EMS Green Team

Taking Charge by Redefining the Terms of the Discussion

2010-11-07T16:22:00.000-05:00

Hi Derek
Your post (from last year) I just had an opportunity to reread, and I was surprised I did not comment on it when I first saw it. I think you've done an excellent job of framing an overview of the conservationist's dilemma - that logically, it can't succeed- that something more is required as well as pointing toward some other options that might be more successful
One thing I'm always fascinated in is "political constraints" and I use that term in a general way because I haven't figured out a better one yet to more clearly define the totality of the concept. What I mean by it is how people allow themselves to be controlled by others in ways that suit the others agenda and not their own. One example is how we allow others to define the terms of a problem. Allowing those who have created a problem to then define it and come up with how WE must change to solve the problem is like allowing the fox to redesign the fence around the chicken coup. By allowing the fox to set the terms of the problem, he might just say, the problem is not so much that hens go missing, but that we have people instead of foxes designing the fence. So, let us discuss whether we should have red foxes or grey foxes design the next fence.
As you have so clearly pointed out, solving our challenges of imbalance will require going well beyond putting out a recycling box or even becoming activist in changing our local municipal policies around consumption, recycling and reuse etc. But that is how the problem has been framed: Only YOU can prevent global warming - and here's how you are going to do it... The hypocrisy of our very own government is there for all to see: they say conserve our water, for example, and come around door to door with free shower heads even, and then they open the door for mining, and oil companies to destroy entire water systems. We need to judge by actions not talk, and these actions demonstrate a complete lack of honesty around this issue. A lack of honesty due to political constraints - they need to preserve their agenda, to reinforce the way they have framed the crisis and thus the solution (that it is we, the average Joe who needs to buy more Green stuff to save the planet) We need to stop being so gullible and wake up to the fact that those who are managing THEIR agenda are doing so in an environment with a paucity of critical evaluation of the FRAMING of the discussion (which is not surprising since they own the media). Your post challenges status quo beautifully. You challenge the framing of the discussion and that is exactly what needs to happen (and is so easily missed by those who have been essentially brainwashed into accepting the terms of the discussion). Real solutions begin with this kind of questioning and dialogue. Notice this blog is all but dead. Why? Do people feel powerless? Regardless of what happens to this blog, there will be those who take up the torch, and "fight" for what I believe ultimately is going to be a battle for freedom. This battle may be one that is as much internal as external- in other words we have to strive to take our next step in personal/ human development and personal responsibility and get beyond our own dysfunctional behaviour. We need to (re?)discover how to get beyond our small selves and tap into a greater consciousness. A greater awareness is the weapon we will need to take onto any battlefield of the future. So, there's lots to do since this "battle" or self- work begins at home. Cheers.

Upping the Stakes, Forget Shorter Showers

2009-10-27T21:43:00.007-04:00

Reposted - Written and Credited by Derrick Jensen

WOULD ANY SANE PERSON think dumpster diving would have stopped Hitler, or that composting would have ended slavery or brought about the eight-hour workday, or that chopping wood and carrying water would have gotten people out of Tsarist prisons, or that dancing naked around a fire would have helped put in place the Voting Rights Act of 1957 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Then why now, with all the world at stake, do so many people retreat into these entirely personal “solutions”?

Part of the problem is that we’ve been victims of a campaign of systematic misdirection. Consumer culture and the capitalist mindset have taught us to substitute acts of personal consumption (or enlightenment) for organized political resistance. An Inconvenient Truth helped raise consciousness about global warming. But did you notice that all of the solutions presented had to do with personal consumption—changing light bulbs, inflating tires, driving half as much—and had nothing to do with shifting power away from corporations, or stopping the growth economy that is destroying the planet? Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide.

Or let’s talk water. We so often hear that the world is running out of water. People are dying from lack of water. Rivers are dewatered from lack of water. Because of this we need to take shorter showers. See the disconnect? Because I take showers, I’m responsible for drawing down aquifers? Well, no. More than 90 percent of the water used by humans is used by agriculture and industry. The remaining 10 percent is split between municipalities and actual living breathing individual humans. Collectively, municipal golf courses use as much water as municipal human beings. People (both human people and fish people) aren’t dying because the world is running out of water. They’re dying because the water is being stolen.

