Hi,
I guess the question is only marginally on-topic here, but
I'm sure people here know more about the chemistry of
the various woods than people in a chemistry newsgroup
would know the practical aspects of the various woods :)
So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
Would it produce toxic substances or gases? Could it
simply cause an explosion due to continuous gas
production as a result of some chemical reaction?
Thanks for any comments / safety tips,
-Zico
Eye of newt....
Your scheme is basically safe, other than for possible flammability hazard
but I'm not sure if ethanol is the best solvent for your oils. You might want
to try a pre-production test with acetone, for example. (as used for
decaffeinating coffee beans.)
Further whimsy...
You could even ferment a woodchip/sugar mixture for the totally organic
approach but this will give a high methanol content which may be a better
solvent than ethanol; but must be evaporated off as it is decidedly nasty
stuff and will produce formalin if absorbed or imbibed and being embalmed
before death is not ideal...
Toe of frog...
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:51:59 +0100, dadiOH wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):
> You want to use potable, 100 proof alcohol for wood chips? *WHY???*
>
> dadiOH
>
>
the only reason I can think of is as a practice run.
errr.. if it works on cedar oil it'll also work on oils you might want to
ingest in small quantities ?
yerknow, _perfume_ and stuff. :-)
which reminds me... another solution
Small pressure vessel containing cedar chips.
Flood vessel with small qty liquid butane or propane which will almost
certainly dissolve yer oils. Run mixture into larger condensing vessel and
bleed gas off, leaving uncontaminated oil in condensing vessel.
Just needs a thick jar with a rubber tube in, a clamp for a valve, a larger
container to condense into.. (could be a big jar with a slightly loose fit
where the tube slides in) A can of common lighter-refill butane...
Obvious fire hazard, less obvious but very real is the danger of burns from
the temperature drop.
scrap the jar... use a block of cedar wood instead, slice a "lid" off it,
route a channel through it, thin at the ends, fat in the middle to take more
cedar chips.. screw lid back on and pass liquid butane straight through it,
end to end. Maybe screw in tube connectors or epoxy or... whatever.
Either way you'll get good, "dry" oil - or resin - with no solvent residue so
you can then dissolve in whatever expensive end-use solvent you might care to
use. Obviously the butane will be totally lost, unless you go industrial and
scavenge and re-compress it.. and then you'll have reinvented the fridge.
Hours of harmless fun for boys and girls of all ages.
Usual disclaimers apply...........
On Apr 23, 5:02=A0pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
> Zico wrote:
>
> ...> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> > 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> > two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>
> ...
> For what end purpose?
>
> I think the premise that woodworkers inherently know more chemistry
> because they work wood than a chemist is flawed... :)
Hehehe, you're right, of course. it was not meant as an
"absolute" unconditional assumption; I guess it goes to
the issue of practical knowledge; woodworking people
are likely to know a variety of facts about wood, including
chemistry. For a chemist, I guess one can not expect that
they will know the practical details about *everything*.
Anyway, coming back to the topic...
The idea is to make tincture (you know, like you make
herb tinctures for nutritional/medicinal purposes --- like
chamomile, various mint herbs, linden, etc. etc.).
Obviously, the cedar tincture is not for human consumption;
I'm planning to use it as insects repellent, specifically ants.
I know there's a myriad of commercial products for this,
but I'm somewhat reluctant to trust those products (not
their effectiveness, but rather regarding their effects on
our health).
That, plus I once read (it was somewhere online, though,
so credibility is not necessarily high) about cedar *oil* as
being a very efficient insect repellent. Since I have not
found such thing commercially, I'm guessing I could try
the closest to it, which I know how to do (well, I've made
my own herbs tinctures for a while --- I'm guessing/hoping
the process should be similar?)
If you think there's some red flag on my assumptions
regarding the use I'm planning for the cedar tincture,
especially whether it may be equally harmful for our
health as commercial presumably toxic products, I
will sure be glad to hear some more from you guys!
Anyway, thanks for the answers so far. I will let you know
how it goes (in particular, if it does explode, I will surely
let you know... that is, I *hope* I'll be in shape to let you
know! :) )
thanks,
-Zico
Keith Nuttle wrote:
> In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
> better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With Isopropanol,
> while you can not sample your raw materials you will also not have to
> pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several hundred
> percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal cost about $100.
hmmm, two things:
(1) Isn't Isopropanol a more "toxic" substance than ethanol?
