Illegal to collect rain water

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 06 Dec 2009, 17:30

JohnB wrote:Would that set up mean that grey water goes to the septic tank, or a soakaway?

Soakaway is way preferable: the fewer times you have to empty the septic tank, the better!

Think seriously about a compost toilet, JB. It can be indoors and odour-free. It just takes a bit of effort each time the receptacle is full. We have two receptacles so the heap only needs seeing to once a week.

If I'd thought about a compost toilet when we moved here, I would have never put in a septic tank, flush toilet and ancillary plumbing, saving a lot of money, time, water and effort and would have an extra bit of land where the septic tank and its soakaway now reside.

Oh, and I would have been able to educate a lot more people!

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 06 Dec 2009, 17:50

emordnilap wrote:Soakaway is way preferable: the fewer times you have to empty the septic tank, the better!

Think seriously about a compost toilet, JB. It can be indoors and odour-free. It just takes a bit of effort each time the receptacle is full.

I was wondering how soakaways coped with the solids you get in grey water, and thought maybe it goes to the septic tank.

There is absolutely no way that I'm allowing anything other than new compost loos

. Apparently the septic tank isn't big enough to cope with more than the one loo that currently exists. The 3 upstairs bedrooms that are unfinished all have provision for en-suites, but with nothing fitted yet. As I need lodgers to start with to help pay the bills, I'd thought of fitting out all the en-suites, but I'm not going to now. If lodgers don't like compost loos they can live somewhere else

.

I would like to know what indoor compost loo options are available. Ideally it needs to be something that is easy to move later, as my plans involve major alterations to the house to turn it back into two houses (maybe 3).

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 07 Dec 2009, 10:47

Solids - presumably you mean bits of food. You have to scrape plates and pans into the compost bucket, really.

A well-made soakaway will last forever. There is some bacteriological activity going on down there.

Compost toilets? Easy to make 'em. Easy to move 'em. Don't go buying these manufactured things that rely on electricity. "Bucket and chuck it".

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 07 Dec 2009, 12:39

emordnilap wrote:Solids - presumably you mean bits of food. You have to scrape plates and pans into the compost bucket, really.

A well-made soakaway will last forever. There is some bacteriological activity going on down there.

I'm curious about how it works at the moment, and it might help to trace the plumbing that needs altering to make better use of so called "waste".

emordnilap wrote:Compost toilets? Easy to make 'em. Easy to move 'em. Don't go buying these manufactured things that rely on electricity. "Bucket and chuck it".

I need to consider what Hockerton Housing Project describe as "the mother-in-law effect". Would your MIL be happy to use it? No problem for me, as I haven't got one, but I need to attract people to live in the house and pay me as much rent as possible. Telling them to poo in a bucket and empty it on the compost heap might put some people off! Ideally I want practical and cost effective solutions that can sell the idea to MILs all over the country.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 07 Dec 2009, 12:58

Since when has a mother-in-law's opinions been valid?

I think changing peoples' view of things has to be from the bottom up. (

)

It's no use trying to convert oppositional views: your efforts will be more productive changing the views of those closest to your way of thinking first and aiming for a knock-on effect.

Who on earth would want to entice their MIL to stay anyway? I'd say bucket and chuck it is a thoroughly good idea in that respect!

I would want to visit the sort of person who uses a compost loo and would be perfectly happy to use it. It's no big deal.

PS, yes, she has used it but there's no way I'd have her living here!

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 07 Dec 2009, 17:46

A bucket rigged into a thing that looks as much like a conventional loo as poss, with a scoop for sawdust/fibre, and a nice laminated set of instructions/agitprop on the wall, surely that'd do?

Bet my MIL (sadly demised so can't ask her) used suchlike at the family Dacha

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 07 Dec 2009, 17:53

RenewableCandy wrote:A bucket rigged into a thing that looks as much like a conventional loo as poss, with a scoop for sawdust/fibre, and a nice laminated set of instructions/agitprop on the wall, surely that'd do?

That's more-or-less us.

A comfortable, "normal"-looking bathroom helps too, if the toilet is to be in there.

Also, any rural dwelling not connected to the sewerage system has a great excuse for not using a flush loo during these rather damp times.

Mitch · Post by **Mitch** » 07 Dec 2009, 20:24

Sorry peop's, but I will NEVER pay for rain water - I have a few rather strange idea's which I will defend till the absolute end.

1 Land is FREE - the only time I would ever pay for it is when someone can show me who's labour it was that made/manufactured the soil. House's/barns/the long-drop outdoor privy etc are something quite different - they have value to the person who built them. I have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to use a small piece of land for my survival - once I am done with it, someone else gets to use it - that's nature.

2 Water is FREE - unless I choose to pay for the convenience of having someone else pre-filter it and deliver it to me - I filter my own, therefore will NOT pay for it.

3 Likewise with Air - what's available is free, unless I want to pay for extra "cleansing/conditioning". I don't, so I won't pay.

