed to exist. Don't you know we are all supposed to " comply " and live a life of debt keeping up with Mr and Mrs Jones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main advantage with NOx is that people can't see or smell it, so its easy to hide the issue or require people to rely on generalised statistics or scientists etc to help them make their point. Smoke, as in the range of particulates (amongst other things) emitted from a solid fuel stove is much more objectionable, even if a scientific analysis of "emissions" shows it to be less so, especially if you multiply those emissions by the number of devices which emit it.

But politics isn't based on science, its based on people feeling if something's done about the issues which are important to them - and if that issue is "smoke from boaters" then doing something about it scores quite highly when you consider the ratio of people who moan about it vs the amount of votes you'd lose/gain by implementing some drastic controls on it. 

Did boaters really think they could get away with the antisocial aspect of operating smelly, smoky stoves in a densely populated area and claim lifetime immunity? I know there's an exemption in The Clean Air Act for such stoves presently, but its easy to see this is something of an anomoly and sooner or later there would be something done. In any case, stopping dirty stoves doesn't automatically mean boaters couldn't live, there are alternates such as gas or diesel heating; or even allowing electricity to take some share, if on hookup (for example plenty of boats have immersion heater elements in their calorifiers, and some space/water heaters have a mains electric element too).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is only one viable full time option for boat heating at present and that is solid fuel stoves. Yes there are other forms I have used them all but non stack up long term against good old solid fuel stoves. The real problem is that the majority of smoke is emitted by " Canal Trash " " Water Gypsies " " Pikeys " etc etc of whom I am proud to count myself amongst and every reasonable person knows that all right minded people should and in fact do live in a house/flat/ bricks and mortar etc thus complying fully with the majority of sheep.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

There is only one viable full time option for boat heating at present and that is solid fuel stoves. Yes there are other forms I have used them all but non stack up long term against good old solid fuel stoves. The real problem is that the majority of smoke is emitted by " Canal Trash " " Water Gypsies " " Pikeys " etc etc of whom I am proud to count myself amongst and every reasonable person knows that all right minded people should and in fact do live in a house/flat/ bricks and mortar etc thus complying fully with the majority of sheep.

You need to look forwards, not backwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Paul C said:

tYou need to look forwards, not backwards.

I don't do either its just reality. Solid fuel is the best to space heat boats ask any long term liveaboard and the majority will concur. I wish there were a viable alternative I also wish electric cars were an option but again they are not, maybe in several years time but not in 2017. The mayor or whoever he is probably lives in a house and doesn't care a jot about people with alternative lifestyles and that's the problem.

Edited by mrsmelly
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The principle advantage of smokeless fueled stoves is that they are easy for the boat owner to manage, manage in a wider sense, in that the owner has possession. It wouldn't be that hard to provide an electric hookup every 72 ft along all of London's canals, it wouldn't cost a detectable fraction of the Crossrail project, but it would be impossible to maintain. Even if the towpath was made private I reckon the structure wouldn't last 12 months before the component parts were damaged or destroyed or nicked. One of the reasons why we sheep live in houses is that they have outer defences that enable our possessions to stay ours most of the time. 

Sorry, MrSmelly but you don't qualify as a member of what the general public thinks of as "Canal Trash " " Water Gypsies " and " Pikeys " unless your philosophy is everything I can remove is mine. 

  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if you actually want to engage in proper debate or are determined to stick your head in the proverbial sand, and stick with "solid fuel stoves are best" for the forseeable.

I shall give the benefit of the doubt - perhaps others are more willing to have a reasonable debate - and we have to accept that (certain) boaters haven't done a brilliant job of being good neighbours, by operating solid fuel stoves with disregard to their immediate neighbours. We all know that its possible to burn dry wood of certain species and produce quite acceptable emissions without a displeasing smell or dense smoke. And that some boaters, for whatever reasons of their own - possibly ignorance - burn unseasoned wood, chemically treated wood, etc which do produce a vastly different type of emissions. So it could be as simple as a proportionate tightening of the regulations regarding the smoke density, ie still allowing solid fuels to be used, just responsibly.

As for other means, it really depends how you define "best", since there is more than one criteria to be factored.

