https://www.minibulldesign.com/produ...3&idcategory=3

Don't see any Moodoos in the store at the moment, but stuff comes and goes regularly.

If I remember my calculations, the break even point is about 15 meals. Of course, there is a good bit of wiggle room depending on your alcohol set-up, your canister set-up and how you cook.

My math was done with a light pop can stove (if you used a Trangia, the number would be lower), and with a Superfly with a wind shield (with a lighter stove, the number would also be lower, unless it was really windy).

I don’t think I am breaking any of the laws of thermodynamics, but who knows perhaps I am on the edge of creating cold fusion (Silliness). We are comparing fuels and not stoves. There are lots of variables that I am assuming to be neutral. Things like complete combustion, similar flame patterns and size relative to the pot and optimum height of the pot off the flame which I have found changes with different stoves. I don’t have the expertise, the equipment or the desire to pin everything down to exact scientific results, just want see what the general trends are.


Thank you for noticing my silliness – it is not always recognized. I don’t think anyone is advocating nuclear fission for camp stoves. But, you could probably boil a pot of water in one nanosecond, and there would be no soot on the bottom of the pot. There are a number of pressurized alcohol stoves on the market. I’ve never used one.




Yes that is true for many denatured alcohol brands. Some of the really “bad” stuff is less than 25% petroleum based ethanol with the remainder being fossil carbon based methanol and various recycled solvents turning your stove into a little toxic waste incinerator.

But the Alcohol I am most likely to use is Klean-Strip Green Denatured Alcohol – 95% Natural, Renewable and Biodegradable Content. You can pull the MSDS if you need further proof. It is widely available in the United States at home improvement stores like Lowes and Home Depot. Many small town ACE hardware stores carry it. I bought the quart I used for my tests listed below at my neighborhood Fred Meyer grocery store (Kroger’s). I have never had access to it, but I have been told in the Midwest you can burn E-85 in alcohol stoves and E-85 is 85% grain based ethanol. I read that the gasoline content burns out of it fairly quickly and you notice some heat drop when it does.

I don’t know the availability of renewable ethanol around the world. I would suspect it would be readily available in South America with Brazil being the largest ethanol producer in the world. Another benefit of using bio-ethanol is the smug knowledge that in the US it is subsidized by automobile and RV owners, and in some very, very small way you are not adding to global warming.

Below are some burn and boil test done on 12/3/2012 on various stoves. In the photo they are L-R a modified Packafeater XL (55 g & my current touring stove), Cat-can Trangia(140 g & used on many tours), Cat-can Sheba (120 g & never intended for touring). To the rear is the Optimus canister burner in a Trangia 25 base (220 g in the Cat-can version & never used on tour) and my T-25 kettle, which was used for all bloom to boil tests. Mother Kenmore is holding them all up ( fuel by 100% Columbia River Gorge wind generated 220 volt single phase-50 amp electricity ).

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=286908




The results generally hold up my and other's statements on the efficacy and efficiency of non-pressurized alcohol stoves while not refuting any of your claims as to the heat density of fossil camp fuels or soot on the pot bottoms.




[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]*[/TD]
[TD]Packafeather[/TD]
[TD]Trangia[/TD]
[TD]Sheba[/TD]
[TD]Optimus[/TD]
[TD]Kenmore[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Boil 500ml[/TD]
[TD]4.9[/TD]
[TD]4.5[/TD]
[TD]3.1[/TD]
[TD]2.8[/TD]
[TD]1.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Burn Time[/TD]
[TD]17.0[/TD]
[TD]26.0[/TD]
[TD]14.0[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Fuel Amt ML[/TD]
[TD]60.0[/TD]
[TD]120.0[/TD]
[TD]120.0[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]ML/Min[/TD]
[TD]3.5[/TD]
[TD]4.6[/TD]
[TD]8.6[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]ML to Boil[/TD]
[TD]17.4[/TD]
[TD]20.8[/TD]
[TD]26.4[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oz to Boil[/TD]
[TD]0.6[/TD]
[TD]0.7[/TD]
[TD]0.9[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



* Of course ignition to full flame is nearly instant with the Optimus and I didn’t time ignition to bloom time on the alcohol burners. In relative terms the Trangia was 15 to 20 second faster coming to full bloom than the Sheba and both were considerably faster than the Packafeather. But because the market only seems to advertise full throttle bloom to boil, I timed this “market speak” standard. Speaking only for myself, a better and more poetic standard is the time from when I dig my cook kit out of the bottom of my pannier until I am sitting comfortably on the river bank enjoying a cup of tea and taking in the sunset, because this entails setting up my tent and sleeping situation and other transitional tasks at the end or beginning of the day’s ride, bloom to boil time becomes a back ground concern at most. It is certainly less of a concern as waking up my campground neighbors at 5:30 in the morning with the howl of a pressurized stove.

