When to use sharp sand and when to use "soft" sand?

Glass really wasn't worth recycling at all until the landfill tax came in. If you have to start your car engine in order to participate in glass recycling, then it's almost certainly still not worth it. "Driving to the bottle bank" is an expression which is sometimes used to refer to pointless recycling. People are looking around for uses for coloured glass, and new road surfaces is something they are being used on, but I think that's still experimental. Manufacturing and using less coloured glass in the first place is probably a better bet, but people seem to like trying to solve problems at the wrong end of the supply chain.

Paper is another questionable one. The cost (in particular the energy use) of processing recycled paper often exceededs the cost of creating new paper. It has always seemed to me that paper should be buried in landfill as this is exactly the reverse process of burning fossil fuels, i.e. it's taking CO2 out of the atmosphere and burying it back underground. Actually, planting fast growing plants, harvesting them, and burying them down old coal mines could be quite a good thing to do from this perspective.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel
Loading thread data ...

I'll not disagree but given the "need" to avoid landfill and ongoing quarrying/dredging for sand it just struck me as a possible use without too much recycling cost.

I'll agree this with the possible exception of glossy papers which have lots of china clay in them, I wonder if this filler can be washed out and reclaimed?

This is a bit of my hobby horse because use of recycled fiber impacted on my erstwhile trade. In the 70s we harvested the portion of the crop that was "pulpwood" at a profit. As GATT and recycling bit we needed to cross subsidise harvesting this with the better grades, now with mechanised harvesting a lot gets left in the wood.

I disagree about burying it though, if anaerobic conditions occur biogas is given off and this has implications for damaging the ozone layer as well as being a worse climate changing gas than the CO2 that would be generated by burning it.

Now if you consider pyrolysing it to >85% fixed carbon and then burying it.....

I also cannot see the benefit in recycling simple (non halogenated) plastics over burning them for power, more a topic for the environment newsgroups though.

AJH

Reply to
sylva

I like the idea of it. Perhaps we could go onto lots of wbesites and request catalogues to be sent to 'shaft 6, The Old Tin Mine, Trefryw, S Wales'

;-)

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Totally agree.

And as far as landfill sites - or their lack - goes - why not use glass banks to shore up the east coast, bits of which keep falling into the sea...?

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

And when the soil has been denuded of all nutrients, what then? Or local water courses are polluted from nitrate run off due to fertilising said crops?

Seems like a paticularly stupid idea to me.

MBQ

Reply to
manatbandq

Eh? either he nitrate has gone into teh plantst or it hasn't. If its gone in it won't be in the water.

Its perfectly possible to grow willows with very little nitrate. Or ghrow a crop of field beans one yaer and then plant the willow.

Yes, but its YOUR idea not his.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

replying to biff, chris wrote: silica sand is glass, used for ashlar . sharp sand contains glass but a not as much. 3:1 ratio is okay for walls and low level renders/pointing. exposed areas need something stronger. 2.2:1 lime to sand ( add a tiny wee bit cement to the mix ) any st astiars nhl (except 5) will work greatly. you can buy pre mix 25 kg for £12.50. fine sand or coarse ( fine for pointing/rendering less than 5mm) . just add water. adhesion is exceptional and it sets very quickly. its bombproof!!! otherwise general building ...... sharp, sand, tradiblanc nhl (35 kg) but be aware, tradi sets very light so use a dark sand or add pigment and defiantly carry out a wee trial.patch

Reply to
chris

replying to sylva, chris wrote: the limes the binder not the glass

Reply to
chris

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.