fogger + glycerin = acrolein??

jantran · Jun 13, 2014

Okay, up until now I've been using glycerin+ deionized water as fog juice. I've been told it's okay by some people and I've been told commercial fluids use it too.
But lately someone on the internet has made me very skeptical that I might be producing and breathing the highly toxic chemical acrolein.
Here's his argument:

1) Glycerin produces acrolein at 280C and heaters in fog machines operate at 400C.
2) Glycerin doesn't need a catalyst or high pressure to decompose into acrolein at 280C
3) Even though the glycerin passes the fogger really fast and doesn't stay long enough to heat to 280C anjd turn to acrolein, some fluid is left in the chamber which is cooked by the heater and creates acrolein.
4) The generated acrolein is very little for our noses or eyes to notice, but even at those levels it is very toxic.
5) Glycols decompose into toxic chemicals, even though less hazardous than acrolein, but commercial fluids have "other chemicals" added which increase the cracking temperature, or further react with the generated harmful chemicals like acrolein to produce less harmful chemicals.

What do you guys think? Have some of us been destroying our health by using glycerin in a fogger?? D:
Or is there some wrong info or logic in his argument?
I sure hope so, I've been using glycerin for quite some time...

ChaosLord · Jun 13, 2014

Well, alot of ecig juices use the same glycerin, and they've been out since ~2008. This is the first I've heard this, and if it's "highly toxic" something would have been known by now. In fact, an ecig can probably get it hotter, yet I haven't seen anything regarding this toxicity. Alot of people who started ecigs were alergic to propylene glycol (also used in fog fluid) and have to use glycerin, which causes no ill effect that I know of.

Not to mention that if glycerin could become "highly toxic" that easily, I very much doubt that governments would allow it's use in either fog machines or ecigs. Plus it would need a warning to avoid heat/flame due to it easily becoming toxic.

Edit:

I did a quick search and found this: Wikipedia-acrolein

Without clicking I see a discrepancy; acrolein produces a foul, acrid odor. Acording to point #4 of your post, this should not be.

BShanahan14rulz · Jun 13, 2014

A well-designed fogger shouldn't be burning glycerin, I wouldn't guess... Just watch your heating element temps. E-cigs are a bit more of an iffy subject, since all ecigs subject the glycerin directly to a resistance wire, which, if not properly heatsinked against a moist wick, can glow red-hot. Is why I don't recommend any of my vaper friends to actually inhale the vapor into their lungs.

That is a good thing to keep in mind, though, for folks who use the stove and a drop of glycerin trick, you don't want to fry the stuff, just turn it into clouds. Most of us take for granted that bit of info, forgetting full well that new folks may not know why it is recommended to keep the temperature low.

jantran · Jun 13, 2014

Thanks for the replies.

ChaosLord said:
Well, alot of ecig juices use the same glycerin, and they've been out since ~2008. This is the first I've heard this, and if it's "highly toxic" something would have been known by now.

Do e-cigs reach 280C though which is when cracking of glycerin and production of acrolein occurs?

Not to mention that if glycerin could become "highly toxic" that easily, I very much doubt that governments would allow it's use in either fog machines or ecigs.

Read the point 5.
"commercial fluids have "other chemicals" added which increase the cracking temperature, or further react with the generated harmful chemicals like acrolein to produce less harmful chemicals."

Without clicking I see a discrepancy; acrolein produces a foul, acrid odor. Acording to point #4 of your post, this should not be.

According to point 4, acrolein does have a terrible smell, but it may be produced very little for the smell to be noticeable, but even at those very little doses it is very toxic.

BShanahan14rulz said:
A well-designed fogger shouldn't be burning glycerin, I wouldn't guess... Just watch your heating element temps.

My fogger doesn't show temperature.
What do you mean by burning here?
Why should a fogger be designed in a way to work with glycerin if all commercial fluids these days use glycols instead?
And did you read point 5? Commercial fluids apparently have chemicals to prevent or undo production of acrolein. If the foggers were working in a way that they didn't cause any acrolein to appear, why would the fog juice manufacturers bother adding those chemicals?