Or let’s talk energy. Kirkpatrick Sale summarized it well: “For the past 15 years the story has been the same every year: individual consumption—residential, by private car, and so on—is never more than about a quarter of all consumption; the vast majority is commercial, industrial, corporate, by agribusiness and government [he forgot military]. So, even if we all took up cycling and wood stoves it would have a negligible impact on energy use, global warming and atmospheric pollution.”

Or let’s talk waste. In 2005, per-capita municipal waste production (basically everything that’s put out at the curb) in the U.S. was about 1,660 pounds. Let’s say you’re a die-hard simple-living activist, and you reduce this to zero. You recycle everything. You bring cloth bags shopping. You fix your toaster. Your toes poke out of old tennis shoes. You’re not done yet, though. Since municipal waste includes not just residential waste, but also waste from government offices and businesses, you march to those offices, waste reduction pamphlets in hand, and convince them to cut down on their waste enough to eliminate your share of it. Uh, I’ve got some bad news. Municipal waste accounts for only 3 percent of total waste production in the United States.

I want to be clear. I’m not saying we shouldn’t live simply. I live reasonably simply myself, but I don’t pretend that not buying much (or not driving much, or not having kids) is a powerful political act, or that it’s deeply revolutionary. It’s not. Personal change doesn’t equal social change.

So how, then, and especially with all the world at stake, have we come to accept these utterly insufficient responses? I think part of it is that we’re in a double bind. A double bind is where you’re given multiple options, but no matter what option you choose, you lose, and withdrawal is not an option. At this point, it should be pretty easy to recognize that every action involving the industrial economy is destructive (and we shouldn’t pretend that solar photovoltaics, for example, exempt us from this: they still require mining and transportation infrastructures at every point in the production processes; the same can be said for every other so-called green technology). So if we choose option one—if we avidly participate in the industrial economy—we may in the short term think we win because we may accumulate wealth, the marker of “success” in this culture. But we lose, because in doing so we give up our empathy, our animal humanity. And we really lose because industrial civilization is killing the planet, which means everyone loses. If we choose the “alternative” option of living more simply, thus causing less harm, but still not stopping the industrial economy from killing the planet, we may in the short term think we win because we get to feel pure, and we didn’t even have to give up all of our empathy (just enough to justify not stopping the horrors), but once again we really lose because industrial civilization is still killing the planet, which means everyone still loses. The third option, acting decisively to stop the industrial economy, is very scary for a number of reasons, including but not restricted to the fact that we’d lose some of the luxuries (like electricity) to which we’ve grown accustomed, and the fact that those in power might try to kill us if we seriously impede their ability to exploit the world—none of which alters the fact that it’s a better option than a dead planet. Any option is a better option than a dead planet.

Besides being ineffective at causing the sorts of changes necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet, there are at least four other problems with perceiving simple living as a political act (as opposed to living simply because that’s what you want to do). The first is that it’s predicated on the flawed notion that humans inevitably harm their landbase. Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the Earth as well as harm it. We can rehabilitate streams, we can get rid of noxious invasives, we can remove dams, we can disrupt a political system tilted toward the rich as well as an extractive economic system, we can destroy the industrial economy that is destroying the real, physical world.

The second problem—and this is another big one—is that it incorrectly assigns blame to the individual (and most especially to individuals who are particularly powerless) instead of to those who actually wield power in this system and to the system itself. Kirkpatrick Sale again: “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.”

The third problem is that it accepts capitalism’s redefinition of us from citizens to consumers. By accepting this redefinition, we reduce our potential forms of resistance to consuming and not consuming. Citizens have a much wider range of available resistance tactics, including voting, not voting, running for office, pamphleting, boycotting, organizing, lobbying, protesting, and, when a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have the right to alter or abolish it.

The fourth problem is that the endpoint of the logic behind simple living as a political act is suicide. If every act within an industrial economy is destructive, and if we want to stop this destruction, and if we are unwilling (or unable) to question (much less destroy) the intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures that cause every act within an industrial economy to be destructive, then we can easily come to believe that we will cause the least destruction possible if we are dead.

The good news is that there are other options. We can follow the examples of brave activists who lived through the difficult times I mentioned—Nazi Germany, Tsarist Russia, antebellum United States—who did far more than manifest a form of moral purity; they actively opposed the injustices that surrounded them. We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems.

Green thumb paramedics growing a garden

2009-06-08T17:08:00.003-04:00

Posted By Mark Hoult

Posted 6 hours ago

Asphodel-Norwood - Peterborough County EMS paramedics stationed in Norwood are growing fresh produce to help improve the health of local residents.

