Sure, you can run your alcohol stove on methanol; that's what comes in a bottle of HEET. I mean it's cheap and available and all -- but it doesn't have as much heat content as ethanol. In other words, you have to carry more methanol just to do the same amount of cooking.


OK, so I can get more heat from ethanol than methanol, great, but alcohols with high ethanol content tend to be more expensive. Just how much weight can I save? In other words, Is Ethanol Worth It?

Join me on today's Adventure in Stoving as we "do the numbers" on ethanol.

HJ

Sunnyside Denatured Alcohol MSDS: % by wt
Ethyl Acetate 1
Ethyl Alcohol 85.7
Solvent Naptha 0.8
Methyl Isobutyl Keytone 1.9
Methyl Alcohol 3.6
This adds up to 93% so I assume the remaining % is water.

Kleeenstrip SLX Denatured Alcohol MSDS: % by wt
Ethyl Alcohol 45-50
Methanol 45-50
Methyl Isobutyl Keytone 1-4
Amount of water content is unknown and not able to compute from the above data.

Kleen-strip Green Denatured Alcohol % by wt
Ethanol 90-100
Methanol <10
Methyl Isobutyl Keytone <10
Ethyl Acetate <5

HEET is 99% Methanol with 1% proprietary additive.
Ethanol has approx 1/3 more energy as methanol by weight and 18% more energy by volume.

I've picked up a new brand of Ethanol called Bioflame at CanadianTire that has a really high ethanol content.
Bioflame Denatured Alcohol MSDS: % by wt
Ethanol 95
Propanol-2 5
Water content not stated.

Jim is so right -- if you need to count grams then ethanol is the winner but it is definitely more expensive. In my case Bioflame is a jaw-dropping 3x the cost of Methyl Hydrate (methanol 99.9%) and is NOT as readily available. See my other post in this forum for my own non-scientific testing.

Nice post! Thanks for all the MSDS info. I've seen them before, but not all nicely collected up like that.

I've been meaning to try Sunnyside for some time. It's got good high ethanol content AND is sold by the gallon. Green denatured (at least where I've seen it) is only sold by the quart, and that gets expensive.

Do you mean "ethanol has approx 1/3 more energy than methanol"?

HJ

Wiki has an Energy content table halfway down the page at wiki/Ethanol

Methanol has 17.9 MJ/L compared to 21.2 MJ/L for Ethanol.
21.2/17.9=1.18 ==> Ethanol has 18% more energy than does Methanol.

The difference between your .333 increase and the .18 theoretical (by volume) is interesting. You're getting better than theoretical improvement using less than optimum (pure Ethanol) fuel. Sunnyside should do even better.

I was using a different site: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/RoxanneGarcia.shtml
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2005/JennyHua.shtml
26.8 MJ/kg vs 20.16 MJ/kg = 1.329x the energy by weight.

Perhaps using the energy per volume is more appropriate when using ml and oz. of liquid for stove testing? In that case your figures make more sense.

Well, whether by weight or by volume, I'm not sure, but as an actual practical matter in the field, ethanol definitely has higher heat content.

If you guys get around to doing quantity boil tests (what amount is required to boil X amount of water of methanol vs. ethanol), I'd love to see your numbers. The won't be exactly the same because so much depends on the set up used and the conditions in which the test was conducted, but they should still show the general trend of being able to use an appreciably smaller amount of fuel with a high ethanol content blend.

HJ

P.S. Anyone in LA want to hook me up with reagent grade ethanol for my tests?

Do you carry everything on your back? Then weight is the relevant parameter.

If one is a backpacker, then weight is always relevant, and as the saying goes "everything weighs something."

How much is a given individual going to spend to save 2.5 ounces? Some will laugh it off, and others will think it worthwhile to go after eliminating that weight.

HJ

Hi Jim. If you had to cook under a semi-enclosed shelter, would it be better to use the ethanol blend? Less toxic? Or would it not even matter.

It's an interesting test, but we do need to be consistent in whether we're measuring energy density by weight or by volume. By weight, Ethanol energy comes out 134% of Methanol -- by volume only 118% -- that is significant.

