It is no secret in the corridors of city halls that fire departments are among the largest fuel consumers. Under intense scrutiny, fire departments across the country are adjusting and reprioritizing their finances to accommodate increasing energy costs. Fire chiefs either have been or will be directed formally to curtail any unnecessary vehicle travel. It is critical for a fire department's success that the chief proactively researches and develops better and more fiscally responsible ways of providing service to the public.

In 2000, a gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel cost about $1.50. In Shreveport, La., the $136,000 that was allocated in the operating budget for fuel at the time made up roughly 0.4% of overall spending. Today with an average price per gallon of regular at $4.10 and diesel at $4.60, that percentage has more than quadrupled to 1.7%. That might not sound like much, but consider that in most departments more than 90% of the financial resources are dedicated to personnel service costs, such as salaries and benefits. This leaves less than 10% for all other costs. This means that of material operating costs, the original $500,000 in Shreveport's budget for fuel was already more than 10% of that total and the additional $280,000 (56% increase over previous year) needed to subsidize the account to year's end raises that number to a whopping 17%. That money has to come from somewhere. But by being financially and operationally creative, a chief can lessen the blow to the department and community.

It is important to understand the economics of what drives fuel prices, where those prices are and, more importantly, where they are headed. The main contributor to rising gasoline prices is the record-high price of crude oil, which according to the U.S. Department of Energy makes up 58% of what consumers pay at the pump. Federal, state and local taxes take another 15%, refining costs and profits comes to 17%, and the remaining 10% goes to distribution and marketing.

The price of crude oil is determined by a number of variables including supply and demand, seasonal increases, global conflicts, market speculation and some say the decline of the U.S. dollar (because oil is bought and sold with dollars, a weaker dollar means foreign suppliers must charge more dollars to reach the same value in their currency). The main reason for the considerable increase over the last year has been attributed to the increase in worldwide demand relative to the available supply. The growing economies of China and India have affected this equation significantly and show no signs of slowing. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and its ability to slow or increase production of 40% of the world market also plays a major role, as does the increase in the nationalization of once-private oil ventures, seen most recently in Venezuela. This nationalization is by and large viewed as having a negative impact on fuel pricing because most countries where this has occurred tend to use the revenue produced by the oil to underwrite their national budget and do not reinvest in their equipment, new technology, or in hiring or training the professionals needed to maintain and advance their endeavor. A slightly more dubious explanation is that speculators, those investing in future oil sales, run the price up by boosting demand. Many economists and politicians are divided over how much influence speculators have had on recent oil price spikes.

In this country, where last year consumers used 142 billion gallons, future expectations for gasoline prices are varied. But most economists predict that prices will stay between $4 and $5 a gallon for regular for the next several years with a possible pull back to the mid to high $3 mark at best. The bottom line is this: Chiefs who are waiting for fuel prices to return to last year's $2.75 average and are not taking steps to improve their departments' fuel efficiency are being naive, and, to a great degree, negligent.

A few of the measures that some departments are trying include allowing emergency vehicles to travel only during calls; this means cutting out trips to the grocery store, riding district, and participating in parades or other community events. Additionally, carpooling for meetings and lunches has become mandatory in some organizations, and they are parking staff vehicles with the exception of essential on-call personnel such as fire investigators and mechanics. In some cases, departments are looking at going to smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Most engines, ladder trucks and other large vehicles, such as heavy rescues, get anywhere from 3 to 5 miles per gallon of fuel. This alone makes it essential for fire departments to evaluate the manner in which they operate their vehicle fleet on emergency and non-emergent basis. Using big rigs to run EMS calls takes a bigger chunk of the fuel-consumption expense than does any other single task the department performs.

The Shreveport Fire Department provides ALS and EMS transport services in addition to fire protection. Last year, the department responded to 35,667 total incidents, of which 25,506 (71.5%) were medical calls. Currently, the minimum response for most EMS calls is one fire engine and one ambulance. For less severe calls, an engine responds and evaluates the incident, calling for a medic unit if necessary.

Most EMS calls are within a metropolitan fire engine's primary response district, making the average round-trip response distance 5 miles. An idling fire engine uses 2 gallons of diesel fuel every 30 minutes. Sending engines to EMS incidents in Shreveport accounts for 62,744 gallons of diesel consumed annually and at the current price of $4.60 a gallon, totals $288,600.

To provide EMS, proper equipment and personnel must be delivered in a timely and expeditious manner. However, there is no clear rationale as to why that service has to be delivered on a fire engine except one of convenience and that the equipment for most fire service based-EMS providers was already in place when they absorbed EMS in the early 1970s and 1980s and some never saw the need to change, until now.

