Almost net-carbon gasoline
 

The recent, December 2021 issue of MOTOR TREND reports:
The HIF, Global Thermostat, SIEMENS, ExxonMobil, ENAP/ Empresas Gasco' Haru Oni synthetic fuels plant, N. Punta Arenas, Chile, goes online next year.
They use a wind turbine to power the facility, which scrubs carbon-dioxide from the air, operates a reverse-fuel cell to create hydrogen to make methanol, from which gasoline is made for shipment to Porsche Motorsports.
Presently, this 'Direct air carbon capture'-derived fuel is $ 44.73 / gallon. By 2026, they believe that they'll have that down to $ 7.57 / gallon.
The gasoline has 10% of the carbon of 'normal' gasoline.
Alongside Porsche's electric fleet, this fuel will allow piston-powered Porsches, which remain on the roads, to lower their carbon footprint.

That's a stupid idea. Capture CO2 at the source where there's more like 180,000ppm as opposed to 440ppm. Even then it's just a slightly less stupid idea.
The one I like takes CO2 from natural gas wells and pipes it to west Texas oil wells and makes the wells produce oil again. Word on the street is it takes between 5 and 20 pounds of CO2 to free 1 gallon of oil.

Unintended consequences?

government seizing property for private industry?

It appears the bio CO2 is being pumped underground just for feelgoodism, not to actually do anything like drive oil out of an oil well. So economically it's a dead end. As soon as tax payers stop paying for it, it's finished. Where Colorado and new mexico natural gas well CO2 being sold to Texas oil wells will continue.

I'm listening to that now. Waiting to find out what's at the end of that pipe. I may disavow the following:

I like turning it into rocks.

CO2 plus water already underground in an oil well also turns into rocks.

"A particular volcanic rock is best for sequestering huge amounts of CO2 deep in the Earth in a way that is stable for geologic time. "

Still don't know what's at the end of the pipe or what kind of [sub]strata are suitable.

An oil formation around 2 miles down seems like a good place for it.

I've recently considered that any "green" initiative that inhibits the advancement of society is a bad idea. This includes taking resources, including human resources, away from otherwise productive work. If 200 years from now humans will be living on other planets, all electricity comes from the sun via panels or nuclear fusion, all travel is electric with near-zero emissions....
Then how in the hell does it matter? If we create the co2 and propel society forward, it was worth it. If we decide to limit growth by limiting access to energy, we're literally shooting ourselves in the foot.

Actually drillers are looking at then analyzing the drilling mud which carries out the rock particles they made. Bit of a lag however.

Yeah a dead end is a dead end no matter how anyone tries to sugar coat it.