-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2021 6:38 pm
I've done a crash course of sorts on chromatography. Home processing for oneself is acceptable, but any use of volatile solvents* is illegal in California. *The California legal definition of volatile solvents in the section on manufacturing specifically lists ethanol as an acceptable non-solvent. https://cannabis.ca.gov/applicants/lice ... ense-types (type 7 license for solvents, type 6 for no solvents, home for oneself is like type 6) Taken as an exception, no other solvents can be used. But taken as a limit of volatility, it leaves open the use of anything less volatile than ethanol.
Not mentioned anywhere related, bottled terpenes can be added when processing cannabis oil and terpenes are non-polar solvents which liquify cannabis oil at only 5% added. Terpenes sold as such should be defensible. D-Limonene bought as a single chemical is more likely to be considered as a solvent. Paying more for the same chemical (limonene) appears more defensible. What do you think of these 'solvents' and what others would meet the intent of California's law?
An acid would be useful for refluxing to clean and isomerize oxidized components (CBN -> THC, CBD -> Delta 8 THC). The acid must be removed without depositing undesirable salts, unless of course the salt can be removed before adding sample to solvent. Hydrochloric and acetic acid appear to fit, but I found 'pros' may use sulfuric. What acid should be used at what maximum concentration?
A brine wash would reduce/eliminate chlorophyll and contaminants. Coconut oil (and others) is non-polar when virgin, but apparently polar as distilled MCT (medium chain triglycerides), which would be useful if they can be removed. Do you have a way to remove them? Are there any other solvents, buffers, augments, or anything else that can be used while meeting the legal definition? (I'm not asking a legal opinion, but a chemistry answer that I'll research the law later)
My intent is to figure out all the chemicals that are allowed and useful, and determine an optimum solvent system given limitations. Terps can be the non-polar solvent, alcohol as the polar non-solvent*, and add a polar solvent to (not quite) equilibrate the column for another batch. I'll use sodium hydroxide, but not for every sample. Does this sound right or should I adjust my thinking?
Cannabis oil can be cooked indefinitely at up to 100c, as it gets limited to with water, going through decarboxylation at about 24 hours. Above 100c, it takes 15 minutes to decarb after water is driven out. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28861498/ There is no degradation after many hours at 110c, or vacuum refluxed indefiinitely. A finished oil for vaping cartridges should be mostly decarboxylated. I have no reference for these suppositions so I may have introduced error. Terps (all essential oils) can be removed at the start and reintroduced, but that's another subject. Cannabis oil can be cooked a long time. The water wash can be done repeatedly before adding solvents and separated by chilling and pouring off the water. Since solvents* are not allowed at home, the water wash stage is needed.
I was going to short path distill, not sure if I can following all local laws, until I discovered chromatography will serve my needs. While I may get to where I'm identifying and pulling out individual molecules using TLC on my fractions, it isn't really necessary. Like a distillation, I only need to remove the heads and tails; as in the most polar and least polar molecules. Cannabis oil has color, so no UV needed to determine what is happening. For good material, you don't want to remove anything more or it ruins the profile. For poor material, it still amounts to eluting near pure THC with high tolerances. As a hobbyist, I can afford time inefficiency. I can combine and concentrate samples and run them again for greater resolution. My time and labor can be wasted in this endeavor. Material cannot.
As an aside, an owner of a large production lab (not cannabis) explained how he uses a dozen cheap shop-vacs and crock pots instead of a dozen RotoVap stations. I'm sure they capture most of the solvent first. So even in California, the alcohol can be completely eliminated.
For personal safety, my biggest concern is Silicosis. Lacking a fume hood, I'll pour silica gel wearing a gas mask, outside where it won't blow toward anyone. I figured I'd pour it into a glass jar, add ethanol, put on the lid, shake, and then hose down any silica outside that jar. Will this be sufficient protection? Does a column need to be run in a fume hood, when used with... ahem, legally not solvents?
In researching columns, and multi-columns, I conclude that a two column system would be useful, especially with a tiny volumetric pump to adjust the column's speed. Would it be correct to say that a 10mm tube, 100cm long would introduce mixing? I found used Luer connectors for 6mm OD tubing to 24/40 which suggest they exist, but found no other examples. What glassware and connectors would serve this purpose?
I am a legal medical marijuana patient in a state where recreational use is legal. My opinions are my own. I do not promote any illegal behavior. The topic of this post is how to proceed while obeying all local laws.