During these tests a small flame appeared at the burner end of the Optimus hose. I have used this burner less than a dozen times, never while cycling. Inspection revealed a serious crack in the swaged hose-end clamp. The flame was small and was put out safely by a turn of the valve. What if the identical clamp on the canister end of the hose was throwing out a larger flame directly onto the fuel canister? Now this is a specific safety failure to a specific model burner, but the more general issue is the greater complexity of the system the greater chance of failure be it safety or just general functioning, and the greater quantity and energy density of the fuel, the great the danger if failure does occur.

I bought the expensive Evernew Appalacian Stove seta while ago and did some tests. It can be set up in numerous configurations and they are all less efficient than just sitting the pot directly on the stove. By efficient I mean how hot a set volume of fuel will get 2 cups of water.

0.25 fl oz (2 to 3 squirts from my bottle) will heat 2 cups to 189F which is almost too hot to drink. In other configurations with more flames and the mug held above the burner the burn time is a lot shorter, flames lick around and outside the base of the mug and the water gets up to 151F.

This actually points out the flame regulation advantage of canister stoves, but most people seem to crank them all the way up to boil water quickly.....slow and steady is often the most efficient use of fuel.

I realize you were joking but I did post earlier that I have cooked just fine around that altitude with my Trangia in Tibet. No problems. I'll post it again though: http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/p...id=190294&v=N4

I agree. It's a shame insults are being allowed here. This should be reported to the moderators.

cycocommute is completely wrong on this one. Most of the 13 billion gallons of ethanol produced in the U.S. is produced by fermentation of starch-based crops, primarily corn:

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/eth...roduction.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethano...her_feedstocks

Methanol is primarily produced from fossil fuels (natural gas, not oil):

http://www.methanol.org/Methanol-Bas...nol-Made-.aspx

Hence why my farmer friends around me are doing so well, land prices have sky rocketed, food prices including meats have gone way up, my shares of ADM have done well and my gas milage suffers because my state requires 10% ethanol in every gallon of gas sold. Mixed bag to say the least.

It's kind of sad that this turned into a giant alcohol stoves are dangerous debate. I'm a little surprised though that so many use alcohol stoves. I thought they would be a little too fringy outside of the lightweight backpacker community but I guess there are a lot of similarities.

I used my pop can alcohol stove for close to 200 days in '07/'08 while hiking the PCT and it was perfect. However no stove is perfect for all situations. Alcohol stoves have their drawbacks but I really don't have a problem waiting an extra 5 minutes.

I've used the MSR pocket rocket a lot and it's really nice to cook on but I dislike the canister issue and I can't use larger pots on it.

I've used the old school whisperlite a lot also and it's great to cook on but when things go wrong they can really go wrong (like impossible to cook).

The other intriguing option are the small contained wood burning stoves. I know some will immediately say this is a huge fire hazard but they haven't seen these in operation then. This is great because you have a 5-6 oz stove and you don't have to carry any fuel. Of course you have collect some twigs every time you want to cook. Your pot also becomes a sooty mess. One of my PCT friends seemed to always be covered in soot.

Okay lets stop the insults and bickering RIGHT now. Don't bring up issues from other threads. Respect what others say and stop trying to make them think like you. I'm not going to go through cleaning up this thread because there's too much so let's get back on topic.

Which "small contained wood burning stoves" are you referring to? Maybe we need a new thread for that though.

I've also been intrigued by what I have seen of these since they first appeared about a decade ago.

I don't see that there is a fire danger issue (the same as with all other proprietary stoves) so long as the flame remains contained, and that comes down to user competence.

But there is always a lot of fuel lying around in the form of small, dry twigs to feed such a stove. However, I think both weight and the inevitable wait to get up to sufficient heat might (note, I said, might) be an issue.

I think there have been several posters here use them over time, although I can't remember who.

This one is very interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcFyzsnODJ8

I would be referring to the Bushbuddy (from backpackinglight forums) and there are a few others out there as well.

My expensive, and now unused, Evernew Appalachian cook set can be used as a wood stove. It's basically a TI cylinder with holes for airflow and big hole at the bottom so you can feed the fire with twigs. The big issues with wood burning stoves are the soot and the rate that they burn the small twigs that they use as fuel. IMHO they are not much of an improvement over simply getting a few stones together to hold your pot over a fire that you build underneath. Most organized or state campsite will have a firepit and I've never had any trouble finding enough wood on the ground to build a fire. I then wait for it to go down a bit and put my TI mug on the embers to boil water.

