Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1COUNTER-MORTER-68

I worked in an industry that had occasional problems with rail cars and trucks that weren't cleaned properly. It wasn't life threatening but it messed up our product.


121 posted on 04/01/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by Retired Chemist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: Retired Chemist

It's only been recent history where the government prohibited carrying foodstuffs in carriers that contained chemicals.


130 posted on 04/01/2007 7:55:24 PM PDT by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

To: Retired Chemist

You would know better than the rest of us,,,
for that amount of product to have been tainted,,,
must be the bulk-carrier...
shipping records must have led them back-track...
this stuff will turn up in other places,IMHO,this week.


137 posted on 04/01/2007 8:06:09 PM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

To: Retired Chemist; Cold Heart
If you do a calculation of volume versus surface area, you will find that in the case of a rail tanker it is perfectly safe for most substances for a tanker to be used for fuel or some such inedible substance in one trip and then used for milk or some edible substance the next trip.

Why do I say volume versus surface area? Because you use surface tension properties to determine the thickness of the "skin" of fluid present on the interior surface of the vessel once it is drained.

In reality the quantity left over is much less since the interior is hosed down and let dry.

139 posted on 04/01/2007 8:13:08 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson