Isolates CO2 from seawater, concentrates it and catalytically
Converts it to hydrocarbon…
Yes, I see we have our carbon source…
Nice reference….
Thanks for the further explanation.
6 Likes
Not in the slightest. I am merely suggesting that chemically selective solvents with tightly controlled temperature parameters might have an edge when it comes to extracting compounds of interest, relative to chemically nonselective methods like agitating the biomass in ice water and attempting mechanical separation with a hydraulic press and a sieve bag. That’s all I’m saying. No shade on the squish.
Not shade. Asking for any reason for bringing stereochemistry into the discussion.
Other than not knowing ones Rectus from ones Sinister
Very few of the solvents used for extraction have anything in the way of “stereochemistry”… can you name an exception?
Hint: it’s also one of the few exceptions to “plants generally only produce one stereoisomer…”
Yes, there IS stereochemistry at the heart of our precious cannabinoids…I’m asking how chirality is relevant to the extraction process.
3 Likes
Put your beaker with a buchner funnel clamped to it on an utrasonic shaker 
1 Like
Water at subcritical, 3500psi/300 C is an incredible catalyst!
Down hole chemistry. It can turn hemp biomass into oil
On the fly. Think about all that post extraction biomass…
If you were doing H2O extraction….you would be “feed ready’
Here the term means like putting cellulose in and getting a
Liquid out.
“The application of ultrasound (US) energy for assisting the lignocellulosic biomass and waste materials conversion into value-added products has dramatically increased.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2020.105455
Ultrasonic assist is certainly a “gamer”.
Thanks.
Not saying it ISNT.
Just asking why/how you believe it is…
Eg: an
Could be either created in either D or L…only one would actually deserve the moniker
2 Likes
Yes! And when you combine this with ALL the detailed knowledge of BUTANE EXTRACTION THEORY…
Why not throw out “chirality” with the rest of the BS.
It’s all water over the dam now.
With considerable amusement.
Exactly!
If we were synthesizing from scratch, then using chiral solvents would make sense.
3 Likes
Solvent structure is a variable to consider
2 Likes
The chirality of several terpene isolates produces highly variable results when used as a secondary solvent for post-processing/refinement techniques.
Additionally, not that it is directly related to the question of stereochemical conformation, but different hydrocarbon isomers also function extremely well, or rather poorly, depending on the parameters at which you attempt to use them for extraction, Iso-butane vs N-butane is one obvious example.
I have been conducting a large-scale research project in my lab, for instance, to test the efficacy of various hydrocarbon solvents at a wide range of parameters for the extraction of specific cannabinoids, terpenes, thiols etc.
To date, we have committed over 50,000lbs of fresh frozen biomass to this endeavor, with some exciting results and some very clear winning formulas. Keep your eyes peeled for a white paper to be coming soon.
I guess a better way to put it than I did in my initial ramblings, would be to say that “Chemoselectivity doesn’t care if you’re a heady-boy with clout on IG.” But I digress.
3 Likes
I am making fun of first step extraction.
If you think the whole class of modified cellulose supports
Which give rise to enantiomer selective separations…In prep HPLC…well then yes…but cellulose itself is chiral and shows little if any selectivity in these regards.
Now back to rosin: chemically extracted…?
I want to introduce a new concept…when you separate trichomes with ice water….have you ever thought…same SOP except…
Can I look in the cold water for cannabinoids….???
Variation of HOT TEA previously discussed with @cyclopath .
Some have published hot pressing in varying temp steps to
Yield a crystalline white THCA left in bag….
Can we just forget the pressing TEK and look for THCA in Water?
Fire in, Firewater out…??? One step???
Perhaps we should let the sleeping lion lie.
“Water, water, water, one step”…
Color and fire.
This is an SOP advertisement for Certified Organic Cannabinoics.
DM if interested process chemistry.
5DAYS…COUNTING….Wake up 4200…the days of stainless are numbered.
3 Likes
Suggesting squish is more “full spectrum”?
One would expect the changing the solvent to change the nature of the extract. How many PAIRS of terpene isolates have you compared.
Limonene is the only one I can think of off the top of my head, but I certainly imagine there are others.
“Highly variable results” could be construed as a failure. One generally aims for repeatable differences
1 Like
You are aware of the enormous amount of effort put forth in the past two years concerning “chemoselectivity” of solvents, especially alkanes in the extraction of cannabinoic acids AND their subsequent precipitation in various crystalline forms.
