I'm always ambivalent about boycotts. Here is a good reason why.
I agree with the author that making a futile gesture is pointless. Our best interests in this case would be served by becoming energy independent, a topic I've expounded on in other posts.
There are some boycotts I'll go for. Presently I won't buy anything from France due to their almost rabid anti-Americanism. I also don't patronize Caribou Coffee due to their Muslim connections. But how effective are these acts really? IMHO, not very. These twits never heard of yours truly and will probably live long, happy lives no matter what I do. When I boycott someone it isn't for any effect on them, it's for my own peace of mind. If a gazillion other consumers agree with me and we have an impact, great. But it's never anything I look for. Good thing, I'd be sorely disappointed.
It goes back to a line from Hamlet, "To thine own self be true. And it follows, as night does the day, that thou canst not be false to any other". Might have mangled it a bit, I don't go to work with a copy of Shakespeare in my hands. But you get the idea, it's about my own peace of mind and nothing else.
If you want to be effective find out what will work before you jump on the bandwagon. Maybe it will be a letter writing campaign, maybe a public demonstration, maybe a push to alter a present national policy. Whatever it is, it'll take time.
To sum it up; Boycotts are as effective as trying to raise the level of the tide by pissing into the ocean.