4 Food is free - I buy it through choice - am just too damn idle to grow my own, but that will soon change.

Ecxessively simplistic take on life - but then, I am only a simple soul

P.S. Have just aquired 2 x 9 year old feline sisters. Thier humans are moving to Aus and the conversation got round to "what about the cats?" "Well, they might have to go to the RSP........" Am subsequently getting used to having company round the place. They are just wonderful!:D

fifthcolumn · Post by **fifthcolumn** » 07 Dec 2009, 20:38

Mitch wrote:1 Land is FREE - the only time I would ever pay for it is when someone can show me who's labour it was that made/manufactured the soil. House's/barns/the long-drop outdoor privy etc are something quite different - they have value to the person who built them. I have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to use a small piece of land for my survival - once I am done with it, someone else gets to use it - that's nature.

Sounds fine in a low population density environment where the nominal "owner" has more than enough land for his/her own purposes.

On a piece of land which is being exploited to the full by the labour of a family that's already on it, do you STILL have the right to come on to the land and expropriate some part of that land's services?

I think not. And natural law agrees with me, not you.

If you came on to my land without my permission and decided to try to take something from it, I'd shoot you.

Water is FREE - unless I choose to pay for the convenience of having someone else pre-filter it and deliver it to me - I filter my own, therefore will NOT pay for it.

Unless it's a pond or a river or something else on a piece of land already being used. See above.
Rainwater is free. That's about it.

4 Food is free - I buy it through choice - am just too damn idle to grow my own, but that will soon change.

Is it? Same as your idea that land is free.

Ecxessively simplistic take on life - but then, I am only a simple soul

Excessively simple and wrong.

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 07 Dec 2009, 20:53

There's certainly something wrong with land ownership in this country. I walked past an entrance to Cirencester Park the other day. "Cirencester Park is open to the public free of charge, on foot and on horseback, by kind permission of the Earl Bathurst." But only from 9am to 5pm. It's really generous of the Earl, to let the descendents of the people his ancestors stole it from see what should rightfully be theirs

. Local people could grow huge amounts of food and fuel on it after the revolution

.

Mitch · Post by **Mitch** » 07 Dec 2009, 21:00

"Excessively simple and wrong"

Yea Fith - I agree, our forefathers made an unholy mess when they made the universe - I mean just look at the idiotic way all other life - except us human Gods - use/own/sell the resources, what the hell were our ancestors thinking? Never mind, we are doing our very level best to correct the original creator's idiotic idea's......

Anyway, totally off-topic now - I withdraw. Thanks for responding Fith, hope all's well your side. (Any land you not making full use of?)

fifthcolumn · Post by **fifthcolumn** » 07 Dec 2009, 21:17

Mitch wrote:"Excessively simple and wrong"

Never mind, we are doing our very level best to correct the original creator's idiotic idea's......

You missed the point mate.

I'm not justifying anything, just pointing out the reality.

Your nice theory where you can walk along and collect fruit from the trees and drink from the rivers is built into your genes. All of our genes in fact.

Unfortunately, it comes from a time when there was plenty of land, food and water and hardly any people.

That's no longer true, and regardless of how you feel it ought to be different it isn't.

Aurora · Post by **Aurora** » 08 Dec 2009, 08:38

BBC News - 08/12/09

An independent review has called for a huge increase in the use of water meters to encourage people to use water more efficiently.

It recommended an approach that would put meters in 80% of homes in England by 2020, compared with 35% currently.

The review for England and Wales found that charging based on property's rateable value was outdated.

Ageing infrastructure, population growth and climate change are putting pressure on supply and cost of water.

Article continues ...

More meters = higher bills. I can feel it in my water.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 08 Dec 2009, 09:12

Ageing infrastructure? So the water companies don't want to invest as this would impinge on shareholder profits.
Climate change? Uncertainties abound but the balance of evidence points to the UK becoming wetter rather than drier.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 08 Dec 2009, 11:25

Mitch wrote:1 Land is FREE - the only time I would ever pay for it is when someone can show me who's labour it was that made/manufactured the soil. House's/barns/the long-drop outdoor privy etc are something quite different - they have value to the person who built them. I have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to use a small piece of land for my survival - once I am done with it, someone else gets to use it - that's nature.

2 Water is FREE - unless I choose to pay for the convenience of having someone else pre-filter it and deliver it to me - I filter my own, therefore will NOT pay for it.

3 Likewise with Air - what's available is free, unless I want to pay for extra "cleansing/conditioning". I don't, so I won't pay.

4 Food is free - I buy it through choice - am just too damn idle to grow my own, but that will soon change.

This theory is all true if you take the total amount of usable land, edible food, breathable air and potable water and divide it up equally between the earth's population of species. And we have no more right to a portion than an elephant or a tree or whatever have to theirs.

But where would your share of 'usable land' be? Think about it. And how far away from it would be your share of potable water? And would there be any food actually growing on your piece of land? 'Usable' might be only usable for building on, not growing.

And I'm on your side, don't forget!