Author Topic: "True Blue" NH3/Li reduction ie birch  (Read 126152 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Guest
"True Blue" NH3/Li reduction ie birch
« on: May 18, 2004, 09:41:00 AM »
This process assumes the reader has some experience regarding a NH3/Li reduction of ephedrine hydrochloride or ephedrine freebase. The quantities of reactants listed are based on 60 grams of clean ephedrine freebase and the presence of any contaminants including waxes or fillers will change the quantity of NH3 and Li needed for the reduction to complete effectively. Please use caution when manipulating the molecular structure of a compound. They enjoy attentive handling. Please read material safety data sheets on all reagents in the processes prior to attepting the process. This basic list of instructions excludes much important data regarding the safe handling of reagents.

A good education is the best safety coordinator.
Please take time to read accordingly.

The BIBLE says in James 3:8 "But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison."

Having all that been said lets get on with it.....

1- add 500ml of NH3 to rxn vessel
2- dissolve 5.5 double a Li strips into NH3 1/4 a piece
   at a time taking approximately 2 minutes per while
   stirring or swirling. 15 minutes later you have a deep
   indigo blue solution with the consistancy of a thin
   soup. If your rxn vessel is not on a ice bath you
   will loose a substantial quantity of NH3 in this
   Adjust accordingly at the onset of process.
3- slowly, add 250ml of NP
   solvent/ephedrine freebase solution to the rxn
   vessel stirring or swirling the entire time. The NH3
   will displace the NP solvent allowing the Li to
   manipulate the ephedrine reduction directly to
   the freebase molecules. This will hold true as long as
   there is adequate quantities of NH3 present to displace
   the NP. The coolness generated by the NH3
   stabilizes the freebase molecules during the reduction.
4- remove the rxn vessel from the ice bath
5- continue stirring or swirling every 2 minutes for a
   full 15 minutes. This will assure all molecules of the
   freebase have interaction with the Li which is the
   reducing agent.
6- remove top of rxn vessel if fitted and allow
   evaporation of ammonia to begin.
7- Add 250ml of anhydrous NP. Note: if NP is warmer than
   room temperature the evaporation of ammonia will
   accelerate synergistically. Some consider this
   benificial as the reduction has been completed in the
   first 15 minutes and the balance of the time spent
   is waiting for the excess ammonia to evaporate. This
   usually takes about 30-45 minutes but can be done
   quicker via DH20 washing.
8- filter off the reaction fluid being careful not to
   include the solids remaining in the rxn vessel.
9- add 100ml hot NP solvent to rxn vessel and agitate
   for 5 minutes. This should gravitate any freebase
   molecules trapped in the post reduction waste and the
   NP solvent. Let settle 5 minutes then filter again.
10-with a gloved hand placed inside a pantyhose
   stocking, collect the solids from the rxn vessel.
   squeeze these thoroughly through the stocking, above
   the filter into the collected solution until no more
   liquid is released.
   This may contain some freebase oil.
11-add 250ml hot DH2O to the NP/freebase solution. Shake
   violently for several minutes. allow to settle for 10
   minutes. remove the aqueous layer. now add 250ml cold
   DH2O to the NP/freebase solution shaking violently
   again for several minutes and allow to settle for 10
   minutes. remove again the aqueous layer. a third DH2O
   wash will get any residual water soluable contaminants
   such as chlorine or NaOH out of the solution.
12-now you have two choices. either gas or titriate. then
   evaporate or filter and acetone crash and recrystallize.

13-lucky thirteen! 95% pure product at a yield
   of 78% the original mass in weight. 60 grams reduced to
   47 when the a/b was clean and all filtering mediums were
   pre-moistened. swims preferred a/b extraction begins
   with a DH2O soak then taste test filtering prior to NaOH
   push. the NP/freebase solution was then succesively
   washed 3 times with DH2O. the NP/freebase solution was
   then reduced to 25% under very guarded heat(low, low,
   low). the NP/freebase solution(anhydrous) was then
   slowly added to the rxn vessel during the reaction.
   the one drawback is wondering how much product you have
   in the NP/freebase solution.
   swim feels the uncommon yields are due to the minimum
   use of filtering agents and lack of handling the
   crystalline product. this combined with an accurate
   Ph level during the NaOH push is pobabably the

A) the NP/freebase solution was created during a a/b
   extraction of a pill solution that was filtered
   prior to the NaOH push. then three successive DH20
   washes were completed prior to the 25% reduction
   under low heat. this made for a near crystal clear
   solution of NP/freebase stock for the reduction.

