Exactly how pure is Vector Butane?

[Mr. Bongjangles]

It is my understanding that MSDSs don't need to list components less than 1% if they are deemed not-harmful, and less than .1% if they are carcinogenic.

http://www.ilpi.com/msds/osha/1910_1200.html#1910.1200(g)(2)(i)(C)(2)

This may be why the MSDS for the non-recommended brands look nearly identical to the brands people prefer to use for BHO.

 

[ElRubio]

interesting inputs guys!

im runnin Collibri now due to availability reasons.

Buenas vibras todos!

 

[jd4083]

I've never really noticed a difference in quality between Vector, Colibri, and Lucienne but those are the only 3 I've had access to. I've used thousands of bottles of Vector at this point and the only reason I continue to do so is because of how cheap my case price is from a semi-local cigar shop. I still remember the BS story I made up the first time the guy casually inquired as to why I needed to buy 72 bottles of butane at once (something about buying nice Colibri lighters for all of the employees and needing to fill them up first...really bad excuse, actually ), now the guy just laughs when he sees me walk in and hands me a couple cases. I think that Vector knows exactly who they're marketing this to now, kinda funny to me.

This is a really interesting thread, I'm sticking around to read more for sure.

 

[superslvrhazbin]

BernzOmatic Butane:
http://www.bernzomatic.com/Portals/8...SDS-082010.pdf

Hazardous Components

N,Butane, volume (CAS #106-97-8) 22%
Isobutane, volume (CAS #75-28-5) 78%

doperoor so your saying theres additives within these percentages? have you used bernz before?

 

[dope_roor]

BernzOmatic Butane:
http://www.bernzomatic.com/Portals/8...SDS-082010.pdf

Hazardous Components

N,Butane, volume (CAS #106-97-8) 22%
Isobutane, volume (CAS #75-28-5) 78%

doperoor so your saying theres additives within these percentages? have you used bernz before?

I never used it because of the strong odor I could immediately smell when refilling my hand torch.

Unfortunately MSDS does not reveal some of the unwanted compounds that we seek to avoid. Considering the fact the intended application is gaseous whereas we liquefy and concentrate via pressurization and evaporation, minuscule amounts that may initially be of no concern may be of extra importance to us

 

[Guest3498]

II think that Vector knows exactly who they're marketing this to now, kinda funny to me.

Oh for sure! Gotta love the tye dye cans

 

[dontstepongrass]

dangers of bho...

dangers of bho...

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2011/02/butane_hash_dangers_edibles.php

 

[vta]

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2011/02/butane_hash_dangers_edibles.php

Wow your still at it!

That article is pure BS....driven by greedy scum of the MMJ movement...either that or just stupid. I like how she says 'butane' it's self is what makes you get more high when smoking BHO. I understand this chick is pushing for a BHO ban in CO. That's good...make patients into criminals for using something that works. She even admits she doesn't know the dangers...just blowing smoke...sound familiar?


You talk your smack like you know what your talking about but what your really doing is spreading misinformation. That that is not good my friend. BHO is NON-TOXIC safe as safe can be. Why do you think it is used in the food industry to extract vital oils and flavors from food sources? Or as an aerosol propellant for health care products that contact the skin. Because it is safe! So tell me...do you know anything about hydrocarbons? Did you take chemistry? It's pretty simple really....mostly common sense. Hydrocarbons are the simplest of organic compounds, composed of only carbon and hydrogen. Butane has a boiling point of only 31..poof it's gone!

I only use high quality butane.

So...in recap...Fully purged BHO is Safe, Non-Toxic and Organic!

 

[BudGood]

Yes! Thank you VTA! The troll can crawl back under his bridge now.

 

[Guest3498]

Wow your still at it!

That article is pure BS....driven by greedy scum of the MMJ movement...either that or just stupid. I like how she says 'butane' it's self is what makes you get more high when smoking BHO. I understand this chick is pushing for a BHO ban in CO. That's good...make patients into criminals for using something that works. She even admits she doesn't know the dangers...just blowing smoke...sound familiar?


