Vaping among minors has emerged as a significant public health crisis, prompting school districts, student transporters, parents and public officials to take aggressive action.

This crisis, fueled by the marketing strategies of companies like e-cigarette companies like Juul Labs, has led to a wave of litigation, settlements and innovative prevention strategies. The rise in vaping has spurred interest in new technologies, such as vape detectors, with potential applications even on school buses.

Juul Labs settled a lawsuit led by San Franscisco Unified School District in December 2022, marking a pivotal moment in the battle against youth vaping. The reported $1.2 billion settlement resolved over 1,500 lawsuits filed by school districts, cities and counties nationwide. The legal fight emphasized the role Juul and its parent company Altria played in creating and perpetuating the youth vaping crisis.

Mike Dorn, executive director of Safe Havens International, testified during the trial about the severe consequences of vaping on school grounds and during transport, providing compelling evidence that contributed to the settlement. “The scope of this crisis is unprecedented,” Dorn told School Transportation News, referencing not only the rise in nicotine addiction among minors but also the emergence of vape devices used for substances like THC oil, crystal meth and fentanyl.

Dorn highlighted alarming incidents that underscore the dangers of vaping in unsupervised environments. For example, ambulances in Palm Beach County, Florida, were dispatched to treat 11 students who overdosed after sharing a vape device on a school bus. A similar case occurred in Glynn County, Georgia, where 12 students overdosed in an athletic transport van. Dorn said these cases demonstrate the rapidly evolving nature of the crisis and the urgent need for preventative measures.

“These devices were never just about nicotine,” explained Dorn, a member of STN’s editorial advisory board. “With aftermarket pods and illicit substances, we’ve seen students exposed to risks far beyond addiction, including overdoses and physical harm from malfunctioning devices.”

Vape Detectors: A New Frontier in Prevention

To address the crisis, school districts are exploring new technologies to curb vaping. Vape detectors are promising tools for creating vape-free environments. While these devices have been installed in school bathrooms and other indoor areas, their potential use on school buses represents a new frontier in prevention efforts.

Randall Jubb, president of school bus contractor Jubb’s Bus Services, said he sees on-board vape detection as a crucial step in curbing the issue before it escalates further.

“We are planning to implement a demonstration of selected units in our fleet, with detectors positioned under the seats, as vape is denser than air and tends to settle lower,” Jubb explained. “A puck-sized indicator will be installed in the driver’s area to provide an immediate alert. Additionally, an app will be installed on school administration devices to notify them of any alerts, including the specific bus number and the time the alert was triggered.”

Jubb emphasized that this system—when combined with video surveillance and school bus driver observation—will provide the best chance at accurately identifying offenders.

“We recognize the severe impact vaping can have on the health and well-being of our students, and we believe that any deterrent is crucial in safeguarding their future,” he added.

Guy Grace, a representative of Partner Alliance for Safer Schools (PASS) and a retired director of safety and emergency planning for Littleton Public Schools in Colorado, emphasized that vape sensors alone are insufficient to address the youth vaping epidemic. Based on insights from safety practitioners across the country, Grace outlined a multi-layered approach that integrates vape sensors with human roles, processes and additional technologies to maximize effectiveness

First, he said properly designed awareness programs are critical. Students and parents need to understand the addictive nature of e-cigarettes and the policies in place to address violations. Education campaigns that involve students and parents can significantly reduce vaping incidents.

The stealthy nature of vaping also necessitates vigilant student supervision, he continued. While vape sensors can alert staff to incidents, live supervision in restrooms, stairwells, and other hotspots is essential. Free training videos on supervision techniques are available through Safe Havens International to help staff improve their ability to detect and deter vaping.

Grace noted additional personnel, such as vape prevention coordinators and monitors for hot-spot areas, are often needed to support detection technologies and ensure consistent enforcement. These roles work alongside technology to address vaping more effectively.

Vape sensors can detect e-cigarette aerosols in areas where direct supervision is challenging, such as restrooms and locker rooms. He said these devices can also integrate with smart cameras and analytics software, enforce no-go zones and monitor high-traffic areas.

Robust electronic hall-pass systems help administrators track students’ movements and identify patterns of misuse, Grace offered. These systems can also prevent students with a history of vaping together from obtaining hall passes simultaneously.

School buses represent a critical and often overlooked area in the fight against youth vaping. Grace discussed the potential for integrating vape detectors, which can range in cost from hundreds of dollars to about $1,000 dollars, with modern bus surveillance systems, including 360-degree cameras and real-time monitoring capabilities. These tools can help capture activity both inside and outside the school bus while ensuring driver focus remains on the road.

“While no districts have officially implemented vape sensors on buses yet, the technology exists to make this feasible. Early adopters could set an important precedent for broader adoption,” Grace said, referencing ongoing pilot programs and partnerships with companies like Zeptive.

“Like IP cameras, vape sensors require relatively low power and can be connected via Ethernet to a bus’s power switch. While APIs for integrating vape sensors with bus cameras are still under development, standalone sensors can already enhance monitoring efforts,” he continued.

Grace noted that vape detection companies are exploring pilot programs to evaluate these systems in real-world conditions.