B-the whole process took just under an hour. rather than
  wait for the ammonia to evaporate, swim chose to do
  3 successive DH2O washes to remove the ammonia, chlorine
  and NaOH reminants. the Li was spent in the reduction
  process while the NP was retained with the additional
  amount that was added for the final titriation/gassing.
  also it should be noted that the original pills had a
  antihistimine listed under active ingredients. swim
  believes these 2mg per pill were either diminished in the
  rxn environment and released as other by-products or
  account for the 5% impurity.

swim prefers gassing to retrieve HCL needle like crystals
and uses these without acetone crashing or
recrystallization. swim believes these steps to be unnecessary having little or no affect on the final product.

swim also conveyed a therory she has regarding rxn's that are interupted by the addition of DH2O. She theorizes that the DH2O/Li rxn creates an environment that propels and encourages over-reducing. She believes pockets of concentrated Li are accumulated when the DH2O/Li interact creating an environment in which the temperature exceeds a favorable level for the stable reduction of the freebase molecule. The result being small deposits of over-reduced or otherwise damaged molecules. She also stated that the only time she would consider interupting a rxn with DH2O is when there was an excess of Li known to be added to the rxn due to the lack of a scale or having previously failed to identify the required quantity for the rxn to complete. she then would add DH2O because too much Li IS known to cause over-reduction and/or molecular damage. this would result in smaller yields and a less favorable quality. she also has a theory on multi-solvent extractions, alchohol extractions and NP soaks, adding moe contaminants than they remove but we won't go there.

all I know is that swim knows her "True Blue" like a true crystal knows it's proper structure ratio!

the rest can just vaporize..............


  • Guest
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2004, 09:57:00 PM »
I read through this quickly a week or so past and did not notice until this time that the diference is the addition of freebase suspended in NP.  This sadly has been standard in the past.  I do share your excitement and joy for nailing a smooth procedure.  Due to the nature of NH3 and it's availability not many opt to Birch.  SWIW believes it to be fabulous but alas lack of patients and  the existance of close neighbors keeps this dream at bay.  Also keep in mind that quite a few Bee's are having dificulty with pills and your joy may not be welcome company.  Though this procedure may seem in your eyes to be the answer for those Bees, time will tuely be the judge of that.  As most of us are sceptics and believe sucess under any reaction to have it's numbered days until the pill fuckers roll out a new beast.  Again congradulations and if you have any tips for the micro bircher toss me a PM. ;)


  • Guest
Ephedrine hydrate
« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2004, 03:35:00 AM »

The quantities of reactants listed are based on 60 grams of clean ephedrine freebase and the presence of any contaminants including waxes or fillers will change the quantity of NH3 and Li needed for the reduction to complete effectively.

The ephedrine freebase MUST BE DRIED before using in a birch reduction as ephedrine forms a hydrate (ephedrine.1/2 H2O). The water on the hydrated ephedrine will react with the Li and diminish the mole ratio of Li.


  • Guest
Drying of the ephedrine
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2004, 08:04:00 AM »
I believe it was mentioned in the original post that the NP/ephedrine freebase solution became anhydrous while reducing the quantity of solvent over low heat. If the solution was not properly "dryed", there may be enough moisture to react in a way that was less than pleasant when it came into contact with the dissolved Li(not to mention changing the rxn ratios a tad) This moisture content is stated to change the ephedrine to a hydrate. That would lead swim to believe that it has become a new compound and that a rxn would be necessary to free the ephedrine of the H2O. I am not a chemist by any means nor is swim. Possibly the addition of a heat source above H2O's boiling point but below the NP's flash point would be in order. If not youv'e got me cuz swim continues to stand by her original post verbatim. Swim is curious as to whether or not you are suggesting that something other than heating need to occur to properly dry the E. Thanks for the response. I appreciate.