12 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

I don't do either its just reality. Solid fuel is the best to space heat boats ask any long term liveaboard and the majority will concur. I wish there were a viable alternative I also wish electric cars were an option but again they are not, maybe in several years time but not in 2017. The mayor or whoever he is probably lives in a house and doesn't care a jot about people with alternative lifestyles and that's the problem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Paul C said:

I'm not sure if you actually want to engage in proper debate or are determined to stick your head in the proverbial sand, and stick with "solid fuel stoves are best" for the forseeable.

I shall give the benefit of the doubt - perhaps others are more willing to have a reasonable debate - and we have to accept that (certain) boaters haven't done a brilliant job of being good neighbours, by operating solid fuel stoves with disregard to their immediate neighbours. We all know that its possible to burn dry wood of certain species and produce quite acceptable emissions without a displeasing smell or dense smoke. And that some boaters, for whatever reasons of their own - possibly ignorance - burn unseasoned wood, chemically treated wood, etc which do produce a vastly different type of emissions. So it could be as simple as a proportionate tightening of the regulations regarding the smoke density, ie still allowing solid fuels to be used, just responsibly.

As for other means, it really depends how you define "best", since there is more than one criteria to be factored.

It's not the mayor's responsibility to tell you how to heat your boat, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a responsibility to improve the air quality in London that fails EU requirements.  So if smelly, smoky, highly visible solid fuel stoves are creating a nuisance then they will all end up being banned within the M25.  Followed by engines without emission controls if too many boaters run smoky engines and generators near peoples houses.  If that doesn't fix the problem, then annual inspections for engine smoke will follow.  Glad I don't live in London - boat or house, terrible place to live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this discussion about stoves and emissions  is entertaining but the point here is the Mayor seems to have inadvertently found a solution to the London overcrowding problem. If this get passed many London boaters will have the choice of either dealing with no power and freezing to death or vacate the inner areas. Very bad for those who bridge-hop the moorings or just don't move at all but not so bad for visiting boats. And CaRT can say "Nowt to do with us".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Or, adapt their heating system to meet the requirements, (gas diesel or whatever) and stay in London.

Yes that too, but can we anticipate the NBTA encouraging their members to convert?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

I don't do either its just reality. Solid fuel is the best to space heat boats ask any long term liveaboard and the majority will concur. I wish there were a viable alternative I also wish electric cars were an option but again they are not, maybe in several years time but not in 2017. The mayor or whoever he is probably lives in a house and doesn't care a jot about people with alternative lifestyles and that's the problem.

 

My Whispergen CPH unit has a lot of potential as a viable alternative.

It runs on diesel, makes about the same amount of noise as a Ebersplutter so can be run without causing a nuisance any time of day or night, and heats the boat and charges the batteries at the same time. 

It has a few shortcomings and rough edges but I haven't had the stove alight since commissioning it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

My Whispergen CPH unit has a lot of potential as a viable alternative.

It runs on diesel, makes about the same amount of noise as a Ebersplutter so can be run without causing a nuisance any time of day or night, and heats the boat and charges the batteries at the same time. 

It has a few shortcomings and rough edges but I haven't had the stove alight since commissioning it. 

Any Idea as to Fuel consumption on the Whispergen yet?,I looked at one to be Installed on a 50 Foot MotorYacht when they first came one the Market.it was around 26 Litres  every 24 hours and not enough Electrickery produced.

Used a Conventional Cocooned Generator instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cereal tiller said:

Any Idea as to Fuel consumption on the Whispergen yet?,I looked at one to be Installed on a 50 Foot MotorYacht when they first came one the Market.it was around 26 Litres  every 24 hours and not enough Electrickery produced.

Used a Conventional Cocooned Generator instead.

 

Mope, no idea yet but given the heat output at full chat is 5kw, probably quite a lot. This is my primary doubt about it too.

Heat output and therefore fuel consumption falls as the batteries go into absorption, so I'm hoping as the thing runs (silently) for hours and hours punching in that last 10% of charge, the heat output will fall commensurately. 

Didn't you do a power consumption audit before fitting it?!!

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.