Slashdot Mirror


The Science Behind Powdered Alcohol

Daniel_Stuckey (2647775) writes "Last week, the US Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau approved Palcohol, a powdered alcohol product that you can either use to turn water into a presumably not-that-delicious marg or to snort if you don't care too much about your brain cells. It's the first time a powdered alcohol product has been approved for sale in the US, but not the first time someone has devised one, and such products have been available in parts of Europe for a few years now. Now you may be wondering, as I was, how the heck do you go about powdering alcohol? As you might expect, there's quite a bit of chemistry involved, but the process doesn't seem overly difficult; we've known how to do it since the early 1970s, when researchers at the General Foods Corporation (now a subsidiary of Kraft) applied for a patent for an 'alcohol-containing powder.'" It turns out the labels were issued in error, so don't expect it to be available soon. But it does appear to be a real thing that someone is trying to have approved.

176 comments

  1. Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...can turn water into wine.

    1. Re:Now you too... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...can turn water into wine.

      Moped Jesus is pissed.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:Now you too... by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

      ...can turn water into wine.

      Moped Jesus is pissed.

      From reading the comments on the bevlaw link, it seems that NASCAR Jesus is pissed, too. In the US English sense, at least.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    3. Re:Now you too... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I saw more of the "wont someone think of the children" posts. Seriously people, if you are worried about your children getting alcohol you have weay bigger things to worry about.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    4. Re:Now you too... by JasonGoatcher · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is how Jesus originally did it. If God's been around forever, He knows all sorts of cool stuff that we don't. The next question is whether or not alcohol could be powdered by someone with the proper knowledge, but only primitive technology.

    5. Re:Now you too... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe this is how Jesus originally did it. If God's been around forever, He knows all sorts of cool stuff that we don't. The next question is whether or not alcohol could be powdered by someone with the proper knowledge, but only primitive technology.

      This is beginning to sound like a job for Powdered Toast Man.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:Now you too... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Now you too......can turn water into wine.

      Yes, bad wine apparently. Jesus did better.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    7. Re:Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this is how Jesus originally did it.

      Nah. That wouldn't explain how "he could have turned wheat into marijuana."

    8. Re:Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could he not do better, he's made of magic?

      People might just take your research and you just a little more seriously if you didn't try to come across as one of them religious nutters at every opportunity.

    9. Re:Now you too... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      Moped Jesus is pissed.

      If communion wine is really his blood, he must have been wasted 24/7.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    10. Re:Now you too... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm turning water into ale even as I sit here. Not that hard. A bit of barley, some hops, some yeast. I'd turn water into wine too but NC wine simply sucks, at least so far. Wrong climate, wrong soil, and who wants to turn water in the form of imported extract into wine?

      The difference between this ancient process of turning water into beer, ale, wine and adding a powder to water that releases alcohol is that one might actually want to drink the results of the former process and one might even find the resulting beverages (consumed in moderation) healthful, brimming with b-vitamins and bioflavanoids/pigments and antioxidants. OTOH, since alcohol per se does not have a "powderable" form at room temperature, the powder involved can at best break down into alcohol and leftovers when put in contact with water. And I'll just bet that those leftovers are organic and/or inorganic molecules, oxidants, and quite probably carcinogenic. Finally, I'd bet a fair bit that even cheap vodka would be less toxic, less expensive, and less likely to cause cancer as an additive used to achieve any given concentration if all you want is to turn a water-based beverage into a cocktail.

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    11. Re:Now you too... by cusco · · Score: 1

      Try something besides grapes for your wine. You have fairly decent peaches in that area if I'm not mistaken, and peach wine can be quite pleasant if you don't over-sugar it (which I tend to do). Just keep in mind that while commercial wines stop fermenting when the PH changes or they run out of sugar, homemade wines with wild yeasts stop fermenting when they've poisoned themselves with too much alcohol.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    12. Re:Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moped Jesus is pissed.

      If communion wine is really his blood, he must have been wasted 24/7.

      Oh yeah, Jesus was a partying kind of guy. If there was food or drink, he was there. Jesus knew how to have fun, without selling his soul (literally). Heck, his very first documented miracle was turning water into wine. Thats gotta say something for the guy.

    13. Re:Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't talk about Jesus!!

    14. Re:Now you too... by iMySti · · Score: 1

      How could he not do better, he's made of magic?

      Lucas told me it was midichlorians!

    15. Re:Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No you can't. At most you can turn it into grain alcohol. Wine is a lot more than just water and ethanol.

    16. Re:Now you too... by BattleApple · · Score: 1

      It's been suggested that it's just alcohol mixed with a highly absorbent tapioca starch sold as "N-Zorbit M", so at best, it would down into starch and alcohol.

    17. Re:Now you too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as likely

      More likely though since the 'wine' was never scientifically tested to see if it was wine, Jesus just hypnotised them into thinking it was wine, or they were just too polite to tell him his water sucked, or Jedi mind trick, or they were just too drunk.

    18. Re:Now you too... by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      ...like the people carrying guns around legally practically everywhere in Georgia.

    19. Re:Now you too... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      And I'll just bet that those leftovers are organic and/or inorganic molecules, oxidants, and quite probably carcinogenic

      Everything is carcinogenic if you test it thoroughly enough.

      But yeah, I'd expect there to be some pretty nasty chemistry there.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    20. Re:Now you too... by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Actually, I looked into it further and it turns out that the encapsulating agent is alpha cyclodextrin. This basically a ring of 6 dextrose molecules, hydrophilic on the outside and hydrophobic on the inside. It is extremely stable and to the extent that it breaks up at all, breaks into dextrose and dextrins. Basically, it is an indigestible complex sugar that the body completely ignores. Not only that, but it is a food-safe source of fiber. Not only that, but as a food supplement, that hydrophobic center loves to grab triglycerides and trans fats and forms a complex of fats bound to the ring that can bind 9 times the weight of the ACD in fats and flush them out of the body. There is double blind placebo controlled data that it has a number of health benefits -- 6 grams a day neutralizes over 500 calories of fat a day, lowers triglycerides, lowers cholesterol, drops insulin levels, prevents weight gain, all at statistically significant levels in spite of the comparatively small N of the studies done so far.

