Thanks for the input!
Iâd like to hear about the potential capabilities?
a few factors which are important are throughput (how much can each run process)
Cost to run (consumables).
If a system can handle a liter at a time.
Use consumables that are cheaper than current practices.
Have repeatable separation of various cannabinoids
And not produce a ton of waste ie solvent mixtures.
This is a fantastic solution. In the price range quoted.
1 Like
I would think that CO2 chroma would be the easiest to scale, (high pressure steel costs aside). Although I wonder what specifically would make it more ideal to scale up? I now know extraktlabs claims of 500 runs on one column are bullshit, but does it offer significantly more runs on the same media vs other methods? @EilainaVe
Edit: For the purpose of isolating cannabinoids from eachother
Does that media cost offset the use of co2 and the capital expenditure of the equipment to run co2 thru media in a effective and safe manner ?
Id rather go thru more media than have to put out $200k for a machine that just eats the same media anyways, it either has to produce a superior product or it has to be more financially viable to compete
1 Like
If youâre not developing and designing the equipment in-house, itâs not a huge barrier for scale. (Many vendors sell equipment that can be adapted for this industry)
The limiting factors are the columns and equipment capabilities. I.e. media cost, column packing, column volume to flush, pump and seal life, etc. Itâs not the theory of chromatography that is difficult to scale, itâs the mechanics and materials that pose the greatest financial and maintenance barrier.
Youâd also have to consider the valves and torque required to overcome the higher pressures, filters and methods for media seepage. Those instruments and maintenance are not cheap.
2 bar and the thruput is about 1L per min, im afraid increasing psi isnt going to improve flow or results
1 Like
Media cost wonât change, itâs a fixed market.
The thing is, everyone is allowed to have their more preferred methods. Again, processors decide what is best for their bottom line: what their sellable products are; operation vs. product cost, etc. I think the biggest barrier for quality discussion is that a lot of people have egos and they miss out on a lot of information because they just arenât open to it.
Thereâs also the international market which seems to be a fleeting notion for the greater majority of the US market. We are not an island and many other countries and companies also require different tech and compliance standards. Pharma standards are incredibly different than nutraceutical standards. Different needs require different solutions. I service an international market, not just here at home.
Couple of years ago I would have agreed with you but verified reports of membranes remediating color bodies, lipids and waxes have saved media costs considerably
1 Like
Again, without knowing your process I canât comment on it.
However, co2 goes supercritical at 73.8bar and 31.1C. So there isnât much else to say here in terms of sCO2 chromatography.
In terms of engineering, you found the process variables that suit your current needs.
As for the media, itâs still an incredibly established market. Yes, improvements will always continue, thatâs innovation, but still at scale, the costs are astronomical when users can only get 80 runs out of one column before efficacy is sacrificed. My methanol chroma team edited our standard media, which gave us our success.
Curious if you have adapted your processes to meet the needs of D8 producers? Love it or hate it, d8 is here to stay in the âillegalâ states and with all of the talk of contaminants and by-products, it sounds like high-throughput chromatography would be the ticket for d8 producers that would like ND d9 or contaminant removal for dirtier processes. Do you have any data regarding d8 purification through your chromatography implementations?
2 Likes
@EilainaVe I donât think there are any low-cost CO2 applications for this. ExtraktLab has made their systems for a long time, but I have never seen a demo of throughput.
I guess the question is, what are you trying to use the chromatography for? Isolate individual cannabinoids or remove pesticides? You will get very different throughputs depending on what your goal is, regardless of hardware.
I havenât seen CO2 provide high throughput, but traditional chromatography can. If you want to build something custom yourself, I can help. How does a 30bar max pressure 200mm x 400mm column hardware for $37,000 sound? I can get that professional grade GMP quality column for you, but we would have to put on our own pumps and UV detector, those parts donât cost nearly as much. Let me know if an idea like that interests you!
1 Like
Whatsâ the max flowrate you can push through that?
I suspect there will be a continuing need for chromatography for synthesis cleanup, be it D8, CBN, HHC, ectâŚ
Isolation of minor cannabinoids will also likely be in need of chromatography for some time to come.
Which indeed begs the question, is CO2 a contender in this?
I only measured it with 1L and a stopwatch @2bar but It can go up to 7bar with advertised flow rates up to 1000 cm/hr
2 Likes
Nail on the head. As a d8 producer I look at from my lens, but from a broad scope, if it is cheaper to synthesize certain cannabinoids than it is to grow them, the market will favor synthesis. People want to hate on synth 'noids but financially it makes sense so long as the end product is clean. I would absolutely implement chromatography in my process if it made sense financially both in terms of dollars as well as throughput. THC has its place in remediation via chroma, but I believe in the long term synthesis will be where chroma shines as the relative costs for chroma could be absorbed by the cost of the rare 'noid that is being purified.
3 Likes
I have purified d8 to remove d9 and all other cannabinoids before, but no one was interested in the technology. My best estimates were that it could be profitable if the ultra pure d8 kilos sold for about $3000-3500, but the daily throughputs might only be in the kilo to couple kilo range.
I have a brand new flash system I unboxed today that can sell you for a great deal if that kind of R&D interests you, and I would give you my methods. The flash system is 300ml/min up to 2175psi max, way better than a Buchi Revelaris, $42,000 discount list price, or $40,000 to the first customer.
However, using this system on a smallish column I think you could only make hundreds of grams of product a day. You would need a 20cm dia column (and a bigger pump) to get into kilo daily production range.
4 Likes
States are banning synthetic left and right for obvious reasons. Iâd bet that a legit facility that is making products up to spec with the correct analytics and clean up could overturn negative regulation.
2 Likes
It is an unsaturated hydrocarbon though. 
2 Likes
It is but you usually call things by their major functionality not their scaffolds. Itâs not outright wrong, but in our (cannabis) world where non-functionalizd hydrocarbons are employed already Iâd be as specific as possible.
4 Likes
Nothing yet, again, we are in the design state with sCO2 chromatography, but knowing what processors need to separate is a driving factor.
As for the our other methanol columns, nothing for THCs yet because we have not had the need with our current customers; theyâre all in the hemp processing field and do not have a cannabis license. We do, however, see a retention flush of THCâs. They are not isolated, but drop out together.
Good to know what youâre looking for! Thank you!