Sick Or Dying? Don’t Worry, We’re Cutting Carbon Emissions!
By Paul Homewood
h/t Dennis Ambler
The NHS is in crisis. Waiting lists are at record levels, ambulances routinely queue outside A&E departments, and nurses and paramedics are pursuing industrial action.
But the NHS has bigger fish to fry!
Sustainable tech company Jump has been awarded a £690,000 contract from NHS England to develop a healthcare-specific carbon engagement tool designed to encourage NHS staff to reduce their carbon footprints.
The funding has been awarded as part of the second phase of a Small Business Research Initiative (SBRI) Healthcare competition, an Accelerated Access Collaborative (AAC) initiative championed by Academic Health Science Networks. The competition was run in partnership with the Greener NHS programme.
The new tool will be a healthcare-specific development of Jump’s existing employee engagement platform, which is currently used by 22 NHS trusts in the UK.
Being healthcare-specific, the new development will allow greater participation from the workforce and data tracking within the NHS. It will also help the NHS reach its goal of going net zero by 2040.
Graham Simmonds, chief executive at Jump, said: “We are delighted to have won this contract which will enable us to accelerate our work with NHS Trusts across the country.
“The potential for increased carbon savings through more effective employee engagement is very exciting and it will be great to see the new tool motivating colleagues across the NHS play their part in the journey to net zero.”
The development will see Jump tailor the users’ journey based on their specific working role within the NHS. It will deliver motivating positive actions that are individually tailored to roles, which can help reduce carbon impact in a range of areas including energy use, water use and waste reduction.
The NHS will be able to track employee engagement in the programme, as well as a range of environmental data such as carbon savings of KwH reduced via the platform’s dashboard.
In addition, the carbon calculator will allow staff to calculate the emissions of the individual working role and their actions at home, allowing them to see a split between workplace and home emissions.
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and the five NHS trusts within the Dorset Integrated Care System will trial the carbon engagement tool. Following this, it will be available to NHS trusts through Jump’s bespoke sustainability engagement platforms.bespoke sustainability engagement platforms.
Libby Sutherland, head of sustainability at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, said: “This innovation will allow the NHS to track its scope 2 and 3 carbon emissions in a way that is not currently possible and will enable us to reach our goal of net zero by 2040 much faster.
“Working with Jump on the initial development phase of the project has been really exciting and I am confident that colleagues and teams across our five hospitals in Leeds will really get behind the new tool.”
Quite why Leeds Teaching Hospitals need a Head of Sustainability is a mystery!
It reminds us of an analysis last year by the Taxpayers Alliance into NHS Net Zero non-jobs, which found these for starters:
https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/net_zero_the_latest_wave_of_public_sector_non_jobs
No doubt these were just the tip of a very large iceberg!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Maybe the N.H.S. is trying an initiative approach to combat anxiety ?
Respondents with better environmental knowledge scored lower on the measure of climate anxiety.
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/04/19/people-with-better-environmental-knowledge-suffer-less-climate-anxiety/
Yet score much higher for eco(nomy) anxiety?
Another organisation benefiting themselves and harming us from the Government’s ignorance about carbon.
I wonder if anybody bothered to ask the hardworking, underpaid front line staff how they felt about this. Sounds like big brother on steroids
I guess they had better fall in line with it:
“The NHS will be able to track employee engagement in the programme…”
Big brother on steroids
Underpaid? How do you calculate that?
I was thinking of nurses and support staff, They keep complaining about it.
Re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic!
It is clear that Climate Change policies are an excuse for squandering money in a manner that is not accountable: it is virtue benefits rather than real benefits that are lauded. Our local council declared a “Climate Emergency” although we are in the centre of the UK and have no measurable climate changes over the last century, and are not at any risk of sea-level rise (even if the modelled level rises occurred) This policy is designed to allow organisations to spend on projects without any cost / benefit assessment.
Our own council follows the same pathetic routine. I gave up (almost) trying to hold them to account when I realised they were just parroting national-level propaganda and spending money they otherwise wouldn’t have.
Same with Extinction Rebellion et al. They’ve effectively been given permission by the government; it’s just a matter of scale and approach.
Another example of a failing organisation that, like a tree dying from the inside out, is so far away from its original purpose, it is unusable, anachronistic, dangerous and being dismantled by those who allegedly work “FOR” it.
May I suggest that the term “virtue” – as in “virtue signalling” or “virtue benefits” – be abandoned and substituted with “harm” inducing or “defect” signalling? Why should something that is recognised/shown evidentially as being of no benefit whatsoever be described as a virtue?
“Other antonyms of virtue are available”
Well observed. Maybe you can apply your intellect also to “Joy Riding”, “Grooming Gangs” and “Honour Killings”?
Thank you; to me and MOH, “Joy riding” is also known as tailgating and Idontgiveas***aboutyouinfrontriding/driving. “Grooming gangs” might be “Defiling Gangs” and “Honour killings” as “The (insert the requisite faith version) Inquisition” – on the basis that those inflicting the “punishment” will undoubtedly feel that “this hurts me more than it will “hurt” you”.
I am sure others will suggest some more apposite descriptions.
Paul, you should do more to fundraise and pay for some assistance, you must be overwhelmed with work!
A quote from the palaeontological record,
“Decadence and eccentricity are indicative of incipient decline and decay”.
also “burned” while “fiddled” and “Rome”. Chose your own word order.
And given a chronic problem getting the cash to the front line the NHS has used time and money to hire a ridiculous number of diversity and equity managers and consultants.
Clearly the decision makers have their eye on the ball…..
The Monster Raving Loony Party has a more sensible policy to reduce our carbon footprint: they propose to ban the sale of shoes made out of coal.
Absolutely priceless….and what an astute comment about the current “Terrors”.
NHS just loves spraying money around, it spent £8M advertising diversity jobs recently. The bureaucrats running the NHS don’t seem to realise that every penny given to them needs to be spent on making people better.
But who is running the bureaucrats running the NHS? Someone ought to be supervising their ‘performance’….
Also, in terms of calculating the NHS’ carbon footprint, are they counting the amount of CO2 being released by the personnel and patients?
FFS!!!
I guess one improvement to lessen the NHS carbon footprint will be to dissolve the corpses of medical failures rather than burn them using fossil fuels or dig expensive holes in the ground.
The great thing about the NHS is that there’s ALWAYS money to ensure that there are sufficient troughs and no limit to the snouts to put in them. KERCHING!!
Will they ban cremation next?
““This innovation will allow the NHS to track its scope 2 and 3 carbon emissions” … Scope 2 and 3 carbon emissions? – no me neither so I googled it and found the definition of pure, distilled and weapons grade bullshit.
https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/what-are-scope-1-2-3-carbon-emissions
“Healthcare specific”
So no doubt there are similar contracts everywhere in government. So not just a waste of some money, but a waste of a good deal of money.
Well, here we go. I wonder how many individuals are going to physically be honest in providing the data – a humungous lot over each 24 hour period both at work and at home as stated, or elsewhere? I recall such form-filling decades ago, in half hour increments when at work, mostly made up on a retrospective batch completion process. Rubbish in and rubbish out, unless every individual has a smart watch with satellite communication implanted in them.
Anyone who really thinks a ‘carbon engagement tool’ is exciting needs help.