Steam just got lucky
The Industrial Revolution was more a series of events and inventions than a period of actual dates. It is therefore considered to be the approximate period of 1760–1830.
The first liquid fueled (gasoline) internal combustion engine was built by Robert Street in 1794 — about half-way through the Industrial Revolution.
It could be said that had coal not been so easily obtained and plentiful that gasoline and the combustion engine would have driven the Industrial Revolution, possibly having no more effect than to delay the final outcome of the period by 10-20 years, which would have ultimately had little to no effect on the presence of modern technology today.
Now, specifically addressing alcohol.
The Hot Rod Network explains the following about alcohol vs gasoline fuels:
For purposes of this story when we refer to alcohol we mean methanol or ethanol. Gasoline is much denser from an energy content perspective, meaning it takes less gas (versus alcohol) to make the same power. It’s easier to ignite gasoline than alcohol fuels.
Said simply, gasoline provides better bang for the buck, meaning (somewhat simplistically) the same engine can do more work. Further...
The great things about gasoline and its use in racing engines, is also why it’s inherently a riskier fuel than alcohol, gasoline will ignite in less than ideal conditions, as in outside the engine. And, once it’s lit, it’s harder to extinguish outside of the controlled burning that is taking place in the combustion chamber.
Gasoline will burn the barn down, where Alcohol only might burn the barn down.
There are some upsides, perhaps the most important being...
When you burn alcohol one of the byproducts of combustion is oxygen. This helps enhance the combustion process. Another is the cooling effect of alcohol as it “vaporizes” in the inlet track. This helps create denser air as the air/fuel charge enters the engine, another positive. The cooling effect also helps to cool the engine, at least on the inlet side of the equation. Remember, producing horsepower is all about creating and controlling heat.
In other words, it would be easier to make an operating internal combustion engine with alcohol, even if it wasn't as efficient as gasoline.
I believe it is completely believable to describe (for instance) an alternate history where the internal combustion engine stole steam's thunder. Make coal a scarce commodity and steam would have been relegated to something interesting.
However, when you analyze the whole effect it might have had on history — the anser is ultimately "none." Remember that technological development is a pyramid, with "today" at the top and an absolute mountain of knowledge, experience, perserverance, and luck beneath it.
You're talking about plucking combustion engines from where they were in that mountain and moving them a bit further down the slope. Yes, that would have changed a few things nearby, but ultimately, the shape of the mountain would have remained the same. After all, the line between steam and internal combustion engines and modern computers is mighty thin, if it exists at all (turbines for electricity were an altogether different branch of study).
So, nada, zilch. No impact on society at all, other than maybe to have the 1964 Corvette in 1954 instead.