I'm probably splitting hairs here, and was definitely going by pure
intuition --- ethanol is what one uses for the herbal tinctures
intended to be *ingested*... Isopropanol (which I'm not sure
if it's exactly the same as the Isopropylic Alcohol that we buy
in pharmacies?), ok, we can rub it on our skin, and it is not
toxic, but as far as I know it is highly toxic if ingested, no?
(2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
of that thing !!! :) )
thanks,
-Zico
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:37:44 -0700 (PDT), Zico <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I guess the question is only marginally on-topic here, but
>I'm sure people here know more about the chemistry of
>the various woods than people in a chemistry newsgroup
>would know the practical aspects of the various woods :)
>
>So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
>50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
>two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>
>Would it produce toxic substances or gases? Could it
>simply cause an explosion due to continuous gas
>production as a result of some chemical reaction?
>
>Thanks for any comments / safety tips,
>-Zico
Well, I have a BS in chemistry and know wood fairly well but that does
not make me an expert. The most concern is that the mix is flammable,
so keep away from heat and sparks. Of course the danger depends the
amount. The alcohol will drive the cedar hydrocarbons (resin) to
solution which is a physical change.
On Apr 23, 4:37=A0pm, Zico <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
snip
> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>
> Would it produce toxic substances or gases? =A0Could it
> simply cause an explosion due to continuous gas
> production as a result of some chemical reaction?
several replys have referred to toxicity issues with alcohols
(isopropanol) in terms of drinking or skin exposure.
this is information from emedicine http://emedicine.medscape.com/
Isopropanol, methanol, and ethylene glycol
In 2005, 7,394 cases of isopropanol ingestions were reported to the US
Poison Control Centers. Of these, 406 patients were classified as
experiencing "major" morbidity. Five additional deaths occurred. In
the same year, 807 cases of methanol and 5,469 cases of ethylene
glycol were reported. Of those intoxicated with methanol, 33 patients
were classified as experiencing "major" disability, and 6 additional
patients died. For those patients who were intoxicated with ethylene
glycol, 176 patients were classified as having "major" disability,
with an additional 16 patients dying.1 It is important to recognize
that these numbers likely underestimate the true incidence of
exposure, however, because of both a failure to recognize the
ingestion as well as a failure to report the suspected or known
ingestion to a poison control center.
The primary toxicity with isopropanol is CNS depression. These CNS
manifestations can include lethargy, ataxia, and coma. In addition,
isopropanol is irritating to the GI tract. Therefore, abdominal pain,
hemorrhagic gastritis, and vomiting can be observed. Unlike methanol
and ethylene glycol, isopropanol does not cause a metabolic acidosis.
The toxicity with methanol occurs from both the ensuing metabolic
acidosis, as well as the formate anion (formic acid) itself. Although
the eye is the primary site of organ toxicity, in the later stages of
severe methanol toxicity, specific changes can occur in the basal
ganglia as well. Pancreatitis has been reported following methanol
ingestion. Hyperventilation will occur as a compensatory mechanism to
counteract the acidosis.
As previously stated, ethylene glycol by itself is nontoxic. The
majority of the metabolic acidosis occurs from glycolic acid. One form
of morbidity occurs when oxalate combines with calcium to form calcium
oxalate crystals, which accumulate in the proximal renal tubules,
thereby inducing renal failure. Hypocalcemia can ensue, and cause
coma, seizures, and dysrhythmias. Autopsy studies have confirmed the
calcium oxalate crystals are deposited not only in the kidneys but in
many organs, including the brain, heart, and lungs.
Richard
33 years as analytical chemist.
"Keith Nuttle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > The original poster said he was going to put it on his skin as an insect
> repellent,
No, he didn't. He said that he wanted to use it as an insecticide for ants.
I doubt to many people have problems with ants crawling on them.
On Apr 23, 2:48=A0pm, Zico <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 23, 5:02=A0pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Zico wrote:
>
> > ...> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> > > 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> > > two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>
> > ...
> > For what end purpose?
>
> > I think the premise that woodworkers inherently know more chemistry
> > because they work wood than a chemist is flawed... :)
>
> Hehehe, you're right, of course. =A0it was not meant as an
> "absolute" unconditional assumption; =A0I guess it goes to
> the issue of practical knowledge; =A0woodworking people
> are likely to know a variety of facts about wood, including
> chemistry. =A0For a chemist, I guess one can not expect that
> they will know the practical details about *everything*.