      I was impressed enough with what I learned that I'm considering adding an ACD supplement to the beer I make. There are reasons to think that it will alter the flavor profile, but quite possibly in positive ways (there is a German research paper onto this very subject, but it is paywalled). The interesting thing is that if the alterations are acceptable, one could end up with a beer that absorbed (say) half of the fat from the buffalo wings you eat along with the beer so that your body never absorbs it. It could also mean that the powdered alcohol beverages already on sale in e.g. The Netherlands could be more valuable as a dietary supplement fat eliminator than they are as a 3% alcohol fruit punch in a packet sold mostly to young people.

      In a truly paranoid world, it might explain why the FDA put it on hold here. Imagine the chaos if somebody started marketing a "Margarita in a pouch" where 2-3 of them a day completely blocked weight gain and cured metabolic syndrome and effectively treated type II diabetes! Drug companies would go nuts -- nobody can really patent a complex sugar that has been known and studied for decades and that is really pretty easy to make. I can't QUITE get it to be automatically created during the mashing process of making my own beer -- it requires certain specific bacteria and/or the direct addition of a particular enzyme that takes the dextrins that are produced in the mash and wraps some fraction of them into rings -- but somebody could easily decide to mass produce the enzyme and sell it ready to add as a supplement to a wort, or one can do what I'm doing -- buying a jar of ACD directly, crush the tablets, and add them to the wort. That's too expensive for the long run, but hey, beer that is really, really good for you is a dream worth pursuing, is it not?

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    21. Re:Now you too... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      On general principles I'd disbelieve all claims of the form "here's a pill that will cure 90% of lifestyle diseases". But that does sound an interesting combination of properties.

      half of the fat from the buffalo wings

      Buffalo crossed with chickens? Or is this some marketing name for ostrich steaks - they're good by the way?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. First time? by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    I recall powedered alchohol cans when in the 1970s. The alchohol was enclosed in vesicles.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:First time? by davester666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      much more appealing than being enclosed in testicles.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    2. Re:First time? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      OK, I admit I had to look up "vesicle".

      Stop laughing. It's been a quarter-century since I took a biology class

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:First time? by careysub · · Score: 1

      I remember powdered alcohol being test marketed back then. Didn't know if it ever went big. This is 40 year old "food" technology.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    4. Re:First time? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 0

      +1 balls are funny

    5. Re:First time? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      You looked it up. That's more than many people would do.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  3. It's just by JustOK · · Score: 1

    Cocognacicaine

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:It's just by necro81 · · Score: 1

      Cocognacicaine

      I'm just waiting to hear Arnold Schwarzeneggar say that on screen. [relevance]

  4. Synthohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is one more step on the road to the synthohol we were promised.

    1. Re:Synthohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, not really, why would you say that? First of all, it's spelled synthehol, if you're going to gobble up sci-fi fantasies learn to spell it, or at least make an effort to use existing technologies to look it up.

      According to Wiki, "Synthehol is an artificial substitute for alcohol, allowing the drinker to experience the taste of alcohol without any adverse effects". Synthehol is a liquid, and has nothing to do with alcohol. Why does powdered alcohol mean "one more step" to you? And "one more"? What was the first one?

      Oh, and "promised"? Who promised you anything in sci-fi? Star Trek was FICTION, people!

    2. Re:Synthohol by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      and nobody cares for the taste so fuck it.

      however, several researchers have been researching for alcohol substitute that could be cleared from body with another substance.

      however biggest problem with this research is simply that any such substance is either already labeled as a drug or gets labeled as a drug very fast. because alcohol is the only thing state wants you to use for druggy effects.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Synthohol by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      Star Trek was fiction, but man, let me tell you, Trekkies was fact.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    4. Re:Synthohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree this has nothing to do with an alcohol alternative, there have been first steps elsewhere toward that idea, from various other alcohols and chemicals that are stronger effects we associate with alcohol but weaker negative effects, to things like kava that in some places have been legally allowed in places that alcohol has been banned.

    5. Re:Synthohol by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      Synthehol was one of those dumbass things that can only exist in Star Trek fantasy land (like a communist society where everyone just works for the common good, there is no money, and no crewmember ever complains that the captain is the only one getting laid). Who the fuck likes the "taste" of ethanol?? We drink it specifically for its EFFECTS. Take those away and you had may as well just drink a regular fruit drink.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    6. Re:Synthohol by cusco · · Score: 1

      Synthehol was one of those dumbass things that can only exist in Star Trek fantasy land

      Why would you say that? Humans have been testing random drugs in a rather scattershot manner for the last several tens of thousands of years. It's only recently that any sort of methodology has begun to be applied to studying chemical effects on the brain. I actually would be very surprised if something were not found in the next few years that gave a similar high to alcohol but without the nasty hangover.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    7. Re:Synthohol by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      I actually would be very surprised if something were not found in the next few years that gave a similar high to alcohol but without the nasty hangover.

      I agree such a chemical would be sweet. But from the general description usually given in the series, that's not what synthehol was. It basically removed the high altogether (or at least made it impossible to actually get intoxicated).

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    8. Re:Synthohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't answer the question. How is powdered alcohol, consumers of which will experience the side effects of alcohol just as if they had imbibed it in liquid form, one more step towards an alcohol substitute that offers all of the taste but none of the side effects?

    9. Re:Synthohol by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Tert-amyl alcohol is what you are looking for, no acetaldehyde generated, no caloric value, 20x the potency, less psycho-motor side effects, smells like camphor, don't taste too good, though. Check bluelight for details.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  5. But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I can get 1.75L of decent vodka for about $13/US. That gives me approximately 39 drinks at $0.33 per drink. How much does this stuff cost?

    Because, you know, that's all that matters when you're trying to be wasted every day.

    1. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see you, too, have found the joys of Svedka.

    2. Re: But is it cheaper? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Given that unpretentious vodka is pretty much food-grade ethanol and water, plus packaging, distribution, and sin tax, and powdered alcohol would be food grade ethanol, some sort of dextrin, plus packaging, distribution, and sin tax, they'd have to be saving a lot of money on the reduced bulk and weight of the omitted water to do any better.

      Given that, and given the obvious utility in alcohol concealment and infiltration scenarios, I suspect that they aren't even going for price parity with either the Not Too Much Methanol(tm) brand vodkas or the Tastes Like Piss And Turns to Piss!(tm) economy beer sector.

