The main problem I see on the procedure is related to the overall yields. As chlorination of (pseudo)ephedrine by Zn/HCl will yield not much more than 75% best and the electroreduction also 75% the overall yields will be about 56% not more. Thats comparable low to a well-done HI reduction and I see no way to boost these yields without the use of hard-to-get chemicals like thionylchloride or PCl3.
The second problem is the separation of remaining chlorinated ephedrine from the finished reaction. This is IMHO much more a matter of concern than lead. Steamdistillation and recrystallization are a must.
To the electrolytic procedure:
The amount of electrolyte in the anode chamber seems to be very large to me, 2000ml. I guess this could be reduced drastically what would also allow to place the electrodes nearer together what would reduce heating up. (please correct me Wiz if I overlooked here something).
What counts is voltage and current density on the cathode, 3,5V and 0,25Amp/cm2. This says always a large area cathode is to be used. Lead-battery plates should work fine.
To form the sulfate-ester of the ephedrine in-situ and to reduce would be favorable IMHO. The sulfate-ester is told to be easier reducible as I remember and will be easier to separate from the product I guess. But I dont know exactly how this could actually be done, but there should be a way.
Chemosabe, as long there are pills, matchboxes and tincture nobody will be able to trigger a new wave and when the pills run out ppl will be to tired for anything. The new wave will come when a no-pills-avail generation has grown up and this generation will solve the problem to fullfill their needs with new synthesises. Or just buy the shit from the local frontend of some cartel.
ORG