1. What does SSTB mean? See our glossary of acronyms.

The Persei Vaporizer for herbs and concentrates.

Discussion in 'Portable Vaporizers' started by THC SCIENTIFIC, Jan 13, 2012.

  1. Toastface_Killah

    Toastface_Killah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    45
    Just my two cents...but aren't co2 extractions completely out of reach for the average oil maker? As far as I know and have read, something that will withstand the pressure of co2 safely and not blow up will cost an absurd amount of money compared to what you need for other methods of solvent extractor.
     
    Fully Melted, fake name and OF like this.
  2. NoddingDonkey

    NoddingDonkey Oil, Glass & I'm a bit of an ass

    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    On an oil rig somewhere
    No, this is incorrect. (As long as you are not trying to reclaim the CO2)



    edit ^ This guy sells extractors if you feel like contacting him - he will happily help you perfect your method post-purchase too
     
    hektik8625 and Limosnero like this.
  3. Bart

    Bart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    165
    I'm on the other side of the country but would love the info.
    I've got a 60# bottle of co2.
     
  4. Toastface_Killah

    Toastface_Killah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    45

    Oh wow, I had read somewhere on Tokecity about it being dangerous but after watching this video and reading the guys description, that seems to not be the case. Still, this does look quite a bit more in depth and a huge step up than my small run BHO extractions, so I guess this is the next thing I get to research in depth and learn about.
     
    NoddingDonkey likes this.
  5. MaDsCiEnTiSt22

    MaDsCiEnTiSt22 Active Member

    Messages:
    63
    It is illegal to manufacture any narcotic krazzykid.... that goes for hash, meth, etc.... so it would actually be illegal to manufacturer oil using co2 also.....
     
    OF likes this.
  6. Limosnero

    Limosnero Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    72
    Not hating but this guy totally reminds me of Carl Spackler from caddy shack.
     
    NoddingDonkey likes this.
  7. Krazzykid

    Krazzykid Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    213
    Again do your homework. Using CO2 is not illegal under the current laws because you aren't using chemicals to manufacture the hash. This has all been covered many times by many lawyers. Call any lawyer that specializes in medical marijuana cases and they can tell you as much.

    Do a little research and you will find everything I am telling you is the truth. I gain nothing by making up lies.
    I don't want to hijack this thread any further, so if you want to continue this discussion PM me and we can talk about the reasons all you wish.

    Edit: According to California Health and Safety Code statute 11379.6, manufacturing BHO is against the law. Look it up.
     
  8. tharealmclovin

    tharealmclovin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    927
    I'll believe the guy who quoted the laws

     
    OF likes this.
  9. ataxian

    ataxian California

    Messages:
    5,989
  10. OF

    OF Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,067
    Location:
    Left Coast
    Excellent advice.

    As KK just suggested, you might find a mirror...... It is a serious bust, with all the fires and accidents the law is taking a very dim view of such home science projects, drug issues aside.

    IMO we have to be very careful with advice, especially around stuff that can take some poor guy who mistakenly believes 'I read it on the web, it must be true' and destroy his life. He's the one who pays for lame advice.

    Fair enough. How about:

    "(a) Except as otherwise provided by law, every person who manufactures, compounds, converts, produces, derives, processes, or prepares, either directly or indirectly by chemical extraction or independently by means of chemical synthesis, any controlled substance specified in Section 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057, or 11058 shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for three, five, or seven years and by a fine not exceeding fifty thousand dollars ($50,000)."

    http://law.onecle.com/california/health/11379.6.html

    OF
     
  11. Krazzykid

    Krazzykid Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    213
    That would be the one! By the legal wording in that law it means that CO2, steam distillation, water, dry ice, or any other method that doesn't require the use of chemicals is completely legal under California law so long as you are a medical patient. Under federal law it is still all illegal, but the whole med scene is illegal under federal law so that doesn't matter in this case.

    Madscientist, I am not really sure why you liked that post because it is the exact law that proves my point.
     
    Bart and OF like this.
  12. fake name

    fake name Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    huh?
    Sorry double post
     
  13. fake name

    fake name Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    huh?
    Hey krazzy, my question would be has precedent been set? the courts can interpret laws loosely, and co2 extraction could be considered chemical extraction unless established already that it is not.

