The message
from "JennyC" contains these words:

But I must admit, I've never licked it so can't say.
Simon Avery, Dartmoor, UK Ý http://www.digdilem.org/

try putting some sand in a container and adding water. Stir. Leave to
settle.
Taste water ?

Mmmmmmm! Cats' penc!

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

Obvious, when using sand for seriously sensitive plants (e.g. orchids
or carnivorous ones), it should be well washed. Most plants don't
mind a trace, and quite a lot can handle actively salty soil if they
are soaked when they are watered.

Many of the British wild orchids don't mind quite a lot of salt. Links I
know on the west coast of the Isle of Lewis (regularly doused in heavy
sea spray) are thick with Orchis mascula; Spiranthes romanzofficiana
Subsp. stricta; Dactylorhiza incarnata s/s coccinia; D purpurella; D
Kerryensis; D maculata s/s ericetorum; D fuchsii s/s hebridensis and
others I haven't identified.

One was rather like D ericatorum in form, but the flowers were a
transparent dull orange, and the leaves were low and more-or-less
horizontal like a stripey butterwort. I took a photo of it, but the
light was dreadful, and the next day I couldn't find it again.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

The tens of thousands of years that's been there, any salt would have
been leached out, whatever the source.

If it was on the surface, yes. But there is a lot of salt underneath
Cheshire, that has not leached in millions of years. I could very
easily believe that many such deposits are mixtures of sand and salt,
and that there are places where salty sand is an accessible mineral
(and not near a current seashore).

I don't think sand at that depth would remain in free granular form, but
would be sandstone by now.

That salt in Cheshire has been there for a very long time, isn't very
close to the surface, and is, IIRC, sandwiched between two impervious
layers of rock.

So much sand lies at the surface that no-one is going to mine the stuff,
anyway.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

In article ,
Rusty Hinge wrote:
The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

The tens of thousands of years that's been there, any salt would have
been leached out, whatever the source.

If it was on the surface, yes. But there is a lot of salt underneath
Cheshire, that has not leached in millions of years. I could very
easily believe that many such deposits are mixtures of sand and salt,
and that there are places where salty sand is an accessible mineral
(and not near a current seashore).

I don't think sand at that depth would remain in free granular form, but
would be sandstone by now.

Not necessarily. To create sandstone, the pressure and temperature
has to be high enough to liquify something to glue the grains
together.

That salt in Cheshire has been there for a very long time, isn't very
close to the surface, and is, IIRC, sandwiched between two impervious
layers of rock.

Yes.

So much sand lies at the surface that no-one is going to mine the stuff,
anyway.

I was thinking of the (fairly common) circumstance where something
else (like salt) is mined, and the sand is a waste product.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Rusty Hinge wrote:
The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

The tens of thousands of years that's been there, any salt would have
been leached out, whatever the source.

If it was on the surface, yes. But there is a lot of salt underneath
Cheshire, that has not leached in millions of years. I could very
easily believe that many such deposits are mixtures of sand and salt,
and that there are places where salty sand is an accessible mineral
(and not near a current seashore).

I don't think sand at that depth would remain in free granular form, but
would be sandstone by now.

Not necessarily. To create sandstone, the pressure and temperature
has to be high enough to liquify something to glue the grains
together.

That salt in Cheshire has been there for a very long time, isn't very
close to the surface, and is, IIRC, sandwiched between two impervious
layers of rock.

Yes.

So much sand lies at the surface that no-one is going to mine the stuff,
anyway.

I was thinking of the (fairly common) circumstance where something
else (like salt) is mined, and the sand is a waste product.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

"JennyC" wrote in message
...

"Simon Avery" wrote in message
...
(Nick Maclaren) wrote:

Hello Nick

NM As Cormaic pointed out, builders' sand has not had salt in
NM it for many decades - at least not if bought from an even
NM half-respectable person.

They don't wash it at the quarry, and that's where I get mine from.
I'm a bit hazy about the geology side - I guess sand comes from both
sea and river sources, so if former it would surely have traces of
salt in it?

But I must admit, I've never licked it so can't say.
Simon Avery, Dartmoor, UK Ý http://www.digdilem.org/

try putting some sand in a container and adding water. Stir. Leave to
settle.
Taste water ?

Urine from small furry mammals?

Franz

"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rusty Hinge wrote:
The message
from (Simon Avery) contains these words:
(Nick Maclaren) wrote:

NM As Cormaic pointed out, builders' sand has not had salt in
NM it for many decades - at least not if bought from an even
NM half-respectable person.

They don't wash it at the quarry, and that's where I get mine from.
I'm a bit hazy about the geology side - I guess sand comes from both
sea and river sources, so if former it would surely have traces of
salt in it?

But I must admit, I've never licked it so can't say.