    3. Re: But is it cheaper? by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can get 1.75L of decent vodka for about $13/US. That gives me approximately 39 drinks at $0.33 per drink. How much does this stuff cost?

      Because, you know, that's all that matters when you're trying to be wasted every day.

      Decent Vodka??? please tell me which brand sells decent vodka at that price? (genuinely interested as a vodka lover) and by decent I mean you should be able to tell the difference between it and metho!

    4. Re: But is it cheaper? by mmell · · Score: 2

      It is if you're going to the ball game. Priced a beer at the local sports arena lately?

    5. Re: But is it cheaper? by thejuggler · · Score: 1

      It has to be Philips or Barton's and neither qualify as "decent". You might as well drink sterno. However, Luksusowa Vodka is decent (IMHO) and runs about $20/L.

    6. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      However, Luksusowa Vodka is decent (IMHO) and runs about $20/L.

      It's more than decent. It's a luxury!

    7. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Decent vodka? Just buy a bottle of Everclear and mix it with tap water, you can easily get the equivalent of 1.8L of vodka for $16-17.

      Or, better yet, you could start drinking a spirit that actually has taste -- there are plenty to choose from.

    8. Re: But is it cheaper? by mjwx · · Score: 2

      I can get 1.75L of decent vodka for about $13/US. That gives me approximately 39 drinks at $0.33 per drink

      It can also be used to strip paint.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    9. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm envious. Over here the tax on alcohol is 75.86 USD/liter (501.41 SEK/liter). In addition to 25% VAT...

    10. Re: But is it cheaper? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      If that was about reducing weight, they could start with selling higher concentrated spirits that need to be watered down to drinking strength. You'd have to add water to the powdered stuff, too...

      --
      bickerdyke
    11. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yuck, spoken like someone with their taste buds in their arse. just because you can't tell the difference in good and bad vodka doesn't mean that others can't.

    12. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your lack of taste or understanding of Vodka suggests you must be American where it is common practise for the spirit manufacturers to buy ethanol and mix it with water and then sell it as vodka, this comes from extremely lax definition in the US of what can be classified as vodka.

    13. Re: But is it cheaper? by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      much of the vodka on the market today, especially the cheap crap, is little more than what you describe. but a good vodka DOES have taste, the taste varies from vodka to vodka based on the distillation process and filtration (if any). The crap that is passed off as vodka in most of the cheaper brands isn't even fit as a mixer.

    14. Re: But is it cheaper? by dbIII · · Score: 4, Funny

      Given that, and given the obvious utility in alcohol concealment and infiltration scenarios

      Good news, everyone! Ethanol suppository.

    15. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm envious. Over here the tax on alcohol is 75.86 USD/liter (501.41 SEK/liter). In addition to 25% VAT...

      You can't tell me that your country doesn't have moonshiners making illicit alcohol then.

      That taxation level is unconscionable, and is highly regressive. I thought Scandinavia was all about equality, but apparently equality doesn't entail allowing the less wealthy to enjoy alcohol.

    16. Re: But is it cheaper? by sjwt · · Score: 1, Funny

      Poor Scandinavians,

      too busy enjoying good health care, education, not getting shot,not being murdered, not being hated by the majority of the world, not having mass shooting in school.. If only they had cheap Alcohol then they too could be like the pride of the world MERICA!

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    17. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I can get 1.75L of decent vodka for about $13/US. That gives me approximately 39 drinks at $0.33 per drink. How much does this stuff cost?"

      I guess it's like that old Doris Day movie, where the scientist created alcohol cookies to allow people to get a cheap buzz.

    18. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i saw 96% for 4 euro last time i was in italy. just add equal volume water and you're set.

      i don't understand vodka epicures, given that they distill all the taste out of it (and brag about purity on the label).

    19. Re: But is it cheaper? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      If the vodka has any taste other than the taste of alcohol, the distiller has failed (except in cases where it is specifically flavored such as vanilla vodka). Vodka is supposed to be a flavorless spirit. For that matter, there have been numerous blind taste tests and the results indicate that while people can distinguish between vodkas when they drink it neat they cannot do so when it is in a mixed drink (the tests mostly compared mid-level vodkas to premium vodkas, so there may be some difference between bargain basement vodka and good vodka).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    20. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know your comment is a logical fallacy, right? Critiquing a fault in another's claimed tenet does not imply that one's putative tenets are fault free. To wit: calling out a Scandinavian country on economic inequality is fine, because the US doesn't pretend to have economic equality, whereas Scandinavian countries extol their equality.

      Besides, man, WTF? Aside from an attack on what you perceive to be US cultural failings, do you have anything constructive to add to the conversation... like, say, an explanation for why an ostensibly proudly egalitarian society has such a punitively regressive tax on a mild recreational drug that mankind has enjoyed for thousands of years?

      Or, maybe, whether or not this punitive taxation actually does result in bootlegging there. We have already proven that the rule of law only goes so far in the US. Tax our drugs too highly and the masses are willing silently rebel and resort to the black market.

      Then again, in Scandinavia, their prisons are basically run on the honor system and look like hotels. So, maybe they don't have bootlegging.

    21. Re: But is it cheaper? by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      A good vodka has no taste, it's run through charcoal to eliminate any character, aroma, color or taste. There is a reason the best vodkas are only $40 a fifth, triple distilled with filtering is all that is needed, the goal is to have only alcohol and water. Contrast that with whiskey which is much more complex, flavors from the mash and charred barrels must work in symphony with each other and makers take extra precautions when making whiskey because you cannot filter out any mistakes since you will lose flavor.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    22. Re: But is it cheaper? by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      That's is what all vodkas are, they are triple or quadrupled distilled and filtered then water is added at the end to get it to the correct proof. Poland, the birthplace of vodka, grades vodka based on purity. Any vodkas with flavor are infused by putting the flavor agent in after the distillation and filtering are complete.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    23. Re: But is it cheaper? by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      BULLSHIT. traditionally vodka has had significant taste, it is a fairly recent thing where filtration and distillation have gone to extremes to remove all taste. the top end brands pride themselves on NOT filtering and distilling out all the taste.