ChaosLord · Jun 14, 2014

According to this site:

Acrolein (2-propenal) is ubiquitously present in (cooked) foods and in the environment. It is formed from carbohydrates, vegetable oils and animal fats, amino acids during heating of foods, and by combustion of petroleum fuels and biodiesel. Chemical reactions responsible for release of acrolein include heat-induced dehydration of glycerol, retro-aldol cleavage of dehydrated carbohydrates, lipid peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids, and Strecker degradation of methionine and threonine. Smoking of tobacco products equals or exceeds the total human exposure to acrolein from all other sources. The main endogenous sources of acrolein are myeloperoxidase-mediated degradation of threonine and amine oxidase-mediated degradation of spermine and spermidine, which may constitute a significant source of acrolein in situations of oxidative stress and inflammation.

That's from the national institute of health.

If it's ubiquitous in food and the environment, I doubt a fog machine will produce enough to be dangerous. Unless it is running hotter than it should.

jantran · Jun 14, 2014

ChaosLord said:
According to this site:

Acrolein (2-propenal) is ubiquitously present in (cooked) foods and in the environment. It is formed from carbohydrates, vegetable oils and animal fats, amino acids during heating of foods, and by combustion of petroleum fuels and biodiesel. Chemical reactions responsible for release of acrolein include heat-induced dehydration of glycerol, retro-aldol cleavage of dehydrated carbohydrates, lipid peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids, and Strecker degradation of methionine and threonine. Smoking of tobacco products equals or exceeds the total human exposure to acrolein from all other sources. The main endogenous sources of acrolein are myeloperoxidase-mediated degradation of threonine and amine oxidase-mediated degradation of spermine and spermidine, which may constitute a significant source of acrolein in situations of oxidative stress and inflammation.

That's from the national institute of health.

If it's ubiquitous in food and the environment, I doubt a fog machine will produce enough to be dangerous. Unless it is running hotter than it should.

So now you're saying acrolein isn't toxic? Well from your quote it just says acrolein can be found in the environment and food. You don't take into account how much though, which is extremely important.
www.who.int/ipcs/publications/cicad/en/cicad43.pdf

Acrolein is an upper respiratory tract and eye
irritant in humans. The threshold concentration for
the perception of acrolein vapour may be as low as
0.07 mg/m
3
(Sinkuvene, 1970), while the odour
recognition threshold may be as low as 0.48 mg/m
3
(Leonardos et al., 1969). Sensory ocular irritation has
been observed at concentrations that were reported to
be as low as 0.13 mg acrolein/m
3
(calculated value)
(Darley et al., 1960), while nasal (sensory) irritation has
been reported following exposure to concentrations as
low as 0.34 mg/m
3
(Weber-Tschopp et al., 1977).
Respiratory rate was reduced in male volunteers exposed
to concentrations as low as 0.69 mg/m
3
for 40 min
(Weber-Tschopp et al., 1977). Inhalation of
concentrations as low as 0.6 mg acrolein/m
3
may cause
respiratory effects, including coughing, nasal irritation,
chest pain, and difficulty breathing (Kirk et al., 1991).
Most individuals cannot tolerate exposure to
concentrations of acrolein in air of 5 mg/m
3
or higher for
more than 2 min, while exposure to concentrations above
20 mg/m
3
may be lethal (Einhorn, 1975; Kirk et al., 1991).
Effects including weakness, nausea, vomiting,
diarrhoea, severe respiratory and ocular irritation,
shortness of breath, bronchitis, pulmonary oedema,
unconsciousness, and death have been observed upon
accidental exposure (by inhalation or ingestion) to
acrolein

Sounds pretty dangerous.

I mean if I knew I'd feel little irritation and caughing before anything else, I'd be okay because I'd know when acrolein is present and stop my fogger. But if I get a serious irritation or die first that won't work...

I hope I missed something and you can prove me wrong.

ChaosLord · Jun 14, 2014

I never said it wasn't toxic. What I was trying to say was, I don't see a threat from glycerin fog or vapor production. Fog machines have been around a long time, and I don't see them being so ubiquitous while capable of producing a highly toxic substance. Not in quantities that would be dangerous.

Personally I think this is the latest scare tactic against ecigs, but that just my opinion.

