CO2 Wax

[purple_man]

thx hammalamma...

if that stuff were 93% thc it would have to be a clear or mildly semi-clear liquid... all that gooey stuff implies a high ammount of waxes me thinks??? still would love to sample it no matter what kind of % it holds (as long it is done via co2 extraction for realz)

blessss

 

[RuralRoute420]

clarification

clarification

what you see in the pics are not the batches that tested at 93% at sclabs. these pics probably test in the 70-80% range, we simply aren't taking the time to test them all. with only 2lbs of flower or trim being loaded into extractor on each run, there are a lot of runs. it is what it is guys, amazing. if you are in the socal region and have proper id & rec like i do then let's talk.

 

[kmk420kali]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but technically ANY extraction is illegal to make in cali, as per California Health and Safety Code Section 11379.6

11379.6. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, every person who
manufactures, compounds, converts, produces, derives, processes, or
prepares, either directly or indirectly by chemical extraction or
independently by means of chemical synthesis, any controlled
substance specified in Section 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057, or 11058
shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of
Section 1170 of the Penal Code for three, five, or seven years and by
a fine not exceeding fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).


http://law.onecle.com/california/health/11379.6.html

CO2 shouldn't be an exception. I think it has to do more with the stigma the bho has associated with it, people blowing up garages and apartments and whatnot...

The line, "(a) Except as otherwise provided by law,", is the sticker here--
Prop. 215 explicitly covers marijuana possession and cultivation (Health and Safety Code Sections 11357 and 11358) for personal medical use. Hashish and concentrated cannabis, including edibles, (HSC 11357a) are also included.
BHO is only illegal to make...not to possess-- And that is only because of the danger in making it--
(Keep in mind, this is only for 215 Patients--)

 

[Momerath]

ACTUALLY...

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/a-little-dab-could-doom-ya/Content?oid=3518696

"It was legal to make butane hash oil in California for medical purposes until a 2008 case known as The People v. Bergen, said Schultz's attorney, William J. Panzer of Oakland. Before Bergen, prosecutors could charge butane hash oil producers — or "blasters" in industry slang — with operating a "drug lab" under section 11379.6 of the California Health and Safety Code. But defense attorneys could make a motion that blasters should be charged under the more specific "marijuana processing" statute listed in section 11358 of the California code.

Under 11358, qualified medical marijuana blasters who got caught could walk. "I always won that motion," said Panzer.

But in Bergen, the court ruled that the "drug lab" statute — which was created to address PCP and methamphetamine labs — trumped the "marijuana processing" statute. So since 2008, qualified medical cannabis blasters have been going to state prison for up to seven years per charge for making hash with butane."

Just because they haven't been busting blasters and hash makers left and right, doesn't mean they can't.

Just ask Ryan Schultz!

http://www.leagle.com/decision/In CACO 20130520002

"...Defendant further argues Bergen's conclusion should be rejected because it would preclude the assertion of a medical use defense to the manufacture of THC using chemicals and "the baking of medically infused brownies." By its terms, the medical use defense applies only to violations of sections 11357 and 11358, providing a "limited immunity" from prosecution for cultivation and use of marijuana. (§ 11362.5, subd. (d); People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 469-470.) Because defendant cites no legal authority suggesting a medical use defense was intended for all activities involving marijuana, we find no legal basis for disagreeing with Bergen's holding on this ground.4 As discussed, section 11379.6 is an exception to section 11358, and this exception may include the denial of a defense otherwise available if the offense had been charged under section 11358.5 (See Bergen, supra, 166 Cal.App.4th at p. 172, fn. 6.)..."

"...Contrary to defendant's claim, nothing in the legislative history suggests "the Legislature's intent that § 11379.6 would not apply to the manufacture of hash oil, concentrated cannabis, or any type of marijuana." Defendant's argument is based on the failure of the legislative history specifically to mention marijuana derivatives. In determining legislative intent, however, we reach extrinsic sources such as legislative history only if the plain language of the statute is ambiguous. (Lopez v. Superior Court, supra, 50 Cal.4th at p. 1063.) Given the clear reference in section 11379.6 to the statutes governing schedule I controlled substances and the similarly unambiguous inclusion of marijuana in schedule I, broadly defined by section 11018, the fact that the legislative history does not specifically refer to marijuana or its derivatives is irrelevant to the interpretation of the statute in this regard...."

 

[Momerath]

Possession isn't the issue here, we know we can have any kind of concentrate with our Rec. I was merely pointing out that PRODUCING said concentrates is illegal under sec 11379.6

 

[Green Supreme]

Rural, I'll take some of the free cannabis you are advertising in your avatar. LOL. Peace GS

 

[theJointedOne]

interesting stuff,

id love to hear more. and a pic of the extraction process would be nice too, imho

thanks for sharing all

 

[kmk420kali]

Possession isn't the issue here, we know we can have any kind of concentrate with our Rec. I was merely pointing out that PRODUCING said concentrates is illegal under sec 11379.6

I mis-read...you are correct sir(or Ma'am)--

 

[TheCleanGame]

i believe this stuff to be the direction that weed is headed, medically, super concentrates. we've had batches test at nearly 93%...

