***** The Platinumill Exposed and on Trial *****

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
xelexo
Advertise with us
Gold Refining Forum

Help Support Gold Refining Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
loco said:
Lou said:
It's tried and true that lead works, same for copper. Both (more often copper) are used industrially. Thing is, I don't agree with Rob's saying it's cheaper to use the lead. They (the EPA, your municipality, hell even your neighbors if you're not zoned right) can nail your ass to the wall if you're using 2000*F and VOLATILE (meaning it's got a vapor pressure!!) lead to collect values. There are stringent guidelines for dealing with lead. You'll need to have a fume scrubber (many thousands of dollars), periodic inspections, etc. It gets worse if you employ other people!



As a general note of caution to you all considering iodine, make sure you CYA very well with a business license and proper documentation and can explain all of your glassware because it's now illegal to own elemental iodine in ANY quantity. New DEA regulations, which really are pretty stupid since anyone who really wanted iodine need only get potassium or sodium iodide, but thankfully 99% of those damned methcooks aren't smart enough (if they were, they wouldn't be ruining people's lives/hobbies/ causing extra bureaucratic red tape, etc. instead they'd have real jobs!)

Lou
Click to expand...

hey does anyone know what the EPA regulations would be for useing the furnace with copper, or silver instead of lead?
Click to expand...

probably the quickest way to get in trouble is to get crossways with the code enforcement officer. It doesn't matter if you're right. I had to go to a town council meeting for a citation . They asked my why I was there because my property is zoned industrial. I said a citation is a citation and to ignore it, even if i'm right would get me in trouble. I have not had a squeak out of them since. He was just screwing with me.
 
I swear I thought this forum was full of people who knew what the heck they were talking about but it doesnt seem so. This is the same as running a stuipid charcoal barbque what are you talking about with the epa now??? You guys werent concerned when you guys thought you would leach this stuff with all those acids now you are complaining about epa nonsense to me about my method?? If you all have tried any method here(which I highly doubt) it would be something but to not try anything and then say all this bologna is absurd and its getting comical to see what most people here are writing after googling all these sites like patentstorm.com etc. to see what all kinds of scientists have done or are doing etc. but nobodys trying any of these methods just researching this website should be called http://www.howtogetinfoonsomethingyouhaveneverdoneinyourlifeandgettingtheinfoonhowtodoitfornothing.com

:lol:
 
Heavyshakes,
Well, most of us are here to try to learn.
Since you already have it all figured out , I guess that doesn't include you.
I didn't sink 8 grand into what somebody promised me.
I'm running my own experiments for myself (with assays) so I will not have to guess or take someone else's word.
If I could afford to run out and buy a 80,000 dollar machine, I would probably buy two. Just because you weren't able to leach any material doesn't mean it can't be done. Obviously, the easiest way to lose is to gamble.
 
Yeah, best to play it safe Irons.




OK guys, the problem with using silver as your collector is (drum roll please) COST!! To process a large amount of converters milled/crushed to dust would require a darn large amount of silver. If you've got a couple 1,000 oz. bars lying around God Bless, but I don't think you need to be refining to make money.

Copper...3.40 a pound...silver (does quick mental math :p) $275/lb. Both are pretty dense so you don't get much volume out of it. Copper is much cheaper and lead is 12 times cheaper than that (make sure you use antimony free lead--antimony is hell to deal with, trust me!). Lead is bound to give you the most disposal problems.

Both silver and copper work nice with induction though!

As for your EPA regs, well you guessed it--yes you will have some regulations which won't be that friendly. They consider silver and copper solutions toxic waste. Thankfully, we're not idiots and we understand that silver and copper can both be a.) sold, b.) reused. I never throw away copper, even in solution form. Even if I don't want to recover the metal, I'll still make the oxide and have some fun with the thermite :)




Rob, I'm not quite sure who you're directing your last post to or why you're even making it. I get it, you think your way is better. It may be.

However, you're stopping just short of calling us armchair speculators: there are plenty of people here that have done cats before, maybe not with lead, but have done the leach method amongst others. To say that we all are just regurgitating information gleaned from the 'net is not only bull, it's also insulting. I already responded once to this and told you what I have done. If you don't believe me, that's just fine with me; I'm not here to convince you, when I have yet to see any work from you. I've posted photos of a miscellany of things here and other forums, some PGM related, some not. I can also say I've worked with EVERY member of the platinum group in some form or another. While I can't vouch for others here, I'm more than willing to consider their suggestions and appreciate their hard work and research. It's one thing to tell people that their process is wrong when you've got proof that yours is superior, but I've yet to see your process implemented on the small scale.

All I can say to you is: SHOW ME THE PLATINUM!! And let's see the rhodium and palladium too.
 