From that link it says that cigarette smoke has one of the highest concentrations of acrolein. It even said that smoking can exceed maximum levels of acrolein. I haven't researched it, but I don't know of any link between smoking related death and acrolein.

So in my opinion, and it's just my opinion, I don't see something that dangerous not being noticed and ignored. If you had gotten the information in the OP from a reputable source, like the NIH for example, I'd say there was reason for concern. However, if the info comes from "someone on the internet", I take it with a grain of salt. Unless I can confirm it with a reputable source.
In that regard, don't listen to me, dig around and find all you can and decide if it's safe or if you should switch to something that is.

The Lightning Stalker · Jun 14, 2014

In that quote, it says the threshhold of perception could be as low as 0.07mg/m and recogntion is
0.48mg/m. That means you will probably smell something at 0.07mg/m, you just can't tell exactly what it
is. So if you're doing the glycerin thing and something starts to smell funny, I'd say cut it out. Otherwise,
you're fine.

LSRFAQ · Jun 14, 2014

The proponent of the argument on the other forum that keeps saying
" And if so they are pretty much making up scare stories and selling us tap water " will NOT disclose his professional interest in championing glycerin.

I suspect he is closely tied to the E-Cig industry.

All the rest of us have disclosed our professional interests.

I'll slice open a cheap fogger and measure the element temperature this afternoon while its at hot Idle, that will solve much of this debate once and for all.

FDA and EU long term studies of the E_Cig have just been authorized, as little or no legal permission was required in the current regulatory framework to start producing the devices, other then for obtaining the Nicotine. E-Cigs have just realized the level of sales that have caused FDA and EU health officials to start funding long term studies and making regulations. So the jury is still out on the E-Cig. Just because something is on the market does not mean its safe.
Government is reactive in most cases, it needs to see a potential problem before it reacts. It then takes considerable time to react.

The current users of E-Cigs are for all practical purposes the lab animals for a long term study. Doctors will ask ill patients if they smoked, if the answer is yes, and if a pattern is seen, eventually regulations will come.

The attached snippet of a document is from the ANSI E1.5 Fog Fluid standard and covers the requirement for testing for three hazardous byproducts. Sorry for the poor copy, access to the standard requires payment and it is tightly copy protected. I really had to work at it to make a copy.

The board governing the standard is made up of theatrical industry representatives and a few interested individuals with careers in the safety industry, academia and the performers unions. They added a significant safety warning for a reason. As ANSI standards are peer reviewed, it is unlikely they would list a Acrolein hazard specifically unless they had reasonable cause and scientific proof that a hazard can exist.

Compliance to this standard in the US is voluntary. However it is required by Actors Equity (Actors Union) and many other professional theatre contracts and is a recommended guideline or required by many state and local safety agencies.

In a lawsuit, however, it would be easy for a lawyer to introduce the standard as evidence. That is why it exists.

There is also a series of stated levels for maximum peak and eight hour weighted average exposure levels to the generated Fog. You are far more likely in a home setting to be exceeding the maximum permissible peak exposure to the FOG droplets then worrying about the Acrolein and other byproducts. Public buildings typically have standards for air turnover, at home you typically have slow air turnover.

The reason for the debate on the other forum is simple. What you expose yourself to at home is your business. What you expose the public to, is everyone's business.
Steve

KrowBar · Jun 14, 2014

If you mix your glycerin with water (so that there is much more water than glycerin) it won't be getting much over 100 deg C. If you smell something acrid and your eyes nose and throat get irritated then you have probably made some acrolein and should probably air out your house.

jantran · Jun 14, 2014

ChaosLord said:
I never said it wasn't toxic. What I was trying to say was, I don't see a threat from glycerin fog or vapor production. Fog machines have been around a long time, and I don't see them being so ubiquitous while capable of producing a highly toxic substance.

He's point is, as I've said already, that commercial fluids which use glycerin also include chemicals which will react with the produced acrolein and turn it into a less harmful substance, or chemicals which will increase the temperature of glycerin cracking beyond the temperature inside the fog machine.
So that statement, if true, would make sense why fog machines and commercial glycerin fluids are still used with no issue and reported incidents.