With the support of the Norwood Fair board, the municipality and Morello's Independent Grocers in Peterborough, the paramedics have expanded what was originally a narrow strip of garden alongside the ambulance station into a larger plot at the edge of the Norwood fairgrounds.

There they have planted tomatoes, zucchini, squash, eggplant, carrots, cucumbers, lettuce and brussels sprouts, which will be given away free through the local food bank and the medical centre next to the EMS station. In addition, the garden will produce some fresh garlic because “garlic is one of the main things for fending off cancer,” said paramedic Mark Cameron, who became an avid gardener as a means of reducing stress.

Cameron and the other seven paramedics at the station put the vegetables from their original strip garden in baskets and left them in the doctor's office for patients to take home. This year, when Cameron received a call from Morello's with an offer of help with the community garden, he at first refused because they didn't have the space. Then, acting on a suggestion to approach the fair board, Cameron talked to secretary Paul Quinlan, who gave the go-ahead and in turn talked to Reeve Doug Pearcy. The result was a crew of township employees and their equipment arriving to help paramedics stake out a garden along the fence separating the ambulance station from the fairgrounds. And Sunday three Morello's employees arrived to help with the planting of the vegetables. “And we're going to give all of it away; everything is going,” Cameron said, noting that although everyone will be welcome to the produce, the main purpose of the garden is to distribute fresh vegetables to seniors.

Cameron estimates that the approximately $150 worth of seeds and plants donated by Morello's will generate more than $4,000 worth of produce, an example of how much can be generated by a single moderately sized vegetable garden.

“Gardening is not expensive, although it is hard work,” he said. “But I think that everything that comes out of the garden is the best way. We have gotten so farm away from knowing where our food comes from.”

Cameron said most of the vegetables in the garden are high yield. Zucchinis can be picked and more will continue to grow; and tomatoes are also easy to grow “as long as your soil in good and you add a little fertilizer.”

At this point the vegetable plot is “a fledgling garden,” Camerons said. But he expects that the garden will flourish as they add better soil and fertilizer, perhaps even some manure left over from a local farm. “Our ultimate goal is to have people come in and pick their own,” he said.

Paramedic Stations as Waste Generators: Are Yours Registered?

2009-05-30T08:41:00.000-04:00

How often do you find yourself throwing your gloves in the garbage? Or a vomit suction containers? Bloody dressings? These items end up in landfills. There is a better option.

All Paramedic stations need to be registered as “waste generators” with the Province of Ontario. Plastic bins should be supplied at each station by a proper biohazard company like Stericycle.

Bio hazard bags are still required to be used inside the plastic bins. Signed manifests are to be available at each registered station eliminating any need for Paramedics to be involved in the pick-up process.

This is in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Environmental Protection Act, SO 1990, Part V, Section 19 and 27; Part XVII, Section 197, and Infection Control Guidelines and The Management of Biomedical Waste in Ontario Guide Guideline FC-4, Public Health Agency Canada.

Please place all biohazardous waste in the supplied containers and ensure no garbage is discarded in them.

Note: In the interests of health and safety, paramedics are not to return transport soiled linens or biohazard products back to their stations. Biohazard receptacles need to be available at hospital destinations.

Disposal of Medical Waste

2008-04-04T03:42:00.000-04:00

Medication Return Program - so that families, patients and families of deceased patients do not flush medications into the toilet. Shoppers Drugmart should hand out a bag with every medication pickup.

http://www.medicationsreturn.ca

Decreasing Emissions by Increasing efficiency of buildings

2008-03-31T21:59:00.001-04:00

take a look at this article. (Click here) Considering most EMS stations are cinderblock construction, I'm sure there is a lot that could be done to improve their efficiency.

Idling policy TFD

2008-03-28T00:35:00.002-04:00

IDLE-Idling.pdf
85K Download

Groupwise Posts

2008-03-08T05:22:00.003-05:00

I have to say, I've been writing "groupwise" GREEN posts intermittently for almost a year now and want to encourage anyone who feels alone, small and disheartened in their attempts to leave a lighter footprint on our earth.

Every time I make a post, I get at least one response, most often from people I've never met. Sometimes it's supportive and sometimes it's flack, but what do I care; the message is being read.

Take heart!

Suspending Earth Day Deployment

2008-01-20T14:31:00.000-05:00

I am going to ask my employer to suspend vehicle deployment on Earth Day.

