Patients Will Die, Thanks To The NHS Net Zero Drive

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Philip Bratby/Paul Kolk

Will somebody please stop this nonsense now, before people die!

The NHS is to introduce electric ambulances, raising concerns that its drive for net zero is being put above patient safety.

Paramedics fear patients will be forced to wait longer because of the hours lost recharging the vehicles, with particular concern about coverage of rural areas, given the limited range.

The move next month is part of a series of measures that whistleblowers fear put green credentials above medical priorities.

The drive had created a bureaucracy that was diverting vast sums from the front line, and placing “grossly unethical” obstacles in the way of clinical decisions, one whistleblower warned.

NHS England has set up a Greener NHS team with a combined salary bill of £3 million a year, leaked documents reveal.

Officials created 48 roles, including five on six-figure salaries, as part of efforts to pursue an environmental agenda which means every medicine and product has to undergo an “evergreen assessment”.

The 135-question process means that no decision can be taken without a product’s social values and contribution to emissions targets being considered.

One supplier alleged that devices such as plastic cannulas were routinely being rejected on environmental grounds, despite the fact they would improve patient safety.

An extra layer of bureaucracy will be added next month, with every NHS supplier asked to draw up a carbon reduction plan.

Other eco-initiatives being rolled out include “climate-friendly pain relief” for mothers in labour and chemotherapy deliveries and GP visits via e-bikes.

A whistleblower told the Telegraph: “Every part of the NHS is under-resourced and waiting lists remain historically high, but commitment to green zealotry remains unchanged.

“The amount of resources dedicated to the green agenda is astounding, and the fact that it is now impacting clinical decision-making is, I believe, grossly unethical.”

Next month, electric ambulances will be piloted across swathes of the country. Under the scheme, electric ambulances will be trailed across the North West, East of England, Yorkshire, South West and London at a cost of around £150,000 each.

The West Midlands has already introduced the vehicles, although last year board papers from the West Midlands Ambulance Service revealed major concerns.

An evaluation of the pilot scheme found the ambulances took up to four hours to charge and travelled an average of 70 miles between charging, with the papers warning “range and recharge time is a significant limiting factor”.

While the vehicles had a range of 100 miles, which would cover a shift in urban areas, this would not be the case from most of its hubs, it states, adding: “Rural areas in particular are covering twice this mileage and more in a shift.” The report says that, as a minimum, ambulances need to be able to cover 160 miles.

Standard ambulances can cover up to 800 miles a day and be filled up in just minutes.

It follows warnings that ambulances are already spending vast amounts of time off the road, with two millions hours lost to waits in hospital car parks in the 12 months ending March 2023, while heart attack and stroke victims faced average waits of 36 minutes in 2023, twice the target.

Paramedics said they were fearful of the risks if electric ambulances were rolled out widely without a proper safety assessment.

Richard Webber, a paramedic and spokesman for the College of Paramedics, said he could see the benefits of such schemes in urban areas, for short distances.

He said: “I think they really need to produce the evidence that this is safe before this is rolled out beyond urban areas. I would be very wary of that. If I have got a very sick patient, someone who has had a heart attack and I am trying to get them to hospital I don’t want to be worrying about the battery.”

“Staff will want some convincing,” Mr Webber added, urging the health service to “go very cautiously” pushing the green agenda when safety was at risk.

One emergency medical consultant said: “If they could put the charging points at hospitals I would have less of a concern: waits are so long at Emergency Departments you could charge a jumbo jet. My worry is that they are looking to have charging points only in the ambulance station, so that’s even more time lost.”

One in 10 ambulances already spends more than an hour waiting outside hospitals, latest NHS data show.

The emergency medical consultant said: “The worst-case scenario is running out of juice with a patient in the back. I think this is untested territory, I would rather they started testing all of this in Patient Transport Services, where patterns are much more predictable, than in emergency care.”

Paul Bristow, a Tory member of the Commons health and social care committee, said: “Saving lives and patient safety must always come first. The idea that anyone can consider that climate concerns and green zealotry should come before what is best for patients boggles the mind.

“If concerns of first responders and ambulance crews are being overridden it just shows that eco group-think in our NHS is a very real concern.”

Mark Francois, a Conservative member of the public accounts committee urged the NHS not to forget its true purpose.

He said: “Florence Nightingale once famously said that ‘the very first requirement in a hospital is that it should do the sick no harm.’ While achieving net zero is a laudable aim, we cannot allow it to trump common sense, especially if it compromises patient safety.

“The most important consideration must be patient safety, comfort and wellbeing.”

An NHS spokesman said: “NHS services must always put patients first when procuring products and it is also right we seek green alternatives, but only when they save the taxpayer money.

“The new electric ambulances are benefiting thousands of patients, hospitals report they are working efficiently, and they could help deliver annual operational savings of £59 million.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/14/nhs-electric-ambulances-concern-net-zero-above-patients/

The chart shown above highlights everything that is wrong with the NHS’s obsession with Net Zero. Anybody who thinks it is appropriate to analyse carbon emissions in such minute detail, even down into supply chains, should not be working in the NHS. Or for that matter in any position of public responsibility.

Unlike buses, for instance, ambulances are needed around the clock, so every hour of downtime recharging is an hour when patients are not being treated/taken to hospital. This can only lead to patients dying – it is that simple.

The NHS claims electric ambulances will save £59 million a year, but this is farthings in terms of the £100 billion cost of running the NHS, even if true, which anybody with an ounce of commonsense would know disbelieve. (To be fair, patients dead on arrival will save the NHS money).

And note they use the weasel words “operational savings, but don’t mention the extra capital costs entailed in buying electric ambulances, and of course installing all of the charging points/sub stations required.

In any event, the NHS’ overriding priority is healing patients. If it is that concerned about money, it would immediately disband its decarbonisation team.

As usual the Telegraph’s commenters show why they should be deciding policy, but this comment stands out:

As we know too well, EVs struggle to get anywhere near their advertised mileage even in the best of conditions, never mind in winter.

Poppy is quite right to point out all of the other energy hungry devices in an ambulance. No wonder they only average 70 miles per charge.

And in an average environment, that would mean recharging maybe three or four times a day. In short, ambulances will be out of action for half of the time.