>
> Anyway, coming back to the topic...
>
> The idea is to make tincture =A0(you know, like you make
> herb tinctures for nutritional/medicinal purposes --- like
> chamomile, various mint herbs, linden, etc. etc.).
>
> Obviously, the cedar tincture is not for human consumption;
> I'm planning to use it as insects repellent, specifically ants.
>
> I know there's a myriad of commercial products for this,
> but I'm somewhat reluctant to trust those products =A0(not
> their effectiveness, but rather regarding their effects on
> our health).
>
> That, plus I once read (it was somewhere online, though,
> so credibility is not necessarily high) about cedar *oil* as
> being a very efficient insect repellent. =A0Since I have not
> found such thing commercially, I'm guessing I could try
> the closest to it, which I know how to do =A0(well, I've made
> my own herbs tinctures for a while --- I'm guessing/hoping
> the process should be similar?)
>
> If you think there's some red flag on my assumptions
> regarding the use I'm planning for the cedar tincture,
> especially whether it may be equally harmful for our
> health as commercial presumably toxic products, I
> will sure be glad to hear some more from you guys!
>
> Anyway, thanks for the answers so far. =A0I will let you know
> how it goes =A0(in particular, if it does explode, I will surely
> let you know... =A0that is, I *hope* I'll be in shape to let you
> know! =A0:) )
>
> thanks,
> -Zico
Unless you are wanting to do it yourself, you can google "cedar oil"
and buy oils or extracts that are much more concerntrated than you can
make on your own without doing a distillation. A likely cheaper also.
I have used some to soak cedar strips in for repelling moths in
closets. It wasn't very expensive.
Al
On Apr 23, 1:37=A0pm, Zico <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess the question is only marginally on-topic here, but
> I'm sure people here know more about the chemistry of
> the various woods than people in a chemistry newsgroup
> would know the practical aspects of the various woods =A0:)
>
> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>
> Would it produce toxic substances or gases? =A0Could it
> simply cause an explosion due to continuous gas
> production as a result of some chemical reaction?
>
> Thanks for any comments / safety tips,
> -Zico
Zico,
I am not sure about the flammability of 50% ethanol, but it might be
flammable on it's own. I don't think that mixing it with wood would
have any reactions other it removing water from the wood. I have read
about using acohols on green wood and assumed that was the purpose. I
have training as an analytical chemist, but on experience in your
question, other than my assumptions.
I have interested in the source of your question however.
Regards,,
Al
"Zico" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
Is that a fishing rod in your hand?
Zico wrote:
> Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
>> better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With
>> Isopropanol, while you can not sample your raw materials you will
>> also not have to
>> pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several
>> hundred percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal
>> cost about $100.
>
> hmmm, two things:
>
> (1) Isn't Isopropanol a more "toxic" substance than ethanol?
>
> I'm probably splitting hairs here, and was definitely going by pure
> intuition --- ethanol is what one uses for the herbal tinctures
> intended to be *ingested*... Isopropanol (which I'm not sure
> if it's exactly the same as the Isopropylic Alcohol that we buy
> in pharmacies?), ok, we can rub it on our skin, and it is not
> toxic, but as far as I know it is highly toxic if ingested, no?
>
> (2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
> they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
> pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
> then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
> that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
> sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
> you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
> high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
> ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
> for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
> of that thing !!! :) )
>
You can buy 98% ethanol (the remaining 2% is water absorbed from the air)
without paying the tax. You may use it for fuel, compounding cosmetics,
pharmaceuticals, mouthwash, antiseptics, and dozens and dozens of other
things. The retail price is trivial (like $5/gallon).
In my younger days, we'd steal a gallon from the biology department (it cost
the department about $0.85) and have a party. One gallon is equivalent to 10
fifths of 100-proof Vodka.
As I said, you CAN obtain pure ethanol - you just have to jump through
innumerable government hoops (and probably pay enormous licensing fees).
Keith Nuttle wrote:
> Zico wrote:
> > Keith Nuttle wrote:
> >
> >> In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
> >> better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With Isopropanol,
> >> while you can not sample your raw materials you will also not have to
> >> pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several hundred
> >> percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal cost about $100.
