You might wonder why some people want to boycott fossil fuels: Gasoline, natural gas and coal. Here’s what is going on.
The greenhouse gases that drive our manufactured global warming are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) and f-gases. F-gases are human-made gases that contain fluorine.
About 80% of the global heating in the next 100 years from the greenhouse gases that the U.S. releases today will come from carbon dioxide; 93% of that carbon dioxide comes from burning fossil fuels.
Another 5% of American overheating comes from methane and nitrous oxide that are released by the fossil fuel industry. Stop fossil fuels, and you stop that 5%, too.
Stopping fossil fuel burning would cut at least 80% off future temperature growth. Here’s the recent trend in global temperatures with 80% taken off.
That’s a dramatic improvement. Stopping fossil fuels would slow global warming enough to give people a chance of adapting to the slower changes rather than our current situation where we’re usually behind and trying to catch up with the growth in flooding, hurricanes, fires and heat waves.
There is more going on. What we need to stabilize temperatures is very different for different greenhouse gases. For example, methane produces 11% of America’s global warming emissions, but methane breaks down 12 years after it gets into the air.
Methane is like bubbles that you make with a bubble wand. Let’s say each bubble lasts 30 seconds. If you make a new bubble every second, you get up to 30 bubbles after 30 seconds. After that, the bubble you created 30 seconds ago will pop. Older bubbles will continue popping as fast as you make new ones, and you will have a steady 30 bubbles until you change how fast you’re blowing bubbles.
That’s how things are with methane. We don’t have to stop methane to stop global warming. If we stabilize methane emissions, 12 years later, methane will no longer increase global temperatures. Same goes for nitrous oxide after 110 years.
However, it’s a different deal with carbon dioxide. If we release the same amount of carbon dioxide as methane each year, carbon dioxide levels in the air continue rising, and global temperatures continue rising too. To stop global warming, we need to bring carbon dioxide emissions down to zero.
Ocean impacts
Since 2008, climate scientists have recognized that our oceans have important impacts on carbon dioxide levels and earth temperatures. If we stopped fossil fuel burning tomorrow, some extra energy that has already been radiated into the oceans by global warming would radiate back out and heat our planet some more over the coming decades.
At the same time, the oceans would continue absorbing carbon dioxide. That continued absorption would lower carbon dioxide levels initially. In about 150 years, carbon dioxide concentrations in the air would stabilize at levels that are lower than whatever was the highest concentration they got to. However, the levels would still be higher than in 1950.
Lowered carbon dioxide concentrations will lower temperatures. It turns out that the best estimates are that the increased heating from the oceans would roughly balance the reduced cooling from removing carbon dioxide. That is why current best estimates are that global temperatures will hold roughly steady wherever they are when we stop burning fossil fuels.
“We get an essentially flat temperature curve… when human carbon emissions approach zero.” ~ Michael Mann, Presidential Distinguished Professor of Earth & Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania 2023
“Most models project that the Earth will stop warming if CO2 emissions reach net zero.” ~ The Fifth National Climate Assessment from the federal US Global Change Research Program 2023
Cleaning up your own mess
In preschool, my kids loved learning to clean up their own messes. Having watched them, I enjoy my own peace of mind when I clean up my own messes rather than leaving bad things behind me.
You’ll be pleased to know that the industries who make F-gases are already working on finding replacements that do less harm. That makes sense. F-gases are their pollution, and they should clean up their own mess.
Farmers can clean up their own mess too. Scientists at agriculture schools are developing farming techniques with much lower emissions of methane and nitrous oxide.
For us, a lot of our global warming messes are our carbon dioxide emissions. We share responsibility for those emissions with the communities that got us to buy gasoline cars or natural-gas furnaces in the first place. We also share some responsibility for the emissions created to get food and other products to us.
To start cleaning up your mess, stop burning gasoline and stop burning natural gas. Whatever you do, don’t buy another gasoline car or another natural gas furnace. When we have all done our part, we will stop global warming.
Walking and biking are also boycotting gasoline. These days, I’m getting around mostly on bicycle and foot. Riding electric public transportation is boycotting gasoline too.
Nick Maxwell is a certified climate action planner at Climate Protection NW, teaches about climate protection at the Creative Retirement Institute and serves on the Edmonds Planning Board.