I don't know that he's completely wrong. Synthetic ethanol is produced from ethylene, which in turn is produced from ethane, which is either separated from natural gas or is a by-product of petroleum refining. I was under the impression that much of the alcohol intended for use as a solvent (like dentured alcohol found at the hardware store) came from synthetic ethanol.

I have no idea where alochol in its many guises in other countries comes from, though. I suppose much depends on prices for various commodities. Ethylene has other uses, so that has driven up the cost of synthetic ethanol.

Have you a source that updates the figure from 2003 that I posted?

And from what I gathered, much of the ethanol produced from ethylene is used for industrial feedstock, not put on the shelves of supermarkets and hardware and outdoor shops in North America.

I agree, the soots gets on everything and there will always be creosote build-up. Hot wood smoke hits metal container filled with cold water and you get creosote, just can't stand the smell of creosote, just horrible in my opinion. Couple rocks and some scooped coals from the campfire and away you go.

Hope the personality focus and negativity some unfortunately have can stop, and on-topic discussion and good will can prevail.

Regarding woodburning systems: I experimented with these quite a bit. They have their pros and cons. The cons can be largely overcome through better skills and practices.

IntenseAngler shows his DIY woodburners in action. Others also have videos at youtube.com on the topic.

However, once you learn a variety of improvised setups, and gain a little facility with these, they are quick and simple. And you don't need to carry them around.

These are both lighter and simpler than alcohol fuels and stove systems. And less bulky, easier to carry.

Your sources are for ethanol produced for fuel, which goes into the gas pump here in the US. Your first link is under US Department of Energy vehicles and fuel. The subsidies and tax structures for it are all driven by use of ethanol as a vehicle fuel.

I do not believe the denatured alcohol I buy at the hardware store comes from ethanol plants here in the midwest. I suppose I could write to Klean-Strip, but I don't know if they would answer my query. A cursory glance at an MSDS indicates that it is about half ethyl alcohol (ethanol) and half methanol: http://jwbasecamp.com/Articles/Super...%20-%20SLX.pdf

Right:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethano...lene_hydration

I guess it would be true that denatured ethanol you pick up at the hardware store is pretty likely to be produced this way. But I doubt it's written on the bottle one way or another. The overwhelming majority of ethanol is produced using renewable processes.

I guess we are destined to hover around the stove, topic, until Spring ,

when Y'all can, finally, go out on the Bike again, and ride somewhere.

On earlier trips, I would set up a small campfire and cook my food over that. It worked reasonably well, partly because I had been taught how to make a fire and keep it under control at all times and partly because it was easy to find small dead branches for fuel. One drawback is a fire takes a lot of time and attention. It takes a while to get the fire to the stage where it is good for cooking. Another drawback is the potential risk involved. Each summer, we have a lot of wildfires throughout the province which were caused by campers who left a campsite before the fire was completely out.

In the last decade, I have had campfires just two or three times while on bike trips, and only one of those was for cooking. A stove is a lot faster and easier.

There are many hidden costs, or not-immediately-obvious environmental consequences, including fuel usages, involved in the production of ethanol. Those who have studied this carefully seriously question its supposed cleanliness and superiority as a fuel.

Our application here uses very little, though.

Agreeable no-cooking-required foods are another option.

When I want to go light and am just boiling small amounts of water I often use a Swiss military surplus "Volcano" cookset paired with a pepsi-can Trangia type burner. It works well; that being said I was hampered this summer in Wyoming (backpacking) with this setup because of what I suspect (I was warned) was a batch of old fuel that had absorbed water, combined with altitudes over 10,000. I may try my hand at home brewing a lighter setup than this over the winter. I like the simplicity and what I percieve as, yes, the safety of an alcohol burner. That perception is colored by an experience with my Whisperlite.....an o-ring in the plastic pump sprung a leak when I was testing the stove on my back deck prior to a trip. The violence of the fire had to be seen to be believed, it looked like a mini oil rig disaster. I don't exaggerate when I say that if I did not have an extinguisher handy, which I ran dry, I might have lost my house. I have also had a Whisperlite pump break on me, besides the one that was destroyed in the deck fire.
The one pressurized liquid fuel stove I trust is my old-school dead simple Svea 123. I use it when with a group and using a bigger pot to boil a couple of liters at a time. It is only a bit heavier than the Whisperlite, all metal, and has served me since I was a Boy Scout 40 years ago (holy crap). It simmers well, burns hot when that's what you need, and the shiny brass 19th century look is damned cool.