Peggy, Our '94 40.5 unfortunately was built and delivered with a 40 gallon aluminum holding tank. I have taken great pains to protect it from failure. I know that I am living on borrowed time and that it may well very soon fail, and would appreciate any information on a source for a new plastic replacement tank for my 40.5. Thanks! Ron Hughes s/v Best Revenge
- Status
Best source for a tank
Ronco Plastics http://www.ronco-plastics.com However, if your boat has two heads, it may also be time to rethink the whole system. Boat builders cut costs by connecting two heads to one tank when two are really called for, because the distance from at least one of the toilets--sometimes both--is so far that there's no way to prevent waste sitting in the head discharge hose to permeate it. Even when there's only one toilet, the tank is often too far away from it because tanks are viewed as an necessary afterthought and therefore put wherever it's easiest to install instead of where they belong. And there's something else to consider: your waters are NOT "no discharge"...which means the use of Type I MSDs (CG certified device that treats waste and discharges it overboard) is legal. A Lectra/San takes up a lot less room than a holding tank big enough to meet the needs of a 40' boat. I suggest you check it out on the Raritan website at http://www.raritaneng.com Don't let the amperage draw scare you...actual consumption averages only about 10 AH/day for two people. Examine all your options and then let's talk about the best way to go for your boat.
Ronco Plastics http://www.ronco-plastics.com However, if your boat has two heads, it may also be time to rethink the whole system. Boat builders cut costs by connecting two heads to one tank when two are really called for, because the distance from at least one of the toilets--sometimes both--is so far that there's no way to prevent waste sitting in the head discharge hose to permeate it. Even when there's only one toilet, the tank is often too far away from it because tanks are viewed as an necessary afterthought and therefore put wherever it's easiest to install instead of where they belong. And there's something else to consider: your waters are NOT "no discharge"...which means the use of Type I MSDs (CG certified device that treats waste and discharges it overboard) is legal. A Lectra/San takes up a lot less room than a holding tank big enough to meet the needs of a 40' boat. I suggest you check it out on the Raritan website at http://www.raritaneng.com Don't let the amperage draw scare you...actual consumption averages only about 10 AH/day for two people. Examine all your options and then let's talk about the best way to go for your boat.
Can you see it?
Ron Our holding tank (94 - 40.5) appears to have a glass tank at least from what I can see of it under the nav seat. Any idea why the difference? Don
Ron Our holding tank (94 - 40.5) appears to have a glass tank at least from what I can see of it under the nav seat. Any idea why the difference? Don
Thanks!
Wow Peggy, it never occured to me that we could use a Lectra-san here in the fresh water of the Columbia River, but as I saw a recent post of yours yesterday mentioning adding salt........ I also might mention that we NEVER use our forward head. I operate it often, but only to flush water, mineral oil and vinegar thru it, the hoses and the tank. I really wish that a forward head had never been installed, but it does make a nice place to sit in the shower AND we DO have a functional spare! I will look into your comments on the plastic connections Don. We have them too! I'd better do some more poking around, eh? Thanks for your comments! Ron
Wow Peggy, it never occured to me that we could use a Lectra-san here in the fresh water of the Columbia River, but as I saw a recent post of yours yesterday mentioning adding salt........ I also might mention that we NEVER use our forward head. I operate it often, but only to flush water, mineral oil and vinegar thru it, the hoses and the tank. I really wish that a forward head had never been installed, but it does make a nice place to sit in the shower AND we DO have a functional spare! I will look into your comments on the plastic connections Don. We have them too! I'd better do some more poking around, eh? Thanks for your comments! Ron
None of the waters of OR are "no discharge"
At least, not according to the list published by the EPA (and which IS current). OR isn't even on it. You can see the list at http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/vessel_sewage/vsdnozone.html
At least, not according to the list published by the EPA (and which IS current). OR isn't even on it. You can see the list at http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/vessel_sewage/vsdnozone.html
Hey...we're on the same side, Tom!