  • Guest
hey hey
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2004, 08:18:00 AM »
Hey weaz
Thanks for the thata girl, guy or whatever. I can relate to fellow bee's frustration with extraction inhibitors. I am not sure if swim remebered that these bee's collect honey all over the globe. Sometimes it's easy to assume flying is as easy south of the equator as it is north. Sounds like somebod-bee should post a simple, effective pill extraction technique for the fellow swarmers. Maybe swim has a copy I could post. She is kinda scared of the internet with emails and all required. Personally I don't have anything to hide(other than my stash) I think I'll get a PM to ya sometime in the future. I watched swim perform this rxn on 60 grams in a basement one bedroom apartment without incident. Very confident she is. Not only that but with all the necessary materials needed sold OTC you may just convert with a little coersion. At any rate thanks for the post. I was sure that somebod-bee out there had used suspended freebase before, I was just suprised not to see any posts on it. After all, it does save a substantial amount of excess handling from being required. Any tips on how to create image files so I can send you some good nano pointers?


  • Guest
Hey O.G. Swim would like to read some thoughts
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2004, 01:26:00 PM »
Hey O.G.  Swim would like to read some thoughts on small birch's.  P.m Bigblue as well, or just post it in this topic.  T.I.A


  • Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2004, 04:23:00 PM »


Also search the server room here st the hive. 8)


  • Guest
nano schematic
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2004, 07:32:00 PM »
Thanks weaz. It's about time somebody saw the value and potential breezy flow of the NH3/Li. I call it this because it really isn't a true birch reduction. A true birch utilizes sodium as a reagent in liu of Li. I do not however recall the actual name, although it has it's own, of the NH3/Li rxn. Keep your eyes peeled in a few days for a few pages of drawings etc that may benifit swiw. It may take me a few days to get this info in a medium that makes any kind of sense at all. Especially in that I am not familiar with the software necessary to get the schematics ready. I'll do my best but I wish I had access to a scanner. Then I could just color a pretty picture and voula...insti map. Also I use the computer in an environment that is within the commons area of the complex where I reside and lots of other tenants seem to slow the process if ya catch my drift. I will not forget you though and If I were you I'd study at Rhodium and search on "The complete Birch" by mister clean. This document has been around for a long time and speaks with lots of hands on experience regarding the rxn as well as generating NH3 on your own from OTC products. Thanks for your patience and understanding. I may have to ask swim to nano a batch of ambition to keep me company.....


  • Guest
Thanks for the interest
« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2004, 07:50:00 PM »
Hey Big with weaz you can keep an eye peeled for a workup in a few days. I'd convert the whole world if I could thus saving me from ingesting those awful post Rp/I crystal imposters. If you have any doubt just look at them under a microscope. A true Methamphetamine crystal has a 3/1 structure ratio as with various other unique characteristics that the imposters don't. A true Rp/I rxn takes well over 48 hours to achieve product even remotely close in uumph and yield. Not to mention that stinky, messy need a home-lab-kit package that comes with it. After all how would swim explain the need for a 1000ml flask, contained heating element, condenser as with the peeling paint and rusted blinds that result. Goooooood luck! He's got Iodine stains on his fingers, Got a silver spoon made of glass, and a grand piano to prop up his mortal remains.... Isn't that a Pink Floyd spin off? Swim would rather play in the stench for an hour,then be done with it, incriminants and all. If done properly one would never even know NH3 was utilized in this process.(at least from a smellers perspective) Then comes "fluff" time or real shards if prefered.


  • Guest
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2004, 07:53:00 PM »
By the way....Whats this stand for?


  • Guest
« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2004, 05:00:00 AM »
I dont know what lingo you're after, but it does sometimes stand for "Thanks In Advance".

Thats what I use it for anyway.

There might be som chemical abrivation Im not aware of, though...


  • Guest
« Reply #11 on: May 25, 2004, 07:24:00 AM »
Jammin is correct on my usage of T.I.A.  Thanks in advance!  Swim is with the OG on the Birch "Like."  Mr.Clean's write up conviced swim of that.  Much shorter reduction.  You can control the smelly.  The li is easily obtainable.  You can make your own juice.  No heat, till gas, then only a small amount.  Dry Ice can control the reduction.   Plus the best part, NH3 and Li don't care  much about binders, gakks, etc..


  • Guest
A few anal retentive quesations
« Reply #12 on: May 25, 2004, 09:45:00 PM »
Thanks for the informative process. Being a big dummy I can't fully appreciate something until I understand all the details so I ask the following hopefully without offending
1. Since you use the fb and not in an OH, where does the H come from after cleaving the OH? Not being a chemist I may be confused here but I thought the H from the cleaved OH couldn't be used and that the NP needed to stay intact for extraction
2.How did you determine a purity of 95%?
3. Did I understand correctly that you obtained a yield of 78% final MA HCl from possible E in pills?
4.You mentioned obtaining MA crystals when you gassed. I have only recent gassing experience but I've never obtained crystals. Any suggestions?
5.You mentioned making your E anhydrous by reducing the quantity of NP it was suspended in. What do you use for NP?