Shakes,

I have processed a few cats myself as tests. I have successfully been able to precipitate both Pt and Pd, albeit small amounts.

I'm a firm believer in researching every aspect of any process before committing to any one process and then upscaling the reaction that works the best for me. I think it would be foolish to blindly decide on any one process without hard facts and yield data before moving forward. A process that works for a large refinery may not be right for the small scale home refiner looking to process cats as a hobby. For me it's more about learning the processing of the PGMs as opposed to learning how to process cat material for a profit specifically. By learning these general techniques associated with PGMs I can better process other PGM scrap with better yields.

In short, everyone here may use a different process for their cats, the point is that we all end up with the PGMs. I know you are in this for a profit, and you most likely know that I am not. For this reason we will both undoubtedly have different approaches to the problem, that doesn't make either one of us right or wrong, we just have different goals in mind.

Steve
 
Steve,
Very prudent of you to point out that most of us here are looking for knowledge to help us in the future. If there was a "magic formula", there would be no need for further discussion. I , like everyone else, has to make a living ,and for now, will not be giving up my day job anytime soon.
Teamwork has great advantages.
Mark
 
Ok, I'm running a few cats tommorow, Lou send me a p.m if you want to assay this material and post the results,,, will you have the extra time this week? Frog
 
well as for myself, I never claimed to know anything about noble metals. heck I'm a communications contractor that's hobby is learning and with a hair brain idea I chose to see what I could find on processing converters and scrap gold and silver. I found this forum which with guys like steve, and gsp, harold, etc, all guys with lots of knowledge that share it openly. So I have been sitting a spell. trying to absorb a small amount of all the info mentioned on this board.

In reguards to processing converters I have been going at it with an open mind. Not closed! not thinking one is better than another but trying to evaluate all methods I find both here and abroad. Heck I've even asked questions here and not had them answered at all both via pm and here in the open forum and haven't had them answered especially about Rob's furnace method. Would I like to make it my means of income....absolutely. Am I betting the farm on it....nope.

Refining all together interests me and seems like something I would like to learn alot more about and maybe if/when the time comes maybe work into making it a business. But I have a ways ago. And until then I'll be adding more wrinkles to my brain (if the old story I heard about knowledge adding wrinkles is true..lol.).
 
hvyshakes1 said:
I swear I thought this forum was full of people who knew what the heck they were talking about but it doesnt seem so. This is the same as running a stuipid charcoal barbque what are you talking about with the epa now??? You guys werent concerned when you guys thought you would leach this stuff with all those acids now you are complaining about epa nonsense to me about my method?? If you all have tried any method here(which I highly doubt) it would be something but to not try anything and then say all this bologna is absurd and its getting comical to see what most people here are writing after googling all these sites like patentstorm.com etc. to see what all kinds of scientists have done or are doing etc. but nobodys trying any of these methods just researching this website should be called http://www.howtogetinfoonsomethingyouhaveneverdoneinyourlifeandgettingtheinfoonhowtodoitfornothing.com

:lol:
Click to expand...

You know i am usually one to make quick judgements. Here lately i have been trying to correct some of my ways of thinking, But i wish you would shut the hell up with that negative thinking. If you are a man of business it would not suprise me why you are where you are at in your little venture.

Someone will moderate this one,

Indeed! Someone just did. Please refrain from using vulgar language. We are a gathering of intelligent beings -----not a bunch of morons. I am personally offended by the words I just deleted, including the attachment. Above all, you should know better.

Harold

and we should approach the terroist with with candy and kind words. Don't forget that childern.

You appear to be somewhat delusional, unable to sort that which is acceptable, and that which is not.

The topic of dicussion is NOT terrorists----and we are not dealing with terrorists, so your comment lends nothing to solving the problems at hand. You, as a moderator, should not be part of the problem. You should be part of the solution. What part of this conversation is hard for you to understand? If you understand the conversation, why are you fanning the flames?

Harold

No actually this is my first interjection into this topic. Maybe you should stay in your own conservation. Not that i am trying to disrespect you , but i get tired of hearing your what is right views expressed as much as the next person. I actually liked it better when you weren't a moderator myself. It seems that once given that appointment that you seemed to take on this persona of super moderator. I do value your wisdom, but sometimes that crabby attitude you have toward others is a real motivation killer. That's what i don't like about our friend munson there. His higher than thou attitude. Some people post for the first time and you just slap lay into them. Sometimes people need understanding and motivation not chastising. Not that you do this all the time. But for some reason it's in your words. I wait most of the time to see what the moderator lead maybe on a topic before i just proceed with god given authority that you seem to have had magically disposed upon you.

Maybe you need to work on your people skills. Who knows. I'm thru with this kiddie discussion with you. Just a dam shame it had to be here, but i never really like to hide things anyway.

