Climate Mythbusters: welcome to a limited series on debunking persistent bits of climate misinformation. This week we are featuring some transportation climate myths that keep coming back, from the media to the holiday dinner table. How many of these have you heard this week? Let’s debunk them together!

Myth 1: When it comes to transportation, we can meet our climate goals with a gradual transition—on a timetable set by the auto industry

Reality: A gradual, industry-led approach risks locking us into decades of unsustainable practices. The auto industry tends to prioritize profitability and market readiness over climate urgency. We need to act assertively to set ambitious, science-based timelines that outpace the industry’s often slower, self-serving transitions. Climate science tells us that the window for action is shrinking, and delaying aggressive measures could make it impossible to meet critical targets like those set for 2030 or 2050.

Myth 2: Vehicle electrification alone will save us

Reality: Electrifying vehicles is a crucial way to reduce pollution, but it’s only part of the solution. Vehicle electrification doesn’t address other issues like road congestion, land use, or the environmental impacts of producing electric vehicles (EVs). Achieving climate goals will require reducing miles driven, using low-carbon fuels, and switching to zero-emission vehicles whenever possible. The future of transportation must be multimodal, and investments in walking, biking, and transit will make it easier and less expensive for consumers and policymakers to decarbonize. Investing in multimodal transportation solutions also offers a whole host of co-benefits. See our report Transforming Transportation, which provides a roadmap for meeting our climate goals.

Myth 3: As more EVs replace gas-fueled cars on the road, expanding our highway capacity will be a good idea.

Reality: Highway expansions encourage more driving, and thus do not provide a solution to congestion. Whether vehicles are electric or not, more driving means more sprawl, higher infrastructure costs, and further reliance on cars, which runs counter to climate goals. Oregon needs to prioritize reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), not just swapping gas cars for electric ones if we are serious about curbing emissions.

Myth 4: Reducing congestion reduces greenhouse gas emissions

Reality: On a related note: reducing congestion through highway expansion leads to more driving, more sprawl, and more emissions. While idling in traffic is inefficient, expanding road capacity ultimately encourages more car use. Put another way, the total amount of vehicles on a road, not the speed they move, has the biggest impact on air quality emissions. Plus, electric vehicles still produce emissions through tire wear and energy consumption, particularly when pulling energy from non-renewable sources. The real solution to congestion lies in reducing car dependence by investing in public transit, biking, and compact, walkable communities.