I am looking for any statistic or data related to Ambulances (Crestline or Ford), fuel usage and fossil fuels that will help make my arguements.

The principle of it is ask them to suspent mobile deployment for the whole day and ask my coworkers not to idle their vehicles at any point during the shift.

The "hitch" is that we don't have stations, therefore my employer will take the pollutant route in the name of reducing responses times when, in sad reality, it is unnecessary. Response times unfortunately dictate requirements to drive around alot in the HOPE that a call will come in.

I'm interested in any other ideas.

Regards,
Tim S

Dry Cleaning EMS uniforms

2007-07-20T23:56:00.001-04:00

I heard a few years ago that Cadet no longer uses perchlorethylene. That may be true but begs the question: just what DO they use? Is it safer? Is it safest?

Now that we can take uniforms to other dry cleaning companies, what are they using? The information below is taken from the link in the previous post, and I thought it's something we need to look at. Does anyone know what the deal is with chemicals and dry cleaning companies in Toronto and the GTA?

I have been washing my own uniforms for several years and I think it's about time those of us who do this because we are concerned about dry cleaning chemicals, should approach the union to negotiate something on our behalf in light of the fact we are using our own resources rather than that provided by EMS. If there are companies that are fairly conveniently located that I can be assured are using safe cleaners, that's fine: I'll take my uniforms there. But we don't even use products like Tide etc anymore and are using enviro friendly detergent. So, I really doubt I'll find anything that is up to this standard in the city.

Anyone have any thoughts or suggestions about this? How many others are cleaning their own uniforms without any compensation.

regards,

Marc

Dry Cleaning

Don't take the planet to the cleaners! Did you know dry cleaning is a hazardous process that uses toxic chemicals and poisons the environment, our clothing, and us? Eighty percent of the dry cleaners in the U.S. use a solvent called perchloroethylene, or perc. Perc and other solvents are placed in a rotating cleaning drum along with clothing. The drum spins out the majority of the solvent, and hot air evaporates the remaining fluid before the garment is pressed and bagged. These solvents excel at removing soils and stains without damaging fabrics. Unfortunately, they also excel at making us sick. Perc has been linked to cancer, liver and nervous system damage, infertility, and hormonal disruption. Some 57 million pounds of perc are used each year by the country's 34,000 dry cleaners, and around 12 million pounds are released into the air.

Clothing washed in perc or other solvents often comes home from the cleaners a little less than clean. Residues of these toxins can remain in the fibers of dry cleaned garments, especially when clothes are placed in a plastic bag soon after processing is completed. For this reason, it's recommended that you remove the plastic bag and air your garment out for several days in a safe, isolated, and well ventilated location to let these residues evaporate.

Of course, it's better and safer not to dry clean at all. In fact, many "dry clean only" garments can be hand-washed and air dried or machine-washed using the gentle cycle and a mild detergent.

There are also new and non-toxic professional dry cleaning alternatives emerging. These technologies have found a way to clean delicates safely without solvents like perc.

Our vehicles SUCK (fuel) and BLOW (pollutants)

2007-07-12T12:36:00.001-04:00

Noisy, fuel inefficient, carcinogenic, promote injuries, toxic....etc.

Our vehicles are brutal. Don't get me going...way too late, I'm on a tear. Let me start with the blatantly obvious: Whoever came up with the idea of using cube trucks as ambulances should be tarred and feathered. It's a given that every vehicle is going to be a compromise in one way or another, but the compromises in these vehicles are equivalent to withholding oxygen from a cardiac patient so you don't have to change the tank afterwards. Criminal.

I work NEA so I'm stuck with these vehicles almost every shift. I think discussing the problem is almost redundant as we all know what they are so I"ll try and be brief:

*Vinyl, plastics, particle board, all off gas toxic fumes.
*Diesel fumes are carcinogenic
*lack of air cushioned suspension or proper hydraulic seat suspension as you'd find on a truck promote spinal injury and gives NO consideration to patients, particularly the elderly, or those with possible spinal injury for example.
*interior noise levels may be close to a level to cause permanent hearing damage from engine and or siren

That's a start. I won't even mention safety issues all over the place with unsecured or improperly secured oxygen tanks and equipment. Okay, I just did mention it. Fair enough.