    Also, all methods require chemicals.
     
    OF likes this.
  14. kindbeats

    kindbeats I TH See You

    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    NY
    Last I heard, there's no chemicals used in making bubble/water hash.
     
    OF likes this.
  15. fake name

    fake name Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    huh?
    Water is a chemical. The bags are made of chemicals. The concentration process is concentrating chemicals you do want from ones you don't.
     
    Puffers and Bob Loblaw like this.
  16. OF

    OF Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,067
    Location:
    Left Coast


    Yes, that is my understanding. It's was easy to 'sell' the idea that CO2 is being used as a solvent (mostly because it is...). In legal (and realistic) definitions it's in the same class as ISO, Butane, Everclear and the rest. The water issue has not been 'tested in court', you can get legal arguments both ways. Yes, water is a chemical, but we're looking for it's density, not chemical activity. IMO you'd probably win out since you could show it's a mechanical separation similar to screening, not a solvent extraction. And screening is legal.....

    Best option is to not be involved with the discussion. Not much to win, lots to loose. I recommend avoiding rather than 'outsmarting them'.

    Don't get them interested in you, the Grateful Dead summed it up, "...well if you've got a warrant, I guess you're gonna come in".

    OF
     
  17. Krazzykid

    Krazzykid Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    213
    Again the wording of the law is what you have to focus on. Is says chemical extraction and chemical synthesis. Yes CO2 is a chemical, and so is water for that matter.

    However you have to understand what really happens when C02, water, ice, and dry ice are used.
    With CO2 what is really going on is the extreme pressure and the cold temperature from the liquified CO2 forces the cannabinoids out of the plant. They are then carried away from the plant by the CO2
    With water, ice, and dry ice, the temperatures and agitation make the trichomes fall off the plant.

    Yes precedent has been set which deems these methods legal under California law. I would refer you to the case:The People v. Bergen the court deemed that resin can be "physically extracted" (e.g. pressure) or by "leaching the resin from the plant material by dissolving it in a non-chemical.
    Yes technically C02 and water are chemicals, but because of their use in the food industry they also fall under this non-chemical category.

    So if a dispensary produces "what they claim" is C02 hash it is legal under the law. Some will take it a step further and put the disclaimer "for internal use", "for edible use", or something along this line as an added step to try and cover their asses.

    Edit: Yes everything in life technically is a chemical reaction, including making hash from any method. There are millions of them going on in our bodies at any given time. But because of the wording of this law along with a couple others, a few legal cases, and general loopholes the making of hash by the methods I have already listed are at this time considered the ONLY LEGAL methods publicly known. I forgot to add steam distillation to the list as well.

    Edit #2: In an effort to try and get this thread back on topic, how is everyone enjoying their perseis, benders, hammers, hercules? Any new techniques, issues, or anything along these lines?
     
    JoeKickass likes this.
  18. tharealmclovin

    tharealmclovin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    927
    I am going to test the 3.7v herc into the new year. Ill report back next year.
     
    OF likes this.
  19. fake name

    fake name Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    299
    Location:
    huh?
    Ok, I've just read up on the case. The precedent set was declaring use of butane as a solvent as a felony. But the vague ground of CO2 is not mentioned at all. My point being, that if a prosecutor decides to go after co2 extractors they will have a case. Not saying they will win, but I am saying there s not precedent within that case that would make a judge throw the case out before trial.

    Thank you for the response, but let me clarify my question: is there precedent that CO2 extractions are not considered chemical extractions? Perhaps there was something in that case I missed?
     
    OF likes this.
  20. tharealmclovin

    tharealmclovin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    927
    CO2 uses pressure and cold temps. From what I read that's why it's not the same as butane, which penetrates the trichs. IM GONNA MAKE THIS BOLD...I MAY BE WRONG
     
    OF likes this.
  21. OF

    OF Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,067
    Location:
    Left Coast
    Yes, by all means do read it:

    "Niall Patrick Bergen appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no
    contest to manufacturing concentrated cannabis, known as “hash oil” or “honey oil,” by
    using butane to extract the resin containing the psychoactive ingredient
    tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) from marijuana plant material. (Health & Saf. Code,
    § 11379.6, subd. (a) (section 11379.6(a)).)1 Bergen contends he should have been
    charged under section 11358, which addresses processing resin from marijuana, instead
    of section 11379.6(a). We conclude that when, as here, the method used to extract the
    marijuana resin was by means of a chemical such as butane, section 11379.6(a) applies
    over the more general statute punishing marijuana cultivation, harvesting or processing.
    (§ 11358.) Accordingly, we affirm.

