I stumbled across a dewaxing filter online that looks like a DIY drain droyd. It’s being offered by Infinity Supercritical. Their website made this claim, which I’ve copied and pasted below:
“Hemp Processing: Using the Fast Filter as part of a winterization process, some (most) of the THC will be trapped with the wax in the paper filter.”
Based on many hours of reading threads on THC remediation on this site, I’ve concluded that remediation of THC (in hemp-only states, like the one I live in) is a highly sought after technique and service, and that it’s more complicated than filtering out THC that is “trapped” somehow “with the wax in the paper filter.” I’m trying to wrap my head around this claim.
Granted, with the ability to use adsorbents like activated carbon and presumably bentonite clay, there might be some merit to this claim, perhaps with faking compliance somehow with d9->d8. But I think that’s be gracious. I digress.
Is this filter’s claim total BS or is there some merit? Alarms went off when I read that, and I’d hate for that misinformation being the reason someone drops 10k on a device that can’t deliver.
(Also, this is my first post here, so if I did something weird let me know. Thank you!)
How do you “filter” out thc? If it were that easy, dont you think 100% of the cbd farmers would be all over this vs having to do so much more remediation to get their hot hemp below the legal threshold?
My thoughts exactly. Alas, the company is advertising that their filter does this. Before I deemed this unethical, I wanted to make sure that there was no merit to their claim.
Thanks for the post and welcome to the community!
There are several filtration companies trying to innovate the hemp space and empower the farmer. Im not completely sure about what materials this specific filter paper uses but will dig a bit further as well. I would imagine that the low concentration of thc makes it fairly easy to remediate product to suitable compliance based on a subtle affinity for thc. I know many of the thc focused extractors have seen pretty significant loss of thc with carbon scrubbing.
Different filtration medias have different affinities to compounds… Wouldnt it be more than just a micron filtration thats going on in the case of media impregnated paperfilters?
Glad to be here, and I appreciate the welcome. I’ve been scouring the site for the past several weeks devouring as much as I can. I’m looking forward to contributing more once I get in the lab–by the end of 2019 if all goes as planned. Thanks a bunch for the insight regarding carbon scrubbing and THC. I’m curious to see just how much carbon affects thc at different stages throughout winterization and distillate passes.
Good question. Im a farmer and not a chemist, but I would imagine that there is a difference between them… If im not mistaken, CBD has a hydroxyl group where as thc would not.
Maybe we can get someone with a badass chem backround to chime in… I know @onemadalchemist has lit up the conversation of cannabinoid carboxylation… With that kinda backround in Orgchem maybe he could touch on this?
We purchased the Fast Filter from Infinity Supercritical. We were getting failing heavy metal tests after filtration. Turns out, the fittings were made from brass and had lead in them. The ethanol corroded the brass and introduced lead into our crude. 5 passing HM tests pre-filtration, 5 failing HM tests post filtration. At one point we got a black liquid substance in our lines. We sent it off for testing…came back at 104,000PPB lead. They are denying any responsibility. We’ve replaced all fitting with SS and replaced the lines. No problems at all with lead since. BTW, the Fast Filter has been removed from their website. Can’t find it ANYWHERE. Beware!!
