The most important aspect of 100LL replacement is usability in ALL piston aircraft. As a whole, the flying community should not be celebrating UL94 (a 66% solution according to the Swift website), Petersen’s MoGas STC (which isn’t applicable to any Lycoming fuel injected engine), or any other replacement fuel which doesn’t serve the entire fleet.
Operators of lower-octane capable fuels should not be taking an “I’ve got mine, f(orget) you” attitude. We have demonstrable evidence from GAMI and now Swift that 100 octane replacement fuels are achievable. This is the progress that should be celebrated, despite the problems with ASTM approval and limited STC availability, respectively.
I have no problem with lower-octane alternative fuels or MoGas STCs, but we as a community have to realize these are not solutions to the problem of 100LL extinction facing GA.