Techniques for preparing cannabinoids or CBD nanoemulsion
Multiple techniques are available for preparing cannabinoid nanoemlusion and all have their pros and cons. Selecting the right technique and equipment depend on budget, throughput, human resource and safety
3/7/20242 min read
In previous installments (1, 2), we talked about nanoemulsion and its advantages and disadvantage against other technologies, including emulsion, microemulsion/micelle, liposome and microencapsulation, for developing cannabinoid (say, CBD) infused shelf-stable beverages. In this episode, let’s compare the techniques available for preparing nanoemulsion.
Low-energy emulsification can be used, which includes multiple phase inversion techniques. Spontaneous or self-emulsification is technique for preparing microemulsion or micelle. Although these techniques do not require expensive equipment, they generally are not considered for food and beverage applications as they require high concentration of surfactant, which adversely affects taste and safety.
High-energy methods are preferred for food and beverage industry as they can emulsify with low concentrations of emulsifiers in a more efficient way. High-energy emulsification utilizes high shear mixing equipment, such as ultrasonicators, high-pressure homogenizers and microfluidizers. The fundamental mechanism of microfluidic is based on high pressure disruptive forces to break oils into nanometer droplets, so it is also considered as a type of high pressure homogenizer. Most emerging new equipment, despite how it is named, is based on high-pressure homogenization. Some literature includes rotor stator emulsification method; however, this technique is barely able to reduce the droplet size below one micrometer (1000 nanometers). Advantages and disadvantages of the three major techniques are summarized in the table below (optimal viewing experience by a computer).
In industrial-scale processing, both high pressure homogenizer and microfluidizer are more energy-efficient than ultrasonicator. Maintaining high pressure homogenizer and microfluidizer require more effort and potentially costlier. On the other hand, ultrasonic probes have a limited lifespan, and replacing can be very expensive too.
Not all the high shear mixers are the same. Some high pressure homogenizers or microfluidizer may not have enough operating pressure to reduce particle size down to low double digital nanometer range, while some ultrasonicators cannot deliver the high frequency required for nanoemulsion preparation. Operating and optimizing equipment is more challenging than manufacturers often claim, good process developers require a solid scientific background to develop superior products. To find the right equipment that aligns with your budget, throughput, and human resource requirements, consult independent experts with relevant scientific background and experience. Please click here to see a few CBD nanoemulsions created by ultrasonication. Don't fall into cheap printer expensive ink trap.
References
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2021.102914
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs13205-014-0214-0
https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.fochx.2023.100684