OK to use 5 gallon non-toxic anti-freeze pails for sap?

Oh by the way I dont think I would have fed any of my kids baby formula!! :) :)

I never said i would use the buckets I'm done looking at this post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrTimPerkins

Not to insult anyone, as having this discussion periodically is good. However in most cases, "not that bad" doesn't mean the same as "good". I don't know whether to laugh a little or cringe a little when I hear this phrase. "Not that bad" is basically still a subset of bad. Sort of like the buddy syrup people made this year. When people first started making it after the hot spell it was "bad" -- no qualifiers were needed. As time went on, it got so people would descripe the taste as "not that bad." After tasting a good amount of it, I can tell you for certain that "not that bad" is a lot closer to "bad" than it is to "not so good" than "somewhat good". I don't know of a lot of people who would put it on their pancakes and still say it's "not that bad."

The main reason to NOT use such things as this is public perception and the hypersensitivity to food safety. We are supposed to be making a PURE, WHOLESOME, NATURAL FOOD. That is how we market it. Is it OK to say that it is "close to" pure and really "not that bad?" Kind of hard to market syrup by saying, "pure maple syrup, with just a touch of propylene gylcol."

The second reason to NOT use such things is if the maple industry doesn't clean up its own act....the FDA or other governmental agency will be happy to come do it for us.

I really like the concept of "Would you use it to mix baby formula in?" Simple.

---

I just can't ignore this...
As it gets closer to syrup time; it's feels good to be back on MapleTrader, but it feels bad to see a thread like this one.
I'm not one to spend any time on internet boards, other than when the season gets close, and then during the season to keep up with what's going with maple and gather great ideas and learn from what's posted here. I started in 2006 and have learned more from this sight than I ever could have by trial and error or reading books. I've learned lots by asking questions, and reading answers to other's questions but, I've also witnessed a trend that is becoming more common... and kind of unprofessional on this site. While the older wiser ones remain silent - or will answer in a few words - some of the young and unsure can be prone to over re-act and be just plain rude.

Has the question ever been asked on this board, and is there any way for someone starting out to search for a thread containing "non-toxic antifreeze pails for sap use"? I don't think so. This place is a collective wealth of knowledge for anyone interested in maple and offers hours of browsing, if you are so inclined, to sit back and do some research. I don't think this is a place for rudeness or drive by answers - there are virtual cafes out there for that. For me it's been a source of information and sure beats going to the library and plowing through the Dewey Decimal File - I can't have a cold beverage in the library...

This individual had the apparent guts to ask a very valid question, I think we should thank him - not spank him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnallin

This individual had the apparent guts to ask a very valid question, I think we should thank him - not spank him.

---

OK. So with about 30 seconds spent on a Google search, the very simple answer to this question is NO....don't use them as they contained NON-food grade chemicals.

Cryo-tek 100 "Non-toxic" Antifreeze is made for use "in hydronic closed loop heating and cooling systems, solar heating systems, and general plumbing
systems that require freeze protection." "The virgin propylene glycol used in cryo-tek is “GRAS” (Generally Recognized As Safe) for incidental contact with food."
Source: http://www.herchem.com/specs/cryoteck.pdf

"Incidental contact" is "the limited contact of food products with products not destined for direct contact with food."

So in essence, this product is not, and never was, a food-grade propylene gycol, but rather is a non-toxic antifreeze suitable for use as described by the manufacturer (for use in heating and cooling systems). In use, this material is typically used in a heating or cooling system pipes that run through a food plant, and a small accidental amount of leakage of the system won't result in a toxic discharge into food. It is a safe-guard against poisoning consumers. It is not meant to be added to, or in contact with food.

Non-toxic does NOT equal food-grade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrTimPerkins

Not to insult anyone, as having this discussion periodically is good. However in most cases, "not that bad" doesn't mean the same as "good". I don't know whether to laugh a little or cringe a little when I hear this phrase. "Not that bad" is basically still a subset of bad. Sort of like the buddy syrup people made this year. When people first started making it after the hot spell it was "bad" -- no qualifiers were needed. As time went on, it got so people would descripe the taste as "not that bad." After tasting a good amount of it, I can tell you for certain that "not that bad" is a lot closer to "bad" than it is to "not so good" than "somewhat good". I don't know of a lot of people who would put it on their pancakes and still say it's "not that bad."

The main reason to NOT use such things as this is public perception and the hypersensitivity to food safety. We are supposed to be making a PURE, WHOLESOME, NATURAL FOOD. That is how we market it. Is it OK to say that it is "close to" pure and really "not that bad?" Kind of hard to market syrup by saying, "pure maple syrup, with just a touch of propylene gylcol."

The second reason to NOT use such things is if the maple industry doesn't clean up its own act....the FDA or other governmental agency will be happy to come do it for us.

I really like the concept of "Would you use it to mix baby formula in?" Simple.

---

I'm not at all ridiculing anyone, especially Dr Tim....just the whole idea of some of what's occurred on this thread I can't help but feel like the marketing folks at Crown Maple are taking note of this and laughing their a##es off :(

While we are on the subject I have been told not to use drops of milk/butter for defoamer as it has caused allergy reactions in some consumers. So I wonder about using used milk jugs. If we can not get bacteria out of a plastic spout is this a problem of milk residue. I do not know. Just asking.

You can use butter no problem it will be evaporated
At 219• just dont add to much deformer yuck dont taste good lol.
Milk jugs are ok to for sap.

Here we go again!

no actually its not ok to use butter.

Butter is an emulsion of fat in water - thus boliling starts at about 100 deg C. As it is not pure water, but solution of proteins, salts and hydrocarbons its boiling point will be higher (thus 110-120 looks more or less probable). However, once the water is removed second boiling point is possible - when the fat itself starts to boil. But organic fats have tendency to decompose before boiling.

Because of certain people's allergic reactions to milk products this is no longer allowed, neither is the hanging of salt pork or bacon.

The old timers used to hang a pork chop over the flue pan or just use butter. They all lived to be 100 or so. Now the new generation of sugar maker's use all that safe high tec stuff in a bottle and we only live about 70 years. It sounds like eating syrup made from lead soldered pans with a pork chop dripping on top may be the way to go.:o Oh let's not forget the hard boiled eggs in the flue pan. I would rather die happy then die healthy any day.:) I saw the other day in the news that Vermont is the healthiest state. If being 100 pounds over weight is healthy then I would rather be unhealthy. All these new regulations we have is just a way of creating jobs. I can assure you that the last thing our government wants is for you and I to live to be 62.
Spud