This has been an educational thread for me. If "high ethanol content blends like Green denatured produce a little more soot", how does Sunnyside with an even higher percentage? Since "Complete combustion of ethanol forms carbon dioxide and water vapor", I'm thinking Sunnyside may burn cleaner (less soot) since it doesn't have as much other stuff in the mix. Is there an optimum blend to eliminate soot?

Well, first, I am NOT a medical professional of any kind let alone a toxicologist. If it were up to me, I would prefer fewer nasties in whatever it was that I were burning. The absolute cleanest you can get? Everclear, 190 proof. It's in drinkable form and contains no denaturants.

However, methanol actually burns pretty cleanly. You'd probably be fine burning methanol so long as the flame were blue.

The main thing about methanol is DO NOT DRINK IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Reasonable care in handling it is fine. It's not sulfuric acid or nerve agent or something.

HJ

Russ,

Excellent questions, but I don't have a definitive answer (yet). I've got anecdotal indications that a mix of ethanol with water without some of the denaturing agents found in denatured alcohol will burn cleaner. However, I'm not quite ready to "publish" that yet until I've been a little bit more thorough.

A mix of around 90/10 ethanol/methanol is supposed to be very clean burning according to people that I've talked to, but I haven't personally verified that yet. I've obviously got some more experimenting to do.

HJ

P.S. To the above. If you want a "lose, lose," try isopropanol which is frequently sold as "rubbing" alcohol in the US. From what I've read (again, I am NOT a medical professional), it's more toxic AND it produces more soot when burned. Yep, here's the fuel you really (don't) want.

This is anecdotal, but a friend of mine was doing tests in his garage with isopropanol. He had to stop because he was feeling ill. He didn't feel 100% for a couple of days.

Therefore, last choice, emergency use only: Isopropanol.

HJ

We are grateful, HJ, that you are attending to these burning issues.....

Careful. If you make "flame" posts, the moderators will be all over you.

HJ

P.S. You were one of the people who encouraged me to start taking up alcohol stove issues. So, I know you're interested... or are you getting burnt out on this topic?

We can safely say that this rare issue is well done.....

I gotta say, my jokes can't hold a candle to yours...

HJ

but your comments are matchless...

It always gets interesting when I strike up a conversation with you.

HJ

Thats the spirit!

I'm sorry....I'm pretty well burned out on this thread...

I've got more, but I'm going to leave that one where it lies.

HJ

My first choice is Bacardi 151.
It's got a LOT of uses.
Kind of expensive to use just as a fuel, but you can if you need to :-)

If you use isopropanol, the version that's more pure works better. Standard rubbing alcohol is 70% I think, but you can buy 90%. The main thing is to NOT breathe the vapors, but this is usually not a problem because they smell weird anyway. The trick when cooking is to cover any pots or metal cups with a good lid. Otherwise some of the alcohol vapor can condense on cooler surfaces and drip down into your food or drink.

have fun!
Back to my Bacardi. :-)

Pete 2

Pete,

Obviously the 90% stuff will have higher heat content, but isn't it a sooty, nasty mess when you burn it? The 70% stuff burns cleaner, yes?

What kind of a stove were you burning it on? Do you have any photos of your set up?

HJ

Are you at all concerned about fumes?

Yeah, that's more my experience.

HJ

I'm surprised that breathing the fumes would be toxic. After all, Rubbing Alcohol being sold in the first aid/medical section has certain implications, such as being rubbed on one's body? Or is this not the purpose for which Rubbing Alcohol is sold?

In any event, my preference is 190-proof Everclear, but it's so darn expensive. I mostly use SLX. I do get some soot on the bottom of my containers, but not so much that it bothers me any.

In my area, a .750 liter bottle of Everclear runs about $13.79 or about 54 cents per fluid ounce plus tax. Several years ago I found a much cheaper 95% alcohol substitute at a local liquor store. It is called "Diesel" and is made by Brass Bull Co. It usually costs about $10.49 for a full (one) liter bottle — or about 31 cents per fluid ounce (plus tax). If you’re like me, you’ll find the savings can really add up. (For some reason, my state will not allow Everclear to be sold in any size larger than .75 liters and Diesel cannot be sold in any size greater than 1.00 liter. In other words, the most cost efficient size of either, being the 1.75 liter size, is banned statewide.