And there's nothing wrong with my math. The list is the EPA list. States can only apply to the EPA for permission to declare a body of water "no discharge"...the EPA is who actually does it...and they do keep this list current. I provided a link to it...here it is again: http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/vessel_sewage/vsdnozone.html I don't know where you got the idea that most FL coastal waters are ND...only some parts of the Keys are, all the rest including the ICW are "type I and II legal." All of RI is...but only about half of MA coastal waters are...and there are only a few very small ones--mostly in NY and NJ--between RI and FL. LI Sound is not...neither the is the Chesapeake Bay except for two very small areas--one known as the Northern Coastal Bay, and Herring Bay (see the MD DNR map at http://www.dnr.state.md.us/boating/pumpout/ndz.pdf) On the west coast, they're almost all concentrated in SoCal...a small one in a harbor off SF Bay is the only one north of Santa Barbara. None in OR or Washington coastal waters. If you find 'em all on a map, you'll see for yourself that there's nothing wrong my math. There are a few areas in coastal waters that--arguably--should be "no discharge"--those that have little or no tidal or current flow to cleanse them. I say "arguably" because the only boats affected by making any body of water totally NO discharge are the less than 5% that have installed, or would install a treatment device...all other boats with toilets should already have a holding tank. Herring Bay in MD is good example...of the 500+ boats in both marinas there, there prob'ly aren't 25 that have Lectra/Sans...they're the only ones affected when Herring Bay was made a NDZ. All that was really needed was enforcement of law that already made the waters of Herring Bay de facto ND for all boats that don't have a treatment device...which is at least 95% of 'em.
And there's nothing wrong with my math. The list is the EPA list. States can only apply to the EPA for permission to declare a body of water "no discharge"...the EPA is who actually does it...and they do keep this list current. I provided a link to it...here it is again: http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/vessel_sewage/vsdnozone.html I don't know where you got the idea that most FL coastal waters are ND...only some parts of the Keys are, all the rest including the ICW are "type I and II legal." All of RI is...but only about half of MA coastal waters are...and there are only a few very small ones--mostly in NY and NJ--between RI and FL. LI Sound is not...neither the is the Chesapeake Bay except for two very small areas--one known as the Northern Coastal Bay, and Herring Bay (see the MD DNR map at http://www.dnr.state.md.us/boating/pumpout/ndz.pdf) On the west coast, they're almost all concentrated in SoCal...a small one in a harbor off SF Bay is the only one north of Santa Barbara. None in OR or Washington coastal waters. If you find 'em all on a map, you'll see for yourself that there's nothing wrong my math. There are a few areas in coastal waters that--arguably--should be "no discharge"--those that have little or no tidal or current flow to cleanse them. I say "arguably" because the only boats affected by making any body of water totally NO discharge are the less than 5% that have installed, or would install a treatment device...all other boats with toilets should already have a holding tank. Herring Bay in MD is good example...of the 500+ boats in both marinas there, there prob'ly aren't 25 that have Lectra/Sans...they're the only ones affected when Herring Bay was made a NDZ. All that was really needed was enforcement of law that already made the waters of Herring Bay de facto ND for all boats that don't have a treatment device...which is at least 95% of 'em.
ey...we're on the same side, Tom
And there's nothing wrong with my math. The list is the EPA list. States can only apply to the EPA for permission to declare a body of water "no discharge"...the EPA is who actually does it...and they do keep this list current. I provided a link to it...here it is again: http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/vessel_sewage/vsdnozone.html I don't know where you got the idea that most FL coastal waters are ND...only some parts of the Keys are, all the rest including the ICW are "type I and II legal." All of RI is...but only about half of MA coastal waters are...and there are only a few very small ones--mostly in NY and NJ--between RI and FL. LI Sound is not...neither the is the Chesapeake Bay except for two very small areas--one known as the Northern Coastal Bay, and Herring Bay (see the MD DNR map at http://www.dnr.state.md.us/boating/pumpout/ndz.pdf) On the west coast, they're almost all concentrated in SoCal...a small one in a harbor off SF Bay is the only one north of Santa Barbara. None in OR or Washington coastal waters. If you find 'em all on a map, you'll see for yourself that there's nothing wrong my math. There are a few areas in coastal waters that--arguably--should be "no discharge"--those that have little or no tidal or current flow to cleanse them. I say "arguably" because the only boats affected by making any body of water totally NO discharge are the less than 5% that have installed, or would install a treatment device...all other boats with toilets should already have a holding tank. Herring Bay in MD is good example...of the 500+ boats in both marinas there, there prob'ly aren't 25 that have Lectra/Sans...they're the only ones affected when Herring Bay was made a NDZ. All that was really needed was enforcement of law that already made the waters of Herring Bay de facto ND for all boats that don't have a treatment device...which is at least 95% of 'em.