    The court rejected Bergen’s arguments and held Bergen to answer on charges of producing
    concentrated cannabis (§ 11379.6(a)); cultivating marijuana (§ 11358); possession of
    marijuana for sale (§ 11359); and theft of services (Pen. Code, § 498, subd. (b)).

    http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/Bergen08CalAppB203793hashOil.pdf

    The guy got hosed. Not only was he making hash oil, but growing over 600 plants in a residential area house with stolen electricity.

    If you read it it talks about 'scope and intent':

    "The Legislature adopted section 11379.6 in 1985 and placed the offense of
    manufacturing controlled substances into a separate section. The sole expressed purpose
    of the change was “to increase the penalties for those who illegally manufacture
    controlled substances.” (Historical and Statutory Notes, 40, pt. 2 West’s Ann. Health &
    Saf. Code (2007 ed.) foll. § 11379.6, p. 530, italics added; see also, People v. Coria,
    supra, 21 Cal.4th at p. 879.) The Legislature apparently intended to punish more harshly
    use of chemicals in the production of controlled substances because of the dangers posed
    to the public from the use of hazardous substances, such as fires, fumes or explosions.

    An important concept. It says 'the intent of the legislature in drafting the law was to further penalize for the added risk of the processing itself', it would be real easy to show CO2 used this way isn't safe...... That's a very important legal point. If 'they' can show you 'fall withing the scope and intent' of the law you're dead meat.

    CO2 also being used in the food industry has no bearing. In fact, that would probably hurt your case I'd think.

    My understanding is it's not legal. I think advice to the contrary is dangerous and should not be taken as fact without consent of a competent lawyer.....if even then. Tetra labs very carefully avoids this issue by starting with extracts made by someone else and purifying from there. If CO2 extraction was legal you'd think they'd set up a big time CO2 extractor and increase their profit and reduce their supply issues??

    Actually it's not right i think. It's not cold or pressure (or you'd use Liquid Nitrogen which is colder and cheaper) but precisely because it's a solvent when supercritical. It dissolves the THC, separating it from the solids by 'washing it out'. It flows through a filter paper after all.

    "Supercritical CO2 is becoming an important commercial and industrial solvent due to its role in chemical extraction in addition to its low toxicity and environmental impact. The relatively low temperature of the process and the stability of CO2 also allows most compounds to be extracted with little damage or denaturing. In addition, the solubility of many extracted compounds in CO2 vary with pressure,[1] permitting selective extractions." (emphasis their's)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercritical_carbon_dioxide

    OF
     
  22. MaDsCiEnTiSt22

    MaDsCiEnTiSt22 Active Member

    Messages:
    63
    Very informative... thanks
     
    OF likes this.
  23. darkrom

    darkrom Great Scott!

    Messages:
    3,534
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Anyone got the Bender AND the Herc? Can you compare the 2 for bud usage?
     
    tharealmclovin likes this.
  24. tharealmclovin

    tharealmclovin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    927
    I have both. The bender is still one of the best tasting vapes when used correctly. With the 7.4 volt herc I burnt the herb too much, so I just use that one for oil now. The 3.7v herc when used properly gives me bender quality hits for the first couple but then goes to that familiar burnt popcorn taste.
     
    Bob Loblaw, darkrom and OF like this.
  25. ataxian

    ataxian California

    Messages:
    5,989
    THC = 85.2% CBD = 3.2% CBN = 0.4% This is a JACK FROST OG WAX (notice the blond color? Well Purged!)[​IMG]
    How long does it take to warm up the BENDER to vaporize?
    Is it efficient?
     

Support FC, visit our trusted friends and sponsors