You talk your smack like you know what your talking about but what your really doing is spreading misinformation. That that is not good my friend. BHO is NON-TOXIC safe as safe can be. Why do you think it is used in the food industry to extract vital oils and flavors from food sources? Or as an aerosol propellant for health care products that contact the skin. Because it is safe! So tell me...do you know anything about hydrocarbons? Did you take chemistry? It's pretty simple really....mostly common sense. Hydrocarbons are the simplest of organic compounds, composed of only carbon and hydrogen. Butane has a boiling point of only 31..poof it's gone!

I only use high quality butane.

So...in recap...Fully purged BHO is Safe, Non-Toxic and Organic!

*waits for obligatory non-answer from bob ross*

 

[BudGood]

 

[Mr. Bongjangles]

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=h...20Data%20Sheets%20SDS/Commercial%20Butane.pdf

This is the MSDS for one company's food grade butane.

Quality with <0.1% 1,3-butadiene

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,3-Butadiene

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=458&tid=81

I suspect this Butadiene is one of the chemicals present in commercial butane, albeit in small amounts. It is a byproduct of butane refining. North American MSDS sheets would not need to mention it because they are not required to list carcinogens under .1% as I cited in my last post, but the European one linked above takes care to mention there is less than .1% of Butadiene, indicating there is some small amount rather than zero.

"The presence of residual 1,3-butadiene in butane and isobutane containing products is not due to intentional addition of 1,3-butadiene."(source)

"If butadiene is discharged to water, it will react in water, and some will also evaporate into air." (link)

Yeah, sounds like this stuff doesn't fully evaporate either, though I grant they didn't test anything that really approximates the BHO process.

This is exactly the kinda thing that concerns me about butane extracts. Clearly the MSDS is not the full info, as the MSDSs for shitty brands everyone agrees are disgusting look identical to the MSDSs of the good brands, and even food grade "100%" butane has some amount of carcinogenic byproducts of the refinement process.

Fully purged BHO is Safe, Non-Toxic and Organic!

What test results confirm this statement? In my opinion we need to see GC/MS tests on properly made BHO with multiple brands of butane before such an assertion can be simply stated as fact.

Why do you think it is used in the food industry to extract vital oils and flavors from food sources?

When used in the food industry, the end products are not imbibed in pure form. Some flavoring oil added to a Tastykake will be so diluted as to not pose a potential risk. Can you say the same for a concentrated extract that is repeatedly inhaled into the lungs, potentially for years?

In Canada, butane is only approved for food use in pan coating sprays and they are well aware of the butadiene content & associated risk - they operate under the less than .1% assumption, and know that when sprayed onto a heated pan that most will evaporate - unlike when it is discharged into a substance.

To each their own and all - I'm definitely not as militant about this topic as some of our peers, but for me there are too many question marks to mess with BHO when it is so easy to make potent natural extracts.

 

[vapeman24]

BernzOmatic Butane:
http://www.bernzomatic.com/Portals/8...SDS-082010.pdf

Hazardous Components

N,Butane, volume (CAS #106-97-8) 22%
Isobutane, volume (CAS #75-28-5) 78%

doperoor so your saying theres additives within these percentages? have you used bernz before?

Once you know the difference between n-butane and iso-butane you will understand why it isn't used.

http://zenstoves.net/MSDS/isobutane.pdf
http://resource.invensys.com/instrumentation/msds/pdf/msds_016_d.pdf

 

[BudGood]

Whatever. I'm not gonna worry about a percent of a percent, got bigger shit to worry about IMO...nothing else medicates me the way BHO does, be it dry sift, bubble, qwiso... To each their own.

 

[McSnappler]

.

 

[dontstepongrass]

Whatever. I'm not gonna worry about a percent of a percent

yea, u and alot of other people....

LOL

it's cool, it's YOUR health

 

[Gray Wolf]

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=h...20Data%20Sheets%20SDS/Commercial%20Butane.pdf

This is the MSDS for one company's food grade butane.