I'm actually of the mind it'll head the other way. Eventually being a solventless community.

Once cannabis becomes mainstream you'll see a ground swell movement for more 'natural' processing of cannabis like bubblehash.

Then again... we do live in a chemical mind-set society. *sigh*

Gotta admit though... lotsa fun working with cannabinoids without all that extra plant matter in the way.

Keep it Clean!

 

[mingmen]

I'm actually of the mind it'll head the other way. Eventually being a solventless community.

Once cannabis becomes mainstream you'll see a ground swell movement for more 'natural' processing of cannabis like bubblehash.

Then again... we do live in a chemical mind-set society. *sigh*

Gotta admit though... lotsa fun working with cannabinoids without all that extra plant matter in the way.

Keep it Clean!

I think CO2 is the way. Taste is way better in bho but hopefully that will change. Interesting what we might get once there is some above-board quality control.
Tried the Organalabs co2 oil and taste is pretty bad. I still prefer it to PureGold but it is different.
Nobody else has tried this syringle oil? C'mon. I can't tell how good it is. What pen would you put it in? Or rather who has used this successfully in a pen and what did you use? lol
It ran right through an omicron. Gentleman's nano I will try next. Seems to work decent in a sapphire cart.
I want something that I can vape all day and not have to reload. Any other suggestions? These tincture threads look interesting but way too labor intensive.
Anybody selling something good to load in a pen? I don't trust these preloaded ones I see in the dispensaries. Saw an unbranded one in a dispensary I trust at $95 for supposedly a gram and a half of hash (whatever that means). A little pricey to just try. The o-pen is trash tasting so I am looking for suggestions other than that.

 

[lloyd_christmas]

How come all the co2 hash I've seen is dark and not as tasty as bho? Not saying good co2 isn't out there, I've just yet to run into it. Can anyone explain why butane carries terps so much better? Genuinely curious.

 

[Gray Wolf]

CO2 does a better job of extracting the lighter mono and sesquiterpenes at sub critical pressures, but doesn't do a good job on the diterpene cannabinoids.

Raising the pressure to get a decent yield on the diterpenes, also brings along more wax and starts to extract the chlorophyll.

A number of clever folks working on that issue, so I predict you will start to see significant inroads, and it may involve a dual extraction, recombining them at the end.

 

[villain420247]

Has anyone seen his instructional? Curious if there are any gems in that tutorial...


FE

I have. There are not.

 

[CaliGabe]

A number of clever folks working on that issue, so I predict you will start to see significant inroads, and it may involve a dual extraction, recombining them at the end.

I'm helping a friend look at getting some CO2 equipment and researching a lot. He has some backers that want to set up a small facility. Based on what I've learned so far, which is minimal, I'd say you're absolutely right.

 

[Breakover]

Seems to me CO2 extracts taste bad due to the fact that the material is decarbed before extraction. In my experience, it tastes just like decarbed oil.

The reason for this is two fold, IME

1. Decarbed cannabinoids are possibly easier to extract with CO2.
2. Decarbing super dries the material so when sub/supercritical CO2 hits the plant matter, it doesn't form a hydrate, which is essentially an ice plug. Hydrates can be merely annoying to dangerous, depending on the circumstances.

Still seems an awful long way to go, at great expense, for what is IMO, inferior product.

 

[theJointedOne]

ive been puffin some co2 sap from a place in Sac. The smell an taste are divine, but the stuff is very hard to handle, and i feel like i waste a lot of it when its in a jewel dish rather than when it comes in a syringe, which is the best way imo.

One thing that sucks about buying concentrates is you don't know the starting material and if those growers used anything that would compromise the safety of the product.

That's why i don't puff hash i buy often.

 

[CaliGabe]

Seems to me CO2 extracts taste bad due to the fact that the material is decarbed before extraction. In my experience, it tastes just like decarbed oil.

The reason for this is two fold, IME

1. Decarbed cannabinoids are possibly easier to extract with CO2.
2. Decarbing super dries the material so when sub/supercritical CO2 hits the plant matter, it doesn't form a hydrate, which is essentially an ice plug. Hydrates can be merely annoying to dangerous, depending on the circumstances.

Still seems an awful long way to go, at great expense, for what is IMO, inferior product.

First I've heard of processors decarbing the material before extraction. If decarbed then only makes sense to eat the concentrate. Would be good for capsules, tinctures, and stuff. If decarbed you can do something like a simple alcohol extract like Cannamist per the VICS recipe.

Biggest knock I've heard is the material is more bland than something like BHO. I've never tried BHO as I'm not interested in anything that's extracted with petrochemicals.

As for your #2 maybe you could use a vacuum oven on low temp instead of decarbing. I haven't talked to Eden or Apeks yet as I want to do a bit more research.

Honestly if cannabis ever is decriminalized I'd like to experiment with steam distillation for the essential oils. I'd need a LOT of plants to make it commercially viable.