The Lightning Stalker said:
In that quote, it says the threshhold of perception could be as low as 0.07mg/m and recogntion is
0.48mg/m. That means you will probably smell something at 0.07mg/m, you just can't tell exactly what it
is. So if you're doing the glycerin thing and something starts to smell funny, I'd say cut it out. Otherwise,
you're fine.

But isn't the maximum permissible level per mg/m when things go bad way lower than the perception level? That's what he's saying.

LSRFAQ said:
I suspect he is closely tied to the E-Cig industry.

He's not the only guy you should suspect then, I guess...

The Lightning Stalker said:
Personally I think this is the latest scare tactic against ecigs, but that just my opinion.

I think you have less reason to suspect someone who "promotes" using glycerin in fog machines is tied to the e-cig industry as we do in suspecting the person making these arguments on why glycerin is bad as fog fluid and will produce acrolein is tied to the fog fluid and fog machine industry.
How about we both not assume the other side has bad intentions and motivations?

I'll slice open a cheap fogger and measure the element temperature this afternoon while its at hot Idle, that will solve much of this debate once and for all.

I don't think that will solve much this debate at all.
Because we already know fog machines will run above 290C where acrolein is produced because others have measured their fog machines already.
But on the other hand, see point 3 of the argument:
"3) Even though the glycerin passes the fogger really fast and doesn't stay long enough to heat to 280C and turn to acrolein, some fluid is left in the chamber which is cooked by the heater and creates acrolein."

So the only way I see any one of us could end this debate would be
1) measuring the generated fog for acrolein and the amount of it with specialized tools, or somehow see if any fluid which is heated above 100C isnt pushed out of the fog machines from pressure before it reaches 280C which I don't think anyone can do.

2) Somehow proving that acrolein vapor isn't as bad as one side of the argument claims, isn't generated as much, or in some theoretical way like proving we must be able to sense it at the little amounts when it becomes dangerous and since we don't sense it it isn't there.

KrowBar said:
If you mix your glycerin with water (so that there is much more water than glycerin) it won't be getting much over 100 deg C. If you smell something acrid and your eyes nose and throat get irritated then you have probably made some acrolein and should probably air out your house.

See points 3 and 4 of the argument:
"3) Even though the glycerin passes the fogger really fast and doesn't stay long enough to heat to 280C anjd turn to acrolein, some fluid is left in the chamber which is cooked by the heater and creates acrolein.
4) The generated acrolein is very little for our noses or eyes to notice, but even at those levels it is very toxic."

LSRFAQ · Jun 14, 2014

Quote:
He's not the only guy you should suspect then, I guess...

I think you have less reason to suspect someone who "promotes" using glycerin in fog machines is tied to the e-cig industry as we do in suspecting the person making these arguments on why glycerin is bad as fog fluid and will produce acrolein is tied to the fog fluid and fog machine industry.
How about we both not assume the other side has bad intentions and motivations?End Quote.

I'm going to then assume he's a ass and highly skilled at arguing and will never willingly surrender. Which so far what he's trying to do. He has not been able to debate scientifically, he's only using sentence structure against the other debaters. He sure has, in my opinion, managed to "pull the wool" over a lot of people's eyes. I love his "Strawman" argument that the government is here to protect you and would instantly prohibit the marketing of anything dangerous. Therefore if its on the market it must be safe and legal. Rarely does the government totally ban hazardous materials that they can TAX. One can certainly prove that Tabaco cigarette smoking requires health care expenses in the hundreds of millions of Dollars in the US.

Let me clue you in on something. The E-Cig bunch is reaching for the Fog machine data as the only other two sources of data on Glycerin safety are the Tabaco Industry, who uses it as a additive in Cigarettes, and the Government.

Glycerin at 10%-15% by weight in Combustion at higher temperatures (900'C) reduces the amount of Acrolein and Tar produced by Tabaco cigarettes, at the same time reducing Nicotine transfer to the user by about 10%. (1) Most cigarettes are less then 5% glycerin, after processing, so the Nicotine reduction is less while still allowing some reduction of the toxic byproducts of combustion.

