Re: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- From: Goedjn <prose@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:25:34 -0500
On 28 Mar 2006 14:06:55 -0800, misha.shel@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Folks,
Last year we bought a vacation cabin on a small island and now trying
to find the best solution for a toilet problem. What we have there
today is an old outhouse that will fill up in a year or so. Moving an
outhouse or rather digging a hole for a new spot is quite a challenge
as the island sits on a rock shield. Finding a spot with 3 feet of soil
depth is almost impossible...
Hence, we decided to turn to alternative options. Septic system
wouldn't get approved due to location/landscape. Compost toilet is not
a valid option as there's nowhere on a small island to dump partially
composted waste. As a result, we are considering either incinerating
toilet (Incinolet) or Thetford chemical toilet (cassette type or porta
potty). Or some combination of both...
Human feces that has been in ground-contact for a year or more
is essentially just dirt. Dig out the pit, and dump the spoil
somewhere out of the way. Is this island oceanic, or
fresh-water?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- From: enigma
- Re: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- References:
- Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- From: misha . shel
- Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- Prev by Date: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- Next by Date: Re: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- Previous by thread: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- Next by thread: Re: Incinolet vs. chemical toilets
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|