There do seem to be a lot of these things around, all hiding in semi-obscurity.

I admit to being intrigued by the Thermette myself, but there are certainly some disadvantages to the design....

If you look closely at the photos, you'll see that there's no bottom on the fire chamber. It's just a ring. Maybe that's just as well, that there's no pretense of protecting what's underneath from heat... but leaving fire scars is generally unacceptable to me.

Then there's the fact that the base clearly doesn't "nest" in the bottom of the kettle the way the Kelly and the Storm do, which means extra bulk. Ditto for the cooking ring. Then there's the weight...

On the other hand, it looks like something that would be great fun to play around with. :-) I'm intrigued by the versatility, and by the possibility of boiling and cooking at once, and shifting to cooking alone on the fly once the water boils.

Tempting to think of combining the best features of each of these designs into one, though.

After Isobel passed through, the yard was so covered in tree debris that you couldn't see the ground (we have a LOT of tall trees around the house- too close for comfort in a large storm).
In more trying circumstances, that's a LOT of potential fuel for cooking or water purifying.

I tried to fire up the Storm Popular on Sunday, but I tried it inside with one of those 2.5 oz Sterno cans... figured I'd get a baseline with a clean fuel before maybe clocking a boil again after blackening the inside, one way or another. Didn't work out- Sterno puts out so little heat that 45 minutes later the fuel was gone and the quart of water never did boil. I don't consider that a reflection on the qualities of the kettle, just the weakness of Sterno for cooking, which I've experienced a few times before. I'm sure the Storm will do fine, given decent fuel and a little "seasoning".