(1) Toxicological evaluation of glycerin as a cigarette ingredient.
Food Chem Toxicol. 2005 Oct;43(10):1521-39.
Carmines EL1, Gaworski CL.

Note there is a difference between Glycerin molecules ignited and burning with other materials in the Tabaco @ 900'C vs undergoing a "cracking" or molecular chemistry process in a fog machine chamber that is too hot, but not at 900'C.

Since there is yet again another process going in the E-CIG, ie the Glycerin hitting a hot metal or ceramic or glass heating element, mixed with the reaction results will be yet again different. So relying on the past tests is a guideline but is otherwise foolhardy.

Remember in the E-Cig the user is getting a massive, direct, dose of Glycerin compared to when the user is exposed to the Fog machine.

I'll be the first to agree a E-Cig is probably less harmful then the tar in the cigarette but I''ll also say its not much of a improvement, your still sucking in vaporized material and at least some combustion products.

Acrolein, Formaldehyde, and the other byproducts are mainly made when cold fluid first hits a overly hot heating element, when the chamber is idling with the remaining fluid burning off in air, or when the machine was made prior to the mid to late 90s and runs extremely hot. The amounts are small but cumulative. So the biggest risk is homemade fluid in a homemade or cheap machine with a unregulated, red hot, heating element. There is a reason the National Standard specifies a chamber temperature no greater then 320'C .

I've got a business proposal to write for a piece of gear which uses a infrared laser as an aircraft landing aid, then this evening I'll chuck the cheap fog chamber on the lathe and install a thermocouple on the heater element. If I can reseal the chamber I can run it in a full cycle. If I can't reseal the chamber, I can at least get the idle temperature on the open element. That all depends on what I find when I cut the chamber.

Steve

jantran · Jun 14, 2014

Sorry LSRFAQ, but I don't really understand who you're referring to in the other forum anymore (you can pm me if you don't want to move that crap here), why you still mention e-cigarettes in my thread about fog machines which work differently and why you talk about US laws in a thread I started about health risks and chemistry of glycerin in a fog machine...

LSRFAQ said:
Acrolein, Formaldehyde, and the other byproducts are mainly made when cold fluid first hits a overly hot heating element, when the chamber is idling with the remaining fluid burning off in air, or when the machine was made prior to the mid to late 90s and runs extremely hot. The amounts are small but cumulative. So the biggest risk is homemade fluid in a homemade or cheap machine with a unregulated, red hot, heating element. There is a reason the National Standard specifies a chamber temperature no greater then 320'C .

I don't really understand what you mean (the last sentence).

I'll chuck the cheap fog chamber on the lathe and install a thermocouple on the heater element. If I can reseal the chamber I can run it in a full cycle. If I can't reseal the chamber, I can at least get the idle temperature on the open element. That all depends on what I find when I cut the chamber.

Again, I don't see how measuring the chamber temperature will prove anything we already don't know, for the reasons I mentioned in my previous post. I mean don't get me wrong, I'm really glad you want to experiment and give us answers for free, but what will measuring the chamber temperature of a fog machine tell us which we already don't know?

And BTW, I don't smoke real or electronic cigarettes, never have and probably never will.

LSRFAQ · Jun 14, 2014

jantran said:
Sorry LSRFAQ, but I don't really understand who you're referring to in the other forum anymore (you can pm me if you don't want to move that crap here), why you still mention e-cigarettes in my thread about fog machines which work differently and why you talk about US laws in a thread I started about health risks and chemistry of glycerin in a fog machine...

THE ANSI STANDARD, Which is what you call US LAW, gives the definition of what seven standard chemicals (including glycerin) plus distilled water can be in a reasonably safe fog fluid. That is why I'm talking about US Law. The Same ANSI standard, is copied into the British Recommended Practice, almost word for word. The whole world will copy that same set of mixtures to avoid redoing the safety research.

