Sorry man made hydrocarbon fuels can be 100% carbon neutral, i.e. they will not change the CO2 level.
I'm sure that's something that's a possibility in the future, and will have a role- and I'm all for it.The idea that man-made hydrocarbon fuels can be 100% carbon neutral is, at first glance, an appealing notion. It suggests that we can continue using familiar fuels—gasoline, diesel, jet fuel—without contributing to climate change, provided we produce them synthetically rather than extracting them from the ground. In theory, this is possible: if carbon dioxide (CO₂) is captured from the atmosphere and used to synthesize hydrocarbon fuels using renewable energy, and those fuels are later burned, then the CO₂ released is simply the same CO₂ that was previously removed. On paper, this creates a closed carbon loop, one in which atmospheric CO₂ levels remain unchanged. However, the leap from theoretical neutrality to real-world implementation is enormous—and often misleading.
To begin with, the energy source used to produce synthetic hydrocarbon fuels is critical. Producing these fuels requires large amounts of electricity, typically to power electrolysis (splitting water to create hydrogen) and to drive chemical reactions that combine hydrogen with captured CO₂ to make hydrocarbons. If that electricity comes from fossil fuels, then the entire process adds CO₂ to the atmosphere, defeating the purpose. For synthetic fuels to be carbon neutral, the electricity must come entirely from renewable sources such as wind, solar, or hydroelectric power. At present, the global energy grid remains heavily dependent on fossil fuels, making truly clean synthetic fuel production a rarity.
Moreover, capturing CO₂—especially directly from the atmosphere—is not a simple or free process. Technologies such as Direct Air Capture (DAC) are still in early stages of development and require significant energy inputs. The infrastructure needed to pull diffuse CO₂ from the atmosphere, compress it, and store or convert it is both energy-intensive and expensive. While capturing CO₂ from point sources like industrial smokestacks is somewhat more efficient, it is still far from the carbon-neutral ideal often promoted in discussions about synthetic fuels.
Another challenge lies in the full lifecycle emissions associated with synthetic hydrocarbons. Even if the fuel itself burns cleanly in a closed carbon loop, the broader system required to produce, transport, store, and utilize that fuel rarely achieves zero emissions. Building and maintaining CO₂ capture facilities, renewable energy infrastructure, transport pipelines, and conversion plants all carry embedded emissions—emissions that are often overlooked in overly optimistic narratives. As a result, while the fuel may appear carbon-neutral in isolation, the entire process frequently yields a net increase in CO₂.
Scalability also remains a serious concern. Producing synthetic hydrocarbons at the scale needed to replace global fossil fuel consumption would require an astronomical expansion of renewable energy infrastructure. Converting electricity into liquid fuel is also highly inefficient compared to direct electrification. For example, using renewable electricity to power electric vehicles is significantly more energy-efficient than producing synthetic gasoline to run internal combustion engines. Therefore, while synthetic fuels may have niche applications—such as in aviation or long-distance shipping where electrification is difficult—they are not a practical or efficient substitute for fossil fuels on a mass scale.
Finally, the promotion of synthetic hydrocarbons as a climate solution can become a form of distraction. When these fuels are framed as a way to continue business as usual, they serve more to delay necessary transitions than to solve climate problems. The opportunity cost is significant: every dollar and kilowatt of renewable energy spent on producing synthetic fuels is a dollar and kilowatt not spent on scaling up already proven, more efficient technologies like wind-powered electricity grids, battery storage, or electric mass transit.
So while synthetic hydrocarbon fuels can be carbon neutral in theory, their real-world production is rarely, if ever, truly zero-emission. They are technologically feasible but energetically costly, logistically complex, and currently impractical as a large-scale replacement for fossil fuels. If used strategically and sparingly in sectors where no better alternatives exist, they may play a supporting role in the global energy transition. But presenting them as a catch-all solution risks reinforcing the illusion that we can avoid fundamental change. True climate solutions lie not in perpetuating the fossil fuel model, but in transforming our energy systems entirely.