First, I have to ask why you think that gasoline with blended ethanol is even an issue. That’s not the point of the article or the safety objections folks like me have against ethanol. The worry here is ethanol production and storage facilities, and the millions of tanker trailers, tanker cars and tanker barges that will be transporting pure ethanol every day if ethanol becomes a major factor in American energy.
Second, you ask if we should do away with all flammable chemicals. No, the proper question is should we adopt a chemical (flammable or otherwise) as a major portion of our energy use when it drives food prices up, is difficult to transport, is less efficient than gasoline and releases more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere during production than gasoline. I’d say the answer to that is a big, fat “NO” and I say that as the editor of a national ag trade magazine. Ethanol is a boondoggle, and the government should get out and stay out.
If ethanol becomes subject to market forces it will crash like a helicopter without rotors.
“First, I have to ask why you think that gasoline with blended ethanol is even an issue. “
Exactly, hubel458, has not read the article. Blended fuel is NOT the concern! It is the rail tank car and truck -tanker ethanol loads that is the concern.
http://www.firefightingnews.com/article-US.cfm?articleID=46718
I think the issue is that while it's not too hard to swamp 10 gallons of burning ethanol with 100 gallons of water, it may be harder to swamp 1,000 gallons of burning ethanol quickly enough to ensure that the mixture is too dilute to burn by the time it spreads.