The logic for sending an engine is one of simple division and response times. Traditionally, there are more engines at fire stations that divide the city than ambulances, and they can simply reach the patients faster. It is critical to provide the most expeditious medical service possible, but who says it has to be on a gas-guzzling fire truck? A fire truck is necessary for fires, motor-vehicle accidents and rescue situations. But for a cut arm, broken leg or to assist a nursing-home patient off the floor, the chief should question continuing to operate in this fashion. In addition to the fuel costs, the wear and tear on the fire engines has an even greater cost as they were never designed to make eight to 10 EMS calls a day. There are more economical ways to deliver this service.

Sprint vehicles are smaller staff-size vehicles, such as the fuel-friendly Ford Escape (24 to 29 mpg), that carry medically trained firefighters to EMS incidents as a single-company response or with an ambulance. Some departments operate these with dedicated personnel. Others enlist the members of a fire engine or ladder company and dispatch the appropriate vehicle, sprint car for EMS and engine for fire. Sending an 18-mpg vehicle in lieu of a fire engine to EMS calls would use only one-sixth of current fuel budgets, an 83% savings.

Multitiered EMS response structures send the appropriate level of medical service for the emergency incident. They can range from BLS medic units to ALS units and a compliment of other equipment, including sprint vehicles, rescue and fire engines if necessary. The key to making this work is to get good information from the caller up front and send the appropriate level of response.

Responding to false alarms is another operational issue affecting potential fuel savings. According to the National Fire Protection Association, more than 2 million false alarms were reported in 2006. In every area of the country, only a very small percentage of fire alarms predicate an actual fire. Yet departments continue to send a full compliment of engines, ladder companies and more to each call. Recently Shreveport changed its response standards for fire alarms to sending only the first-in engine company running hot while all other units respond with the normal flow of traffic with no lights or siren.

The call is upgraded if the first-in fire company responding to a fire alarm has any indication, such as visible smoke or the 911 operator received additional information, that the incident is believed to be an actual fire emergency. This has saved fuel and made the risk-management office very happy to not have a fleet of units running with lights and siren through the city for what likely will be a false alarm. And to encourage competent alarm systems and discourage repeat false-alarm violators, fines were approved for multiple offenses.

The next step in fire-alarm response is to evaluate if it is even feasible to send the second-line companies or have them stand-by in quarters until either summoned to the scene or dismissed from the incident. In some areas, fire and police departments have begun to levy excess fuel response fees to recoup their expenses from traveling extended distances or to repeated addresses for false alarms. To collect this fee, the officers chart roundtrip mileage and the city bills the corresponding address or business.

Higher fuel prices also affect those who volunteer; some are paying these increases from their own pockets. Some departments already pay per-diems or per call incentives to volunteers. Those that do not should look at providing some sort of fuel stipend.

A number of fire departments and entire cities and states — most recently Montgomery, Ala., and the state of Oregon — have gone to a four-day workweek to cut down on fuel used by commuting employees as well as that used to operate government vehicles and buildings.

There are some challenges to going with the four-day workweek, as this represents a paradigm and culture shift for not only the organizations involved but also for the residents who are used to having service Monday through Friday. Education is the key to informing the public of the change and perhaps a gradual shift to the new schedule would lesson any negative impact. Others are experimenting with variations of the four-day workweek model. Some are alternating employees to be off every other or third Friday, always leaving someone at the office to conduct business. Of course the fire service's emergency operations does not have the option of closing for even one day. But for all other staff business, including activities at the training academy, inspections and other administrative duties, the four-day workweek may be the answer to lowering fuel bills.

Some public agencies, including fire and police departments, are taking a page from the private sector by looking to save fuel by employing teletraining and telework. These two areas take advantage of the vast availability of transmittable information via the Internet or other electronic medium. Shreveport set up a teletraining classroom with built-in cameras that transmit live education sessions to all fire stations through a dedicated cable access channel. This allows firefighters to interact with the class and instructor by phone line or Internet without ever having to leave the station. Additionally the class can be recorded and retransmitted and archived for later use.

Internet-based learning programs already were popular with fire departments for their convenience and now have the added economic incentive. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Fire Academy both have a cache of certificate-awarded distance-learning programs and online courses that first responders can access from almost anywhere.

Shreveport encourages its personnel to use conference calls, e-mail and the Internet to communicate whenever possible to avoid travel. Additionally, because so much of what we do administratively is done on the computer, some departments are allowing their personnel to spend one or more days a week working from home to avoid the travel costs. Members simply log onto their work computer via the Internet, complete tasks and assignments, and send them in by e-mail. The downside in telework is the lack of supervision. Some individuals need to be supervised or motivated to accomplish their work. Be sure if implementing this practice that the employees have a track record of independent accountability and performance.

Some vehicles, such as the aforementioned Ford Escape that comes in a hybrid model, can serve some of the needs of the fire service and get the most out of a gallon of gas. But what about those big, gas-downing rigs? Is there anything on the horizon in the fire engine manufacturing industry to make the vehicles more economic?