And there's nothing wrong with my math. The list is the EPA list. States can only apply to the EPA for permission to declare a body of water "no discharge"...the EPA is who actually does it...and they do keep this list current. I provided a link to it...here it is again: http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/vessel_sewage/vsdnozone.html I don't know where you got the idea that most FL coastal waters are ND...only some parts of the Keys are, all the rest including the ICW are "type I and II legal." All of RI is...but only about half of MA coastal waters are...and there are only a few very small ones--mostly in NY and NJ--between RI and FL. LI Sound is not...neither the is the Chesapeake Bay except for two very small areas--one known as the Northern Coastal Bay, and Herring Bay (see the MD DNR map at http://www.dnr.state.md.us/boating/pumpout/ndz.pdf) On the west coast, they're almost all concentrated in SoCal...a small one in a harbor off SF Bay is the only one north of Santa Barbara. None in OR or Washington coastal waters. If you find 'em all on a map, you'll see for yourself that there's nothing wrong my math. There are a few areas in coastal waters that--arguably--should be "no discharge"--those that have little or no tidal or current flow to cleanse them. I say "arguably" because the only boats affected by making any body of water totally NO discharge are the less than 5% that have installed, or would install a treatment device...all other boats with toilets should already have a holding tank. Herring Bay in MD is good example...of the 500+ boats in both marinas there, there prob'ly aren't 25 that have Lectra/Sans...they're the only ones affected when Herring Bay was made a NDZ. All that was really needed was enforcement of law that already made the waters of Herring Bay de facto ND for all boats that don't have a treatment device...which is at least 95% of 'em.
Peggy you said 90% of NDZ are in-land lakes
Quote: "If you study the list, you'll see that about 90% of the "no discharge" waters are inland lakes...only a few coastal waters have been conquered by the enviro-nazis. " Re-read what I wrote. I did not say that all of Florida (or many of the other site for that matter) was an NDZ , just that all of the locations that ARE NDZ are Salt Water. Yeah there is TX with their inland lakes and Vermont, etc. But I see a lot of places on that list that are salt water locations in the Northeast. And the one that "sticks in my craw" the most of all is the *whole* state RI -- knowing that state and the politics there, it is such a farce. We do agree, I would love to have an electrasan, but I only have room to either put an electrasan or a holding tank. And becuase there are so many places I sail to around here that are getting NDZ (FYI Connecticut just added one recently), then I will probably NEVER get an elctrasan And the thing is neither will all the irresponsible people that just pump it over. If we encouraged (or legislated) manufacturers to use Type 1 or 2 then I bet most waters would be better, because it would lower the chance of people just pumping it directly into the bay without any treatment. Because we know there is still that percentage of people that always will...... Its sad, because there is a solution
Quote: "If you study the list, you'll see that about 90% of the "no discharge" waters are inland lakes...only a few coastal waters have been conquered by the enviro-nazis. " Re-read what I wrote. I did not say that all of Florida (or many of the other site for that matter) was an NDZ , just that all of the locations that ARE NDZ are Salt Water. Yeah there is TX with their inland lakes and Vermont, etc. But I see a lot of places on that list that are salt water locations in the Northeast. And the one that "sticks in my craw" the most of all is the *whole* state RI -- knowing that state and the politics there, it is such a farce. We do agree, I would love to have an electrasan, but I only have room to either put an electrasan or a holding tank. And becuase there are so many places I sail to around here that are getting NDZ (FYI Connecticut just added one recently), then I will probably NEVER get an elctrasan And the thing is neither will all the irresponsible people that just pump it over. If we encouraged (or legislated) manufacturers to use Type 1 or 2 then I bet most waters would be better, because it would lower the chance of people just pumping it directly into the bay without any treatment. Because we know there is still that percentage of people that always will...... Its sad, because there is a solution
Yep...but the enviro-nazis have more political
clout cuz there are a lot more of 'em than than there are boat owners...especially owners of boats big enough to have toilets. And the politicians go with whoever will deliver the most votes, even when the group they're pandering to does more harm than good.
clout cuz there are a lot more of 'em than than there are boat owners...especially owners of boats big enough to have toilets. And the politicians go with whoever will deliver the most votes, even when the group they're pandering to does more harm than good.