> >
> > hmmm, two things:
> >
> > (1) Isn't Isopropanol a more "toxic" substance than ethanol?
> >
> > I'm probably splitting hairs here, and was definitely going by pure
> > intuition --- ethanol is what one uses for the herbal tinctures
> > intended to be *ingested*... Isopropanol (which I'm not sure
> > if it's exactly the same as the Isopropylic Alcohol that we buy
> > in pharmacies?), ok, we can rub it on our skin, and it is not
> > toxic, but as far as I know it is highly toxic if ingested, no?
> >
> > (2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
> > they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
> > pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
> > then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
> > that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
> > sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
> > you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
> > high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
> > ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
> > for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
> > of that thing !!! :) )
> >
> > thanks,
> > -Zico
> The original poster said he was going to put it on his skin as an insect
> repellent, and my comment was based strictly on the solvent properties
> of the two alcohols.
Hmm... Big misunderstanding here! :) I am the OP (and am the
same person you were replying to).
And I may have used the wrong term (English is not my native
language, so misunderstandings often happen when I'm involved
in a conversation in English:) ) --- but no, I meant exactly the
opposite --- *not* to be used on humans... Insect repellent as
in, spray it around the perimeter of th house to keep ants and
other crawling insects away... as much as possible anyway. it
would seem like the term "insect repellent" specifically means
the mosquito-repellent type of thing?
Anyway, as you point out, yes, I would be a little scared about the
effect of cedar extract/oils on my skin. I mean, maybe they're ok
and 100% absolutely harmless.... but I do not know if that is the
case, so I wouldn't feel like trying.
Intuitively, using it for spraying next to the house, but outdoors
nonetheless, sounds harmless enough.
> Do you know the most dangerous chemical in the world today? One which no
> one is considering regulating to prevent people form being exposed to it.
Polychlorinated Bipheniles?? :) (though I doubt that those are not
regulated). Are you referring to DEET?
thanks,
-Zico
"Zico" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1e10dedd-006c-40ce-8746-284a10a28bef@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> (2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
> they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
> pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
> then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
> that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
> sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
> you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
> high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
> ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
> for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
> of that thing !!! :) )
Denatured alcohol is ethanol with poisons and flavorants added to discourage
internal consumption. It is not subject to alcohol tax. I don't recall what
I pay, but it's about $12 to $15/gallon at home centers. I use it in the
shop for shellac and some cleaning.
Zico wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess the question is only marginally on-topic here, but
> I'm sure people here know more about the chemistry of
> the various woods than people in a chemistry newsgroup
> would know the practical aspects of the various woods :)
>
> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>
> Would it produce toxic substances or gases? Could it
> simply cause an explosion due to continuous gas
> production as a result of some chemical reaction?
>
> Thanks for any comments / safety tips,
> -Zico
You want to use potable, 100 proof alcohol for wood chips? *WHY???*
dadiOH
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> See what's in the other 5 percent of the ethanol you get at the pharmacy.
> It's usually "denatured", which means that that other 5 percent is
> something toxic.
The remaining 5 percent is water. Keeping alcohol completely water free is
quite difficult.
"Zico" wrote:
> Insect repellent as
> in, spray it around the perimeter of th house to keep ants and
> other crawling insects away... as much as possible anyway. it
> would seem like the term "insect repellent" specifically means
> the mosquito-repellent type of thing?
Professional exterminators have access to insectisides than can be
sprayed around the foundation of a building for insects that come out
of the ground.
Additionally, they also have access to insectisides that can be
"painted" around the base of a room that dry and leave a residual bug
poison on the floor that kills the bugs (ants) when they walk across
it, get it on their legs and take some back to the nest.
Neither one are available to across the counter consumers.
Lew
Keith Nuttle <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snip>
> Do you know the most dangerous chemical in the world today? One which
> no one is considering regulating to prevent people form being exposed
> to it.
>
>
Dihydrogen monoxide?
J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>> You can buy 98% ethanol (the remaining 2% is water absorbed from the
>> air) without paying the tax. You may use it for fuel, compounding
>> cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, mouthwash, antiseptics, and dozens and
>> dozens of other things. The retail price is trivial (like $5/gallon).
>>
>> In my younger days, we'd steal a gallon from the biology department
>> (it cost the department about $0.85) and have a party. One gallon is
>> equivalent to 10 fifths of 100-proof Vodka.