    24. Re: But is it cheaper? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Well, if you consider 1949 to be fairly recent I guess you are correct. According to U.S. law vodka is a neutral spirit without distinctive character, odor, or taste (there are in addition definitions regarding the degree to which it is diluted from 95% alcohol for sale). Considering that traditionally the word vodka is just an eastern european word with the same derivation as whiskey (both are derived from the word for water) ANY distilled spirit could be called "vodka", including brandy.
      Basically, it comes down to this. when English speakers began using the word vodka, they already had words for distilled beverages which had distinctive character, odor, or taste. As a result, especially considering that there was no distinctive character, odor, or taste that defined vodka, vodka came to mean in English a neutral spirit with no distinctive character, odor, or taste.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    25. Re: But is it cheaper? by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      That's is what all vodkas are, they are triple or quadrupled distilled and filtered then water is added at the end to get it to the correct proof. Poland, the birthplace of vodka, grades vodka based on purity. Any vodkas with flavor are infused by putting the flavor agent in after the distillation and filtering are complete.

      They are graded on purity, however if you have filtered out all the flavour from the crop it was produced from the vodka maker has failed. Even polish vodka makers pride themselves on NOT filtering out all the tastes and aromas of the crop.

    26. Re: But is it cheaper? by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      Ahhh I get it, so the rest of the world must now accept the american definition of something created in Europe.

    27. Re: But is it cheaper? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      The rest of the world can do whatever it wants, but when you are discussing a topic on a U.S. based website, with a majority of contributors living in the U.S., you can expect that people who are discussing a topic will be using the definition of a word as it is used in the U.S.. If you would prefer to use the word vodka to mean "any distilled beverage", that is certainly your privilege. However, do not expect to actually communicate much with that term. If you do, I will tell you that currently the best vodka is made in Kentucky.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    28. Re: But is it cheaper? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Fruit juice concentrate and powdered alcohol on a backpacking trip, in the ISS, or shipped to Antarctica comes to mind. Sometimes weight really does matter a lot.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    29. Re: But is it cheaper? by Megol · · Score: 1

      So where exactly isn't vodka defined as alcohol distilled to maximum purity (~95-96%) and then diluted with water? It's not an US exclusive definition by far...
       

    30. Re: But is it cheaper? by Megol · · Score: 1

      If you aren't an alcoholic why exactly is this a problem? Seriously?

    31. Re: But is it cheaper? by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      If Lilyhammer has taught me anything, it's that the russians have no problem 'importing' alcohol into Scandinavia.

    32. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you have an alcohol problem. Plus, your definition of decent is terrible.

    33. Re: But is it cheaper? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Poor Scandinavians,...not having mass shooting in school.

      ahem

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    34. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brevik

    35. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no but the idea that vodka must be completely free of taste is most definitely an american thing. there is a reason the best vodkas come from places like poland, russia, france et al and not the USA.

    36. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US is only a fraction of the worlds population, even the english speaking one. this board is probably at best 50% US based. considering you seem to think vodka should be completely tasteless you will forgive me for thinking the kentucky vodka is little more than diluted rubbing alcohol (ie shit). You may as well try and claim the best whisky comes from the US. the best whiskies comes from poland and russia and even the french grey goose is pretty good and they ALL have a distinctive flavour.

    37. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't distil all taste out at all, only bad or american vodkas do that, a good vodka distils as many impurities out as possible while still maintaining the taste of the ingredients used in the fermentation process. a good vodka should be smooth while still having an aroma and taste (especially aftertaste).

    38. Re: But is it cheaper? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      works for orange juice as you can create concentrate by REMOVING water. Does NOT work for alcohol as you have to ADD a substance (=weight) to create powder. And alcohol does NOT contain water that can be removed to further concentrate pure alcohol.

      Hint: There is no weight difference between 1kg liquid alcohol and 1kg powdered alcohol.

      Overall, it might work for pre-mixed, freeze dried drinks that have a fair share of water and rest of the chemical compounds involved are solids solved in that water (like vodka-orange) but any weight reduction here would come from the water involved. But it even wouldn't work if you tried to move on to whisky-cola, as the aromatic components in the whisky are mostly fluids, too. If you remove them, you remove the taste. And you can't replace them by adding water.

      So the only advantage of powdered alcohol would be to prevent the orange juice powder in the drink-mix to turn into some sludge. But you will pay for that with additional weight from the substance needed to trap the (liquid) alcohol.

      Basically, this is a novelty item and won't be any more than that, except some extreme cases where "dryness" matters more than weight.

      Always remember: Alcohol is not a solution!

      --
      bickerdyke
    39. Re: But is it cheaper? by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      Burnett's costs about $13 for a 1.75 where I live, it's not bad at all!

      http://www.burnettsvodka.com/p...

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    40. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, this particular product (from the Dutch video) is sold at 1.5 euro per bag, which delivers one glass of a 3% ethanol drink.

    41. Re: But is it cheaper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? you may as well drink metho.

    42. Re: But is it cheaper? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      One of the linked articles says :

      According to the site, Phillips came up with the idea because he is an "active guy" and wanted a way to enjoy an adult beverage after long hours hiking, biking or camping without having to carry around heavy bottles.

      Which makes a sort of sense. Carrying bottles into the mountains - and then having to carry the empty bottles out - is a deal of a pain in the butt. Which is why we used to decant the whisky or vodka into an accordion bottle and carry that in and out. They're perfectly good for daytime water bottles too.

      (Actually the one that I use is nearly 30 years old and was originally intended for 24-hour urine collection for medical tests. It's amazing the things you can find in the store rooms of hospitals. Several kilos of explosives in that attic room too.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    43. Re: But is it cheaper? by balbus000 · · Score: 1

      Svedka is the best I've found in terms of quality/price, it's about $18-$22 for 1.75L.

      Although I still keep some top shelf bottles in my bar for when I want to drink it on the rocks without any mixers (just a slice of lime).

      As another vodka lover, what are your favorites? I usually go for Crystal Head, Grey Goose or Belvedere, but I'm not exactly a connoisseur.

  6. Boozer backpackers by macraig · · Score: 4, Funny

    What a boon for boozer backpackers: all the buzz but a tenth of the weight!

    1. Re:Boozer backpackers by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      120 proof in pure powdered form, if you mix it 1:1 by weight into water, you'll have something slightly less potent than Vodka or Rum, with 20% sugar in the mixture (from the powder coating.)

