Alcohol Burning Stove or White Gas?

I put two stoves to a test to determine approximate boil times on each unit. The first unit was a trangia alcohol burning stove which comes with a Swedish army surplus aluminum 1.5 liter pot and wind barrier. It is very easy to find these through army surplus stores for about 5 to 10 dollars. There are a number of websites that teach you how to build your own out of a tuna can or a pop can. I got mine through an army surplus dealer because I wanted the windscreen and the proper trangia stove. Admittedly, newer trangia models may have substantial performance improvements over this old-school military issue stove. And I suppose a more tricked out stove--more and larger holes, for instance--might speed up the boil time as well. The second unit was an MSR whisperlite running on white gas that cost me about 60 dollars in the late 1980's. The trangia is definitely easier to set up and you can have this stove burning within seconds. The MSR is a little more labor intensive and there is some flamework that must be contended with when priming the stove. I was surprised at how quickly I could get my old MSR stove up and running. The test times are recorded below. The MSR boiled the water in just under 9 minutes. The Trangia boiled the water in about 25 minutes. Obviously the MSR is a better choice for serious alpinism, but the Trangia is nice to use when I want to leave the stove on next to the car and have a lap on my skis before I have a cup of cocoa or if there is a long time to be had. The biggest disincentive is the cost of the fuel. Presently a bottle of blue HEET which is alcohol suitable for the trangia, a small bottle sells for about four to five dollars for a very small bottle. On the other hand, a gallon of coleman fuel costs (ten?) dollars. The trangia sucks up that methylated spirit, too. About as fast--maybe even faster than you would use white gas full blast on an MSR whisperlite. So, I think that the viability of the alcohol stove is at present limited by fuel costs and its relative inefficiency as compared with its white gas competitors. But this statement is relative only to my upper midwest retail pool. Check out these examples of globally available "meths" from a sports retailer in England: http://www.mark-ju.net/juliette/meths.htm

If boiling a pot of water on ethanol or methanol or methylated spirits is so dramatically different than boiling a pot of water on white gas," naptha" , kerosene, etc., we have pause to wonder about the viability of alcohol as a fuel source in other domains as well. This speaks to ethanol insofar as it is widely touted as a potential solution to our future hydrocarbon shortage. We may be able to run a city on gas and diesel generators, but there is no way that ethanol can be produced in the volume and with the cost benefit of petroleum.

But let's get a better picture of the efficiency--or rather, inefficiency-- of the spirits in question. In the first place one must consider that ethanol does not come into being without significant petroleum inputs. Whether registered in the natural gas in the fertilizer used to grow the crops (corn or grain) or in the diesel for the machinery to harvest the crop, the petroleum base is present both in the physical as well as the efficient uses of agronomy insofar as it is directed towards the production of spirits. Perhaps this "entropic outer ring", that is to say, this farming way of life that produces the spirit is desirable as a thing in itself. Prior to considering any of these details it is worth noting its energy per pound ratio.

I quote here some information on alcohol, note specifically its btu per pound:
"Alcohol: Although Alcohol is one of the only renewable liquid fuels commercially available to backpackers it suffers from having the lowest fuel economy. However, alcohol stoves are among both the lightest and cheapest stoves on the market and simple alcohol burners can be constructed for next to nothing (See below). Alcohol is the fuel with the lowest efficiency, 8419- 12960 BTU/Lb." Cf. the numbers for white gas: "White fuel: Also known by it’s proper name, Naphtha, White fuel is a chemically clean petroleum. While it shares the same chemistry as auto-fuel, it contains none of the additives and burns much cleaner. It is sold as Coleman fuel, or other specialty brands like MSR or Camplite and is infrequently available as cleaning gasoline in hardware and paint stores. The most volatile of liquid camp fuels, it is still very safe if used with caution. And is often the most recommended fuel for camp stoves. @18200 BTU/lb" Cf. with Kerosene: "Kerosene: Available almost everywhere around the world. Avoid using lantern or charcoal lighter fluid, as these are often dirtier and can clog jets. While being the next most reliable alternative to whitefuel, kerosene is very susceptible to the cold, taking longer to prime than white fuel and gelling in extreme weather, making stoves that only burn kerosene impractical for year round use. Kerosene is also a very sooty fuel, and you can expect to blacken your stove and pots quickly, with frequent of clogging. @18540 BTU/lb." Many thanks to Guerrilanews.com, from whom these quotes were taken.

So we can see that alcohol, while depending on hydrocarbons as inputs in its production process, gives back through its product such as "methylated spirits", anhydrous alcohol, denatured alcohol, etc., about half the btu's per pound of the petroleums such as kerosene, "paraffin", white gas, etc. This difference can be felt, especially on cold days when you need to get warm liquid fast or when you are melting snow for water in sub-freezing temperatures. And it certainly makes you pause when you realize how seriously ethanol is bandied about as a potential solution to the coming petroleum shortages.

Keep posted as I test a primus kerosene stove against the MSR Whisperlite.