Not a question but I beleive the name for this reaction is a "Benkser Reduction" or a "MAS (Metal Ammonia Solution) Reduction"


  • Guest
A response to your polite inquiry
« Reply #13 on: May 27, 2004, 03:17:00 PM »
Thank you for expressing an interest in my original post as well as forwarding the information on the formal names of the rxn. I have yet to research what documentation is available on the "Benkser" or "Mas" but definately appreciate your input!

1. Since you use the fb and not in an OH, where does the H come from after cleaving the OH? Not being a chemist I may be confused here but I thought the H from the cleaved OH couldn't be used and that the NP needed to stay intact for extraction

Having dropped out of high school in the 11th grade(regretably so) and being only recently introduced to "The Hive" as a primary resouce on the subject of chemistry, I believe quite honestly(and humbly) that this question is beyond my current capacity to answer accurately. It's my feeling that your reference to OH would equate Hydroxide.?(OH-) Iv'e personally, nor has swim, ever seen the scientific formulas nor molecular structures modeled for ephedrine or methamphetamine freebase or crystalline forms. Nor do I have a complete understanding of how exactly the molecular changes take place.(although I are facinated by what I have leared so far)I believe there to be a OH branch(is this the correct term) on an ephedrine molecule that gets diminished during the reduction rxn. Also if memory strikes accurate an additional brach is necessary to form a methamphetamine molecule. It appears that your use of the word cleaving is as a transitive verb meaning "the seperation of a structure into distinct groups having divergent views." To me it means put the O's with the O's and the H's with the H's ! The H's I believe become H+ or otherwise known as protons. I believe an H+ is necessary on the additional branch previously mentioned to attain methamphetamine. Sorry if this is long winded but I'm kinda going with myself here. I don't really have any other resource than "The Hive" and I'm obviously tied up in a response message, unable to do research enabling me to answer with conviction. My deepest apologies if this is way off of the facts. I would not deliberately mislead anybody in such a manner. It wouldn't prevent me from doing so with out my knowledge however. So in your question you mentioned being under the impression that the H by-product generated by the cleaving of the OH could not be utilized in the formation of this additional brach. I believe you to be correct.(by memory again) I am unsure of the explaination for why this becomes unusable though. So this would leave the whole equation short a H necessary to complete the structure in forming methamphetamine? If memory again serves, I recall an ephedrine molecule as having a branch of NH2 that gets modified into NH during the reduction rxn. Is it possible that this is where the missing H is generated to complete the branch necessary for the methamphetamine molecule? I bet those wizards at Rhodium would know! We could sure use their expertise and clarity.

The second part of this question was in reference to the NP involved.

At this point in the process, the NP is being utilized as a vehicle to convey the freebase molecules from one container to another. The reduction under low heat should not affect it's properties in a way that would prevent this from occurring successfully. It may, however, change the chemical percentages available within the NP via evaporating some ingredients more than others. In swim's experience, characteristic changes here were unnoticable having no detectable change on the conveyance of the freebase molecules. The addition of NP post rxn was mentioned as a vehicle to facilitate extraction of the freebase methamphetamine molecules.

2.How did you determine a purity of 95%?

The 95% purity figure was determined on two contributing factors. The roughly 47 gram yield was divided into two lots. The extracted NP was roughly split in half.(no formal measurement however the solution was agitated to facilitate equal distribution of the freebase molecules within the solution) One lot was titriated for preferred honey bee's and the balance gassed. The titriated lot yielded 28.33 grams. The gassing yielded 20.02 grams. The total was 48.35 grams. The titriated lot was then recrystallized via natural evaporation.(which takes way too long by the way) The post evaporation crystals were then seperated from a suspect material that was present.(there were distinct color and texture differences) The suspect material was weighed and discarded after a small sample was tested via vaporization. It's weight was 1.35 grams which when discarded brought the yield down to 47 grams. This equated to 5% of the total 28.33 grams. A little hind-site on the 5% assumed to be remaining in the gassed product would bring it's yield down to 19.02 grams for a total yield of 46.002 grams.(assuming the suspect material was equally distributed within the NP solution) We stand corrected. Thank you for identifying this. Also the titriated crystals where the suspect material was not present were vaporized in a very small quantity. It appeared as if only slight oxidation occurred within the glass utencil. So we figured on 5%.