Everclear and Diesel are both precisely 190 proof and both made from grain. Diesel's made in Frankfort and Everclear is made just down the road (I-64) in St. Louis.

On the trail I generally keep it in my Trangia 500ml bottle or my 1,000ml bottle or sometimes I start with both full, depending on the expedition’s conditions and duration. On the trail it goes well with most any juice mix. However, I prefer it with fresh squeezed grapefruit juice - sometimes grocery’s can be found right off the trail. (The ultimate mixer of all time is carrot juice, but that’s usually impossible to obtain on the trail.)

I really like multi-use items tucked in my otherwise light satchel. Either of these neutral spirits would be helpful if, god forbid, an amputation was necessary in a remote area of the wildernism — and there was no other alternative. [Remember the makeshift (union) hospital scene in the 1959 movie called The Horse Soldiers w/John Wayne? My cousin was an extra in that movie, but I’ll save that story for another day.] Some say that Diesel comes on slower but hits harder than Everclear, but in any case I’ve found the end result is the same. Trust me, you’ll sleep soundly all night with either. Diesel and Everclear cook exactly the same, obviously produce the same amount of BTUs at the same burn rate (regardless of the barometric pressure, wind speed, humidity and temperature), burn remarkably clean, are environmentally friendly, and there is absolutely no discern-able difference between them as to how long they take to boil water using Trangia burners.

In summary, if the cost of Everclear is a major issue as, previously mentioned, it was with me, find reliable sources for Diesel in your community and without delay. You’re savings will really add up, and how! Note: Diesel’s usually kept on the bottom shelf (or sometimes you have to ask the sales clerk for it because they may keep it under the checkout counter). When its out for all the world to see, its usually kept on the economy clear spirits isle, for instance between the gin and vodka.

Yes the alcohol is a bit sooty when you burn it. And just like they said above - the 90% isopropanol can be hard to get. I think it's just because the 70% stuff is widely used for medicinal reasons.

Actually, I usually use these fuels with improvised stoves. For example, you can very easily build a stove out of an empty Coke can. Just punch a few holes around the base of the Coke can (about 4-5 holes, equally spaced) using a knife. Each hole should look like an indented triangle - you want good air flow into the base. The holes at the base should be about 1 inch (vertically) above the bottom of the can. Then punch a few open slots near the top rim. Then cut out the metal top of the can, leaving it open at the top.

Fill the Coke can with alcohol fuel up to the first row of holes, ignite it, and sit a metal coffee mug on top. Like i said above, your coffee mug needs to have a lid, or some condensing alcohol vapor can get into your coffee. This stove will heat the coffee (or water) inside to a fairly warm condition, but the fuel runs out. So you have to re-fill it and light it again to get it pretty hot. If you use a slightly larger can, should work much better. The Coke can does get pretty covered with soot.

Pete 2

Thanks Pete. I'm going to try that!

The main reason I asked is because of the experience of a friend of mine who was doing stove testing with isopropanol ("rubbing" alcohol) in his garage. He became quite ill. It took him a couple of days to feel better.

I've done very little experimenting with isopropanol for that very reason (my friend's experience) and the general reputation that isopropanol burns with a lot of soot. Nothing I've seen or read has encouraged me to try further experiments with isopropanol although maybe I should revisit that.

With respect to toxicity, it makes sense that "rubbing" alcohol wouldn't be too toxic although I know it is quite toxic if you drink it. The combustion by-products, not the ispropanol itself, are what seem to have made my friend ill.

HJ

Grady,

Thanks for that. I've got some feelers out even as we speak.

HJ

Nice! Good to know. And the 90% stuff works better?

HJ

Hi, Pete,

Good to know about. That's a field expedient stove that could come in really handy.

Yipes, that's a lot of alcohol. And you have to repeat it to get the water warm?

Well, not the most efficient stove out there, but it could be really handy in the right circumstances.

Thanks,

HJ