Decarb before which step?

G.O. Joe said:

See if a more polar solvent extracts acid cannabinoids from material thoroughly extracted with an alkane, or extract with alkane, dry and decarb, then extract again.

Click to expand...

Yes, thank you, this takes me to the point I can defenetly compare! I won't know solubility data but I'll know which is more soluble.
Hmm, needs to be done both ways...to see heptane in both places really good idea, thanks Joe.



Have you checked that predictor?

Douglas.Curtis said:

What is your end goal, being reached through finding the difference in solubility? Nearly any solvent is going to extract almost 100% of the cannabinoid oils. I don't believe 100% is possible without prohibitively large volumes of solvent or additional processing, but that's a guess.

Most people doing extractions are focused on using solvents which pull the least amount of unwanted materials. Nearly any commonly used solvent for cannabis is going to pull all the cannabinoids you're looking for anyway.

Click to expand...

Well you right, I do have this problem sometimes, to obsess about the best solution.

Actually in an industrial setting it would be important to use the best solvent there is, because you need less of it and extracts faster. Actually in a practical sense I guess better to decarb after, less volume... Actually the contradiction between the 2 forums made me make this thread.

zanog said:

1, Where do you decarb? After drying plant matter? After extraction? After rotovap right before short path? Why?

2, How do they decarb in industrial settings?

Click to expand...

Keeping apples and oranges separate, I don't decarb my dabbing concentrates, so as to retain the terpenes and minimize CBN.

I decarb concentrates for oral consumption after extraction, so as to watch the C02 bubble formation and tell precisely where the process is.

THC is less polar than THC-A, so a non polar solvent would ostensibly be more efficient extracting THC than THC-A. They are both soluble however, so that simply means a longer extraction for the same yield.

Polar solvents like Ethanol are ostensibly better at THC-A than THC, but longer extractions with polar solvents bring over water solubles and polar elements like C-55 Chlorophyll. For that reason they are typically done at subzero temperatures and more closely timed to limit heavy molecule pickup.

Non polar solvents have the same issues with the non polar plant waxes unless they extract at subzero temperatures, and require winterization in some form to remove them, prior to short path.

The longer the Alkane molecule, the more hydrophobic it is and the more forgiving with regard to non targeted polar elements, so Heptane is more forgiving than Hexane or Pentane, but also harder to purge afterwards.

Hexane of course breaks down in our livers into 2.5 Hexane Dione, and has tighter residual solvent standards.

We got our highest yield per unit volume by drying our material thoroughly to eliminate water weight from the formula and reducing the material to 10 mesh before extracting with a non polar solvent, but not the highest quality because we drove off many of the aromatics in the drying process.

I haven't seen many large scale industrial extractions, but the non SCFE industrial processes that I've seen, were based around subzero ethanol denatured with heptane, and were decarboxylated afterward using heat.

troutman said:

Extractions are more efficient if you decarb prior.

Click to expand...

I just decarb first in the oven because it's easy.
But why more efficient? Just curious...
JD

Decarbing before extraction?

It's important to use a sealed container for this, and to let the container completely cool before opening. Your terpenes will re-condense back onto the cannabis this way, instead of making your house smell awesome for a few minutes.

Douglas.Curtis said:

Decarbing before extraction?

It's important to use a sealed container for this, and to let the container completely cool before opening. Your terpenes will re-condense back onto the cannabis this way, instead of making your house smell awesome for a few minutes.

Click to expand...

Douglas,
Great idea about a closed container.

Maybe you can clear this up for me. I was previously under the impression that terps were important mostly for smoking enjoyment...aromas. But if I understand the entourage effect...terps have a significant roll in oral ingestion too. I guess my question is...how important are terps for the actual high...nature and intensity?
John Dee

Decarboxylation in a sealed container seems unwise.

Cvh said:

Is this correct? Is it better to decarb before extraction?

Click to expand...

This has been the way of the GW Pharma patents discussed here over the years, who use CO2. Colder or less polar solvent, more difficulty in complete extraction. Are there dimerization or condensation reactions or evaporation causing losses or weird things during decarboxylation? Before or after extracting? Who knows until they do the testing.

G.O. Joe said:

Decarboxylation in a sealed container seems unwise.

Click to expand...

Sous Vide started it, but solid containers are just fine. The pressures from terpene evaporation and expansion are minimal.

DrDee said:

how important are terps for the actual high...nature and intensity?
John Dee

Click to expand...

Significant. With edibles, the terpenes directly affect the type of high, while often increasing the potency 100% or more vs. post extraction decarbing.

Douglas.Curtis said:

The pressures from terpene evaporation and expansion are minimal.

Click to expand...

358 grams of THCA wants to theoretically produce over 22 liters of CO2.

G.O. Joe said:

358 grams of THCA wants to theoretically produce over 22 liters of CO2.

Click to expand...

That's a good point. What's the psi for 22 liters of CO2 in the headspace of a sealed container you would use for 358g?

How much of a gap do you leave?

Douglas.Curtis said:

Significant. With edibles, the terpenes directly affect the type of high, while often increasing the potency 100% or more vs. post extraction decarbing.

Click to expand...

Thanks Douglas...I appreciate the info. I've only done 2 QWET batches and didn't realize I was losing potential yield or potency.

It's plenty potent but I'm all for efficiency...so I'll be looking for a better decarb approach.
JD

Decarb will not help with polar solvent like ethanol. I wouldn't worry about terpenes either.

Douglas.Curtis said:

What's the psi for 22 liters of CO2 in the headspace of a sealed container you would use for 358g?

Click to expand...

850, or add 44 grams dry ice and find out.

G.O. Joe said:

850, or add 44 grams dry ice and find out.

Click to expand...

I'd rather use a larger container.

6 gallons of headspace on a pint container will still be 2x atmospheric pressure.

G.O. Joe said:

6 gallons of headspace on a pint container will still be 2x atmospheric pressure.

Click to expand...

Silly, I'm talking PRE-extraction decarb. lolol I missed that you talking about post-extraction, and pure THCA.

Another cup of tea and...

Id like to comment. I have made tincture from uncompressed hash, finger hash, compressed hash. I mostly used cured week. The directions I had at the time ( for green dragon ) said to let the solution sit for 30 days in a cool dark room to decarb. I used amber 1oz (50 ml) dropper bottles. after at least 30 days the bottles went into the freezer. Well the high wasn't very good. I wasn't sure the tincture was decarbed. i figured uot a way to test the shit using a spoon of coconut oil heated in a small pot on the stove. i slowly heated the oil to ~ 200 deg F then added a couple of droppers of the tincture. the ethyl alc evaporated off. There was a small puddle of amber water left which splatted of like cooking bacon. Then as the temp hit 230 the CO@ came off in little bubbles mostly around the edge. I did this with some other bottles some were more decarbed than others. My goal is to get a smoking high from oral consumption. I work on it when I cant grow outside.
I have tried the vac bag method and the canning jar method several times. Neither worked for me.