The tens of thousands of years that's been there, any salt would have
been leached out, whatever the source.

If it was on the surface, yes. But there is a lot of salt underneath
Cheshire, that has not leached in millions of years.

Probably only in places where the geological structure is such as to protect
it from mobile ground water.

I could very
easily believe that many such deposits are mixtures of sand and salt,
and that there are places where salty sand is an accessible mineral
(and not near a current seashore).


Franz

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

I don't think sand at that depth would remain in free granular form, but
would be sandstone by now.

Not necessarily. To create sandstone, the pressure and temperature
has to be high enough to liquify something to glue the grains
together.

Pressure maybe, but a lot of sandstone is 'cemented' with precipitated lime.

That salt in Cheshire has been there for a very long time, isn't very
close to the surface, and is, IIRC, sandwiched between two impervious
layers of rock.

Yes.

So much sand lies at the surface that no-one is going to mine the stuff,
anyway.

I was thinking of the (fairly common) circumstance where something
else (like salt) is mined, and the sand is a waste product.

I can't think of anywhere where salt is mined mixed with sand - though
I'm not saying it doesn't happen. The salt in Cheshire is more-or-less
rock, and riddled with tunnels and galleries. I've always meant to visit
the salt museum when I've been in Northwich: I shall one day - my
brother and his family live near there. (And there's lots of surface
sand there too - his village is Sandiway.)

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

If it was on the surface, yes. But there is a lot of salt underneath
Cheshire, that has not leached in millions of years. I could very
easily believe that many such deposits are mixtures of sand and salt,
and that there are places where salty sand is an accessible mineral
(and not near a current seashore).

I'll have to go salt prospecting next time I go to Wortham Ling. (About
ten miles away) According to my uncle, who had (probably) the oldest
house in Suffolk on the Ling, that was shore in Roman times, navigable
to there by longboats in the Viking era, though now the nearby River
Waveney isn't tidal to anywhere near there.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:04:35 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


But I must admit, I've never licked it so can't say.
Simon Avery, Dartmoor, UK Ý http://www.digdilem.org/

try putting some sand in a container and adding water. Stir. Leave to
settle.
Taste water ?

Urine from small furry mammals?

Oh you dirty beast :-)
--
Martin

(Nick Maclaren) wrote:

Hello Nick

NM When laid down, sea sand would contain salt, but almost all
NM sources will have been washed clean. There is probably
NM salty sand in the UK, but it will not be sold unwashed by
NM respectable builders' merchants, as the salt interferes with
NM cement and other uses and salty sand does not meet the
NM relevant standards.

But that does assume you bought it from a builders' merchants.

Anyway, wondering way off topic now. OP's sand would've been washed
adequately by being left outside for three years.

--
Simon Avery, Dartmoor, UK Ý http://www.digdilem.org/

"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Not necessarily. To create sandstone, the pressure and temperature
has to be high enough to liquify something to glue the grains
together.

Not necessarily, if the groundwater is saturated with dissolved lime.

Franz

Andy Hunt wrote:

I have some builders' sand hanging around in my yard, and I was going to use
it for drainage in some new pots I've bought today.

My dad however has advised me not to, he says that this sand contains lots
of chemicals which won't do plants any good, because it is building sand.

The sand has been outside in the rain for at least 3 years - does anyone
know if my dad's correct about this, and if so, whether the rain would have
washed the sand clean by now?

Even if it is full of chemicals, if I just use it for an inch-thick layer of
drainage material at the bottom of each pot, would it be OK?

Thanks in anticipation!

Andrew


It is much better to use horticultural grit as it will not contain huge amounts
of lime. I don't think builders sand contains chemicals but you should be aware
of the ph (acidity) level of the sand. Some plants tolerate high lime level
whereas others will not.

The message
from green earth contains these words:

It is much better to use horticultural grit as it will not contain
huge amounts
of lime. I don't think builders sand contains chemicals but you
should be aware
of the ph (acidity) level of the sand. Some plants tolerate high lime
level
whereas others will not.

Most builders' sand is silica, and should have no pH value at all as it
is to all intents and purposes, insoluble.

I suppose there is a possibility of some sand from local non-commercial
sources containing limestone, and/or oxides of iron.

Some beach sands can't be relied on either: for instance, there is a
beach on Skye which is made up almost entirely of coral fragments.

Generally though, you can be pretty sure that sharp sand can be added to
any (rooting) medium without it altering the pH.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

[snip]

Not necessarily. To create sandstone, the pressure and temperature
has to be high enough to liquify something to glue the grains
together.

Not necessarily, if the groundwater is saturated with dissolved lime.

Planet creation for beginners. Slartibartfast would have been proud . . . as
long as the fijords get done properly.

;-)

Andrew
"Is it not written, ye are gods?" - Jesus Christ