Let's see, last time I checked it was 2007. Hmmm. We put communications equipment into orbit in the 50's and a man on the moon in the 60's. The silicon age came to peoples homes 20 years ago with personal computers. But EMS is still in the dark ages with our godawful trucks.

Of course there are the gas vehicles. Somehow it was determined that the lift into the back was a non-issue despite the concerns raised by paramedics. Every once in a while I get on one of these vehicles, and granted, they are quieter and more comfortable, but that lift is a blatant health and safety issue. We've been told it's a dead issue. They found the right person to sign off on this that it was safe. Well, some issues are worth bringing back from the dead. I'm about 5' 9" and that's a tough lift. What are people doing who are 5' 4". Oh yea, they're all on light duties or are management now. Last time I checked, we had a union that had access to legal counsel. It's only a dead issue if we let it die at the expense of our health.

My point in bringing this up is to point out the need to look at vehicles and address some of the environmental concerns that have been raised (not to mention health and safety...oh yeah, I did mention that too). The next procurement of vehicles should be done transparently with input from the field: from the poor bastards that have to work on these things. Maybe we could look at something that is relatively non-polluting, non-toxic, and quiet and incorporates some of the technologies post 1965.

DIESEL EXHAUST - DELAYED OR OTHER HEALTH EFFECTS: Cancer: Prolonged or repeated exposure to exhaust gasses produced from engines burning this material may cause cancer. Whole diesel engine exhaust has been classified as a Group 2A carcinogen (probably carcinogenic to humans) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Diesel exhaust particulate has been classified as reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen in the National Toxicology Program's Ninth Report on Carcinogens. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has recommended that whole diesel exhaust be regarded as potentially causing cancer. Diesel engine exhaust is known to the State of California to cause cancer. Contains naphthalene, which has been classified as a Group 2B carcinogen (possibly carcinogenic to humans) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Risk depends on duration and level of exposure.Target Organs: No data.

Zap electric cars

2007-07-06T20:47:00.000-04:00

link to Zap electric cars videos. Enjoy.

Influencing the Corporatocracy

2007-07-04T23:12:00.000-04:00

This is a one hour talk by author John Perkins. The relevance of his talk to EMS green team may seem a bit of a stretch but I think it gives a good framework for understanding the larger picture. It also follows nicely, I believe, my post about "The Politics of Green".

He believes that people can influence the "Corporatocracy" and move them towards being good corporate citizens. That isn't that different than looking at how we may want to influence municipal government (or Toronto EMS) to be more green.

I know that we can't watch these videos at work, but hopefully you'll get a chance to see it at home.

click here for link to video

Tips from Greenpeace

2007-06-29T23:47:00.000-04:00

click here for link

The Politics of Green

2007-06-27T00:57:00.000-04:00

Do you ever wonder why we bother putting out our little blue boxes while we actively destroy the planet? We can rationalize and say, well, it all starts with one small step. It's true, but this is hardly a step. This would be the equivalent, I think, of saying, "hey we are polluting Lake Ontario. Let's get a pitcher with a Brita filter and try and clean it up. " We are way past this point.

I don't mean to sound defeatist here. Bear with me.

Today I spoke to a friend who often seems to have some cutting edge information. He said there is a group right here in Canada that is using nano technology to create some sort of solar collector that is 7 times as efficient as regular solar collectors. If true, that could be a breakthrough that would change the world. Click here for the link I just found to the breaking story in 2005.

In the development of this one technology, we could get off the electrical grid (end of nuclear and coal generating stations), we could replace much of our heating requirements with off grid electric. With the likelihood of surplus power, we could utilize electric vehicles or at the very least electric hybrids.

Can you imagine packaging this solar power breakthrough with a similar breakthrough in battery technology?

I saw a bit of the film "What happened to the Electric Car" and it seemed to suggest that this was a viable vehicle that was suppressed by industry (big oil?).

The question is: Assuming this technology has been suppressed, how long before it's going to get out regardless of the efforts made by big industry. It only makes sense that it will get to the point where there will be so many little brush fires that every time they try and stamp one out several more will burst into flames.

If you haven't had a chance to check out the film I posted on the cars running on compressed air, I encourage you to watch it (at home or library etc). It's really encouraging to see what these geniuses around the world are doing to solve some of our big problems. Who would have thought that cars could run on compressed air?! I think that these guys figuring this sort of thing out kind of proves that big corporations could have solved these problems long ago if they really wanted to. More sinister is the likelihood that there has been active suppression of technologies that could replace the internal combustion engine quite effectively.