Like this remark :arrow: You appear to be somewhat delusional, unable to sort that which is acceptable, and that which is not.

Or :arrow: What part of this conversation is hard for you to understand?

delusional ? Maybe your not following this close enough. The guy is acting just like you, right now. See It ??????????
 
Gentlemen, and I use that term loosely;

The processing of cats presents problems that are likely well beyond the ability of most home refiners. There's a good reason why those of us that have refined for some time have avoided them, wouldn't you say? I'm as interested as anyone in picking up all that free money, but I also understand my limitations. I also have a sense of understanding about the notion that you're going to get rich refining catalytic converters. That's no likely to happen, no more than all the people were successful in the gold rush. Damned few made money with gold----although many were very successful in providing provisions for those that wanted to strike it rich.

My advice to each and every one of you is to move very slowly, and don't get invested beyond the amount of money you're willing to lose. The chance of regaining your investment is not good, regardless of the direction you take. Look at refining as a pleasurable hobby, and keep your eyes open for the opportunity to move beyond if that be your dream. If you attempt to force grow an operation, it's most likely to fail.

For the time being, there are folks here that are doing their best to resolve the problems with processing cats. Each and every one of you should afford others the opportunity to express their views, even when they may make no sense at all. It's possible someone will come up with a process that works beyond expectations, although I'm of the opinion that won't happen. Remember, there are metallurgists and physicists that have worked with the recovery of values from cats for years, applying a level of expertise that is unlikely to be found in the common man. Keep in mind, they have at their disposal any and all kinds of equipment and funds to further their goals, unlike the hobby refiner. Armed with that thought, you might consider that the chance of stumbling on to a process is not good, but it certainly exists.

I think each and every one of you need to step back, take a deep breath, and stop the sniping at one another. The ongoing argument serves no good purpose, and serves to polarize the readers.

Keep it clean, folks, and have respect for one another.

Harold
 
I promise this entire forum that i will give you the method after i have mastered it. As for the 8k yes iam frustrated and it bugs me to see people chasing this theory when it just cannot be done 100%. Its frustrating. I dont want it or dont want to see anyone get burned in the forum or waste time on the leaching process anymore. and i am willing to show all of you this method soon. this is my promise.

rob
 
Platdigger said:
Aflac, I would say that was uncalled for ...at best.
Randy
Click to expand...

Oh i would agree. I listened to him for like 20 something pages and all i hear is boasting and negative remarks. Some people don't listen to words of enthusiasm and encouragement only to have people with negative views tear them down. I think everyone tried to smooth his anger about his situation to the point that it just needed to be checked in a not so nice way.

He's just lucky i don't have the button or he would be more than gone by now. You getting anything from his negative views ? i sure ain't.

The first step in any research project is to research. Not jump right into the process. That's what they call a basis for a theory. Not buying a machine without doing the research that he needed to do in the first place.

Not my fault he got munsoned.
 
ok since some of the links I've found lately that the substrate is wash coated. that being said why wouldn't leaching be possible? and if it's wash coated on what is the purpose of some of the processes like action mining and a couple others recommending crushing of comb? I can understand the burning off the carbon buildup to make it easier for the acids/leach/resins to do their job.
 
loco said:
ok since some of the links I've found lately that the substrate is wash coated. that being said why wouldn't leaching be possible? and if it's wash coated on what is the purpose of some of the processes like action mining and a couple others recommending crushing of comb? I can understand the burning off the carbon buildup to make it easier for the acids/leach/resins to do their job.
Click to expand...
I'd seriously consider the degree of porosity of the media. If it's relatively open, it's entirely possible that the values have penetrated the material, at least partially. I may be mistaken, but I believe they're applied as a solution. By crushing fine, all surfaces are exposed, which should yield a better extraction. If that be the case, a (gasketed) filter press would certainly be a valuable tool to facilitate the removal of all the solution from the processed (leached) fines.

I do not know that I'm right, nor am I working on cats. Just providing something to think about. I processed a high grade gold ore years ago--and had to do exactly as I've mentioned in order to get full extraction.

Harold
 
loco said:
ok since some of the links I've found lately that the substrate is wash coated. that being said why wouldn't leaching be possible? and if it's wash coated on what is the purpose of some of the processes like action mining and a couple others recommending crushing of comb? I can understand the burning off the carbon buildup to make it easier for the acids/leach/resins to do their job.
Click to expand...

Is the wash coat not made up of a complex of these materials. What i mean is i'm sure that it is not applied in coats or layers like Palladium, platinum, Rhodium in order from top to bottom, but in a combination structure. Am i wrong ?

If it were applied as a complex structure would it not be easier to dissolve this way ? Kind of like inquating.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top