The holidays are a wonderful time to get together with friends and family. We chat, share stories, and occasionally share our views on current events.  Now that I’ve started this project writing about climate issues, the topic comes up a lot more. That’s a good thing because one of the best things we can do for the climate is to talk about it among friends and family.

Often though, these conversations are characterized by confusion, myths, misinformation – and maybe even a little bullying (when one of my family members talked about getting an EV, another sent her the photo above).

I’m not judging. The whole reason I started this project was because I was confused about climate issues.  The science can be complicated and to make matters worse, there are some who deliberately promote false narratives about the climate.  It takes some work to identify and address the persistent myths that are out there.

Here are some of the common myths and misconceptions that came up in my conversations over the past few weeks.

1. EV batteries catch fire!

Yes.  They can. They have.

But if you are concerned about fires, you should never even get into a car.    Conventional vehicles are powered by gasoline – one of the world’s most flammable liquids. 

A full tank for an average passenger vehicle carries enough gas to make nearly 150 Molotov cocktails¹.  That gasoline is piped through fuel lines, that run inches under your seat to be ignited in a series of explosions about a foot or two away from your lap.

Analyses from around the world conclude that the likelihood of an EV catching fire is very low and much lower than for a conventional car.  An analysis based on US Transport Department data found that the risk of fire in a conventional car is over 60x greater than in an EV.  An Australian firm that compiles records of passenger electric vehicle battery fires worldwide estimates that the risk of fire is 80x greater in a conventional vehicle than in an EV.

I like the reliability of a government report and a comprehensive analysis of EV fires was published by Sweden’s Civil Protection and Emergency Management Agency (MSB) in May 2023.  In that study, the agency found that internal combustion passenger vehicles were over 20 times more likely to be involved in a fire than an EV or plug-in hybrid.

The idea that EVs are more likely to ignite than conventional vehicles is not supported by the evidence.

2. Mining for EV battery minerals is bad for the environment.  

Environmental sensitivities seem to peak when the subject of electric vehicles comes up. Some don’t think twice about needing to burn an average of 2,000 l of gas every year to operate a passenger vehicle, but they get really concerned that an EV battery can require about 185 kg of minerals for the one time production of the battery.

Studies consistently show that on a full lifecycle analysis, including battery manufacturing and end-of-life disposal, EVs dramatically reduce emissions vs. internal combustion vehicles.

Skeptics however remain keen to find some way to demonstrate that EVs cause more harm than good.  Even the CBC recently published an article pointing out that there are environmental downsides to manufacturing batteries.

Well, of course – it would be better for the climate if we did no have to manufacture batteries. Mining for battery minerals disturbs the environment and there needs to be good government policy to balance economic interests with environmental concerns. 

But these criticisms lack perspective  – whatever emissions result from transitioning to EVs, they pale in relation to the emissions that will be saved from fossil fuel production and passenger transport. 

In Canada, the entire mining (including gold, coal, iron, potash, nickel, and even gravel) and non-ferrous metal processing sectors accounted for a combined 21 megatons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2021.

That compares to the oil and gas sector which accounted for 189 megatons of emissions.  To be clear, these are only the emissions that come from the production and distribution of oil and gas.  The emissions from the use of fossil fuels are in addition to that.  The fuel used in powering passenger vehicles in 2021 added another 86 million tonnes of emissions.

Even if there was an increase in mining emissions due to the transition to EVs – the opportunity to cut oil and gas emissions is orders of magnitude larger.

3. There is no plan to recycle all those EV batteries.

No, not yet.  But you can bet there will be.  

EV batteries are really valuable.  They contain all these rare metals that are more easily recycled than mined.  They are also really useful to be repurposed into home electricity backup storage units – like Tesla’s power wall.  Home battery backup is becoming increasingly important as people install rooftop solar.

So aside from environmental concerns, there is a huge economic incentive to collect and reuse batteries from EVs.  The issue is that since the EV market is still in its early stages of growth – most EV batteries are still in use.  The International Energy Agency forecasts that it won’t be until 2030, that the first wave of EV batteries will become available for repurposing.

As the market matures and more batteries retire from the road, there will be greater incentives for recycling programs to get up and running.

4. EVs are just not selling anyway. 

They are, and in record numbers. 

The IEA reports that in 2022, over 15% of all vehicle sales globally were EVs or plug-in hybrids, up 55% vs. the prior year.  Those trends are being seen in all regions, including the US and Canada.

In Canada, the new electric vehicle registration share reached a record 13.1% share in Q3 2023 – an all-time record, up nearly 25% vs. the prior quarter.

Analysts expect that EV growth will continue as more models become available, prices decline, charging infrastructure grows and battery technology continues to improve.

5. Bonus myth –  But natural gas is good, right? 

This one is not an EV myth, but it also came up over the holidays.   I was talking about my goal to change our furnace and hot water tank in 2024 so we could unhook our natural gas connection from our home.

Natural gas enjoys a positive reputation, so much so that some environmentalists object to the term “natural” gas, seeing it as a form of greenwashing.

Natural gas is essentially methane or CH4.  Methane is itself a greenhouse gas which when released directly to the atmosphere is 80 times more warming than CO2 over a 20-year period.

When burned as fuel, natural gas releases over 50 kg of CO2 per million BTUs of energy generated ². Natural gas has been marketed as “clean” because it releases less CO2 than coal (-45%) or home heating oil (-29%).

But “less dirty” is not the same thing as “clean”. Canada consumed an average of 11.8 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day in 2022.  That natural gas released about 236 million tonnes of CO2 – about 43% of Canada’s total 2022 CO2 emissions. 

Natural gas is a major cause of climate change and that’s why municipalities are moving to ban its use for heating in new home construction.

The resilience of myths

Change is tough on people. Myths and misconceptions thrive because they tend to reinforce current beliefs and practices. They give people a free pass to ignore change. 

Even worse, people hate to be wrong. The whole climate crisis is constantly in our face, asking us to concede that many of the thing we’ve loved and enjoyed all our lives, like our cars, are now bad.  

Any information that counters that, is going to be welcomed and repeated.  That’s a big advantage to those economically invested in the status quo who are only too happy to push narratives that help confuse people and delay change.

Education, clear communication of scientific findings, and addressing misinformation are crucial in countering these myths and misconceptions. As the technology evolves and becomes more widespread, and as more accurate information becomes available, these misconceptions are likely to diminish.  

It just may take some time.

1. This assumes a 375 ml bottle and a 55 l gas tank. I’m no Molotov cocktail expert, but I figure you’d want a bottle size that can be thrown a good distance. ↩︎
2. For perspective, a gallon of gasoline contains about 115,000 BTUs of energy. Therefore, 1 million BTUs is equivalent to the energy in roughly 8.7 gallons or 33 liters of gasoline ↩︎