How do the CO2 guys get injectable viscosity?

A coule of my buddies got cartridges of CO2 oil that are refillable with oil in syringes. I looked at the manufacturer's (pop naturals) website and they claim that it's pure extracted oil with no glycerin.

Is that the normal consistency of CO2 oil?

I tried their pens and they're pretty nice. Me and my buddies like the pens so we can puff on the go. Their cartridges are way easier and cleaner to deal with on the go. They're supposedly pure, so that takes away one of the selling points of my BHO.

I'd love to be able to get my stuff to that viscosity so I can sway my customers back...

Dewaxing. Also, some of them are decarbing to achieve viscosity change.

Highsenburg831 said:

A coule of my buddies got cartridges of CO2 oil that are refillable with oil in syringes. I looked at the manufacturer's (pop naturals) website and they claim that it's pure extracted oil with no glycerin.

Is that the normal consistency of CO2 oil?

I tried their pens and they're pretty nice. Me and my buddies like the pens so we can puff on the go. Their cartridges are way easier and cleaner to deal with on the go. They're supposedly pure, so that takes away one of the selling points of my BHO.

I'd love to be able to get my stuff to that viscosity so I can sway my customers back...

Click to expand...

Key words ..............

Digital Man said:

Key words ..............

Click to expand...

As a CO2 Processor I can tell you that some of us actually know what we're doing and you don't need additives for a quality product. Proper hardware and proper processing go a long way.

Thomas@LRL said:

As a CO2 Processor I can tell you that some of us actually know what we're doing and you don't need additives for a quality product. Proper hardware and proper processing go a long way.

Click to expand...

I met a guy once who had nice CO2 shatter/pull'nsnap that was really tasty. He said it wasn't dewaxed, but didn't give me much detail on what else would have made a difference in his process versus the standard process which produces the CO2 oil which goes into carts. I've been lead to believe that for most processors, there is generally copious dewaxing required for the cartridge oil, do you have any guess as to what the difference was in his process which required no dewaxing for a high quality end product?

Thomas@LRL said:

As a CO2 Processor I can tell you that some of us actually know what we're doing and you don't need additives for a quality product. Proper hardware and proper processing go a long way.

Click to expand...

Agreed ..... but for the manuf. he mentions ...... I doubt it.

PDX Dopesmoker said:

I met a guy once who had nice CO2 shatter/pull'nsnap that was really tasty. He said it wasn't dewaxed, but didn't give me much detail on what else would have made a difference in his process versus the standard process which produces the CO2 oil which goes into carts. I've been lead to believe that for most processors, there is generally copious dewaxing required for the cartridge oil, do you have any guess as to what the difference was in his process which required no dewaxing for a high quality end product?

Click to expand...

You can separate the light, low viscosity oils from the high cannabinoid, viscous oils after extraction without dewaxing. You can then turn that high cannabinoid fraction into a pull-snap, and occasionally, a shatter.

PDX Dopesmoker said:

I met a guy once who had nice CO2 shatter/pull'nsnap that was really tasty. He said it wasn't dewaxed, but didn't give me much detail on what else would have made a difference in his process versus the standard process which produces the CO2 oil which goes into carts. I've been lead to believe that for most processors, there is generally copious dewaxing required for the cartridge oil, do you have any guess as to what the difference was in his process which required no dewaxing for a high quality end product?

Click to expand...

A lot of it depends on the skill and knowledge of the operator along with the equipment itself. CO2 machines are very different in how they achieve the same result. CO2 operators are not properly utilizing the solvent properties of CO2 in most cases, a lot of that is due to the limitations of the machines, a lot of it is also due to the limitations of the operators themselves. In terms of the machines, separators are not very well designed at the moment in order to isolate the terpenes from the solvent stream itself. In terms of operators, my peers have a wide array of knowledge and skillsets and a significant but fundamental misunderstanding of how CO2 extraction even works, let alone creating a terpene-rich final product so you have a lot of people doing it really well, but a lot of people doing it very poorly and not understanding WHY it's bad. It's not just because CO2 is being used. Cannabis processing follows some very basic rules that are broadly applicable whether it's LHC or CO2.

In theory it's easy, Waters is already doing it and Eden could do it if they wanted to. Additionally, if you do want to run for terpenes, you will need to be doing flower runs, and a lot of processors are only doing trim runs EXACTLY because of the fact that the machines in service aren't suited to pulling the valuable material from a flower run anyway. I think that CO2 is probably one of the more preferred sources for terpene extraction and it has a history of being used as such in the perfume industry, however as it stands now they're not ideal and it's a costly enterprise. It's cheaper and probably more cost effective to outsource bulk terpene production to another company entirely that is set up to isolate or blend them.