>>
>> As I said, you CAN obtain pure ethanol - you just have to jump
>> through innumerable government hoops (and probably pay enormous
>> licensing fees).
>
> Basically you either pay the tax or convince the BATF that your use
> falls into one of the tax exempt categories. If the end result is
> something that one can drink without going blind you don't fall into
> a tax-exempt category. If you do convince them of this and you use
> less than 25 gallons a year then there's no tax at all--if you use
> more than 25 gallons a year you pay 250 a year for the privilege of
> not paying the excise tax. Hoops to jump through--you have to
> convince them that you are a legitimate business, tell them how you
> are going to use it, tell them how you are going to store it in such
> manner that it can't be diverted to beverage use, and you're going to
> have to keep books on its use and provide them the books on request
> (if they don't like your record keeping they can pull your permit).
> Unless you're using a lot of it it's easier to just pay the tax--it's
> 27 bucks a gallon.
>
> Fischer Scientific and several of the other major chemical suppliers
> have explanations of the various grades they sell--unless you have a
> permit on file with them they charge you the tax on any alcohol that
> is not denatured. Anhydrous alcohol can be denatured with less than 2
> percent denaturant (but the denaturant is going to be something
> really unpleasant).
> So once again, while there is a way to obtain alcohol that is not
> denatured without paying the tax, picking it up off a pharmacy shelf
> is not that way.
Thanks for the update.
Zico wrote:
> On Apr 23, 5:02 pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Zico wrote:
>>
>> ...> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
>>> 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
>>> two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
>> ...
>> For what end purpose?
>>
>> I think the premise that woodworkers inherently know more chemistry
>> because they work wood than a chemist is flawed... :)
>
> Hehehe, you're right, of course. it was not meant as an
> "absolute" unconditional assumption; I guess it goes to
> the issue of practical knowledge; woodworking people
> are likely to know a variety of facts about wood, including
> chemistry. For a chemist, I guess one can not expect that
> they will know the practical details about *everything*.
>
> Anyway, coming back to the topic...
>
> The idea is to make tincture (you know, like you make
> herb tinctures for nutritional/medicinal purposes --- like
> chamomile, various mint herbs, linden, etc. etc.).
>
> Obviously, the cedar tincture is not for human consumption;
> I'm planning to use it as insects repellent, specifically ants.
>
> I know there's a myriad of commercial products for this,
> but I'm somewhat reluctant to trust those products (not
> their effectiveness, but rather regarding their effects on
> our health).
>
> That, plus I once read (it was somewhere online, though,
> so credibility is not necessarily high) about cedar *oil* as
> being a very efficient insect repellent. Since I have not
> found such thing commercially, I'm guessing I could try
> the closest to it, which I know how to do (well, I've made
> my own herbs tinctures for a while --- I'm guessing/hoping
> the process should be similar?)
>
> If you think there's some red flag on my assumptions
> regarding the use I'm planning for the cedar tincture,
> especially whether it may be equally harmful for our
> health as commercial presumably toxic products, I
> will sure be glad to hear some more from you guys!
>
> Anyway, thanks for the answers so far. I will let you know
> how it goes (in particular, if it does explode, I will surely
> let you know... that is, I *hope* I'll be in shape to let you
> know! :) )
>
> thanks,
> -Zico
In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With Isopropanol,
while you can not sample your raw materials you will also not have to
pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several hundred
percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal cost about $100.
Zico wrote:
...
> So that's the thing. I wonder if mixing cedar chips in a
> 50% ethanol solution and leaving it there for a week or
> two (sealed) would be asking for trouble.
...
For what end purpose?
I think the premise that woodworkers inherently know more chemistry
because they work wood than a chemist is flawed... :)
I had a fair amount of chemistry and minor in ChemE and have done quite
a lot of woodworking and can't say as I know the absolute answer to the
question.
My inclination would be there wouldn't be any gas-producing reaction
from anything I can think of that would be conducive to a
self-initiating event.
But, I come back to the initial question...
--
Zico wrote:
> Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
>> better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With
>> Isopropanol, while you can not sample your raw materials you will
>> also not have to
>> pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several
>> hundred percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal
>> cost about $100.
>
> hmmm, two things:
>
> (1) Isn't Isopropanol a more "toxic" substance than ethanol?