3. Did I understand correctly that you obtained a yield of 78% final MA HCl from possible E in pills?

Yes, you understood correctly however our figures were slightly off due to the above miscalculation. Including the actual figures mentioned above, the actual yield was 76.66% of a return on the invested 60 grams of ephedrine available within the pills utilized. I believe the maximum yield under perfect conditions to be somewhere in the area of 82% due to reduction. It should be noted though that for certain some E was lost in the extraction but that amount remained uncertain. Midway through the E extraction process there was a total of 63 grams available which obviously equated to unclean E. The remaining 50% of the extraction was carried out in solutions. This made it unfeasible to get an accurate figure on what was readily available post cleaning and reduction.

4.You mentioned obtaining MA crystals when you gassed. I have only recent gassing experience but I've never obtained crystals. Any suggestions?

I stand corrected 50% on this issue. Gassed freebase turns into HCL or crystalline. Although it is minute when compared to the titriated/recrystallized product, it is still crystal formations. The only other option would be freebase which is oil. These tiny fluffy crystals form a sort of spun glass looking structure on the filtering medium prior to handling. Under careful observation one will notice needle like characteristics. The comment within the original post was more so referenced to the titriated lot which did fail to get mentioned. I was unaware of the time perameters governing editing of a post.
If in fact you have any experience with gassing, then you have in fact obtained crystals in doing so. They were just tiny.

5.You mentioned making your E anhydrous by reducing the quantity of NP it was suspended in. What do you use for NP?

Swims personal choice for NP is toulene for various reasons. It is substanially less expensive than other solvents, has less impurities, has good evaporation characteristics, is less volitile than some others, is more common as a everyday garage type product, and has such a sweet smell. Also other NP's such as the common camping fuel so many use causes a cotton candy effect rather than crystallization when gassing and is less than desireable.

Thanks again B.D.N for your interest and your questions. I hope I was able to clarify somewhat. I'm not too sure about that first question though. Obviously having these inquiries come from someone as intelligent and polite as yourself eliminated any chance of offense. Please let me know how you do. Many are unaware that titriation is an option to gassing and that they can obtain what many refer to as glass or shards which is a preferred product for marketing. Maybe if they knew they had a choice they would reconsider this process.

P.s-Do yourself a favor and where the proper eye and respratory protection just in case. It may just save your life.

A few notes in closing...

There was a total of 62 grams available in the pills due to the 2 mg per antihistimine.

The extraction process took a full two days and all filtering mediums were flushed with clean solutions to assure maximum product retention.
All seperation of fluids were done in lab-grade seperatory funnels and the solutions were allowed to seperate completely prior to dispensing.

All solutions in the process were double checked for missed product.

The amount of Li used in the rxn was tailored specifically for the 2 gram antihistimine addition. The actual quantity required for the reduction of 60 grams is slightly less than that utilized. Any overage of Li would result in over-reducing the product and a decrease in yield and quality.

A glass mesh was positioned above the NP during the low heat reduction to catch any freebase oil that may evaporate(nothing notable collected-it seemed to only slow the already slow evaporation process)

The reduction of NP solvent to 25% of the original quantity would not be necessary if enough NH3 was utilized to displace what was used. This would not slow the rxn significantly as the NH3 evaporates so rapidly. Successive DH2O washes will speed this process.

Iv'e seen this done with relatively similar results approximately eight times. Very impressive.

Iv'e heard of people chucking raw pills into the reaction but am unsure as to how one would accurately equate the required Li to compensate for the non-active ingredients. Not to mention what kind of carcenegenics they may be creating within the product they will be utilizing.


  • Guest
Sounds great but...
« Reply #14 on: May 27, 2004, 08:02:00 PM »
Thanks ordinary for an awesome post! Swim feels this is within his capacity to learn but the problem is with the acquisition of NH3.

He has a friend who got popped stealing NH3 from a huge tank out in the plains. These huge tanks are under surveillance and Swim doesnt believe in stealing.

Swim was checking out posts by Mr Clean and iseebatsdude on the production of NH3 with various ammonia fertilizers that are OTC.

The descriptions although directly spelled out should bee accompanied by pictures.

With Eudragit, the DEA and pharm industry have accomplished the task of limiting the supply of gear on the streets of America.

So don't you bees feel that it is now time to unleash the beast?