He also detailed how students attempt to evade detection, exhaling mist into bottles or vaping under desks. He emphasized the importance of proper device placement, sensor sensitivity adjustments and ongoing staff training to counteract these methods effectively.

---

Related: A Different Kind of Smoke on the School Bus
Related: Comments Sought on Additional Smoking Ban on California School Buses
Related: Bus Driver Investigated for Vaping Inside School Bus

---

Progress and Challenges Ahead

The battle against youth vaping is far from over, but progress is being made. School districts like San Francisco Unified are leading the way with comprehensive prevention programs and forward-thinking solutions. By addressing the root causes of vaping and equipping students with the tools to make healthier choices, communities can take meaningful steps toward ending this crisis.

“This is about protecting our kids,” said Jenny Lam, president of the San Francisco Board of Education. “We’re committed to using every tool at our disposal to ensure they have a healthy, smoke-free future.”

Grace echoed this sentiment, noting that while challenges remain, the collective efforts of educators, parents, and policymakers offer a path forward.

“The stakes couldn’t be higher, but with determination and innovation, we can turn the tide,” he said.

Integrating these systems with existing school bus technology could provide a seamless solution for tracking incidents.

“The one thing I might add is that the system interfaces with the bus monitoring systems, reporting and time-stamping any alerts to make tracking easier,” Jubb noted.

While detection technology plays a vital role, the broader issue extends beyond school buses and into classrooms. Mike Anderson, CEO and founder of school vaping sensor manufacturer Space Coast Technology Solutions, highlighted how vaping has become a significant disruption to education itself.

“In our research, vaping is listed as the number one challenge facing educators,” Anderson said. “Students are distracted in class, and school resources are consumed with policing instead of educating.”

The same could be said for school bus drivers, who need to be concentrating on road traffic but increasingly have student misbehavior to contend with.

The post Amid Youth Vaping Epidemic, Prevention Efforts Begin to Target School Buses appeared first on School Transportation News.

This article was originally published by Spotlight Delaware.

In early December, a new website appeared online urging Sussex County residents to contact their councilmembers and tell them to deny a permit required for a proposed offshore wind farm. 

The website – StopOffshoreWind.com – materialized days before the Sussex County Council would vote on the permit, which would allow for construction of an electrical substation needed by US Wind Inc. to build its massive ocean-based power plant. 

StopOffshoreWind.com included the names and contact information for Sussex County Council members, as well as an online message form that sat underneath the phrase, “Write a Letter to your Sussex County Councilmembers.” 

“Tell the Sussex County Council to DENY this permit,” the website stated.

What it did not show were the names of the people or companies that had created and funded it. 

Spotlight Delaware has since learned that the website was the creation of a coalition of Maryland wind farm opponents, funded and led by the government of Worcester County, Md. 

Sitting just south of Sussex County along the Atlantic coastline and within Maryland’s Eastern Shore, Worcester County is home to Ocean City, Md., a summer beach hotspot that is the primary driver of the county’s tourism-centered economy. 

And, many of the local business owners there believe the sight of wind turbines 15 miles offshore would make the beaches less attractive to tourists.

Zach Bankert, executive director of the Ocean City Development Corporation, said his group had led local opposition to offshore wind development in past years. But, with a staff of just two employees, he said the operation was too small to be effective, which is why the county’s Office of Tourism and Economic Development recently took it over. 

“When the county came in and said, ‘Hey, you know, we might have some funds for this, we’d like to kind of take this over’ … It was a no-brainer for us,” he said. 

US Wind Inc.’s proposal is to build a wind farm with more than 100 turbines off the Delmarva coastline – just south of the Delaware, Maryland state line. It would send electricity ashore in Delaware with cables buried near the mouth of the Indian River.

When announcing a federal approval in September, the Biden Administration said the wind farm could produce up to 2 gigawatts of electricity, enough to power about 700,000 homes. 

But coastal opponents say that electricity comes at too high a price, claiming wind turbines will drive tourists away, damage coastal environments and devastate fisheries. 

StopOffshoreWind.com also claims that the windfarm will allow “foreign investors” to collect federal subsidies – references to U.S. government incentives provided to wind energy projects, and to US Wind’s ownership.

In emailed responses to questions from Spotlight Delaware, Worcester County Tourism Director Melanie Pursel said the local government authorized up to $100,000 in public money to fund what she called a coalition of local offshore wind opponents.

According to county records, the money specifically is for a contract with a Washington, D.C.-area public relations firm called Bedrock Advocacy Communications. 

Pursel also noted in her early January email that Ocean City’s municipal government intended to match the county’s contribution. Last week, the Ocean City Council approved during a regular meeting a measure to distribute up to $100,000 to an “offshore wind opposition public relations campaign.” 

During the meeting, City Manager Terry McGean said the campaign would target state lawmakers in Maryland and “other issues” that may arise in Delaware. 

Ocean City Mayor Richard “Rick” Meehan said Bedrock Advocacy had already done a “really good job,” noting his belief that the group “played a significant role” in the Delaware county’s denial of US Wind’s substation permit. 