    2. Re:Boozer backpackers by dbc · · Score: 1

      The real question is how it does at water purification. It should take care of bacteria, no problem. How it does on organisms like giardia, though, is more relevant to a backpacker. Compare the weight/bulk of powdered alcohol to other water purification methods, and you might have a winner.

    3. Re:Boozer backpackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or for about 20% more weight you could carry 200 proof and a packet of kool-aid.

    4. Re:Boozer backpackers by Typical+Slashdotter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is not suitable for water safety, since you can't just drink alcohol to hydrate...

    5. Re:Boozer backpackers by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      What about the times when people drank beer for all 3 meals because it was safer than the water?

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    6. Re:Boozer backpackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like the typical Slashdotter...always naysaying

    7. Re:Boozer backpackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was small beer, which was only 1-3% alcohol (2-6 proof); basically the same as neer beer.

    8. Re:Boozer backpackers by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately that has to be filed with Battle of Britain night fighter pilots having super night vision due to a high carrot diet - a cool sounding historical "factiod" that has caught on instead of being an actual fact. There was a paper about it within the last year that got a lot of press and it's probably even been used as a "weird news" filler in your local paper or morning news show.
      As other posters have pointed out there was also the low alcohol small beer but it turns out that water was drunk more than that or anything else in the Middle Ages.

    9. Re:Boozer backpackers by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      we,, I guess that went well where a clean well was available...

      So that paper is most likely right, but probably doesn't rule out that there were areas where beer was safer than water, it has been cooked at least once.

      --
      bickerdyke
    10. Re:Boozer backpackers by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The disappointing thing is it seems they didn't drink beer because they didn't trust the water. Instead they drank beer because they liked drinking beer, just like today.

    11. Re:Boozer backpackers by jfengel · · Score: 2

      Plus the beer had calories; it was a way of preserving grains in a ready-to-use form. It was more "thin gruel" than "beverage".

    12. Re:Boozer backpackers by jfengel · · Score: 1

      They had the (dubious) advantage of having already been exposed to whatever was in the local wells. You get the same thing today: go to any third-world country and you'll get sick drinking what the locals drink. After that, your immune system will be primed to whatever they've got.

      The worst offenders are the wells contaminated with human waste, which brings you whatever bugs everybody else has. A good well is deep enough to avoid that contamination, and you keep your latrines downstream of it. Still... every once in a while you'd get it really bad, especially in cities, where space for both wells and latrines are limited.

    13. Re:Boozer backpackers by Megol · · Score: 1

      No he does not!

  7. All I need to know is one thing... by LoRdTAW · · Score: 2

    Can I smoke it?

    1. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can smoke anything. But with ethanol being rather flammable I don't think it would really accomplish anything.

    2. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      FWIW I think ethanol along with many other alcohols can be vaporized without combusting. Personally I have done some kitchen chemistry with isopropanol. While evaporating it in a smallish room, it built up to a noticeable odor in the room and I think the buzz I got was a little more than placebo. Kinda like drinking the stuff, or huffing correction fluid or acetone. Not that I recommend doing any of this - but airborne delivery of alcohol seems plausible. probably would irritate the fuck out of your throat

    3. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My sister did this once accidentally. She decided to make jello shots one day, and instead of boiling the water she boiled the vodka. Oops, she got pretty drunk from that.

    4. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by physicsphairy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, although you wouldn't ignite it, you would simply apply a heat source to drive the alcohol out from the granules and into the vapor phase. You can do the same with regular alcohol.

      I wouldn't recommend it however: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

    5. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Forget smoking, I'm waiting for the first reports of someone ending up in hospital because they tried to snort the stuff.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    6. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "FWIW I think ethanol along with many other alcohols can be vaporized without combusting. Personally I have done some kitchen chemistry with isopropanol. While evaporating it in a smallish room, it built up to a noticeable odor in the room and I think the buzz I got was a little more than placebo."

      If you fill your own wine into bottles, you can get more than a buzz from inhaling the vapors of the spilled wine under your nose. Once I filled 250 bottles in an afternoon and they found me hours later on the floor.

    7. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Forget smoking, I'm waiting for the first reports of someone ending up in hospital because they tried to snort the stuff.

      Sounds like they've already thought of that:

      "To take precautions against this action, we've added volume to the powder so it would take more than a half of a cup of powder to get the equivalent of one drink up your nose. You would feel a lot of pain for very little gain."

      I think snorting a half a cup of powder would take a pretty determined effort.

      Then again, I have no idea of the volume of stuff that people snort now, never having decided to try something like that. For all I know, for some people, that's a normal Friday night. :-P

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      FWIW I think ethanol along with many other alcohols can be vaporized without combusting.

      Vaporized? Pure ethanol is a vapor

    9. Re:All I need to know is one thing... by wulfhere · · Score: 1

      You can, and I've tried it before. We have one of these at work: http://vaportini.com/home.html

      --
      -- Sent from a computer.
  8. poison by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the perfect way to get rid of someone you don't like. They look like they drank themselves to death and you could slip it into their cheeseburger.

    1. Re:poison by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure if you "slipped" enough powdered alcolhol to kill someone into their cheeseburger they would notice the taste. Hell, at those levels you could probably smell it from the next room!

    2. Re:poison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is putting powdered alcohol in a burger different from putting moonshine in a soft drink? Unless this is somehow vastly more concentrated and easy to consume without noticing than normal alcohol, that wouldn't be particularly easy.

      Unless they are either exceptionally tolerant or exceptionally sensitive, most people will pass out or throw up before being able to consume a lethal (for them) dose of alcohol.

  9. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me know when they figure out to make powdered water instead!

    1. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crushed ice?

  10. Not approved yet by NoKaOi · · Score: 1

    From http://www.iflscience.com/chem...

    It has now come to light that Palcohol received approval for their label, not the product. A representative for the federal bureau said that the approval was made in error, though details were not provided about how the error occurred. Palcohol creator Mark Phillips was not available for comment, but agreed to surrender the approvals this afternoon. Phillips will likely re-evaluate the situation and try for approval on his labels again.

  11. Wake up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:Wake up! by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      That's not really powdered water anymore than a sponge is solid water.

