Colibri MSDS

[NotGuilty]

Would the vapor pressure of propane blow out the vessel even in an atmospheric temprature of -18C, what if like atmospheric pressure was changed via a second vessel wrapped around the first?

 

[clide2.0]

Terpene bubbles are the bubbles in your oil. Enjoy debate in a vacuum.

 

[NotGuilty]

Do you know of any good websites that have problems i can work with or learn the steps to these calculations? I found one good one at Carnagie Univ. online, however it's mostly questions and not a lot of explanation as tow how to solve them. I enjoyed it though.

 

[NotGuilty]

Kool, so then are Larger solvents geared toward largel molecules? per say.

?The long carbon chain of THC is better picked up by the larger butane than the smaller propane? I suppose one can't really say one solvent is less of a solvent, just geared towards a different purpose.

The above is a little worrisome, yes! Was it just an article on Hydrocarbon GC?

Synthetic Butane.... I just don't see it happening for a long time. That would change everything...

 

[NotGuilty]

lol Thats cold. however VERY obtainable here. (16 psig) for propane @ ~ (24)C.

I'm in the same regions i guess.

 

[NotGuilty]

A poster in another thread claims to have had success with filtering out mercaptans through active carbon. Seems too simple.... Why couldn't the GC guys Filter out the unknown sulfur compound? Can you link me to the article?

 

[NotGuilty]

Yeah, I suppose a multi chambered extraction vessel could help this method. butane>carbon>filter>organics. But up goes the $.

Would you consider colibri dirty enough? I would think yes, If the H2S is around 500 PPM as was suggested.

How about using propane at like 20 psig? would the added pressure compensate for lack of solvent power?

I really appreciate your time here.

 

[NotGuilty]

So can u say Vector is S reduced compared to Colibri?

 

[Hashmasta-Kut]

clide seems to have his shit together, although most abrasive. lucky to have actually lasted this long here, they arent super tolerant of rude insults with swear words or other types of degrading terminology included.

i know the smell of sulfur, and have always been sensitive to it, and hate it more than almost any odor, except patchouli. i burn sulfur to fight PM, and i certainly know what it smells like, just used it today actually. i cannot detect an odor of sulfur from colibri, or mercaptans.

 

[Stond_Face]

Clide2.0 has his shit together, clide is an ignorant piece of shit. How do you manage to last as long as you have at Jokecity given that the Ninja isn't tolerant of people who know more about oil than him?....

Although it seems to have its lucid moments, I would NOT like to be the owner of this brain. Must be a difficult job indeed!

 

[NotaProfessor]

Way back in the thread Clide said this:
"You'll note that while a mole percentage of 0.0005% may seem low that it's 500 PPM of delicious sulfur."

1% is 10,000ppm. So 0.0005% is 5 ppm, not 500 ppm like you had mis-stated.

Even if there were appreciable amounts of methyl and ethyl mercaptans in whatever brand of butane, they would be voltilized off when heating the oil to drive off the remaining butane. Vapor pressure of methyl mercaptan is > 1atm at 20C, ethyl mercaptan is ~450mmHg (0.56atm) at 20C. These would be out only slightly less faster than the butane itself.

Much ado about nothing, IMHO.

 

[NotGuilty]

Thanks for returning HMK! I'm thankful to both you and Clide, for your inputs and answering my questions. Wouldn't it be kool if we could all just work in the lab together and figure it all out while smoking together?

I guess the fact that we were able to overcome our rocky start, and actually document some information, has kept Mods at bay.

One thing I have often wondered about is the SLIGHT presence of Possible Mercury in starting material. Ponder this... Joe Stupid breaks a few bulbs or two releasing mercury into his Room. He cleans it up as best he can. A week later he does all his trimming on the same porous concrete floor. Sweeps up all the clippings, and in cluded is a very low level of mercury. Not really Impossible of a situation.
Now, with this mercury acting as a catalyst during extraction, what kind of harmful goodies would be created?


I'm gonna go look for some Butane CoA's right now..... Let's see what we can dig up!

 

[NotGuilty]

NotaProf., What can you attest as to the sulfurous compounds possibly going through chemical changes during extraction?


What about the H2S while being heated forming H2SO4! It could possibly isomerize the inactive cannabinoids? On a small scale mind you, but this would be beneficial i think... what catalyst is needed here? water And o2 only? like when i have steaming water surronding my bowl?

Would my NiChrome alloy stove element or a Ti pad act as a catalyst for Anything? Anything being OIL/SOLVENTS/MERCAPTANS.

 

[Hashmasta-Kut]

Way back in the thread Clide said this:
"You'll note that while a mole percentage of 0.0005% may seem low that it's 500 PPM of delicious sulfur."

1% is 10,000ppm. So 0.0005% is 5 ppm, not 500 ppm like you had mis-stated.

Even if there were appreciable amounts of methyl and ethyl mercaptans in whatever brand of butane, they would be voltilized off when heating the oil to drive off the remaining butane. Vapor pressure of methyl mercaptan is > 1atm at 20C, ethyl mercaptan is ~450mmHg (0.56atm) at 20C. These would be out only slightly less faster than the butane itself.

Much ado about nothing, IMHO.

i thought he must be off by a decimal or two, i hope you are right instead maybe i'll do the simple math for myself even.