Not more of them, they just yell LOUDER!
It is not that there are more of them. It is just that they YELL LOUDER. It is rather hard to defend a position of crapping in a bay or harbor. Even if millions of duck, geese and other wildlife are putting tons of crap in the waterways (not counting the municipalities) while boats hardly compare with their little amount of pollution they would put into the system if everyone pumped overboard evertime they used their boats. This is not to say that we should be doing it but let's face the facts!!! The squeaky wheel get greased!
It is not that there are more of them. It is just that they YELL LOUDER. It is rather hard to defend a position of crapping in a bay or harbor. Even if millions of duck, geese and other wildlife are putting tons of crap in the waterways (not counting the municipalities) while boats hardly compare with their little amount of pollution they would put into the system if everyone pumped overboard evertime they used their boats. This is not to say that we should be doing it but let's face the facts!!! The squeaky wheel get greased!
You are forgetting something
According to the environmentalists, man is NOT natural... he screws up everthing he touches, therefore he is BAD and any developement of man is a NO-NO. If the greenies had their way, we would all be very constipated, living in caves. Although, none of those guys I know live in caves.... they all drive SUV's and live in condos! Steve
According to the environmentalists, man is NOT natural... he screws up everthing he touches, therefore he is BAD and any developement of man is a NO-NO. If the greenies had their way, we would all be very constipated, living in caves. Although, none of those guys I know live in caves.... they all drive SUV's and live in condos! Steve
Whoa there guys!
Hold on now! I started this thread to try to find a new plastic holding tank to replace the sure-to-fail aluminum one installed by Hunter. While I recognize that there are far too many people in the world making way to much poop, unless a substantial number of you wish to off yourselves, we have a real-time problem with a lot of sewage afloat. Right now. I treat aboard and pump out ashore. I am certain that there are many people aboard ships, floating homes and boats who just put it over the side........I know of many boats, some who are live aboards, that never move from their slips, let alone go to the pump out station. It is my fervent hope that they either use facilities ashore or have a Lectra-san aboard. While politicians fiddle, we as responsible boaters can help keep Rome from burning by doing something to reduce our impact on the environment: Properly handling our own sewage. Lets use this forum to talk together and find better ways to operate our boats and systems in the real world. Now....anyone know where I can find a replacement plastic holding tank for my 40.5 without having one custom made? Rich at Ronco Plastics says they don't have a mold. Mike at DuraCast is looking into it. At Peggy's suggestion I am going to learn more about using a Lectra-san aboard. Any other positive and constructive thoughts that may help us to do better? Hopefully and sincerely, Ron Hughes s/v "Best Revenge" H 40.5
Hold on now! I started this thread to try to find a new plastic holding tank to replace the sure-to-fail aluminum one installed by Hunter. While I recognize that there are far too many people in the world making way to much poop, unless a substantial number of you wish to off yourselves, we have a real-time problem with a lot of sewage afloat. Right now. I treat aboard and pump out ashore. I am certain that there are many people aboard ships, floating homes and boats who just put it over the side........I know of many boats, some who are live aboards, that never move from their slips, let alone go to the pump out station. It is my fervent hope that they either use facilities ashore or have a Lectra-san aboard. While politicians fiddle, we as responsible boaters can help keep Rome from burning by doing something to reduce our impact on the environment: Properly handling our own sewage. Lets use this forum to talk together and find better ways to operate our boats and systems in the real world. Now....anyone know where I can find a replacement plastic holding tank for my 40.5 without having one custom made? Rich at Ronco Plastics says they don't have a mold. Mike at DuraCast is looking into it. At Peggy's suggestion I am going to learn more about using a Lectra-san aboard. Any other positive and constructive thoughts that may help us to do better? Hopefully and sincerely, Ron Hughes s/v "Best Revenge" H 40.5
No one is likely to have an identical replacement
for your aluminum tank. Ronco has more shapes and sizes than anyone else...so go back to the boat with the Ronco catalog and look for the best fit for the space. If they don't have one, you'll prob'ly have to have a custom welded tank made...an expensive solution--if you want a decent quality tank--that isn't much less than a Lectra/San. A slight correction to something you said..."right now I'm treating waste aboard and pumping out ashore." Waste in a holding tank is not treated by any definition. The only thing that holding tank products do is suppress odor (the best ones prevent it from occurring). Chemical holding tank products are anything BUT environmentally friendly ("biodegradable" is a meaningless feel-good word that does NOT mean the same thing as "environmentally friendly"...you're just supposed to be naive enough to think it does). Organic products--enzymes, live bacteria and nitrate--are environmentally friendly. My point is, nothing you can add to a holding tank does anything to "treat" the waste..iow, make it a non-health hazard...and some things make it more of one. Discussions around here have a habit of drifting...someone picks up on a single point and runs with it, and before long the discussion has little to do any more with the question that started it. That's just life on the 'net.
