A recent investigation has revealed that distributors in key extraction markets like Southern California, and Oklahoma are selling extraction-grade cylinders filled with only 100 lbs of butane gas, despite the federal DOT-regulated fill capacity of 120 lbs for butane. Extraction grade propane, butane, and isobutane have different densities due to their unique molecular structures and weights, which influence how their molecules are arranged and how tightly they pack together in both liquid and gas phases.
Further investigation into high-purity bulk butane filling stations in California, Ohio and Texas has confirmed that there is no operational justification to under-fill butane cylinders in the extraction industry, except to manipulate pricing perception. This practice is aimed at making the price of the cylinder appear lower, but in reality, it significantly increases the cost per pound of gas by 17% and adds additional unnecessary service costs for extraction businesses.
Regulatory Context
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulates the fill weight of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) cylinders to ensure safety in transportation and storage under 49 CFR 173.304. These regulations help prevent over-pressurization, which can lead to dangerous situations like leaks, explosions, or fires. Since LPG is stored in liquid form and expands when heated, cylinders must have a margin of safety to accommodate this expansion. DOT regulations specify that liquefied gases such as butane, propane, and isobutane must be filled to a safe level to allow for thermal expansion. The general fill limit is based on a percentage of the cylinder's water capacity to ensure safe transportation and storage.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Weights and Measures require that product labels accurately reflect the content, weight, and measurement of the product being sold. These regulations ensure transparency and protect consumers from deceptive practices. Specifically, labels must provide clear, visible, and truthful information about the net quantity of the contents, allowing buyers to make informed purchasing decisions. Non-compliance with these requirements can result in penalties and legal consequences for businesses, as accurate labeling is essential for maintaining fair competition and consumer trust.
Misleading Practices & Pricing Perception:
Exploiting Customer Assumptions: Some distributors rely on the assumption that extractors won’t notice the reduced fill weight, particularly in cases where they don’t weigh the cylinders or understand the different densities of gases such as extraction-grade butane, propane, and isobutane. Extraction-grade propane, butane, and isobutane have different densities because of variations in their molecular structures and chemical compositions, meaning the same size cylinder can hold different amounts of each gas under DOT law.
Although all three are hydrocarbons—composed of hydrogen and carbon atoms—the arrangement of these atoms varies, impacting their physical properties, such as density. This molecular difference determines how much of each gas can be safely stored in a given cylinder. For example, because LP239 propane cylinders are widely filled to only 100 lbs, unscrupulous distributors are filling LP239 butane cylinders for extraction to only 100 lbs instead of the legally allowed and industry-standard 120 lbs, taking advantage of the misconception that the two gases have the same density.
How Under-filling Increases Costs
While an under-filled cylinder might seem like a bargain at first glance, the economics tell a different story. For instance, a 120-lb butane cylinder priced at $500 calculates out to $4.16 per pound of butane gas. However, if the same-sized cylinder is under-filled to only 100 lbs but still sold for $500, the actual cost per pound skyrockets to $5 for extraction grade butane gas. This misleading tactic means that extractors are essentially paying more for less product, which erodes profitability over time.
Here’s a breakdown:
100% FILLED BUTANE CYLINDER
$500 Cylinder Price of LP239 or 200 lbs Water Content Cylinder Size / 120-pound fill weight = $4.16 per pound of butane
83% FILLED BUTANE CYLINDER
$500 Cylinder Price of LP239 or 200 lbs Water Content Cylinder Size / 100-pound fill weight = $5.00 per pound of butane
In this example, by reducing the amount of high-purity butane gas in each cylinder, suppliers can present a lower cylinder price, creating the illusion of savings. However, this strategy inflates the cost per pound of gas, misleading customers about the true value. This tactic is being used by profit-driven distributors who exploit customers' assumptions, making their prices appear more competitive at first glance while concealing the actual long-term costs to buyers. It's a deceptive approach that benefits the supplier at the buyer's expense.
Profit Maximization: Under-filling allows distributors to increase profits by selling less product at a higher per-unit cost, without customers noticing the difference unless they are closely tracking weight or volume. For extractors, who rely on butane as a core input for throughput, this price differential can result in tens of thousands of dollars in additional annual costs depending on the scale of their facility and throughput.
Additionally, the logistical impact can be staggering: when cylinders are under-filled, more frequent deliveries are required. For example, if an extractor using five 120-lb cylinders per week receives only 100-lb refills, they would need 52 additional deliveries annually. This adds approximately $5,750 or more to annual delivery costs alone in this example.
No Operational Justification for Under-filling
Unlike some industrial applications where under-filling is done for safety or logistical reasons, there is no justification for this practice in the extraction industry. Engineers from Ohio, California and Texas bulk-filling facilities of extraction-grade butane, propane, and isobutane have confirmed that under-filling offers no operational benefits for the extraction industry. In fact, it appears to merely inflate service costs such as delivery and cylinder rental fees while simultaneously lowering productivity for extraction businesses.
The Long-term Impact on Extraction Businesses
In an industry already operating on thin margins, being short-changed on butane fill weight exacerbates profitability challenges. More frequent cylinder swaps, increased delivery costs, and wasted time loading cylinders into the laboratory or C1D1 environment disrupt extraction businesses' efficiency and bottom line. Some distributors choose to implement this practice to make the price of their cylinder appear more competitive, but extractors ultimately pay more for less gas over time.
The Bottom Line: Choose Full Cylinders for Better ROI
Extraction businesses must stay vigilant and demand transparency from suppliers. Under-filled cylinders are not just deceptive—they are detrimental to operational efficiency and profitability. While fully filled cylinders may carry a higher upfront cost, the long-term savings and enhanced productivity more than justify the investment. Extraction businesses that prioritize full, transparent purchases will ultimately maintain stronger financial performance.
Extractors should always partner with suppliers who prioritize quality, value, and service over market manipulation and greed. Opting for extraction-grade butane cylinders filled to the DOT maximum allowable weight of 120 lbs ensures that extraction businesses avoid hidden costs, maximize their resources, and maintain long-term efficiency.
Comments