It will be for any driver willing to pay the price.

From what I've been hearing the most likely to be approved in the USA will still be volatile hydrocarbons consisting of components which are synthetically crafted to meet the current standards for today's gasoline, insead of being refined from crude petroleum.

This is a type of chemical fuel so a number of synthetic processes can contribute some various light hydrocarbons as well as the less volatile components which can be blended to achieve a passing result on the motor gasoline basis.

Regular and premium gasolines have always been carefully blended to spec themselves. Especially to avoid "octane giveaway".

Hundreds of structurally different natural hydrocarbons from one or more sources of crude oil end up in traditionally refined gasoline. Modern blending of these major streams has been an art form for decades.

Some of the alternatives expected to emerge may have only dozens or fewer distinct hydrocarbon components. These can also possibly be cleaner burning perhaps with or without non-hydrocarbon oxygenated components like ethanol included.

Mostly the target is that these will be truly higher quality fuels than ordinary gasoline. There is also the possibility the blending process can be made more predictable and repeatable.

But cleaner burning means just less toxic exhaust byproducts like unburned hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatics, and particulates.

Virtually the same amount of CO & CO2 will still be coming out, not significantly different than ordinary gasoline.

So the fuel still turns to CO2, but that could be what it was made from to begin with, rather than extracting new carbon from underground the easy way. It should be worth it to keep new carbon from building up in the atmosphere.

However making hydrocarbons from CO2 requires an energy input to the raw materials, equivalent to that which later be will contained in the fuel. So it takes in advance the same energy the fuel gives back later, except there are systemic inefficiencies so it actually takes more energy to make than it gives back.

When this energy input is completely carbon-free is the best that can be done, while the realistic objective for the product is to burn not much differently than high-octane gasoline. So no reduced CO2 while driving, just putting back what was originally captured by the synthetic chemical processes. This will be more costly than ordinary gasoline by the time it reaches the average consumer.

So I don't think competitive pricing will occur according to free market forces. Plus this one is being made with Porsche enthusiasts in mind who are not mainly average consumers and many can really afford to pay more.

I can forsee a synthetic fuel that is much more stable over time and can have outstanding performance for collector cars when they are simply parked in the garage over many more seasons or years without needing to be flushed or drained before getting back on the road.

Now imagine if you will, a proven blend composed of say a dozen, maybe fewer, various well-known hydrocarbons that works great. They're testing things like this now on the track even though they don't have well-developed processes to synthesize every one of them yet. Some researchers seem to have a pretty good idea what to shoot for already.

The most likely MVP would be when synthetic processes are barely capable of producing the minimal number of components from clean energy & CO2. Or at least somewhat cleaner energy and a somewhat renewable carbon source besides CO2 or in addition.

As long as you can buy the remaining bulk of the components from oil & chemical companies that might be the earliest launch by far.

It can only get greener from there.