>
> I'm probably splitting hairs here, and was definitely going by pure
> intuition --- ethanol is what one uses for the herbal tinctures
> intended to be *ingested*... Isopropanol (which I'm not sure
> if it's exactly the same as the Isopropylic Alcohol that we buy
> in pharmacies?), ok, we can rub it on our skin, and it is not
> toxic, but as far as I know it is highly toxic if ingested, no?
>
> (2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
> they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
> pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
> then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
> that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
> sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
> you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
> high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
> ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
> for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
> of that thing !!! :) )
See what's in the other 5 percent of the ethanol you get at the pharmacy.
It's usually "denatured", which means that that other 5 percent is something
toxic.
CW wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> See what's in the other 5 percent of the ethanol you get at the
>> pharmacy. It's usually "denatured", which means that that other 5
>> percent is something toxic.
> The remaining 5 percent is water. Keeping alcohol completely water
> free is quite difficult.
You've analyzed samples of ethanol purchased in Canadian pharmacies?
HeyBub wrote:
> Zico wrote:
>> Keith Nuttle wrote:
>>
>>> In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
>>> better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With
>>> Isopropanol, while you can not sample your raw materials you will
>>> also not have to
>>> pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several
>>> hundred percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal
>>> cost about $100.
>>
>> hmmm, two things:
>>
>> (1) Isn't Isopropanol a more "toxic" substance than ethanol?
>>
>> I'm probably splitting hairs here, and was definitely going by pure
>> intuition --- ethanol is what one uses for the herbal tinctures
>> intended to be *ingested*... Isopropanol (which I'm not sure
>> if it's exactly the same as the Isopropylic Alcohol that we buy
>> in pharmacies?), ok, we can rub it on our skin, and it is not
>> toxic, but as far as I know it is highly toxic if ingested, no?
>>
>> (2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
>> they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
>> pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
>> then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
>> that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
>> sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
>> you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
>> high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
>> ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
>> for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
>> of that thing !!! :) )
>>
>
> You can buy 98% ethanol (the remaining 2% is water absorbed from the
> air) without paying the tax. You may use it for fuel, compounding
> cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, mouthwash, antiseptics, and dozens and
> dozens of other things. The retail price is trivial (like $5/gallon).
>
> In my younger days, we'd steal a gallon from the biology department
> (it cost the department about $0.85) and have a party. One gallon is
> equivalent to 10 fifths of 100-proof Vodka.
>
> As I said, you CAN obtain pure ethanol - you just have to jump through
> innumerable government hoops (and probably pay enormous licensing
> fees).
Basically you either pay the tax or convince the BATF that your use falls
into one of the tax exempt categories. If the end result is something that
one can drink without going blind you don't fall into a tax-exempt category.
If you do convince them of this and you use less than 25 gallons a year then
there's no tax at all--if you use more than 25 gallons a year you pay 250 a
year for the privilege of not paying the excise tax. Hoops to jump
through--you have to convince them that you are a legitimate business, tell
them how you are going to use it, tell them how you are going to store it in
such manner that it can't be diverted to beverage use, and you're going to
have to keep books on its use and provide them the books on request (if they
don't like your record keeping they can pull your permit).
Unless you're using a lot of it it's easier to just pay the tax--it's 27
bucks a gallon.
Fischer Scientific and several of the other major chemical suppliers have
explanations of the various grades they sell--unless you have a permit on
file with them they charge you the tax on any alcohol that is not denatured.
Anhydrous alcohol can be denatured with less than 2 percent denaturant (but
the denaturant is going to be something really unpleasant).
So once again, while there is a way to obtain alcohol that is not denatured
without paying the tax, picking it up off a pharmacy shelf is not that way.
Zico wrote:
> Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
>> better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With Isopropanol,
>> while you can not sample your raw materials you will also not have to
>> pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several hundred
>> percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal cost about $100.
>
> hmmm, two things:
>
> (1) Isn't Isopropanol a more "toxic" substance than ethanol?
>
> I'm probably splitting hairs here, and was definitely going by pure
> intuition --- ethanol is what one uses for the herbal tinctures
> intended to be *ingested*... Isopropanol (which I'm not sure
> if it's exactly the same as the Isopropylic Alcohol that we buy
> in pharmacies?), ok, we can rub it on our skin, and it is not
> toxic, but as far as I know it is highly toxic if ingested, no?
