Understanding Anti-EV Myths & Misinformation

Support CleanTechnica’s work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe.

EV myths are everywhere. I have a neighbor who tells me frequently that I can’t drive my Tesla Model Y through a puddle or take it to a car wash. Apparently, doing so will result in instant electrocution for the me and spark a battery explosion that could level an entire city block! Oh, dear. That would be quite concerning — if true.

Emily Atkin is one of my favorite online journalists. She writes hard hitting pieces for her blog — Heated — that speak truth to power. Recently, she sat down with Christian Bretter, an environmental psychologist from the University of Queensland in Australia. He studies what people believe about EVs and why they believe it. That’s the easy part, but Bretters goes further. He interrogates what can be done to change minds. The answer, it turns out, has less to do with facts and more to do with how you deliver those facts.

You may rightly wonder just exactly what an environmental psychologist does. Bretters told Atkin: “The broadest question of what I’m doing every day is asking, why do some people behave environmentally friendly, while others don’t? And how can we make those who don’t behave environmentally friendly, behave more environmentally friendly in the future?”

EV Myths & Misinformation

In 2025, Bretters and his colleagues at the University of Queensland Business School surveyed 4,000 people in Australia, the US, Germany, and Austria to determine whether they agreed or disagreed with misinformation on electric cars.

“The misinformation statements we tested included that EVs are more likely to catch fire than petrol cars, do not produce emission savings and emit electromagnetic fields that damage health … all claims which are demonstrably false,” Bretters said. “We know this sort of false information is out there and circulating, but the scale of acceptance is concerning and poses a significant challenge to the global transition to more sustainable transport. The fact that even EV owners were more likely than not to agree with misinformation underscores just how embedded it’s become in society.”

He said his team was “Really interested in how much of this misinformation … out there actually sticks in people’s minds. In other words, how much do people actually believe in that sort of stuff?” The survey focused on nine myths about electric cars. “What we found is that, of all of the responses across the countries from 4,000 individuals, over a third were in agreement with myths that are demonstrably false or at least misleading. More than a third of people believe in things that are clearly wrong,” he said.

The EV & The Environment

“One of the biggest myths is that electric vehicles are actually worse for the environment because of their production process. But also statements such as, ‘electric vehicles are more likely than petrol cars to catch fire,’ which is again wrong. So, these are clearly items that are circulating in the media and that people believe, unfortunately.” Nearly half of all those surveyed in all four countries agree that EVs are much more prone to fires than conventional cars.

“Around 20 percent of people endorsed a claim that electric vehicles lead to bad health outcomes such as cancer due to the electric magnetic fields. And that again has been disproven by research, but still 20 percent is still a lot of people.” In addition, around 20 percent agreed with the proposition that those electromagnetic fields have a negative impact on bird populations as well.

The research showed that in the original group of 4,000 people surveyed, there was a correlation between negative beliefs about electric cars and their willingness to consider owning one. In the survey, none of the respondents owned an EV. But then the researchers conducted a similar survey among 2,000 Americans, some of whom owned an electric car, and were astonished to find that even EV owners held many of the same beliefs as non-owners.

“What we found was contrary to what we expected — namely that there is no difference in misinformation endorsement between people who already own an electric vehicle and people who do not,” Bretters told Atkin.

The Reasons Go Far Beyond EV Myths

“We looked at the factors that influence people’s endorsement of misinformation. And one of the largest or the largest predictor of why people believe in misinformation is what’s called a conspiracy mentality,” Bretter said.

“This is basically the systemic mistrust of elites. So people who are more mistrusting of elites, more suspicious of what government officials are doing behind closed doors, what organizations are doing behind closed doors, tend to agree more with misinformation statements. That’s along with other factors such as political ideology, conservative political ideology and other factors.

“Interestingly, education and scientific literacy didn’t play any role whatsoever. And that’s, again, contrary to what many people would believe. So it’s not that these people are uneducated. It is simply that ideologies are taking over.” Okay, so now we are into an area that includes opposition to solar and wind, especially in rural areas, vaccines, education, the status of people of color, and the entire panoply of ideas that are representative of the America First movement.

“A conspiracy mindset is basically the mistrust towards people and institutions of power. And basically it refers to the fact that people believe that what is told as an official story by … the government or institution is not really the full truth.” And that’s fueled by past experiences, as there were some conspiracy theories in the past and the last decades that were true,” Bretters said. If you are having a flashback here to Ronald Reagan making a joke about “I’m from the government and I am here to help,” you are not alone.

“So this mindset of distrusting elites, distrusting people in power, is particularly associated with misinformation endorsement. And what makes this particularly dangerous is that this distrust has been shown in the past to be very difficult to be addressed, because you can’t just go to a person say, ‘Look, this is a conspiracy,’ or ‘You should be more trusting of people in power,’ because there are instances where people in power abuse that power as well. So it’s quite difficult actually to address that.”

Older readers may find themselves thinking of the fraud committed on the American people by the Gulf of Tonkin resolution or George W. Bush going on and on about “yellowcake” and “weapons of mass destruction.” Is it any wonder that when the government tells outrageous lies, everything it says becomes a cause for suspicion?

Fighting Against Myths

The researchers wanted to get a better understanding about how to address misinformation, so they devised a new survey that tested two ways to reduce misinformation endorsement about electric vehicles. They took 1,500 people and allowed them to interact with ChatGPT for three rounds about electric vehicles.The second group was just given a fact sheet from the US Department of Energy that addressed the anti-EV myths. The third group only interacted with ChatGPT about sports.

“We found that both the fact sheet condition and the ChatGPT condition where people interacted with ChatGPT about electric vehicles resulted in lower endorsement of misinformation compared to the control condition — roughly 10 percent. And that stuck across a period of 10 days. So potentially … ChatGPT or a fact sheet are quite effective in reducing endorsement of misinformation.

“ChatGPT was actually quite good at, almost better than humans sometimes, in having empathy with people. It’s saying ‘Look, you may believe that electric vehicles are more likely to catch fire, I understand where you’re coming from. But have you thought about these sources here?’ So it’s very empathetic and it doesn’t judge,” Bretters said. “In general, we need to be more empathetic with people who believe misinformation, because if you tell them that they’re basically stupid, borders come up and then you will never get to these people again.”

You Ignorant Slut!

The takeaway here is that attacking those who hold these absurdly ridiculous contrary opinions is not likely to change many people’s minds. In sales, telling a customer, “You would have to be a blithering jackass to believe that!” is highly unlikely to result in a sale. Instead, a trained representative might say, “You know, I understand how you feel. I used to feel the same way myself. But then I did some research and I found that Crest with Gardol not only reduced my number of cavities, it tasted better than Ipana, too!”

An inexperienced sales rep is petrified of questions and objections. A professional knows that they indicate an interest in what is being offered and are nothing more than requests for more information. Someone who is truly disinterested will typically say nothing at all. Questions and objections may actually be buying signs, if we are astute enough to recognize them for what they are.

The state of Maine executed this strategy beautifully recently when it wanted to get more people to switch to heat pumps. It created an incentive program, but it did something a step further as well. It sent people out into the communities to knock on doors and offer to answer questions people had about the new devices.

The fuel oil and propane dealers simply bought a ton of ads attacking heat pumps and suggesting anyone who bought one was mentally deficient. As a result, the heat pump initiative was a success and far exceeded its initial objectives. They performed better than advertised and the good news spread throughout the state.

We might suggest the Biden administration could have done a much better job of informing people about its clean energy and transportation programs. One thing is certain. If your objective is to persuade and inform, this sort of response is guaranteed to fail.