# Gold from Mercury



## Peg leg (Nov 25, 2009)

I have held off on posting this because it displays the ultra ignorance I displayed at the onset. I had some gold, about 3/4 of an ounce that was mixed mostly with small pieces of fused silica. I was somewhat aware of the danger of mercury but not worried enough to think I couldn't handle it so I dumped a small vial of mercury into the gold thinking I would just heat it up and evaporate the Mercury and WALA have a nice clean button of gold. Well lucky for me I began to research and found that I probably had gotten myself into something deeper than I had originally thought. 

SO.............and I come hat in hand on this,

I have seen the retort method, and have have read about nitric acid in seperation as well as the chamois method but I am undecided about the safest method to move forward on this. I have access to fume hoods and nitric and have used acids a fair amount in my work and am leaning towards this, however I am concerned about the gasses that are produced ie. mercuric nitrate I believe. Could someone explain this reaction and method for me. I would rather not build a retort as it seems there is more risk involved that way. Could I use a glass retort from say a scientific suppy? I probably have 400 cc mercury and gold amalgam, most of which is a solid chunk in the bottom of a vial. I have water on top of it right now. I was so impressed with the help I was giving with seperating the fused silica from the remaining gold scrap I have that I decided to gingerly approach this subject as well.

Thanks

Peg


----------



## Peg leg (Nov 25, 2009)

I just found this video on You tube about a tube retort, seems risky not bieng vented. Is this safe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhixtAxwHys


----------



## Rhodium (Nov 25, 2009)

http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=661&hilit=mercury+retort


----------



## Harold_V (Nov 25, 2009)

My humble opinion? You need a small retort. It can be made of pipe fittings, so it need not be expensive. You would have been served best by never getting involved with mercury. It serves no real purpose in this instance.  

I would avoid nitric until all of the mercury had been eliminated. Others may not agree.

Harold


----------



## Peg leg (Nov 26, 2009)

Harold_V said:


> My humble opinion? You need a small retort. It can be made of pipe fittings, so it need not be expensive. You would have been served best by never getting involved with mercury. It serves no real purpose in this instance.
> 
> I would avoid nitric until all of the mercury had been eliminated. Others may not agree.
> 
> Harold




I absolutly agree Harold. Like I said, it was a dangerous combination of knowing just enough to do something foolish mixed with a do ityourself attitude that I have always had. Is the retort style in the video I posted safe, I have all the equiptment to make one of those easily.


----------



## Harold_V (Nov 26, 2009)

Peg leg said:


> Is the retort style in the video I posted safe, I have all the equiptment to make one of those easily.


It's not a type I've used, but from all indications it should work safely, assuming you keep the water level up, and the outer tube has no leaks. My other concern would be if you can transfer enough heat to insure all of the mercury evaporates, but then you have the opportunity to run it more than once if it doesn't. 

A retort is not something you want to screw with if you have any doubts. Everything I've read about mercury poisoning leaves me with a reasonable respect for the material, although I'm not an alarmist. I still have mercury fillings in my mouth. They are superior to those that aren't.

Harold


----------



## butcher (Nov 26, 2009)

It will always help if when someone asks a question to give detail into what they have and what they have done, this can not only help them come to a conclusion faster to their problem but also keep them from danger, with us not knowing about this, and telling you to torch melt could have been very dangerous to your health, if you do not tell us how would we know? there are no stupid questions, unless they are not asked.


----------



## Peg leg (Nov 26, 2009)

butcher said:


> It will always help if when someone asks a question to give detail into what they have and what they have done, this can not only help them come to a conclusion faster to their problem but also keep them from danger, with us not knowing about this, and telling you to torch melt could have been very dangerous to your health, if you do not tell us how would we know? there are no stupid questions, unless they are not asked.




I am assuming you are referring to the gold and fused silica post. That is a seperate lot of gold that I did not mix mercury in. The stuff that is mixed with mercury was from a while back before I decided to find a safer way. What I am saying is that I have both gold in mercury and scrap that is just gold mixed with fused silica, hence the two questions. Thanks.

Peg


----------



## butcher (Nov 26, 2009)

thank's for clearing that up, peg leg.

my post was in general if anybody asks questions, full details should be given, their safety could count on it.


----------



## Harold_V (Nov 26, 2009)

butcher said:


> thank's for clearing that up, peg leg.
> 
> my post was in general if anybody asks questions, full details should be given, their safety could count on it.


From personal experience since being on this forum, I have come to understand that there are people that seek guidance, but border on refusing to provide any useful information that might lead to worthy advice. They also often seek input form more than one source. That is not a wise decision. 

Here's the deal. 

I do not claim, not for one moment, to have any better or greater knowledge than any of the others on this forum that have refined for gain. 

What I do claim, and you see evidence on a regular basis, is that my methods may or may not be similar to those of others. I know that what I propose works, it has been proven in practice time and time again. However, it may or may not be compatible with the methods of another, who most likely experienced equal or greater success. If a reader attempts to blend concepts, it's entirely possible that they will fail, then it's difficult, if possible, for a solution to be suggested, not understanding why the failure occurred. 

Seeking opinions on the open forum is in the best interest of all readers. That way, when a crackpot posts something stupid (all too common), others can step up to the plate and make corrections. 

However, if guidance is sought on a personal level, where information is requested privately, one, *and one only*, person should be asked for advice. That way, you get a report (hopefully) that will be reliable and will produce the expected results, all without any conflicting suggestions. 

My logic here is that if a reader asks guidance from more than one source, and the guidance isn't consistent, the reader isn't qualified to make choices, to insure that the suggested procedures work. If they were able to make those decisions, they wouldn't be seeking guidance. 

Pick your man, and stay with him until you achieve success, or failure. Only then would I recommend a person on the learning side consider cluttering their minds with various methods, some of which may not be all that good.

Harold


----------



## Peg leg (Nov 27, 2009)

I tried to be as specific as possible. Sorry if it seemed as if I was holding back. A new person may not realize what is pertinant information and what is not. I agree with Harold about sticking with one source to give you reliable information, but I think on the public forum is the best place to determine who that person may be since the crackpots often get set straight by multiple users.


----------



## Lou (Nov 29, 2009)

A retort is best. Mercury should never have been used: its use lies in collecting and concentrating gold, not refining.

Don't dissolve the mercury in nitric acid. Although you'd get your gold back, you also get highly poisonous mercuric nitrate. The dissolution of the metal in the acid will produce fumes of nitrogen dioxide, fumes which contain droplets of the solution. This solution, in addition to being very dangerous to the kidneys, is also rabidly corrosive to aluminum.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 31, 2010)

Employing the use of a mercury press seems to be a safe approach for separation but I have not been able find either a schematic of the device or to locate any information on line. Please advise.

Thanks much, haroldg


----------



## Juan Manuel Arcos Frank (Mar 31, 2010)

You can make a retort with a simple iron pipe...I was looking for the file but i could not find...where the hell did I put it?..anyway...send me a pm with your e mail and I will send it to you.

Kindest regards.

Manuel


----------



## patnor1011 (Apr 1, 2010)

Just out of curiosity where can one buy mercury? I know that sale of that metal is prohibited in usa or eu...


----------



## martyn111 (Apr 1, 2010)

removed by p***ed member


----------



## qst42know (Apr 1, 2010)

haroldg said:


> Employing the use of a mercury press seems to be a safe approach for separation but I have not been able find either a schematic of the device or to locate any information on line. Please advise.
> 
> Thanks much, haroldg



No amount of pressing will separate the mercury that has amalgamated with the gold. Some of the still fluid portion yes, but you still need a retort.


----------

