Scrubbing to be banned?

[Gunfleet]

How nice of Lemain to chip in there when I was just thinking you sound like you were repeating one of those things we all think we know . But if you do know, you can help... what is the process, I was asking. It stays on the ship when the ship is still and stays on it when it's moving, whereas yacht antifoul comes off when the boat is sitting still (well, I know that) and.. comes off when it's moving. I expect it's different stuff, but how is it different? It's intriguing. My 'magic' comment was because it sounds like the magic stuff that professionals have, you know, like those fantastic navigation skills that induced three of them to run into the Tricoleur, or the chap that wiped out the end of Southend Pier. This is professional stuff, not for little yachties like you, it sounds like.

By the way not many people keep their boats in still water. Even canals flow a bit. Those of us in tidal estuarries can get a hell of a tide passing on the ebb. But I expecet you knew that and just mis-typed.

 

[Pasarell]

I was just replying to the comments about TBT on ships and yours about whether A/F residue is poisonous.
I agree that it is fairly easy to put collection sumps in yards where there are travelifts and large numbers of boats being pressure washed. Most marinas in the UK keep their dock area looking pretty clean by pressure washing the residues back into the sea which can't be clever. There are some pretty unpleasant sights in some yards where the pressure washing area is not cleaned.
In the grand scale of things the amount of pollution from a scrubbing post is irrelevant. Maximum of 2 boats per day on posts that are few and far between will not affect anything really.
Thanks for the compliment. Deserved or not it is my area. I learn a lot from this forum so nice to give a little back

 

[Anonymous]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way not many people keep their boats in still water. Even canals flow a bit. Those of us in tidal estuaries can get a hell of a tide passing on the ebb.

[/ QUOTE ]Indeed, wherever there is a tide there must be a flow. There are locked marinas (e.g. Chichester) but even that has a significant flow and there is absolutely no evidence of environmental damage anywhere around Chi and Emsworth attributable to antifoul AFAIK?

 

[moondancer]

This seems a small price to pay for all those lovely photos of Dolphins that people um and ah about.

Now, whilst I happily declare that I know nothing about the content and environmental impact of antifoulings my completely unscientific assessment of the Crouch and other East Coast rivers is that the water seems a lot cleaner since the TBT ban, that there are generally more fish, more seals.

This of course may be completely wrong and may have nothing to do with the TBT ban.

 

[Gunfleet]

Evidence

We agree. Where's the evidence and if there is damage, is it proportionate? Like Robyn I don't want to kill dolphins but I also don't want any more blinking rules!

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Evidence

[ QUOTE ]
We agree. Where's the evidence and if there is damage, is it proportionate? Like Robyn I don't want to kill dolphins but I also don't want any more blinking rules!

[/ QUOTE ]Well, Pasarell, who does seem to know what he's talking about said....
[ QUOTE ]
In the grand scale of things the amount of pollution from a scrubbing post is irrelevant.

[/ QUOTE ]

So we all seem to be agreed that subject to there being more evidence we are against any ban on scrubbing posts. Wonder where that got us, tho'? It's not as though we live in a democracy when it comes to issues that matter to us.

 

[Stemar]

Re: Evidence

Unfortunately, if HMG, in its infinite wisdom, decides to provide us with another solution to a non-existant problem, they'll use what is known as the precautionary principle - We don't know if there's a problem, but just to be safe, we'll ban it anyway in case there is.

Grrrr!!

 

[Grajan]

Re: Evidence

This ruling? is not new, nearly 10 years ago when I was involved with the marine paint industry, in certain locations, I had to ensure that all the washings along with blast debris was collected from the dry dock and properly disposed of for ecological reasons and on one vessel the cost amounted to the best part of £60000.00
There has aleady been yacht clubs and boatyards taken to task for not having holding tanks for washings and I believe fines have been imposed or a ban put in place where businesses/clubs would not comply

 

[ashanta]

Don't scoff! The quay agents where I keep my boat over winter say's that this is definitely what is being considered by the authorities and in my case it's Exeter city council.

 

[comoxlarry]

Here in western Canada we are facing the same thing. No more pressure washing, no discharge of any kind into the water. I agree with stopping all pollution but we humans generate waste just by existing and we need some help to do the right thing. I had to clean the bilge of my boat today and I end up with about eight litres of mixed water and oil and I have no place to get rid of it. The Govt. makes the rules but don't tell you how to obey them and while I have always cleaned my boat myself now I am going to be forced to pay someone else to do it. Meanwhile, the city of Victoria, our Provincial capital is dumping tonnes of raw sewage every day directly into the Straight of Juan de Fuca which, thankfully, washes up on their own beaches

 

[seedog]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not against protecting the environment, but I am against legislation which on balance causes more problems than it solve.