Chris Ferrara of Ferrara Fire Apparatus says he is not very optimistic about the possibility of a hybrid-style fire engine in the near future. Because Caterpillar and Detroit Diesel are getting out of the apparatus engine business, leaving only Cummins, Ferrara says that the industry is left with little option than to use what is available for the foreseeable future. Additionally, he says, that the more stringent Environmental Protection Agency emission standards from 2007 and those upcoming in 2010 could cause engines to use more fuel. To meet these standards, the engines must run hotter; they will burn more fuel to generate higher revolutions that create the heat needed to incinerate the byproducts of soot and other contaminants from the exhaust.

Biodiesel and other alternative fuels are being evaluated for potential cost savings. Biodiesel is a clean-burning renewable fuel made from vegetable oil or plant waste, such as corn stalks. Biodiesel can be made from recycled cooking oils used by restaurants for deep-frying. Because of its limited supply and demand, refined biodiesel may cost more than petroleum diesel, but the price is predicted to decrease as the demand goes up and more processing plants are put into operation. In some areas, it is selling for less than diesel. Biodiesel can be used pure, at 100%, or blended with petroleum diesel, typically not less than 20% biodiesel.

Biodiesel has a higher viscosity than petroleum diesel and will better lubricate engine parts. However, it begins to gel at a higher temperature than petroleum diesel, making it tricky for cold-weather climates. Another downside is that biodiesel contains about 8% less energy, and thus will deliver fewer miles per gallon. The cleaner exhaust may reduce the risk of associated illnesses.

Other alternative fuels, such as ethanol, already may be playing a role in reducing the price of gasoline. One recent study by Iowa State University concluded that the use of ethanol as a fuel additive is saving consumers anywhere from 29 to 40 cents per gallon over what the cost would be without it.

There is controversy over the use of food as an energy source. Some argue that this has driven up price of food as well as shortened the supply of readily available food in America and around the world. The American Farm Bureau Federation counters these claims, blaming the high food prices not on alternative fuel use, but largely on a number of other variables including weather and high energy costs.

There are practical and time-tested fuel savers that can be practiced by all personnel on a daily basis. Remaining acutely aware of the fire service's necessity to respond to emergencies in an expeditious and safe manner, the following practices recommended by the U.S. Department of Energy should be used whenever possible and on all non-emergency incidents and staff business.

• Drive at or below posted speed limits. Slower speeds conserve and require less fuel. The optimum speed varies with the type of vehicle, although it is usually reported to be in the range of 35 to 55 mph. Every 5 mph over 60 mph costs an additional 20 to 30 cents per gallon.
• Avoid excessive starting and stopping and racing to the next red light or stop sign. This practice can decrease fuel efficiency of vehicles by 20%.
• Maintain adequate tire pressure. Inflating tires to the maximum recommended air pressure means that less energy is required to move the vehicle. Under-inflated tires can lower fuel efficiency by approximately 1.4% for every 1 psi drop in pressure of four tires.
• Remove excess weight from the vehicle. The heavier the vehicle, the more fuel it takes to pull it.
• Change engine oil and oil filter regularly.
• Fuel vehicles only when they reach a quarter of a tank. Keeping fuel topped off maintains increased vehicle weight, especially those with large tanks. This application of for emergency-response equipment would have to be evaluated on an individual basis, but would not apply to most.
• Purchase fuel in the morning or evening when it is cooler and the fuel is more condensed. This allows more energy per gallon than if fueled in the heat of the day where the mixtures expand. Every degree over 60° diminishes the energy gasoline delivers.

Unless some revolutionary energy source is discovered or invented, the fire service will continue to use fossil fuel, and a lot of it. The skyrocketing fuel prices of the last 12 months may be beginning to plateau or continue to escalate. It's hard to predict where prices are heading; even the experts can't seem to agree. But one thing is certain; the effects will continue to ripple through our society, including our city budgets, for some time to come.

Rising energy costs and other inflation, coupled with across-the-board decreases in revenue sources, are problems for all communities and their ability to maintain basic services. Fire industry leaders should be planning with town, city or county officials to invest the necessary time on research and development of the latest management methods that maximize resource economy and minimize waste. The result will be a fiscally responsible method of operation and one that produces a resource-conscious and more efficient fire service of the future.

Brian A. Crawford is chief and 24-year veteran of the Shreveport (La.) Fire Department. He is a National Fire Academy resident instructor as well as a NFA Executive Fire Officer Program graduate, an IAEM Certified Emergency Manager and IAEM Certification Commissioner, and holds the Chief Fire Officer designation from the Commission on Professional Credentialing. Crawford is a member of the International Association of Fire Chiefs, serving on their Human Relations Committee, the National Fire Protection Association and serves on FIRE CHIEF's editorial advisory board. He is a graduate of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Senior Executives in State and Local Government, holds a master's degree in industrial psychology, a bachelor's degree in organizational management, and an associate's degree in paramedic.