search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
EDITOR’S TAKE


Clearing the Air Written by Ryan Gray | ryan@stnonline.com I


t comes as no surprise that the rate of onboard cleaning and disinfecting has skyrocketed over the past year. In fact, according to reader survey results released this month, over 82 percent of


transportation directors polled said their operations have implemented the use of industrial-strength cleaning and disinfecting solutions on school buses, since COVID-19 took hold. Nearly three-quarters are also now using elec- trostatic sprayers. Long before COVID-19, I heard school buses often re-


ferred to as rolling cesspools, due to the number of germs introduced by student riders. From sticky fingers and runny noses to sneezing and coughing, bus drivers could be easily forgiven for wanting to wear Haz-mat suits. Still, it took a pandemic to force school districts and


bus companies to escalate deep cleaning from maybe a once weekly exercise to a daily, even hourly endeavor. But what will be the long-term effects of introducing harmful chemicals at such frequency onto school buses? I watched in disbelief in late January as a superinten-


dent for a New Jersey school district recounted during a school board meeting how he stood inside an ambulance during the test of an automatic spray system that is being donated for school buses. (Thankfully, we later learned that water was used for demonstration purposes.) My point is, do we really know the chemical makeup


of what we are spraying and wiping down? According to our survey, which you can you learn more about in this month’s magazine edition, 82 percent of readers say they do. At least they think they do. But that also means 18 percent unequivocally say they do not. Dr. Richard Cooper explains, starting on page 54,


what student transporters need to be considering when making decisions on how to address COVID-19 mit- igation throughout their fleets. Simply verifying that products used are listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is not enough. Little if any research has been done to quantify or qualify the health impacts of introducing such high amounts of chemicals into our everyday lives. But information from readers is trickling in on the


effects on bus components. Albeit small numbers, about 10 percent of readers admit that the solutions they use have resulted in some damage or discoloration to seat vinyl, for example. Or a sticky residue is left behind. A


12 School Transportation News • MARCH 2021


small price to pay, one might retort, for providing peace of mind to parents. But is it, really? We simply do not know yet. What has come more into focus is how the SARS-


CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 is primarily transmitted, and that is via airborne particles, accord- ing to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, our reader survey indicates that onboard ventilation systems are the least used mitigation tool at not quite 5.5 percent. This may be due to the relatively recent revelation, stemming from research on how the virus is spread, and because for the first several months of the pandemic the authorities preached the need to wipe down and spray and disinfect everything. Yes, ventilation systems cost a couple of hundred


dollars to over a thousand dollars per unit. The U.S. De- partment of Education has confirmed, however, that this technology can be purchased with federal relief funds. But what about when those funds expire, which hope- fully will be by next year, signaling that no further relief package is necessary because society is properly vacci- nated against COVID-19. There is a concern from some transportation professionals about finding future funds to pay for these systems. That’s perhaps not the way to look at the issue. There


are, after all, plenty of examples of unfunded mandates that have made their way into school bus budget line items, not the least of which are new emissions standards for diesel engines. It takes dexterity and out-of-the-box ideas, but student transporters are skilled at identifying efficiencies to uncover new funding streams, to provide an ever-evolving and higher level of service for millions of students. We may finally be seeing indications that we are


on the way toward overcoming this pandemic, but COVID-19 isn’t going away. It will join the flu and even the common cold as annual annoyances to public educators. With the right mix of research and planning, school buses can align with classrooms to provide a new source of sustainable, clean air solutions. In doing so, they both could also further extend their influence in the greater public health discussions. ●


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76