[/ QUOTE ]
MarkBz put his finger on the problem in OP. What are the problems? This thread indicates a marked reluctance on the part of some boaties to consider anything but their own needs. Rachel Carson, author of Silent Spring, identified problems caused by pesticides to marine life in the early 60's. She was called alarmist and initially dismissed. What we really need to know is the effect and impact on marine life. As was pointed out earlier build up of toxins can be very localised and they can remain for a very long time. Instead of worrying about the legislation should we not be looking to see what problems we cause and what we can do to resolve/mitigate those problems.

 

[mawm]

I get my boat antifouled every 2nd year. Cost $1200 for lift out, wash, antifoul and application. I still have a lift-out and wash a couple of times in the two years at $75. I am not allowed to do a wash when drying.

I can get a bottom wash for $50 done by a scuba diver.

So, if I don't apply antifoul and get a monthly bum wash I save the environment and about $150. WHO NEEDS ANTI-FOUL! It is just a rip off.

 

[seedog]

Trailer sailor myself so antifoul not an issue for me as I can scrub the boat most days of the year!!
Is getting a lift and wash more frequently effective without anti foul or is it effective because you antifoul every two years? If it is a rip off why does everyone keep doing it?

 

[Anonymous]

[ QUOTE ]
I can get a bottom wash for $50 done by a scuba diver.

So, if I don't apply antifoul and get a monthly bum wash I save the environment and about $150. WHO NEEDS ANTI-FOUL! It is just a rip off.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't get a diver to scrub my bottom for $50. It wouldn't even pay for the air round here. They want 60 Euros an hour for scuba, plus air, or 30 Euros an hour without scuba (young lad). Last time I had a scrub without air was from a very fit man and he took a full morning - 5 hours - and cost me 150 Euros. He also made horrible gouges in the hull with his paint scraper (which I couldn't see until we hauled next time) because he was working under pressure with lungs wanting air.

There is a market for someone to offer that service using a compressor direct rather than air tanks, geared up to do the job properly and some kind of inspection, but at the moment it can be dodgy.

 

[cliff]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a market for someone to offer that service using a compressor direct rather than air tanks, geared up to do the job properly and some kind of inspection, but at the moment it can be dodgy.

[/ QUOTE ]A "hookah" setup? aka "surface demand" quite easy to setup yourself.
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"
sailroom <span style="color:red">The place to auction your previously loved boatie bits</span>

 

[mandlmaunder]

No pilings to stand against at low tide(or a wall)?
If you only scrub and scrape surely you are releasing back to the Wild all the little beasties and natural stuff that you where withholding from the enviroment ("let it go ,if it comes back to you it is yours").
Wouldn't better antifoul be the answer in the first place? something that actually works for a year or so would seem the way forward IMHO(what do i know keep shelling out for stuff that works for a while then gives up the ghost /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif).

 

[RivalRedwing]

Quite a lot of this regulation is down to the Environment Agency, they often lack common sense but are rather evangelical in their take on saving the environment (which of course helps to keep them in a job...). Our trouble is that as with red diesel, we are an easy target and for the average ecowarrior from the EA the sight of a boat on scrubbing posts simply has to be bad for the environment and is a much easier target than say controlling road runoff discharged via storm drains and pesticied residue discharge from farmland drainage.

 

[OGITD]

Re: Scrubbing to be banned, Problem Solved???

There is an article kicking around, published sometime in the last twelve months with pictures to support the process. The article demonstrates the marine growth repellant properties of strong chillli powder mixed with the cheapest (to be assumed the least effective and therefore possibly the least toxic) anti fouling. Therefore could this be the environmental answer to this current issue?

 

[Pasarell]

Back after a weekend sailing to find this thread still going - I thought we only discussed antifouling in the spring!

Nothing magic about the different antifoulings for ships and yachts I'm afraid. Eroding antifoulings use a soluble resin to carry the cuprous oxide and biocides. The degree of soubility can be varied so that used for yachts is more soluble than used for fast and active ships. (The original developer of the resin type was scoffed at in the early 70's for having the daft idea of antifoulings that dissolved and it was several years before the products were launched for commercial ships. Within a few years it transformed the fortunes of International and their parent company as they cleaned up in the market.)

Put an antifouling designed for container ships on a normal yacht and it will fail dismally by not dissolving quickly enough to allow biocides out. A yacht antifouling on a container ship would last a very short time as it dissolved too quickly.

Tidal flow helps an antifouling to erode even when the boat is stationary but most tides are quite slow and only flow at peak rate for short periods.
On the pollution point there is no definitive answer. Tidal flows help to disperse chemicals in the water but actually most water moves backwards and forwards in the same small area so doesn't get thoroughly cleaned. As far as I know only a few places have been properly checked for TBT residues but enough evidence exists to show they are highest in areas with lots of yachts.
As for "expert" administrators I could be very subjective! Personally I think they take a very narrow view and often make uninformed statements .....

Finally, there is no perfect antifouling that any of us would be prepared to use. They are all a compromise based on hitting most of the targets most of the time. Even the best will fail sometimes and in some places. I've seen no evidence to suggest chilli works well as an antifouling for instance, but it may boost other biocides in a few places and appear effective. If so - use it - but I am sure it will reduce antifouling performance in many more places than it helps.