Don't battery-powered ambulances sound like a great idea?

When every minute counts

With ambulance response times in the U.K. averaging over eight minutes for those in a life-threatening situation, there's certainly room for improvement. This is acknowledged by the U.K. authorities, which have set a target of seven minutes for such calls, even though that could still be far too late for many people. Meanwhile, response times for less threatening but still very serious events, such as stroke and sepsis, average around 36 minutes, while women in the later stages of labor usually have to wait over two hours for an ambulance.

Part of the problem is a lack of ambulances; the other part is the long wait at the hospital for the patient in the ambulance to be admitted, delaying the time at which the ambulances are freed up to respond to a different call.

But it wasn't with these problems in mind that the nation's National Health Service (NHS) decided to “update” its ambulance fleet with electric vehicles. The NHS, in the grip of progressive policy like many other institutions, is intent on “greening” itself and is convinced that EVs are the way to go, even for emergency vehicles.

Hours instead of minutes to charge and limited mileage too

The new EVs acquired by the NHS officially have a range of 124 miles between charges, significantly below the 160 miles recommended during the trial phase. However, during trials, it was found that the actual range was nearer 70 than 124 miles, as the listed ranges for EVs are based on optimal conditions, including flat terrain, no use of air conditioning, and mild weather.

Charging, officially, takes “just” 90 minutes — but again, during the trial phase, things worked out differently; it often took up to four hours. Filling the tank of a diesel-powered ambulance, of course, takes just a few moments.

Supposedly, the ambulances can hold enough power to last a full 12-hour shift. When off-duty, drivers will have to park their vehicles at any one of the 56 charging stations located at ambulance centers. Whether or not sufficient fast-chargers are available for the new electric ambulances is unclear. Similarly, it is unclear what the NHS would do in its ideal version of the future, where the entire fleet is electric-powered, if a mass-casualty event demands all hands on deck, within minutes.

A question of priorities

The EV ambulances are also expensive; each one costs around £150,000 ($190,000). According to a NHS spokesman, they “could help deliver annual operational savings of £59 million,” but he omits to explain why this should be.

Part of the reason they are so expensive is that they have to be specially converted. The NHS uses Ford Transit vehicles converted by the German-based company WAS, as well as the Mercedes-Benz Sprinter. At the beginning of the year it was using Fiat Ducato ambulances, which, according to paramedics, were too small to be usable by paramedics who are tall or have big feet, and didn't allow for sufficient space around the patient, sometimes leading to a worse outcome for cardiac patients who had to be treated during transport.

What's more, as virtually every British citizen knows, the NHS doesn't have money to spare. An unnamed whistleblower told media:

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.

Just to illustrate the extent of the ethical question: In 2022, over 500 seriously ill people died while waiting for an ambulance.

But London Mayor Sadiq Khan has expressed his satisfaction with the development and did not relate to any of the potential issues.

It's brilliant to see London Ambulance Service leading the way with London's first fully electric emergency ambulance. This new vehicle will enable paramedics to deliver first class care to thousands of patients whilst also improving air quality and reducing harmful, toxic emissions in the capital.

What the ambulance crews say

When speaking to paramedics themselves, one hears a different story. Richard Webber, a U.K. paramedic, told the Telegraph,

I think they really need to produce the evidence that this is safe before this is rolled out beyond urban areas. 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.

Paul Bristow, a Conservative MP, also noted the concerns of medical professionals, saying,

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 … 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.

Targets for ‘the planet’ — but what about its inhabitants?

The NHS was the first national health body in the world to commit to achieving Net Zero and has set the year 2040 as its target date. Members of the British public aren't impressed, as comments on the Daily Mail website show:

I'm sorry 999 [emergency services] caller, you are outside of our vehicle range. Please call again when you are in range. Have a nice day.

Others pointed out potential issues concerning which officials have not provided any reassurance: 

I bet in cold weather, there will be no heating for fear it will drain the batteries. Plus where is the power coming from to run all the medical equipment?