Climate Crisis: The Recklessness of Fossil Fuel Expansion
Written on
Chapter 1: The Inefficiency of Fuel Consumption
When you fill your car with gasoline, your immediate thought may be about getting to your destination. However, a sobering truth exists: approximately 75-80% of the energy from that gasoline is wasted as heat, leaving only about 20% for propelling your vehicle. From an engineering perspective, this is quite embarrassing. It’s not merely a financial burden for motorists, who receive only about 20 cents worth of motion for every dollar spent on fuel; it’s also a significant release of pollutants and greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, yielding no real benefit.
Is there a way out of this dilemma? Yes, there are gradual improvements available for traditional gasoline engines, but it's essential to emphasize that these changes are merely incremental.
Electric vehicles are generating considerable buzz, and rightly so. However, addressing the global transportation dilemma requires looking beyond just electric cars. It starts with the existing gasoline-powered vehicles. Given their longevity, the transition to an entirely electric fleet, even with aggressive efforts, will take decades. In the interim, we will see an increase of two billion fuel-based cars on the roads, alongside 100,000 daily flights and around 180,000 vessels traversing the oceans. This sector alone contributes 17% of worldwide CO₂ emissions. Clearly, we must strive for improvement; there is ample potential for advancement.
Yet, astonishingly, we continue to spend exorbitant amounts on extracting, refining, and squandering most of the oil we extract. This is not a sustainable model for operating vehicles or managing our planet.
Transportation is just one facet of the issue. Heat generation is a byproduct of all energy conversions, such as from chemical to flame and then from flame to motion. More heat signifies greater energy loss. This principle holds true whether discussing steam engines, electric generators, power plants, jet engines, oil rigs, or any other systems converting fuel into motion.
Moreover, if you thought the situation couldn’t get worse, consider that a recent UN report revealed the largest and most profit-driven fossil fuel producers are planning expansions that could exceed the planet’s carbon budget by a factor of two.
This is not merely "insanity"; it poses a clear threat to humanity's future.
Chapter 2: Historical Precedents for Efficiency
We have evidence that transportation can be made more efficient—just look back to the aftermath of the 1970s oil crisis. President Gerald Ford didn’t just talk about change; he lobbied Congress to implement mandatory fuel-efficiency standards. The goal was to double the mileage performance of new vehicles within ten years. Despite automakers claiming it was unfeasible, the legislation passed, and they were compelled to adapt. Market demand reflected this shift, as Americans sought more economical vehicles in light of rising gas prices.
During this period, Japanese manufacturers gained a significant market share from the Big Three automakers in Detroit by introducing efficient compact cars. Innovations led to lighter vehicles, improved engine design, and enhanced aerodynamics, culminating in substantial advancements.
Though there were notable failures—such as the Ford Pinto and Chevrolet Vega—the automotive sector focused on fuel efficiency for over a decade, resulting in new cars by 1982 consuming half the gasoline compared to those from 1973.
However, progress stalled in 1985. The oil surplus of the 1980s, boosted by offshore drilling and new Saudi fields, eased the pressure on gasoline prices. Consequently, subsequent presidents, including Ronald Reagan, lacked motivation to tighten standards. For 25 years, efficiency stagnated, and during the late '90s economic boom, Americans gravitated towards less efficient SUVs.
What’s more, automotive innovation persisted. Engineers continued making strides in efficiency that could have led to better fuel economy without sacrificing performance. Yet, without government pressure, these advancements were often used to create heavier and more powerful vehicles.
Today's family sedans can accelerate like sports cars from decades past. While faster cars have their allure, that added speed typically only gets you to the next stoplight sooner. A more balanced approach to performance and efficiency was attainable.
The missed opportunity? Had automakers been required to enhance their fleets regularly, we could be consuming significantly less oil today—even less than in 1973, despite a 56% population increase.
This example from the automotive industry serves as a relatable illustration of a broader issue. As Vaclav Smil points out, our modern civilization relies on four essential materials—cement, steel, plastics, and ammonia—all of which require fossil fuels for their production.
