Behaviour experts say misinformation shared in media and by other stakeholders is impeding uptake

Experts from a “nudge unit” have been hired to help ministers fight misinformation about heat pumps to try to encourage take-up of the devices.

The appliances run on electricity instead of gas and are regarded as a way of decarbonising homes at scale. A target of installing 600,000 a year by 2028 is part of a drive to achieve Britain’s commitment to reach net zero by 2050.

However, misinformation shared in the media and by “other stakeholders” is impeding uptake, according to a £100,000 government contract awarded to the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), which specialises in ideas to “nudge” the public into taking different actions.

The contract awarded to BIT contains details of a previously unpublished research by the Department for Energy.

It found that individuals who self-reported that they knew a fair amount or a lot about heat pumps were less likely to want one. However, people who correctly answered a simple knowledge question about heat pumps were more likely to want one.

BIT is finalising a large survey of householders’ views and coverage in the media that will be used in planning how the government will push back against misinformation.

“Information about heat pumps is being shared by the media and stakeholders, which may be skewed to negative, incorrect or exaggerated stories of heat pump adoption,” says the contract, which cites examples including claims that the pumps are noisy, cost too much to install and are not reliable and don’t work in older homes.

Articles about heat pumps in the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph were cited in the document, which states that some of these stories “are generally well-founded, such as believing that heat pumps are expensive” but adds that some include incorrect misconceptions, such as believing they might not work well in the cold.

“Online information which is imbalanced or skewed towards incorrect and exaggerated claims could be considered an environment where misinformation is a problem,” it reads.

  • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝OPAEnglish
    24·
    5 days ago

    Articles about heat pumps in the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph were cited in the document, which states that some of these stories “are generally well-founded, such as believing that heat pumps are expensive” but adds that some include incorrect misconceptions, such as believing they might not work well in the cold.

    I haven’t blocked those two from my newsfeed and the constant drizzle of anti-EV news is enlightening. Makes you wonder whose agenda they are promoting pushing back against important green initiatives.

    • wewbullEnglish
      22·
      5 days ago

      The world economy has a really scary event ahead of it, and many are doing whatever they can to avoid it. The event is the change from an oil based world economy to an electricity based one. It’s scary for a number of reasons.

      1. A number of industries are based off the drilling, refining, transporting and sale of oil and gas based products. All of those industries become basically worthless. Additionally any manufacture of goods that consume oil based products (e.g. cars) that need to pivot at much cost.
      2. Electricity generation is much more diverse than oil production. Anywhere between the tropics can generate from the sun with abandon. Costal countries have wind and tidal sources. Mountainous regions can use hydro, volcanic - geothermal. All of this takes power away from the oil producing nations. Nations will become much more self sufficient. The middle east loses much of its importance. Russia is toast. America takes a hit.
      3. The dollar is the fiat currency of the world because of oil. This no longer needs to be true.
      4. The loss of trading oil as a commodity will destabilise markets. Electricity is not traded in commodity markets. It’s mainly traded in highly regulated closed auctions, or between national bodies.
      5. Renewables will hit a point where we have large amounts of cheap plentiful energy. This will be deflationary on a global scale. All goods are transported and cheap transportation means prices should go down. The alternative is that gains are taken as profits and would be highly inflationary. Either way - destabilising.

      Renewable energy is going to change the world. A lot of (currently) powerful people are terrified.

      • jabjoeEnglish
        2·
        4 days ago

        Things, economics now is favour of green. Not just to avoid a future no one wants, but because to be green is cheaper and better, today.

      • LePoisson@lemmy.world
        3·
        5 days ago

        I’m sure there’s still going to be a huge need for oil based products but I agree the world economy is going to see some huge changes to it. Idk what we will replace oil with, if we ever can, plastics make up so much of everything but overall oil use will decline when it’s not used as fuel for everything mechanical.

        Certainly going to be some interesting times we’ll be living through as we march towards the cyberpunk dystopia.

        • wewbullEnglish
          2·
          4 days ago

          I think plastics will be the last refuge of oil, but that will be such a smaller market than it currently is. I’m hopeful that other materials will replace them in a lot of cases, but I doubt it will be everything.

        • jabjoeEnglish
          2·
          4 days ago

          I think we are in the cyberpunk dystopia today. I hope we are heading for a solarpunk future. Green tech is now cheap effective tech. Open technology is taking over more and more. Most people just don’t see that because the bit they interact with is wrapped with closed.

          The problems of massive international monopolies is also economic one of lack of innovation and price competition. The problem of inequality so bad the rich can basically buy countries elections, is also economic one. At the other end of it, people can’t buy well, and are stuck in the “Sam Vimes’s boots problem”, which is bad economics. It’s “lost opportunity cost” to have to waste money like that. Same with “right to repair”, it’s rubbish for citizen and society to have to not be able to repair. Etc etc

          Where the economics leads is more solarpunk than today. 😃

    • fakeman_pretendname
      5·
      5 days ago

      It might take quite a bit of wondering to work out specifically who, but I think you can gather the general gist of whose agenda they’re promoting without too much wondering :)

      • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝OPAEnglish
        4·
        5 days ago

        Oh I’ve got a good general idea but I’d love to know the specifics - are they doing it to be contrarians or because it’s a fairly well-accepted Tory press narrative or are think tanks funded by fossil fuel companies giving them “press releases” or “talking points” that a “journalist” then reworks into what passes for an “article”?

        • fakeman_pretendname
          4·
          5 days ago

          Yeah, I’d like to actually know, rather than just guess. I always felt it might merely be a case of “it’s the sort of thing liked by the type of people we don’t like”.

          To be fair, I’m doing exactly the same thing back at them.