    2. Re:Wake up! by careysub · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Neither is the powdered alcohol solid alcohol. It is all the same.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    3. Re:Wake up! by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Fair enough.

    4. Re:Wake up! by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      It is pretty neat though, kinda reminds me of that scene in Aliens 4 where the general zaps a gelatin cube with a laser to turn it into a shot of what looked like whiskey.

  12. There is a reason we don't have powdered alcohol by superdude72 · · Score: 2

    This will be approved when the powder has a weight, volume, and alcohol content comparable to the liquid forms currently on the market. Which kind of defeats the purpose.

    On a tangent, there is no technical reason for rubbing alcohol to be made of isopropyl alcohol (not fit for human consumption), rather than ethanol (basically the same thing as vodka.) There is no technical reason that vodka should cost so much more than rubbing alcohol. This is all due to government regulation. Powdered alcohol will not be allowed to fit through the cracks.

  13. How many calories? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My only problem with alcohol is it doesn't like my waist line but it loves leaving me wasted.

    1. Re:How many calories? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      given the alcohol is encapsulated in sugar crystals I imagine it would be like drinking a vodka with a couple of teaspoons of sugar added calorie wise.

  14. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by careysub · · Score: 1

    ... There is no technical reason that vodka should cost so much more than rubbing alcohol. This is all due to government regulation. Powdered alcohol will not be allowed to fit through the cracks.

    This should be news to no one. The high sin/public health tax on alcohol (theories of the tax vary) is a key and very prominent feature of public alcohol policy. Most people feel it should be heavily taxed - public discussion of the issue is limited almost exclusively to whether it should be higher still. Powdered alcohol will be regulated no differently.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  15. "marg"? by DogDude · · Score: 1

    either use to turn water into a presumably not-that-delicious marg

    Don't tell me to Google "marg", because if it is a word, it's a stupid word. I really doubt that it's a word, though.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:"marg"? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      either use to turn water into a presumably not-that-delicious marg

      Don't tell me to Google "marg", because if it is a word, it's a stupid word. I really doubt that it's a word, though.

      Marg is a contraction of the name Margaret in Australia.

      To be honest, all of the Marg's I've met have been over 50 and definitely not what I'd call delicious.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re:"marg"? by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

      It's short for Margarine. I assume that's what they're talking about anyway. Very common short form where I come from (UK).

    3. Re:"marg"? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      It's an abbreviation for "margarine", which is a butter substitute. I don't know what it has to do with powdered alcohol, though.

    4. Re:"marg"? by starsky51 · · Score: 2

      I assumed it was short for Margarita, a tequila-based cocktail which is not that delicious to start with.

      --
      There are 2 types of people in this world. Those who understand ternary and those who don't.
    5. Re:"marg"? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Get out of here with your context sensitivity. Marg obviously stands for margarine, margaret, or marginal. In other cases it's a negative slang for Maginot Line.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  16. You're right. The reasons are purely legal. by mmell · · Score: 1

    It is so that rubbing alcohol may be sold without further precautions. That's why it's labelled 'denatured'. Anybody notice something about the price of rubbing alcohol (say, the 70%abv stuff) versus the potable variety?

  17. Wow slashdot has gotten stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actual cool story. Novel chemistry. Could have large far reaching social implications.

    Default view. The TWO comments i see at default view are some lame shit about powdered toast man. And can i smoke it.

    Back to reddit. where i expect stupid shit like that.

  18. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by mewyn · · Score: 1

    Food grade equipment and starting stock is the reason. Sure there's the "sin tax" for governments to get more money out of alcohol, but that's not the bulk of the difference. The bulk of the price difference is from the fact that you're starting with food grade materials and using food grade stills and other equipment. With non-food-grade alcohol distillation they can throw whatever they want in and, if it's a little impure, or contains some toxins it doesn't matter because no one is supposed to drink it. There is usually a lot of stuff you don't want to drink in that 5% that's in rubbing ethanol; including methanol, toxic esters, turpentine, etc; due to the stock they typically start with. Denaturing isn't just because the gum'mint doesn't want you to drink it, it's that it's not all that safe to drink to start with. And if you decide to cry "oh, why not just 100% pure ethanol", going over 95% ethanol is exceedingly hard to do and gets to be really, really expensive with each added percentage point (or fraction there of).

  19. Missing link by q043x · · Score: 1

    So, where is the link to the DIY instructions for the creation of powdered Vodka & Redbull?

  20. more slashadvertisements by ruir · · Score: 1

    Their site is irresponsible, and the evident reverse psychology of "do not USE IT EVERYWHERE" seems to be written by a 13-year old. Slashdot at its best...the moderation system is failing us.

    1. Re:more slashadvertisements by eam · · Score: 1

      Well, DUH.

  21. Alcohol vapors and rapid drunkenness by billstewart · · Score: 1

    I've occasionally heated up liquor to pour over a dessert before flaming it. Brought it to near-boiling in the microwave, and carrying it over to the table where we were going to serve it was ... entertaining. It goes right through your sinuses into your bloodstream, faster than drinking it, but I'd much rather drink it.

    This powdered alcohol does keep telling you not to snort it; says it'll get you drunk but be unpleasant, and certainly with the flavored versions I'd expect that to be true. (Even with the unflavored ones, seems like a nose-ful of carbohydrates isn't really what you want.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Alcohol vapors and rapid drunkenness by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Even with the unflavored ones, seems like a nose-ful of carbohydrates isn't really what you want

      You're waiting for the alcohol drenched beef jerky/bacon strips?

      Half and half cream and alcohol?

    2. Re:Alcohol vapors and rapid drunkenness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This powdered alcohol does keep telling you not to snort it; says it'll get you drunk but be unpleasant, and certainly with the flavored versions I'd expect that to be true. (Even with the unflavored ones, seems like a nose-ful of carbohydrates isn't really what you want.)"

      Just as with pill-snorters who have to cope with all sorts of filling material, it's not about what you want, it's about what you need.

  22. Rubbing alcohol vs. denatured alcohol vs. drinking by billstewart · · Score: 3, Informative

    In the US, "rubbing alcohol" usually refers to isopropyl alcohol, not ethanol, and it's medical-use purity. And you can absorb alcohol through your skin, so you wouldn't want toxic impurities in it.