I don't think any intelligent person believes the U.S is in the middle east to bring so-called democracy to that region. We have to acknowledge it's at least partly about oil. So the reality is that here we have an administration willing to murder thousands, if not 100's of thousands to gain control of oil. All while we could very nicely have put resources into alternatives.

But the problem, it seems apparent, is they don't want alternatives. Oil is keeping certain corporations and the individuals behind them very wealthy thank you very much. So we fight this battle of going green with our blue boxes instead of with implementing the technologies WE ALREADY HAVE that could do something significant. I mean COMPRESSED AIR for God's sake. That's not exactly high tech!

I'll update you on any developments I hear about the solar technology. That is, if someone doesn't kill this before it has a chance to get off the ground.

Meantime...I guess we keep filling blue boxes.

Hybrid Vehicles

2007-06-04T16:25:00.000-04:00

Am wondering if anyone knows if there was an inquery into the purchasing of these new (and so amazing...please read the sarcasm in this statement) gas ambulances. Perhaps we should have gone hybrid?? If the TTC is so inclined to use hybrid vehicles as the buses are constantly in use, then why wouldn't The City, and our dept think of the same rational approach to reducing emmissons....oh right, because they forgot to think. Any chances of petitioning for Hybrid in the future. OR currently, to have our replacement vehicles be hybrids? If the City really wants to save money this might be something to consider.

Marcilyn

thank gawd!

2007-06-04T15:44:00.001-04:00

Hey all.
Just a sigh of relief in regards to the EMS Green Team. This is truly a beautiful thing. My anxieties in the workplace, apart from the regular rants and raves of our fellow commrades exist mostly in what i view as an apathy towards our environment. It's hard to get others interested in the environment and to actually have them acknowledge that one person can make a difference. Recycling, composting, energy efficiency, chemical free cleaning products, etc etc. The list goes on and if you like I would be willing to post in stations or to start, on this site, things that can be done in the workplace to help our environment. If anyone has anything they think wise to contribute please let me know. Starting with the basics is probably the best. ie) turning the taps off, turning the TV off when leaving to go to a call, recycling, no idling. You get my jist. At some point I hope the department might help out those poor souls who clean up our stations and give them eco cleaning products so that they actually have lungs to breath with sometime in the future. Here's to hoping we can make more of a difference.
Marcilyn

idling ambulances

2007-04-10T11:26:00.001-04:00

We could all stop idling ambulances while in hospitals. The drug freezing argument is bull. It takes a really long time to freeze and the temperature has to be below minus 10(I think). We can do our part by asking others to do the same.
Question of the day
can you be a smoker and and environmentalist.
I thought the ems green team was based on color code.
I can certify Mark as green, he moves so slow and infrequently that his emissions has to be below normal.
Brian B

2007-03-13T23:28:00.000-04:00

As part of this medium sized organization, Toronto EMS, we have the opportunity to make some small changes to the way we are doing things and significantly lessen our impact on the environment.

My commitment is I will take better care of the recycling at 49 station. I'll empty the boxes into the large containers that are outside, keep them neat, etc. My partner and I are already careful about idling the vehicles but maybe I can make an effort to change some of my driving habits to maximize the mileage per gallon of gas.

I think we should consider making an effort, as a group, to avoid idling the ambulances as much as possible. I put together a design for a button that addresses this issue. Unfortunately, I couldn't upload it to this blog. It's bitmap and maybe blogger only accepts JPEG or something like that. I put it together using "paint". If anyone has a suggestion how to successfully upload this image I'd be happy to hear it.

Anyways, I think there's lots we can do, just to do our part. It will be interesting to see if we can work together on this. It's always great when we can work together as a team and to think what we might accomplish.

2007-03-13T09:43:00.000-04:00

I'm a junior tree hugger. I don't picket or write to congress or start petitions. I have no interest in living in the dark ages but I am concerned about the environment because the signs of climate change are all around us. So I turn the truck off at work. Not when a sick patient is being loaded, but while on offload delay or on standby. At home, I recycle religiously, use energy efficient light bulbs and I have a programmable thermostat that allows me to have the house cool when I'm not home in the winter. (it actually saves big $$$$) We started this blog so that people could pass around tips on how to be more environmentally friendly without having to drastically change their lifestyle. I would like to start composting this year. I hear it's excellent and cheap fertilizer. If anyone has tips on how to do that please post.
Cheers!