I’ve written extensively about decarbing cannabis in a typical home use environment over the years, but there’s an experiment I’ve wanted to conduct for a long time, and I am finally getting the opportunity to do it. I’ve always been curious about how potent an infusion would be if you don’t decarb first. I’ve been asked so many times, “Can’t I just heat the infusion and decarb during the process?” Until now, I’ve never known the answer. I’ve finally quantified the results through testing.
Unlike my typically long-winded exercises in pursuing detail, I am going to keep this very short because there’s not much to chase. The results align with extensive anecdotal experience and my preconceived expectations. Don’t blink, I’ll be done quickly (yeah, yeah, I know….. “that’s what she said.”)
An “infusion” is simply the process of combining decarbed cannabis with a carrier oil (coconut, olive, sunflower, MCT, etc.) and heating it to around 180°F for about an hour. The oils have a high affinity for cohesion, making it easy for the heated carrier oil to extract the oil-based cannabinoids and terpenes from the cannabis trichomes. Ultimately, the infusion will have a consistency similar to that of the original carrier oil but will now be medicated with an average of about 15 mg/ml of THC. This video explains it very well; please check it out Cannabis Infusion is Easy: No Complications Necessary.
The plan was simple. Make a traditional oil infusion on the stovetop at a temperature normally used for decarbing, for a corresponding length of time that would be expected to produce complete THCA to THC conversion. The finished product would be lab tested to measure the potency conversion and compared to existing data for regular decarb conversion.
For more information on the concept of decarboxylation (decarb) and my previous decarb posts, here are some links:
- Jar Tech Decarb to Keep the Terpenes: Real FECO, Carts, and Terpy Deliciousness
- Closed Wash Decarb (CWD): Activate Cannabinoids and Keep the Terps
- Decarboxylation (Decarb) 101:Basic Understanding and at Home Method Comparison
Drawing from that past decarbing experience, I decided to work with 240°F for 1 hour. I brought 500 ml of sunflower oil to temperature and added 2 ounces of the broken-up flower. I had some trouble with the heat and ended up with an average temperature closer to 250°F, but I was happy with that and would rather it be a bit higher than lower. The material was steeped for an hour with periodic stirring for agitation. Then, it was put through a wire mesh strainer and coffee filters. Finally, it went off for cannabinoid potency testing ($250!!!!….damn!).
The interesting and surprising aspect I liked about the oil was its flavor. When making the infusion, the material went from a delicious-looking green sticky-icky to a roasted brown color, with the nutty aroma typical of decarbed material. However, after the oil cooled and settled a bit, the flavor wasn’t the roasted, bitter, peppery, spiky taste you often encounter.
It had a mellow, floral, beautiful aroma and flavor better than most infusions I’ve had. I appreciated that outcome, but contrary to the success of the flavor and aroma, the potency didn’t seem very strong. When you are accustomed to extractions, infusions always feel a bit weak in volume, but if you take the right amount, watch out for takeoff. I tried one teaspoon (2.5 ml) and it lit me up for a number of hours. I hoped the testing would yield strong results because if this flavor was fully decarbed, it would be a triumph.
After a week, the testing came back and the results weren’t what I’d hoped for, but they were pretty much what I expected. About 50% decarb was achieved in terms of total possible THC. The flower tested at 13% decarbed at the start, and the final infusion total conversion was less than 50%.
| THCA | THC | TOTAL POSSIBLE THC | |
| Starting Flower | 12.59% | 1.63% | 12.67% |
| Final Infusion | 7.96 mg/ml | 6.09 mg/ml | 13.06 mg/ml |
It might be tempting to assume that simply doubling the heating time would result in complete decarb conversion. Unfortunately, that’s not how it works. My previous posts, particularly the CWD post, illustrated the increasing difficulty with decarb conversion after the first 50%. The initial 50% is the easy part, which happens pretty fast. Then, as decarb percentage increases from 50% to full conversion, each incremental conversion unit takes progressively longer to achieve. This suggests to me that reaching full conversion might require significantly more time, perhaps up to three hours or even longer.
I don’t know why decarb is so much slower in oil. There’s probably a simple chemistry answer to my quandary, an interaction I’m completely in the dark about. I’m not a chemical engineer, so I’m often in the dark, just guessing. If anyone knows, please let me know.
CONCLUSIONS
There are a couple of simple conclusions I draw from this exercise. They are separated by the intended use of the final infusion. Is the crafter looking for maximum THC, or a THCA/THC balance with medicinal value? I didn’t realize how much I like the THCA/THC balance until working on this post. The THCA has so many health benefits; maybe my body is telling me that it’s enjoying the effects.
First, I found the exact decarb answer I was looking for. Decarbing while making an infusion isn’t the best approach for complete THC conversion. Normal methods that achieve full decarb take an hour at most, and traditional infusion also takes one hour. Together, that’s only two hours total. So, for complete conversion, the typical decarb first, infuse next approach seems to be the best route.
Second, for a 50:50 THCA:THC medicinal infusion, decarbing while infusing works well. If you want to get high, just have a little more. That’s pretty simple!
The final parting thought. Please don’t waste money on the infusion machines. They are WAY too expensive for what they do. Here is my article on the subject, Cannabis Infusion is Easy, No Complications Necessary (An Ardent FX, Levo, Instant Pot, and Oven Comparison
LOVE YA’LL, STAY LIFTED !!!!!!
CHECKOUT THE IBC EXTRACTION LOUNGE GROUP ON FACEBOOK
I’m sad this didn’t work out and I’m really curious if simmering longer would yield better results. Periodicedibles.com claims they capture all the cannabinoids and terpenes in butter by “slowly simmering”. They don’t say for how long.
As for simmering longer, I addressed that possibility in the article. I don’t have much more insight than what I mentioned there.
I also “capture all the cannabinoids and terpenes.” However, depending on who says it, what they mean by it, and how true it is are usually suspect. I normally don’t trust anything these manufacturers say. It’s usually wrong because they don’t know or are purposefully misrepresented.
That is why I did this experiment and shared the results.
I just realized I missed some of the information I wanted to share with regard to the “capture all the cannabinoids and terpenes” statement from the manufacturer. This is where it gets expensive and complicated if what they say were true. First, they would have to full panel test every starting material and every final output, every batch, for all terpenes and all cannabinoids. I’m positive they don’t.
Next, what would they mean by all cannabinoids and all terpenes? As I mentioned, in the test I did in this experiment, I captured all the cannabinoids, because they are heavy and had nowhere to go. However, that means nothing about conversion. Meaning, all THCA and THC are there, but not all THCA was converted to THC. A lot of terpenes were collected and saved, which is evident in the terpene-heavy aroma. Still, by looking at the browned material at the end of the process, it is also apparent that a lot of oxidation occurred, and with the temps, some light terps may have found a way out.
Here are the realities.
(1) Producers lie about just about everything; it’s horrible, but it’s true.
(2)The science is incredibly complex and beyond what most of us will think about at home.
(3) The actual implications of the hair-splitting science are moot at home. Whatever we do is pretty darn close in the big picture, even if it looks like a big difference under the microscope.
(4) Cannabis product producers, infusion maker manufacturers, and snake oil salesmen are always going to make things look difficult enough that the consumer MUST buy whatever they are selling. Unfortunately, especially with cannabis, almost EVERYONE falls for their nonsense and throws cash at them.
thank you