Chapter 3: A Call to Action
"Humanity faces a choice: cooperate or perish. This is either a Climate Solidarity Pact or a Collective Suicide Pact," stated the UN Secretary-General during the COP27 conference.
Regrettably, it appears that we have opted for the latter, as a recent UN report indicates that major fossil fuel companies are preparing for expansions that would double the planet's carbon budget. Experts have decried these plans as "insanity," casting doubt on humanity's future.
These expansive energy projects starkly contradict established climate policies. The report warns of a staggering 460% increase in coal production, an 83% rise in gas, and a 29% increase in oil by 2030—figures that defy the internationally accepted limit of a 1.5C temperature increase.
If merely 20 countries were to abandon their expansive plans, we could avert 173 billion tons of carbon emissions—equivalent to preventing the emissions from nearly 1,100 new coal plants or over 30 years of annual emissions from the United States.
Among the most egregious offenders are five governments from the Global North: the United States, Canada, Australia, Norway, and the United Kingdom. Despite having the economic capacity to quickly phase out fossil fuel production, they account for 51% of the projected expansion from new oil and gas fields by 2050.
The UAE, despite pledging to uphold the 1.5°C goal, is set to become a major player in increasing oil and gas output.
This is a staggering contradiction—countries with the means to lead in climate action are simultaneously planning extensive drilling operations. This hypocrisy is unacceptable; these nations must not only halt their expansions but also take responsibility for a fair transition to sustainable energy.
Scientific research consistently confirms that any new oil and gas projects are incompatible with the 1.5C global temperature limit established in Paris. However, a recent analysis reveals a concerning gap of 20 billion tons of CO₂ between planned production and what aligns with climate goals.
Inger Andersen, executive director of the UN environment program, emphasizes, "These plans jeopardize humanity's future. Governments must stop saying one thing and doing another."
The proposed expansions, if left unchecked, could lead to colossal financial losses for fossil fuel companies as the world increasingly works to reduce CO₂ emissions.
Chapter 4: The Dangers of Predatory Capitalism
The contradiction is stark: our identity is intertwined with consumption, and we remain entirely dependent on fossil fuels, regardless of the toll it takes on our planet. Fossil fuels remain artificially cheap, neglecting their production and environmental costs.
Globally, fossil fuels received a staggering subsidy of $5.9 trillion—6.8% of GDP—in 2020, projected to rise to 7.4% by 2025. The fossil fuel sector benefits from $11 million in subsidies every minute. Disturbingly, for every dollar spent on climate change, we invest at least five times that amount in subsidies for industries that contribute to our destruction.
Fossil fuels are indisputably the root cause of the climate crisis. Even within the industry, some companies, like Chevron, have acknowledged in court that "fossil fuels are the problem." Yet, climate denial and inaction remain prevalent as these companies push for expansion while positioning themselves as part of the climate solution—a paradox that must be addressed.
These corporations have become so profitable that they are now engaging in stock buybacks—a self-serving maneuver to boost share prices and ensure hefty bonuses. This economic model can aptly be termed "Predatory Capitalism," wherein profit takes precedence, shareholders dictate priorities, and maximizing returns supersedes all else, even human welfare.
As a society, we seem to adopt a "minimal change and hope for the best" mentality, making superficial adjustments while clinging to the belief that everything will be okay. The reality is clear: this approach is failing, and our planet bears the consequences.
A monumental economic transformation is necessary to shift away from fossil fuels. It is glaringly evident.
But the question remains: where is this transformation happening? Our current strategy toward climate change makes substantial progress increasingly elusive. Daily decisions in communities continue to entrench our reliance on fossil fuels, from city governments ordering new gasoline vehicles for their fleets to counties opting for diesel garbage trucks despite the availability of electric alternatives.
The truth is evident: fossil fuels are undermining our crucial climate goals, and our planet is suffering as a result. Meanwhile, the fossil fuel industry gleefully continues to deepen this chasm.
Thank you for your thorough reading and support! If you're seeking more insights into climate change, scientific advancements, and geopolitics with a unique twist, subscribe to the newsletter Antarctic Sapiens for weekly thought-provoking content.