Quality with <0.1% 1,3-butadiene

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,3-Butadiene

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=458&tid=81

I suspect this Butadiene is one of the chemicals present in commercial butane, albeit in small amounts. It is a byproduct of butane refining. North American MSDS sheets would not need to mention it because they are not required to list carcinogens under .1% as I cited in my last post, but the European one linked above takes care to mention there is less than .1% of Butadiene, indicating there is some small amount rather than zero.

"The presence of residual 1,3-butadiene in butane and isobutane containing products is not due to intentional addition of 1,3-butadiene."(source)

"If butadiene is discharged to water, it will react in water, and some will also evaporate into air." (link)

Yeah, sounds like this stuff doesn't fully evaporate either, though I grant they didn't test anything that really approximates the BHO process.

This is exactly the kinda thing that concerns me about butane extracts. Clearly the MSDS is not the full info, as the MSDSs for shitty brands everyone agrees are disgusting look identical to the MSDSs of the good brands, and even food grade "100%" butane has some amount of carcinogenic byproducts of the refinement process.


What test results confirm this statement? In my opinion we need to see GC/MS tests on properly made BHO with multiple brands of butane before such an assertion can be simply stated as fact.



When used in the food industry, the end products are not imbibed in pure form. Some flavoring oil added to a Tastykake will be so diluted as to not pose a potential risk. Can you say the same for a concentrated extract that is repeatedly inhaled into the lungs, potentially for years?

In Canada, butane is only approved for food use in pan coating sprays and they are well aware of the butadiene content & associated risk - they operate under the less than .1% assumption, and know that when sprayed onto a heated pan that most will evaporate - unlike when it is discharged into a substance.

To each their own and all - I'm definitely not as militant about this topic as some of our peers, but for me there are too many question marks to mess with BHO when it is so easy to make potent natural extracts.

Thanks brother BJ for sharing the details of your concern! Though we may not agree on interpretation, I share some of your concerns on the subject!

May I address your supporting data from a different perspective?

Before doing so, as committed on a similar thread, given how controversial the subject, I agree that empirical tests needed to dispel any myths, one way or the other. I have therefore added Butadiene to the list of things to test for, but only on our own oil samples.

A few thoughts in the interim! As noted by the philosophers, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

You are correct that substances that present no known health hazard and are less than 1%, are not required to be listed on an MSDS.

There is however a Catch 22. Per 1910.1200(g)(2)(i)(C)(2), If a substance has been determined to be a carcinogen and comprise less than .1%, they do not need to be listed either, unless there is evidence that the ingredients could be released from the mixture in concentrations that would exceed an established OSHA permissible exposure limit or ACGIH Threshold Limit Value, or could present a health risk to employees.

All chemical substances in the workplace require a MSDS, and the Threshold Limit Value for breathing 1-3-Butadiene is Total Weighted Average of 2ppm, for an 8 hour exposure.

One divided by a million, times two (2ppm), is .000002, or .0002%.

A MSDS showing that a contaminant is less than <N, does not mean that the product ever has any in it. If the content is zero, they will still report it as <N.

In the US at least 1-3 Butadiene is not a byproduct of making butane, though butane or other light alkanes may be used as a feed stock

It is an alkene, with four carbons and six hydrogen atoms , rather than Butanes as an alkane with four carbons and 10 hydrogen atoms, and has a boiling point of -4.5C, as compared to N-Butanes boiling point of -0.5C. It would boil off first in fractional distillation or evaporation .

Methane, Ethane, Propane, and Butane are all produced by fractional distillation of raw crude oil and 1-3-Butadiene is a byproduct of producing ethylene and propylene by the steam cracking process.

The world demand for 1-3 Butadiene is high due to the demand for automobile tires.