The rxn itself is easier then RP, hypo and phosacid.

What we need as a collective is a fully descriptive thread concerning self production of NH3 with PICTURES and captions.

Dwarfer knows the birch and has no shame concerning pics.


Aside from Fester's Eudragit cure, NH3 is probably the last straw before settling on racemic product or beeing forced to learn pseudo production via L-PAC?

Someone should unleash the beast and open the flood gates because it is obvious THEY have plans to shut down shop, as we once knew it, regardless.

There is a time and a place for everything, isn't NOW the time?

If not, PM Swim.



  • Guest
What an excellent post!
« Reply #15 on: May 27, 2004, 09:13:00 PM »
Man! Just gotta dig that enthusiastic post!!$^%&^ Are all of your posts so passionate? Swim gets her NH3 from a daring source that retrieves it from a cooling system in a cold storage facility so she has not too much to offer on NH3 generation. Although the process is relatively simple. It envolves manipulating a base with a more aggressive base which is a minimal rxn! Swim believes the hard part is getting the system to withstand the required amount of pressure without leaking that dasterdly smell. Otherwise the system can be dissasembled into ordinary garage type equipment relatively quickly. The other difficult part would be the time required with focused attention. Mr clean mentioned I believe 8 hours to produce 500ml. Keep in mind, this isn't really that big of investment considering he obtained enough NH3 to reduce 60 Grams of ephedrine freebase. Not a bad return in my eyes. If this could be done in 8 hours then I would imagine one could retro fit the generator with a double rxn chamber thus doubling the production. It would require a bit of Mcgyvering to assure one rxn vessel didn't compete with the other but is very achievable. There are options available to using NH3 to begin with. Keep in mind that the reason the rxn is executed with NH3 is to attain the low temperature required to dissolve the Li. Other than that it plays no role in the actual reduction of the ephedrine molecule. Having this been said, a little bit of leg work on some convicted individuals part, researching the "Benkeser" rxn would identify plenty of alternative cooling reagents that could be either obtained or sythisized as easily as NH3 is extracted from fertilizer. Not only that but the reagents that can be substituted are not as dangerous or as smelly as NH3. NH3 is very dangerous and should never be taken lightly. It can literally steal the H2O from the walls of your lungs leaving you with raisins to breath(or attempt to)-Just figuratively speaking of course. I will be continuing my research on an alternative to NH3 for various reasons. Around here it costs quite a bundle to aquire, and living in the atmosphere swim does generation is just not an option. If swim chose a different site to generate then someone  else would certainly have to aquire knowledge about her activities in the cooler which might not be such a good idea. Too many fingers in the .... you know. Any how the "benkeser" rxn is the correct name for the rxn utilizing NH3/Li and references various other solvents for Li. A little studying need be done but there is definately room for a huge breakthrough here. I hope I beat you to it in spilling the good news amongst the oppressed whom are waiting. Start by doing a body search at "The -Hive" and "Rhodium" on this rxn and go from there. Birch is not the proper name for this rxn. It just has been so commonly misused over the years that it has been deemed an acceptable term. Lets get shit straightened out! Then people can find the information they are searching for instead of some slang missed information. This may be a good thread to post any new information you may discover on this subject. People are beginning to respond. Possibly we can motivate the masses and get the real wizards supporting us on this venture. Thanks again for your enthusiasm. It is quite refreshing and if I was sitting next to you, I'd give you swim's favorite glass toy!


  • Guest
the "Benkeser" rxn
« Reply #16 on: May 27, 2004, 09:48:00 PM »
Hey there Biggie, just thought I'd drop you a line and let you know that I discovered the correct spelling of the rxn to be "Benkeser". Not to be critical of your spelling or anything but I figured maybe we could save some fellow "Hivernators" the trouble of searching without success due to one letter. Thanks again for your inquiry and I was wondering if anything I responded on question number one proved to be accurate or not. Also I was wondering if you ever recieved an answer on the proper mole ratio for this rxn using Hcl in liu of freebase. I was looking over your past posts and this seemed to be one that you didn't ever get a straight answer on. TIA for any insite or ridicule you may convey. It's all part of learning in my opinion.


