Very interesting. I would like to see some numbers. Alcohols have less energy per pound combusted, which equals less flight time/payload/performance per tank full. Probably OK in some applications (touch and go training/familiarity flights over CONUS) but probably not viable for deployment. Water entrainment and freezing in the fuel system (alcohols are mostly extremely hygroscopic) is also a nontrivial concern on most airplanes. Then again, it can be a
problem with kerosene-powered airplanes, too
Probably worth mentioning that in the late days of WWII, Germany was so short on petroleum that they were fueling the ME262s with an alcohol fuel. As I remember it had reduced performance compared to the normal kerosene, as you would expect.
The biomass Fischer-Tropsch derived fuel might be more ready for prime time use, although careful storage procedures would be needed, as most decomposition-derived fuels are tasty to bacteria (like biodiesel).
They chose a warthog as a testbed for a bunch of good reasons: Separate fuel systems for the two engines, very conservative engine design, very conservative (forgiving) airplane design means that flight with an engine out is no big deal, and not much interest in high-altitude flight (where water in alcohol freezes). The fact that a warthog is also ancient probably doesn't hurt either.