Despite that high demand, a review of Refinery/Field Grade Butane standards reveals that it doesn't even list trace 1-3 Butadiene as a component. Instead a GC shows only slightly lighter and heavier alkanes:

Propane 0 to 1%
Isobutane 0 to 5%
N-Butane 90 to 99%
Isopentane 0 to 3%
N-Pentane 0 to 1%

Exactly what you might expect from fractional distillation?

Contamination in raw butane feed stock, is shown by gas chromatograph to be sulfur compounds typically in the .06 to 2.70ppm range, with odor thresholds less than 1ppm which, makes them hard to miss if you can still smell.

Dimethyl sulfide for instance is a major player and has an odor threshold between .02 and .1 ppm , and a TLV of 10ppm. It is also produced by cooking cabbage, beets, asparagus, corn, and some sea foods.

It also has Methyl ethyl sulfide, and Diethyl sulfide, all of which are listed as "practically" non toxic, with Rat LD-50's ranging from 3700 to 5000mg/kg.

These sulfides are removed using reactive bed catalysts and if they are not removed to below .02 ppm, will produce a strong odor.

The parts per millionth issue is one of the primary places that I have come to believe common reality is lost between the two sides of this question.

A substance is rated as a carcinogen, not because it causes cancer, but because it has the potential above some Threshold Limit Value. OSHA does its best to protect workers by establishing TLV below levels of health concerns. That is their only justification for existence!

Lets look at how the numbers stack up here. If a carcinogen is actually present at .1% of a mixture of butane, and the butane is then evaporated away to parts per millionth, the carcinogen is similarly reduced by the same proportions, if not greater because of its lower boiling point.

One divided by a million (ppm), times .1% is .0000001 starting concentration or 100,000 ppm. If the butane was then evaporated to even 100 ppm, and we ignore the lower boiling point and faster evaporation rate of the 1-3-Butadiene, the 1-3-Butadiene level would then be .001%

The Canadian report that you referenced, stated that the inclusion of Butadiene, "May not be on purpose", but failed to quantify how common finding it was and how much was found.

After the conference, their level of concern seems to be to do nothing other than just keep an eye on the issue.

What can I say? Both life and excitement (within my own personal safety comfort zone) have their balance for me personally. That doesn't mean that I am oblivious to possible concerns, only that I have put them into my own personal by the numbers perspective.

I'll let the test numbers speak for themselves and will pass them on as they are available.

Thank Gawd (Great Spirit) also for different tastes and the right of choice! Without it, us male childs would have long ago killed each other off, over the same woman.

 

[BudGood]

I can see how my last response can be misconstrued as being obstinate, hard to tell tone and inflection on the net. All I'm saying is, if there is a small amount of butadiene in the finished oil, which I doubt, it's not enough of a concern for me to stop vaping BHO. I enjoy the flavor, the heavy medication, and the lack of combustion, which leaves me feeling healthier overall. I feel loads better than I did when I was smoking blunts bowls and joints all day, haven't coughed up nasty crap in a long time too. I'm sure I've been exposed to much nastier stuff, in much higher concentrations...

Grey Wolf puts it in good perspective, that was a great post. K+

 

[Gray Wolf]

One small additional tidbit of information on the subject of 1-3-Butadiene in N-Butane.

I was finally able to make contact with the technical department of one of the largest US specialty gas suppliers and asked how much 1-3-Butadiene shows up on any of their GC analysis of any and all grades of their incoming N-Butane.

The answer is that none has yet been detected at 1 ppm resolution, nor would it typically be found in N-Butane.

The contamination they find at those levels are things like Ethane, Propane, Iso-Butane, Pentane, and Iso-Pentane as well as sulfur compounds.

I am still working on finding a petroleum engineer to see if more light can be shed on how 1-3=Butadiene might find its way into N-Butane.

More when I get luckier.

 

[sunset limited]

anyone doing side by sides for solvent residual analysis?
that is, same raw material, same technique, different gases.
say lucienne vs power 5 vs power 7.
i'd be curious to see if one or another was more prone to sticking around after the purge.
my guess is that newport and vector aren't really worth the extra money.
at least not for our purposes.