Thanks, Nick, for your continued reporting. Increased human population also puts pressure on our climate to warm. Yes, with more people there is more breathing in of oxygen and out of carbon dioxide. More importantly there are more people consuming resources in a way that requires the release of carbon as a gas into the atmosphere. How do we stop population growth? Wars? Birth Control (forced and voluntary)? Wait for natural disasters? Capital punishment? All these are or have been tried! One method that has potential is economic development. Countries with greater economic development have lower birth rates. As countries develop economically, citizens see children as consumers of family resources in the effort to prosper: more children means more costs of care. Families in economically undeveloped countries see children as producers of resources: more children mean more resources. If all this is true, we need to help countries that are economically undeveloped to proper. Stopping wars and the spread of diseases and famine, promoting education and improving communication have all helped in the development of countries. US AID assisted in these efforts. Those of us in economically developed countries need to live comfortably while releasing less carbon gas into the atmosphere, and bring along our neighbors.
This is a really great additional point, and something that’s been proven to work. I encourage you to watch Hans Rosling’s entertaining and data-filled explanation. This link should start at about 7 minutes for the juicy part showing just what you describe at work!
https://youtu.be/fTznEIZRkLg?si=b2vLx6AV1nF49cY5&t=383
Thanks for all the info, Nick. I hope you sent this far and wide.
Thanks, Sarah Boyd, for the encouragement. I’ll have to figure out how to do that.
Unless nuclear fusion is perfected or we build many more nuclear fisssion reactors, there is not enough renewable stable electric generation to fulfill Nick’s goals. Maybe there will be future advances in battery storage and solar panels but, for now, that only provides about 10% of our energy needs, at best. Until that day comes, abandoning fossil fuels will result in cold homes, no economy and darkness. By the way, I have a heat pump and one electric hybrid car.
Yours is really a non-argument, Mark. As people start “abandoning” fossil fuels it will not lead to cold homes, no economy, and darkness simply because it won’t happen all at once. It is a continuum. As the use of fossil fuels goes down, the use of renewables goes up, and the grid gets cleaned up, and the new battery systems get deployed. Your argument is one that says the status quo is no new technology is being developed so we won’t have enough energy unless we go to nuclear (which will happen as well). That is not true. There are so many green technologies in the pipe stream, coming on board. Everything is in flux. And you have to think globally, because so much is happening beyond our own backyard, our own country. Even though Trump has tried to put the brakes on here, it is full steam ahead in other places. And every year, the temperatures will rise, the disasters will mount, and the cost of fossil fuels from all the consequences, such as the demise of the insurance industry, will increase until we have the choice to either break the economy or leap off of fossil fuels all at once. It will be much better to push to eliminate fossil fuels now and save us from some of the disaster they will bring.
Thanks for another well-reasoned piece, Nick!
You really did leave the best advice for last: Walk and bike more (we love our two EVs… electric cargo bikes) And if you have to drive, a vehicle with the most people is most efficient!
Thanks!
Yes! Walking is great. Great for the climate if it replaces a car drive. Great for your health.
Nick and my good friend Mike Molly, you both will be happy to know I’ve found climate change religion. Our new home in Hansville has a heat pump, is all electric, and has an induction range. I have to say that induction range cook top is fantastic. It has faster heat and is easier to control than our old gas range. No natural gas anymore for this Cowboy. Of course I still drive a gasoline pick up and my wife loves her gasoline Honda SUV, but at least the pick up is a V/6 and the SUV is the smallest version with a little four cylinder so we are not major car polluters. Mike’s point about human population being a major part of the problem is well taken and the issue of world wide de-forestation for animal ranching and farming is a big one that still needs to be overcome. The wildfires and smoke will be coming our way far too soon too I suspect.
Mr. Wright. Wisdom is something greater than always being right about things. And your comment reminds me of how very wise you are.
Yes! Hooray for avoiding natural gas!
Hansville is lovely.
Thank you for the facts, Nick, and a very readable summary of them. I appreciate it!
Thanks Cynthia! This column was prompted by a question in the My Edmonds News comments on my last column. I appreciate good questions!
Meanwhile, and for the umpteenth year in a row, China is the world’s leading emitter of CO2, primarily from burning fossil fuels (coal) to produce electricity. Stunningly, China alone produces more CO2 that the other top 10 CO2 emitting countries Combined. Of note, China brought 30.5 GW of coal powered electrical plants on-line in 2024 and permitted an additional 94.5 GW of coal fired electrical plants to be constructed in the next few years.
So, Washington could eliminate ALL fossil fuel burning, exploration and production and it would not even amount to a rounding error on annual worldwide CO2 emissions. For 2024, the U.S. had 4.79 Billon metric tons of CO2 emissions, a 20% reduction from 2005 levels. China in 2024 had 11.9 Billon metric tons of CO2 emissions compared with 4.5 Billon metric tons in 2005; a 250% increase in emissions.
Source – U.S. Energy Commission annual report
A recently posted documentary on this topic – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1FGql4hD4Y – looks to be worth a watch.
Let’s see how we are doing with Net Zero in our region and how the mandates that have been passed by our state legislature to reach this goal.