There's also high proof stuff available readily, though not up at the everclear level. For example of a really common one, bacardi 151.
IMO, the hiking reason fails for a different and very simple reason:
* It's not worth it unless its really good.
The big claim is that weight is the factor for why you would want to pack powdered alcohol. I'd really like some clear facts on that first. Parent post links shows the 37.5% alcohol by volume for the powered stuff, so I don't know why it wouldn't weight any less than 80 proof vodka (for example). Is it just that it's not a liquid and doesn't need a glass bottle? A plastic bladder would solve that problem.
Anyway, lets say it does weight a little less, but it still has weight. You still need to add liquid to it, which you may be able to filter from a stream, but then you're drinking stream water + powdered alcohol. I see very little hope in that being any good. And what's the end goal there? Are you trying to get blackout dunk? If so, that's fine, but you shouldn't be hiking to remote locations to do so. Are you just trying to enjoy a delicious beverage while gazing at the night sky? Then I'd be surprised if you wouldn't be better served by bringing a small flask of a high quality whiskey (or whatever your preference).
The craziest part is simply that site. All those really poor arguments and defenses on the front page - why not just talk about the positive aspects and sell the product? The one I laughed at the most was regarding snorting it:
Listen, people can snort black pepper....so do we ban it? No, just because a few goofballs use a product irresponsibly doesn't mean you ban it. But even the goofballs won't snort Palcohol due to the pain the alcohol would cause. It really burns. Imagine sniffing liquid vodka. Second, it's impractical. It takes approximately 60 minutes to snort the equivalent of one shot of vodka. Why would anyone do that when they can do a shot of liquid vodka in two seconds?
1. Why is he talking about black pepper?!?! What about cocaine, the obvious comparison to snorting a powder?
2. Imagine snorting vodka? I've done it (I don't do it regularly). It does burn, but people do it, usually when they're not making good decisions. It's actually dangerous because you are not simply metabolizing it; it enters your blood faster and more directly.
3. "impractical"? "take 60 minutes to snorth teh equivalent of one shot of vodka"? See #2... you don't need to snort a whole shot. Drops can be enough. So yes, I'm pretty certain this stuff will get snorted all over the place. I've seen lots of people snort pixie stix back in they day for no other reason than because they can and it hurt.
4. Why would anyone do that when they can do a short of vodka in two seconds? This is his argument? Why would someone abuse my drug when they could quickly consume some other drug?
It's going to happen. There's no argument it won't. It's stupid, but so are many of the use cases and arguments here.
His argument that, "airlines can reduce the weight on an airplane", is just stupid. They'd have to mix it with liquid, so they'd have to carry an equivalent amount of liquid for mixing it, and they'd also have to care the powder, and the combined weight of those is greater than pure alcohol. If I'm overpaying for booze on a plane, I want the real thing. There's a first class / coach argument to be made here as well.
FWIW, I don't think it should be banned. I think there's loads of better ways to market this stuff though. Food prep, medical, manufacturing, remote temp locations (ex military or research camps), etc are all interesting areas. Why is he trying to sell it as a drinking replacement? I'm simply not going to:
* buy powdered drinks in a bar
* buy powdered booze to keep at home (standard booze doesn't go bad any faster, and probably has a longer shelf life)
* carry powered booze on vacations to lands that don't allow alcohol
* pretend powdered booze is what I want after a long day of hiking