>
> (2) If I go to the Liquors store and try to buy 95% Ethanol, yes,
> they charge me about $100 for 1.14 litres of it ... If I go to the
> pharmacy and by *rubbing alcohol* that says "Ethanol 95%",
> then I pay $5 for 500 ml ... That's more or less the proportion
> that you're saying for the taxes .... BTW, I'm in Canada, so not
> sure if the alcohol taxes issues are exactly the same from where
> you're writing from --- I know the alcohol taxes here are *very*
> high, in any case. I wonder if that's a loophole? Or maybe the
> ethanol one buys from the pharmacy is not really good enough
> for drinking it? (I would certainly not try ingesting a single drop
> of that thing !!! :) )
>
> thanks,
> -Zico
The original poster said he was going to put it on his skin as an insect
repellent, and my comment was based strictly on the solvent properties
of the two alcohols. Isopropanol would dissolve a greater percent of the
cedar oils which when evaporated would leave more cedar oils on the
skin. Before he proceeds he should check the toxicity of the oils from
cedar.
Isopropanol is another name for Isopropyl alcohol. Since there is an
odd number of carbon atoms in the Isopropanol molecule, it is a poison
like Methanol (Methyl Alcohol). Therefore, yes, it should not be taken
internally. Ethanol (ethyl alcohol) which has an even number of carbon
atoms in the molecule.
Isopropanol is the same as you get in the pharmacy, thought the percent
water may will vary depending on the intended purpose of the alcohol.
My pricing is slightly out of date, since it is what we paid for 100%,
200 proof Ethanol when I managed a laboratory, but as every one knows
taxes never go down. The price of Ethanol is also based on whether it
is denatured. ie a solvent is added to the ethanol so it can not be
used at a party. There are many type of solvents used as denaturants.
Do you know the most dangerous chemical in the world today? One which no
one is considering regulating to prevent people form being exposed to it.
Jim Willemin wrote:
> Keith Nuttle <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Do you know the most dangerous chemical in the world today? One which
>> no one is considering regulating to prevent people form being exposed
>> to it.
>>
>>
>
> Dihydrogen monoxide?
I think that it was last year that one of the more foreward thinking
communities in the People's Republic of California actually got to the
voting stage when someone pointed out the common name for the chemical.
This is used in alcohol lamps. Hot and blue flame.
Martin
scritch wrote:
>>
>> I am not sure about the flammability of 50% ethanol, but it might be
>> flammable on it's own.
>
> 50% ethanol = 100 proof. I can tell you from personal mustache-flaming
> experience that 80 proof whiskey burns. Thus, 100 proof, or 50%
> alcohol, will burn, too.
>
>
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:49:32 -0400, Keith Nuttle
<[email protected]> wrote:
>The original poster said he was going to put it on his skin as an insect
>repellent, and my comment was based strictly on the solvent properties
>of the two alcohols. Isopropanol would dissolve a greater percent of the
>cedar oils which when evaporated would leave more cedar oils on the
>skin. Before he proceeds he should check the toxicity of the oils from
>cedar.
I thought he said for ants..???
Is that some kind of torture...???
Mike O.
In article <[email protected]>, Keith Nuttle <[email protected]> wrote:
>Isopropanol is another name for Isopropyl alcohol.
<nitpick>
No chemist would call it that. The IUPAC-approved name is 2-propanol.
</nitpick>
>Since there is an
>odd number of carbon atoms in the Isopropanol molecule, it is a poison
>like Methanol (Methyl Alcohol). Therefore, yes, it should not be taken
>internally. Ethanol (ethyl alcohol) which has an even number of carbon
>atoms in the molecule.
Toxicity has absolutely *nothing* to do with an odd or even number of carbon
atoms in the molecule: butanol, with four carbons, is toxic. For that matter,
so is ethanol -- less so than any of the other simple alcohols, but toxic just
the same.
In article <[email protected]>, Keith Nuttle <[email protected]> wrote:
>In that case you may wish to consider Isopropanol, as it will do a
>better job of disolving the cedar oils than Ethanol. With Isopropanol,
>while you can not sample your raw materials you will also not have to
>pay the tax to the government. At one time the tax was several hundred
>percent of the cost of the Ethanol. ie $10 worth of Ethanal cost about $100.
Only *beverage* ethanol carries the high tax burden. "Denatured" ethanol,
made unfit for beverage use by the addition of small amounts of methanol
and/or other toxic substances, is comparatively cheap.