 

[NotGuilty]

1 PPM is 1/1,000,000 = 0.000001 which would be 0.0001%

So you would divide by 10,000

10 ppm = 10/10000 = 0.001%


Correct! 5ppm is .0005%



On the lighter side of things, one link mentions...... INGESTION: If a large amount is swallowed, get medical attention. HOLY CRAP! that person would explode from the liquid/gas transformation! What a thought

 

[NotaProfessor]

NotaProf., What can you attest as to the sulfurous compounds possibly going through chemical changes during extraction?

What about the H2S while being heated forming H2SO4! It could possibly isomerize the inactive cannabinoids? On a small scale mind you, but this would be beneficial i think... what catalyst is needed here? water And o2 only? like when i have steaming water surronding my bowl?

Would my NiChrome alloy stove element or a Ti pad act as a catalyst for Anything? Anything being OIL/SOLVENTS/MERCAPTANS.

Changes during extraction: You mean while the whole tube is well below 0C? No.

H2S is dang volatile also. It would need to be solubilized then oxidized. Butane extraction doesn't draw out water, so solubilization is not possible. Even if there was usable water, you're not gonna oxidize that while driving off excess butane. (FYI, cannabinoid isomerization just needs the H+ ion and some temperature.)

As for your final question, no, nichrome or Ti does not catalyze any reaction with butane, cannabis extractives, and ppm levels of mercaptans.

 

[Hashmasta-Kut]

but appearances are deceiving, regardless of the bubble content. its possible to scrape oil and have little to 0 bubbles present in the end product, yet its also possible to scrape the same oil at the same purge level and have it full of bubbles in the end product, just by scraping it warmer. i dont insist on calling bubbles terpenes. i know they are, when they are. i also know which bubbles arent terpenes. there is a simple test that can be done to completely over-purged oil(oil that will not produces bubbles even under continual heat) that shows the proof that the small bubbles are terpenes.

 

[wordtree]

I would like to take a step back from this analysis and pose a newly framed question.
With all these concerns of purity and sulfur/sulfur compounds in regards to BHO, can we still agree that concentrated cannabis is still worlds 'cleaner' than smoking cannabis, or even vaporizing plant material (of course this has to be posed in a relative sense, as in smoking properly purged BHO vs smoking plant matter and vaping BHO vs vaping plant matter)? I am thinking that smoking with a common lighter (of course these come in grades based on what gas is in them, if there is a flint present, the ignition precision, etc) is a fair bit more concerning, if you really want to even get this far in so called 'harm reduction'.
What do you think is the cleanest or healthiest or most wholesome, whatever you want to call it method, of consuming cannabis? I don't suppose you eat it all the time? Even then, BHO gets my vote for use.
just trying to be practical about this discussion...

 

[jump117]

... i dont insist on calling bubbles terpenes. i know they are, when they are. i also know which bubbles arent terpenes. there is a simple test that can be done to completely over-purged oil(oil that will not produces bubbles even under continual heat) that shows the proof that the small bubbles are terpenes.

Hi Hashmasta-Kut,
When some bubbles are not flameable it doesn't mean they consist of evaporated terpens.
BHO-process temp isn't hot enough for evaporation of terpens, which volatilize around the same temperature as THC.
When and why could terpens evaporate into bubbles?

 

[NotaProfessor]

I would like to take a step further back and ask you if you think pyrolizing weed or butane lighter fuel in order to smoke weed is the same as vaporizing or boiling or cracking thiols. I would like to ask if you have tasted improperly purged oil side by side, smoked and vaporized, off properly seasoned titanium. I would then like to point out that no sulfur taste is noticable when fire is involved but ultra detectable when vaping. I will also point out that hydrogen sulfide, methanethiol, and ethanethiol have never been detected in any analyzed sample of cannabis that has been published since the 1850's. If you can find one before or since that shows it has then your argument is valid since BHO does not add any external compounds. It does though, and such a publication detecting such compounds in a cannabis product will only exist when BHO is tested.

You're doing it wrong.
You're the one making the claims so the onus of proof falls onto you. So far you haven't made the case....at all. Nothing put forth by you has backed up your claims.

It would be nice if we all had an instrument that could detect sub-ppm levels of mercaptans. Portable and compact, we could whip it out whenever we needed to detect such compounds. One so cheap that all of us could own one.

But we do! There between your eyes and above your mouth: your nose. Go back to Clide's post where he gave a link to a document called "Odor perception and physiological response." In there it states that the recognition threshold for H2S is 0.0047ppm, methyl mercaptan is 0.0021ppm. (Detection threshold isn't so good cuz you can only say you smelled something. At the recognition threshold you can discern the actual compound, just like a GC-MS.)

Your premise is that butane puts those in your hash oil. That would mean that it is in the butane. Simply squirt a bit of butane into a paper bag and smell it. If it doesn't smell like rotten eggs or decayed cabbage then you can safely say that there are less than low ppm levels of H2S and methyl mercaptan.

I did it to my stuff (Ronson and some other "quadruple distilled" butane) and I got no smell.

Now anyone can test their butane to see if it's as full of sulfur compounds that Clide here thinks is there. If you don't smell it, it ain't there. It's as simple as that.

Nothing else to see folks....move along.

= = = = = =
I'd like to comment about Clide and what is going on in this thread. People come to boards like this for information, practical information that can help them with their hobby. Folks like Clide wanna get in a pissing contest about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or in this case whether butane has adulterants that can harsh your buzz. He wants to play dueling papers, where he argues about esoterica that has no real bearing on practical applications. People want answers, not a lot of condescension or haughty attitude.

Perhaps in future posts Clide will try to be more helpful.