The E-Cig people are trying to use the STAGE FOG safety studies to prove E-Cigs are safe. SO you will see a lot of marketing material right now about Glycerin being safe as E_Sigs take over the market. Other posters mentioned Glycerin in E-Cigs, so I'm tying up the loose ends.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look, a modern fog fluid is going to be Polypropylene Glycol and (pick one) Di or Tri EthyleneGlycol plus a tiny amount of a CH2CH(OH)m Polymerized -Alcohol complex to stabilize the mixture from aging, separation, and keep it from being ate by bacteria. A tiny amount of a sugar will be added as a stabilizer. It will be mixed with Distilled water. It will be colored with a harmless dye to make it easier to see in the machine.
Some other chemical stabilizers will be added, in tiny amounts.

Just about all Fog mixtures are miscible liquids, they never really mix, and they will separate phases over time, so the one additive is a tiny amount of a jelly like molecule, it forms even more of a jelly with the sugar. This entraps the glycols and keeps them mixed.

What no one will tell you is the exact ratio, if I knew one for sure, or one was public domain, I'd tell you.

Here is why Glycerin went away:

Pure Glycerin in water, (And Glycerin with Polypropylene Glycol in water ) was phased out because it was inefficient, has a disagreeable Oder under certain circumstances. Once bacteria grew in a bottle, it quickly smelled when used. Also because it mildly to severely irritated dancer's and opera singer's throats long term. Not to mention the slippery mess it makes on the stage and furniture inside. Dancers did not like slipping. Glycerin also has a bad habit of making noxious fumes if the machine temperature gets too high.

If you have to dance or sing in Glycerin fog four hours a night, four nights a week plus rehearsals, you will notice it.

Once you smell a good fog fluid (of the few that still smell), you will not go back to Glycerin.

Steve

jantran · Jun 14, 2014

Okay, I understand. Please lets stop talking about e-sig studies of glycerin and move to fog machines.
I'm not sure how you can have such a bad opinion about a government to say that "Rarely does the government totally ban hazardous materials that they can TAX." but have an opposite opinion about organizations and what they have to say... Both are made of people, who can be bribed, etc.

Again, what do you hope to prove by measuring the heat chamber of your fog machine? I'm glad you're willing to spend your time to do tests and tell us your results, but as I've said already that has been done before and as I explained I don't tink that is enough to end this debate.

So you're saying that decent fog machines wouldn't produce acrolein from glycerin and water mix, but e-sigs will?
I'd love to have some evidence for the former, that's why I started this thread after all.

LSRFAQ · Jun 15, 2014

I'm saying E-Cigs will produce a direct injection of a lot of noxious chemicals, right straight into the lungs. After it hits the heating element. That is the definition of Smoking. Its proven to shorten lifetime of most individuals who do it, and is addictive.

------------------------------

Glycerin fog was also disposed of because you need more of it for a given effect. The Glycols do not evaporate as fast in the air, so you use less fluid for a given effect. Glycerin fog basically rains on a small scale.

------------------------------------

The standard states to test all fog machine designs for Acrolein, Formaldehydes, and acetaldehyde, as well as other combustion products.
Certain machines are also tested to prove they do not distribute bacteria.

The ABOVE requires an industrial hygienist, or someone like Kecked at PL. Kecked is so angry over being insulted he is no longer interested in finishing the tests. AS HE PUT IT, he has better things to move on to.

Those products come from Glycerin Cracking, starting at 280'C in air. SO if your sure no part of your Machine's chamber is going to be above 280'C for any length of time, play with Glycerin or other home made fluids indoors all you want....

The responsible companies who make the fluids hired chemists and improved the fluids after the actors union requested a government investigation of their safety. It was a win for all involved, safer, better, and cleaner.

I'm willing to slice open a machine I paid 20$ for, to prove my point, which is that low cost machines without PID temperature controllers using internal finned heaters will produce more byproducts then those better machines with good controllers.

A view of what's left in the chamber will be nice picture of tar like materials and mineral scale on the upper walls.

If you want to use a old, outdated mixture, which you will need a lot more of, be my guest. It's your lungs.

Steve

fogger + glycerin = acrolein??

jantran

0

ChaosLord

0

BShanahan14rulz

0

jantran

0

ChaosLord

0

jantran

0

ChaosLord

0

The Lightning Stalker

0

LSRFAQ

0

Attachments

KrowBar

0

jantran

0

LSRFAQ

0

jantran

0

LSRFAQ

0

jantran

0

LSRFAQ

0

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Share this page