The fact that you are even here offering information means that your have found an audience which is capable of appreciating your 50K lb efforts in VARIATION. So in regards to “chemoselectivity” as a broad term, you are preaching to the choir.
Now with respects to chiral chemistry?
But a priori , please tell us what it is you are extracting from
Biomass. Like a little molecular diagram…or what it is YOU THINK you are extracting into your chemoselective solvent or chiral terpene modified solvent.
Or better, perhaps a white paper on the state of cannabinoic acids in trichome storage soup?
Or better, save everyone a lot of time…and explain the crystal structure of medusa vs chalk.
If you read the X-ray diffraction study on THCA….they produce a crystal product ready for diffraction study in a single step…
Using a procedure that has less than 10% efficiency ….now that may have something you might write a white paper on.
Actually , it is obvious you know what your are doing…looking forward to your white paper reports…
Have you given much thought to water? Might want to get away from those nasty, carcinogenic terpenes…
Sometimes there a bit of humor here.
I should add, it is quite clear you have switched from “stereochemistry” to the more broad caveat, “chemoselectivity.”
1 Like
Suggesting squish is more “full spectrum”?
Well that would be one way to spin it. Another way would be to say that they contain a smaller ratio of the target molecules (Cannabinoids, Terpenes, etc.) relative to the molecules that were not targeted for extraction. Yet another way to put it would be to say they are less pure.
Bear in mind, I am not speaking in absolutes, I am speaking from my own anecdotal experience.
However, not for nothing, I oversee one of the biggest processing labs in Michigan. We process hundreds of thousands of lbs of biomass annually, in Etoh, Hydrocarbon, and Solventless. I read dozens of COA’s daily, and I am looking at a broad swath of data when I make statements like the above.
One would expect the changing the solvent to change the nature of the extract. How many PAIRS of terpene isolates have you compared.
It does, significantly. I feel like you’re only asking that to in an attempt to troll me, but I’ll be genuine in my response. Isobutane dominant blends, for example, produce extremely favorable results for the extraction of ALL target molecules when other parameters are tightly regulated.
Limonene is the only one I can think of off the top of my head, but I certainly imagine there are others.
Yes! Citronellal is another worthy of investigation.
“Highly variable results” could be construed as a failure. One generally aims for repeatable differences
Ok, now you’re being a little nitpicky, but I get it. I am assuming it is for the sake of clarity, and not your ego. The results vary greatly between test groups with varying structure and chirality. They are replicable within test groups.
A most sincere ‘My bad’ is in order, for my linguistic imprecision presenting a lack of clarity on the matter.
3 Likes
Trying to explore the science requires precision in the language.
Otherwise we’re comparing Ethyl valerate to Limonene
4 Likes
Have you given much thought to water? Might want to get away from those nasty, carcinogenic terpenes…
You mean the very same class of molecules that SHO guys brag about extracting in abundance? Weird. How are they bad when they are ratioed, and used in a controlled environment to produce favorable extraction/refinement outcomes, but good if they are in your hash rosin?
I should add, it is quite clear you have switched from “stereochemistry” to the more broad caveat, “chemoselectivity.”
I didn’t switch from or to anything. I used imprecise language while replying to a post on a forum on my phone, between meetings. I didn’t feel it was necessary to engage in the omnipresent dick-measuring contest that perfuses the pages of this forum by writing a dissertation regarding one or several of the three research projects I currently have the pleasure of working on with three other consummate professionals.
But then again, my identity is not attached to idea being know-it-all canna-chemist. I am happy with my two degrees, working in a $10M+ SoTA extraction facility, and driving my 2500 Denali HD back to my homestead every night to my beautiful wife, and sons. That’ll do for me. I’ll leave the clout-chasing to you boys.
1 Like
You are absolutely correct, sir.
1 Like
Dr. McDabbin…please…you realize that there are scores of millionaires in America who made fortunes on BHO related procedures…
It is not a qualification.
I think almost everyone here understands we are all swimming in an ocean of ignorance.
I am sure we will look forward to your white paper contributions.
Best regards,
3 Likes
He is not a millionaire, he is a lab manager lol
3 Likes
almost 90$/500ml of the green apple flavor
1 Like