http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest...monly-used-rail-car-has-dangerous-design-flaw
I realize that some industries require Ethanol, but it has been proven to be ineffective (in fact, counter productive) in reducing emissions, dangerous to transport, more expensive than gas, harmful to engines, and removes much of the corn crop from use for the world's food supply. The only people that benefit from it's use as a gasoline additive are the farmers that receive the subsidies that the rest of us pay for. It seems silly to complain about a design flaw (?) of the transportation container for a product that is useless, and then suggest that shipping companies should pay millions to improve the same, all the while knowing that those costs get passed on to the consumer.
I realize that some industries require Ethanol, but it has been proven to be ineffective (in fact, counter productive) in reducing emissions, dangerous to transport, more expensive than gas, harmful to engines, and removes much of the corn crop from use for the world's food supply. The only people that benefit from it's use as a gasoline additive are the farmers that receive the subsidies that the rest of us pay for. It seems silly to complain about a design flaw (?) of the transportation container for a product that is useless, and then suggest that shipping companies should pay millions to improve the same, all the while knowing that those costs get passed on to the consumer.