    That's different from "denatured alcohol", which is usually some combination of ethanol and things that are bad for you, and it's the version that's not food-grade, it's paint-thinner-grade solvent.

    The strongest distilled ethanol-water combinations are about 96% ethanol, which has a lower boiling point than pure ethanol; if you want to get it any drier than that, you need to add some kind of other organic solvent such as benzene, so that you can boil off the alcohol-water-benzene mixture at an even lower temperature, leaving the ethanol and less or no water. But you're not normally going to do that for food-grade alcohols, because you don't want any remaining benzene, and because 96% is too strong to be actually drinkable anyway; maybe you'd want a stronger alcohol if you wanted to dissolve some flavoring that's less soluble with the remaining water content, but 96% is usually strong enough to do the job pretty well.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  23. Re:You're right. The reasons are purely legal. by dbIII · · Score: 1

    It's regulated in my country which makes it almost as much of a pain to get hold of as lab ethanol but more expensive.

  24. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by dbIII · · Score: 1

    going over 95% ethanol is exceedingly hard to do

    Around a century ago in Germany there was some Schnapps just a bit beyond that point. Not so hard to distill off some more water with just a little bit of Benzene in the mix. Of course if it doesn't poison you immediately there is cancer to look forward to.
    I think there's some varieties of high purity lab ethanol with similar additives to make it easier to distill.

  25. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will be approved when the powder has a weight, volume, and alcohol content comparable to the liquid forms currently on the market. Which kind of defeats the purpose.

    On a tangent, there is no technical reason for rubbing alcohol to be made of isopropyl alcohol (not fit for human consumption), rather than ethanol (basically the same thing as vodka.) There is no technical reason that vodka should cost so much more than rubbing alcohol. This is all due to government regulation. Powdered alcohol will not be allowed to fit through the cracks.

    Pure isopropyl is excellent for cleaning optical surfaces and dissolving muck. Much better than ethanol or methanol for some times of muck and certain types of surface. Eye glasses, camera lenses, telescopes and binoculars, screens and monitors, projectors etc. Anywhere you have a precision lens mirror or glass where a smear affects the quality of the image.

  26. Gluhwein by StripedCow · · Score: 1

    Mix this with self-heating powder, and you can make the perfect on-the-go gluhwein!
    https://heatermeals.com/how-se...

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  27. How flammable is it? by jasenj1 · · Score: 1

    Alcohol stoves are fairly popular with backpackers. Would this powder be an effective way to carry more fuel? Would it be a fire hazard - especially if it became airborne?

    1. Re:How flammable is it? by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      Hmmm... let's do some quick math....

      If you carry 1 litre of denaturated ethanol (methylized) your fuel package contains 100% burnable fuel. I doubt you can squeeze more than 100% alcohol in a powder.

      --
      bickerdyke
    2. Re:How flammable is it? by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      But it is easier to carry a box of powder than a bottle of liquid.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    3. Re:How flammable is it? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Why would that be?

      That's true if that "powder" was made in some process (usually freeze-drying) that removes water and thus decreasing the weight of whatever you're powderizing. When powderizing is done by adding substances, that's just more dead weight you have to carry.

      The only other point I could imagine would be easier handling, but liquid alcohol can be used as-is and does not require additional ingredient (water) and additional time to become useable. Depending on the grain size of the powder, a gale of wind at the wrong moment may send your whole fuel reserve airborne. And even if a bottle leaks in your backpack, alcohol would evaporate without any sticky residue from the sugar-coating.

      --
      bickerdyke
    4. Re:How flammable is it? by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Just because you can put powder in anything, while a liquid needs special liquid containers that might leak or shatter and for the most part will be solid instead of flexible.

      A bottle takes up a lot of room, is often going to be an inconvenient shape, and there is the whole breakage concern. Liquid would be easier to use, but powder would be easier to pack.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    5. Re:How flammable is it? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      An EMPTY bottle would take up uneccsessary room. I don't know the specifics of the powdered alcohol, but my guess would be that it takes up MORE volume than liquid alcohol.

      Imagine the volume you need in your shopping bag to carry home 1 kg of sugar. you need roughly 300ml of water to put that into solution. So at least for sugar, you're decreasing the volume by storing it as a solution. (but of course increasing the weight by 300g) I'm pretty sure that that's the case too for alcohol, espescially if you have to ADD something to get the dry form.

      And there is no need to store it in rigid container, like bottles. I'm sure you have seen those foldable water canisters before or a foil pack of Capri-Sun. (they now even come with screw caps.) And they can withstand forces, that would cause powder containers to break or deform and crack, too.

      So my guess still would be that, compared to powder the points for packing go to liquid alcohol. (I'm ready to review this if someone has numbers for volume/gravity/weight of that powder) but for packing AND usability, both would loose to plain old Sterno.

      --
      bickerdyke
    6. Re:How flammable is it? by afidel · · Score: 1

      You're not worried about breakage of the container when backpacking, you use an anodized aluminum bottle with a plastic/rubber screw top stopper, something like this. They've really never been a problem with packing for me (the stove on the other hand..)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    7. Re:How flammable is it? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      The Palcohol website says :

      Palcohol can be transported in your luggage without the fear of bottles breaking.

      and you say

      and there is the whole breakage concern.

      In nearly 40 years of hiking and mountaineering, taking weeks worth of food (and booze) into the mountains in a rucksac, and not being gentle with them, I've never once had a bottle break on me. Even when I've been transporting mountaineering metalwork in the same body of the rucksac. Just making sure that there's a layer of fabric around the glassware is sufficient.

      A part-used bottle - yeah, I could see that being a concern, leaking through the lid. So drink the whole bottle, and if it's a multi-day trip, take multiple smaller bottles rather than one big one. Or decant it into a proper re-sealable bottle, as I describe up-thread.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    8. Re:How flammable is it? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      you use an anodized aluminum bottle with a plastic/rubber screw top stopper,

      To be honest, I always use plastic, not aluminium. It collapses down when it's not needed, so you don't need to waste volume in your rucksac. Taking a plastic bottle of beer on the walk in, and then using that bottle as your day bottle for the rest of the trip works perfectly well and costs essentially nothing. Throw the bottle into a bin when you come down out of the mountains and start to hitch hike back home (or back to where you left your car, if you're doing it that way).