  • Guest
Scotty, SWIP is with you on the timing.
« Reply #17 on: May 27, 2004, 10:50:00 PM »
It's definitely time to explore alternatives, IMHO (SWIM's, that is.) SWIP started to try one of the birch write-ups, and he doesn't recall who the poster was, but it gave instructions on generating NH3 with little or no odorm, using tubing and fittings for an irrigation system. What stopped him from going on with the plan was the painful discovery that the vinyl irrigation parts do not hold up to HI at all. That doesn't mean it would be a problem in a birch, but he decided he wouldn't risk it.

Other than the possibility of a leak, SWIM was wondering if Weaz had thought of venting through a drain pipe, as has so often been discussed wirh regard to RP/I reactions. As long as no huge quantities of NH3 are involved, it would seem to SWIP that the neighbor problem wouldn't be a big one.

Birch sounds like a good shot for many bees. If a really good procedure for generation/containment of the NH3 could be developed there might be a lot more interested bees.



  • Guest
Illiterate High Shool Drop Outs
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2004, 04:12:00 AM »
Just Kidding. I can't remember if I dropped out of school during or after 11th Grade.People will learn what interests them regardless of formal education so long as they don't question their intelligence.
  Sorry about the misspelling. I even rechecked the name (on the Hive of course) while writing that post. I think I'll do better once I learn to use both finger while typing. You seem to be a quick study. You're correct about gassing resulting in crystals Ive just considered it otherwise since I've never seen it in that state that was transparent or tranlucent or dazzling while I have with Titration. The gassing came about with many posts suggesting it superior in the "War on Pill Fuckers" and it does wonders on impatients.
  No offense but I don't think your method of measuring purity is accurate but this from someone who questions any method. When I was a kid everything was supposedly broken down to protons, neutrons, and electrons. I've lost track of how many atomic building blocks there are now, this all falling under the catagory of Quantun Mechanics I believe. The smaller these things become the farther it gets from known physics and closer to mysticism such as "the Dancing Wooly Masters" or Taoism and some highly accredited physicist believe everything brakes down to one common thing(?), a Vibrating String. With this in mind I'm not sure we can quantitatively analize 2 substances and say they are the the same and what they're made of.
  Please excuse my diahrea of the keyboard. I believe it's from recent results to answer (at least to me) this Molarity thing.The best vague answers so far have been:
   1. 2 moles Li / 1 mole pseudo
   2. "  "     " "  " "   pseudo fb = 1 battery /11.2 fb
   3. 3  "     " "  " "   pseudo HCl = " "      / 9.1 HCl
   4. 1 AA batery (.94 gram) / 7 grams pseudo fb -doesn't
      match 1, 2, or 3 and seems like too much excess to
      cover impurities.
Recently I heard of a dream where there was 11.5 grams of what seemed to be clean Pseodoephedrine HCl extracted from white 60's with a ton of crap in them. They were boiled for 10 min (2X)in carb cleaner containing Acetone and Toluene. They were then pulled with 99% isopropal Alcohol 3X with heat allowed to settle somewhat for 1/2 hour and filtered thru 1 coffee filter. Still pretty cloudy but that's OK. Heated to boiling and held there with ice filled cup as cold finger for 1 hour.Right before boiling NaOH (lye)was sprinkled in. As the lye would settle on the bottom after stirring, DH2O was added until most lye dissolved. This can cause a fountain of meat tenderiser all over your body. The ugly on the bottom layer was seperated from the top and discarded. The top layer dryed in Epsom, gassed and recrystalized yeilding 53%.
  Now approximately 300ml of refrigerant grade NH3 with no detectable refrigerant oil (alkylbenzene)was added to a HDPE 2 quart jug nestled in dry ice. Peeled baterries (2)in Camp fuel and the suzy in a container were already in the dry ice getting cold.The suzy was added first and stirred with a rod of UHMW til dissolved (?). About 1/6 of a battry at a time was added till blue stayed for afew seconds the ittybitty pieces until blue stayed a while (10 min this time)Stirred occaisionlly for another 15 min then pulled out of ice put under window with heavy fan flow. Then left the house for 4 hours. 1.2 bateries was used for 11.5 Pseudo HCl which equates to 2.85 moles Li / 1 mole Pseudo HCl. The final yield was not calculated due to too many finger in the pie. It wasn't anything to write home about but the quality iswas beter than I've seen since staying at a lab/ commune in the sixties.
  I know my thoughts here are incomplete and scattered (and forgetabout my spelling)but that's all I'm good for right now


  • Guest
Homebrew NH3 that works 4 swim---
« Reply #19 on: May 31, 2004, 10:49:00 PM »