for your aluminum tank. Ronco has more shapes and sizes than anyone else...so go back to the boat with the Ronco catalog and look for the best fit for the space. If they don't have one, you'll prob'ly have to have a custom welded tank made...an expensive solution--if you want a decent quality tank--that isn't much less than a Lectra/San. A slight correction to something you said..."right now I'm treating waste aboard and pumping out ashore." Waste in a holding tank is not treated by any definition. The only thing that holding tank products do is suppress odor (the best ones prevent it from occurring). Chemical holding tank products are anything BUT environmentally friendly ("biodegradable" is a meaningless feel-good word that does NOT mean the same thing as "environmentally friendly"...you're just supposed to be naive enough to think it does). Organic products--enzymes, live bacteria and nitrate--are environmentally friendly. My point is, nothing you can add to a holding tank does anything to "treat" the waste..iow, make it a non-health hazard...and some things make it more of one. Discussions around here have a habit of drifting...someone picks up on a single point and runs with it, and before long the discussion has little to do any more with the question that started it. That's just life on the 'net.
Custom-built
Ron: Assuming you can't locate one already built to original spec, you can buy stock sizes, as from Ronco, go the LectraSan route, or custom build. We had the replacement tank custom-built for our boat (H37.5), and I thought the price was reasonable and install was a snap because it was identical to the original. We got the line-drawing for the original aluminum tank faxed to us from Hunter parts (Mike Thomas). I faxed that to C.C. Tech in Rhode Island, who gave me a quote within a day or two. 25 gallon tank for our boat, custom-built to be identical to original (but in 3/8" poly) was $375. I think the cost is reasonable and you don't have the headache of reconfiguring your install for a different shaped tank or LectraSan, assuming you don't want to do LS. Our new tank worked fine all this season. C. C. Tech contact info: http://www.gocctech.com/marine/boat-tank.htm Phone: 401-784-6168 Linda Kleinman for sales. Technical questions ask for Bert. They are in Rhode Island, so shipping will be a tad pricier for you, but ask. Do not delay this project!
Ron: Assuming you can't locate one already built to original spec, you can buy stock sizes, as from Ronco, go the LectraSan route, or custom build. We had the replacement tank custom-built for our boat (H37.5), and I thought the price was reasonable and install was a snap because it was identical to the original. We got the line-drawing for the original aluminum tank faxed to us from Hunter parts (Mike Thomas). I faxed that to C.C. Tech in Rhode Island, who gave me a quote within a day or two. 25 gallon tank for our boat, custom-built to be identical to original (but in 3/8" poly) was $375. I think the cost is reasonable and you don't have the headache of reconfiguring your install for a different shaped tank or LectraSan, assuming you don't want to do LS. Our new tank worked fine all this season. C. C. Tech contact info: http://www.gocctech.com/marine/boat-tank.htm Phone: 401-784-6168 Linda Kleinman for sales. Technical questions ask for Bert. They are in Rhode Island, so shipping will be a tad pricier for you, but ask. Do not delay this project!
- Status