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    9. Re:How flammable is it? by afidel · · Score: 1

      This was in regards to fuel, you're not putting white gas into (most) plastic =)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    10. Re:How flammable is it? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I don't know what you mean by "white gas" - it's normally kerosene (paraffin) that I use, though my stove will take anything from diesel to light petroleum spirits (they can get ... interesting ... if you let the pressure chamber get too warm). Goes in polythene or polycarbonate drinks bottles perfectly well, though I wouldn't store or transport it in polycarbonate because that tends to crease and I wouldn't trust the microfractures. But I've got a couple of dedicated polythene fuel bottles which I've used for 30-odd years, so I use them. Obviously, your fuel bottle goes in an outside pocket of the rucksac, not in the main body with the food.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  28. Re:Rubbing alcohol vs. denatured alcohol vs. drink by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    That's different from "denatured alcohol", which is usually some combination of ethanol and things that are bad for you, and it's the version that's not food-grade, it's paint-thinner-grade solvent.

    I don't even use denatured alcohol for cleaning things. You can buy pure IPA in gallon steel cans (or even five gallon cans!) at most hardware stores. The only time I've gotten it cheaper is in those rare cases when the grocery outlet has 70% IPA, but usually it's only 50% and less than 70% won't adequately clean many varnishes and so on off of the metal surfaces where I tend to use IPA — in automotive applications. I refill my bottles and then add water to make my own 75%-ish bottles for less-demanding jobs.

    They've been dicking around with paint thinner, too! Now you often can't get real toluene, they have some kind of substitute. That sucks, because it's got a bunch of specific uses as a thinner for stuff other than paints, like silicone.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  29. Re:Rubbing alcohol vs. denatured alcohol vs. drink by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    In the US, "rubbing alcohol" usually refers to isopropyl alcohol, not ethanol, and it's medical-use purity. And you can absorb alcohol through your skin, so you wouldn't want toxic impurities in it.

    So shouldn't I rather be worried if I can absorb those toxic impurities through my skin instead of absorbing the alcohol part?

    --
    bickerdyke
  30. Xylitol doesn't count? by DarthStrydre · · Score: 1

    It's both a sugar AND an alcohol. It's been available in powdered form for a long time. I do not believe it can intoxicate humans, so perhaps not considered "Alcohol" by most people, but the article didn't mention ethanol by name.

  31. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For high power laser optics, we just use either high purity water or high purity ethanol. The optics are not taking outside, so there is less variety in what they get on them, but still with the occasional finger print, it didn't seem to make much difference which alcohol is used. And since a few more exotic optical pieces directly recommend ethanol and avoiding methanol is a plus, we stuck with that.

  32. volume by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    28g per "one drink equivilent"?
    good luck sneaking a 6 pack of this into a sports event.
    to be relevant in any market it'd be useful, they need to work on the "10-12% alcohol by volume"

    9oz flask versus 1/3 pound of white powder, which one is easier to sneak into a venue?
    unless i'm missing some other purpose for this product...

  33. It's not decent vodka...it's blend! by swb · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've done work for a distiller. My contact there is a good guy and knows a ton about the products and how their made. I had seen some kind of advertising for vodka in that price range and was giving him a hard time, asking why I should buy his premium product when the cheap stuff was being advertised as four-column distilled.

    What he told me was that cheap vodka is made from a large percentage of what he called "blend" which is primarily a distilled alcohol product made from waste oranges. As a giveaway to the orange industry, waste oranges can be made into alcohol with a much lower excise tax than grain alcohol. He said you wouldn't make the excise tax on grain alcohol at $13 for nearly two liters, let alone any profit.

    I've always gotten rotten hangovers from cheap vodka and he says that "blend" is the reason why, it lacks the purity of grain alcohol.

    1. Re:It's not decent vodka...it's blend! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've always gotten rotten hangovers from cheap vodka

      I don't drink, but from what I've read, the "get hangovers from X but not Y" has always been shown to be bogus. It may be false memories or something similar to the placebo effect.

  34. "Lover Come Back" 1961 by alfredo · · Score: 2

    In the movie an inventor comes up with a candy that had the alcohol content of a triple Martinis. Rock Hudson, Doris Day, Tony Randall.

    --
    photosMy Photostream
  35. Available in parts of Europe? by neminem · · Score: 1

    I'm going to be in Europe next week. I want to know what parts of Europe it's available in, because I'm rather curious what it was taste like and whether you could actually get successfully intoxicated off it. Where can you buy it?

  36. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Lab ethanol (reagent grade) is 99.5% ethanol with 99.5% with less than 0.005% water.

  37. Re:Rubbing alcohol vs. denatured alcohol vs. drink by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

    You can buy pure IPA in gallon steel cans (or even five gallon cans!) at most hardware stores.

    You can buy beer in hardware stores?

  38. Re:Rubbing alcohol vs. denatured alcohol vs. drink by afidel · · Score: 1

    Yup, my dad was lamenting the fact that you can't get good solvent based paints or cement sealers anymore, my brother has a house he recently purchased with wooden shake siding that's been neglected for probably 20+ years and it could really use the extra penetration of solvent based paint.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  39. Re:"Lover Come Back" 1961 by Poohsticks · · Score: 1

    V.I.P. The product that didn't exist - except as an advertising campaign until Rock Hudson (advertising weasel extraordinaire) hires a mad chemist to make a product. Which turns out to be "a good cheap drunk". Still a fun movie.

    --
    "The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been wide
  40. Re:"Lover Come Back" 1961 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doris Day, Rock Hudson, and Tony Randall can make any movie fun.

  41. Re:There is a reason we don't have powdered alcoho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Most people feel it should be heavily taxed

    Citation needed.

  42. Powdered or liquid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Powdered this, liquid that, why don't you just get a syringe and some heroin? They're all just drugs!

  43. Extremely diluted ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    From the Palcohol website :

    11. Can I snort it? We have seen comments about goofballs wanting to snort it. Don't do it! It is not a responsible or smart way to use the product. To take precautions against this action, we've added volume to the powder so it would take more than a half of a cup of powder to get the equivalent of one drink up your nose.

    Screw the responsibility question. But making it a half-cup by volume for one drink! Stupid.

    It's a solution (if you'll pardon the pun) in search of a problem.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"