“We’re all in,” Meehan said about the $100,000 appropriation. “And I’d hate to miss an opportunity to really capitalize, which might be the right timing to really get our messaging out.”

Winding up the opposition

US Wind is a subsidiary of Renexia SpA, an Italian energy infrastructure company. The American investment giant, Apollo Global Management, also owns a stake in the company. 

In response to critics, US Wind spokeswoman Nancy Sopko said in an emailed statement that the opposition’s campaign is filled with “blatant misinformation designed to frighten people.” 

Asked for details to support the claims, Sopko pointed to what she called doctored photos from a website called SaveOceanCity.org, which is run by Bankert’s Ocean City Development Corporation. 

“The complete disregard for facts, accuracy, and settled science is irresponsible and dangerous,” Sopko said. 

She also asserted that state leaders in Maryland and Delaware have been “full-throated” in their support for the wind project in a region that “needs more electricity to keep the lights on, grow the economy, and support local jobs.”

The opposition to the US Wind project is nominally being led by a political nonprofit, called Stop Offshore Wind Inc.

It was formed in Delaware on Dec. 5, around the time that StopOffshoreWind.com appeared. State business records show that Florida attorney Andrew L. Asher created the company. 

Asher, a solo practitioner, previously served as general counsel for the BGR Group, a powerful lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. Its biggest clients in recent years include Qualcomm Inc. and the governments of Bahrain and India.   

He continues to work for BGR Group in an “of counsel” capacity, according to his website. Asher did not respond to requests for comment. Pursel said Asher’s role in Stop Offshore Wind was limited to the creation of the entity, describing it as strictly administrative. 

She further said that while “several county staff members” are working with the nonprofit, the entity “is not controlled” by Worcester County.

“Stop Offshore Wind Inc. is a 501(c)4 organization formed by a coalition of concerned citizens, community-based organizations, business organizations and local governments to raise awareness about the potential negative impacts of the US Wind proposed project,” said Pursel, who also calls herself a spokeswoman for the Stop Offshore Wind Coalition. 

As a 501(c)4, Stop Offshore Wind Inc. is not required to disclose its donors. 

Pursel said it had raised $11,000 from private donors as of late December, with much of the money donated during a Dec. 4 fundraiser. 

A flyer for the fundraiser, which charged $150 a head, said the money raised would pay for “a bold, multi-channel media blitz” opposing industrial wind farms in Ocean City. 

Prior to the Sussex County vote, Stop Offshore Wind did not list any governmental funding ties. Following inquiries from Spotlight Delaware, the website now has an “about us” page that lists its affiliation with Ocean City and Worcester County. 

What led to all of this? 

On Dec. 17, days after StopOffshoreWind.com appeared, the Sussex County Council voted to reject the windfarm’s substation building permit application.

The 4-to-1 vote in opposition came after the Sussex County Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the county approve the permit. Three of the voting council members are leaving office in early 2025. Of those, two voted against the permit. 

It is not clear if the StopOffshoreWind.com website influenced the council’s vote. Members of the county council would not comment on this story due to a pending appeal against the decision. 

Still, the vote followed mounting public opposition in Sussex County to offshore wind. On the day of the vote, dozens of residents appeared at the county council meeting, with many asking to speak in opposition to the project. 

The council did not allow comments, stating the public record had closed following a July meeting when they discussed, then tabled, the permit application.  

Following the vote, US Wind CEO Jeff Grybowski said his company’s plan to build the offshore wind farm is “unchanged.”

“We know that the law is on our side and are confident that today’s decision will not stand,” Grybowski said.

On Dec. 26, US Wind’s subsidiary Renewable Development LLC appealed Sussex County’s permit denial through a petition asking a Delaware Superior Court judge to review the matter. 

In the petition, the company’s attorneys called the council’s decision “irregular, arbitrary, capricious,” and “not supported by substantial evidence.”

On the heels of Sussex County’s rejection, Worcester County announced its own move to hinder US Wind’s plans: it would use eminent domain to buy two West Ocean City properties targeted as US Wind’s operations and maintenance facilities.  

“If there ever was a worthy use of eminent domain, this is it,” Worcester County Chief Administrative Officer Weston Young said in a press release.

Also in the press release, Worcester County linked to two websites that it said provided more information “about efforts to protect Maryland’s Coast from ocean industrialization.” Those sites are StopOffshoreWind.com and SaveOceanCity.org. The latter represents the Ocean City Development Corporation’s opposition to offshore wind farms.

What’s on the horizon? 

With a pending appeal and a Trump administration that opposes offshore wind, uncertainty looms over the US Wind project – as well as other wind farms proposed for the Delmarva peninsula. 

According to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Danish wind farm developer Ørsted intends to build up to 72 wind turbines 16 miles off the coast of Rehoboth Beach. 

In early June, the company submitted its plans to the federal government, and they currently are under review. 

This month, then-Delaware Gov. John Carney and the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control announced a 25-year agreement with US Wind. As part of the agreement, US Wind must give Delaware utilities $76 million worth of renewable energy credits throughout the life of the project to help the state meet its renewable energy goals.

Through the agreement, US Wind also commits to investing $200 million to upgrade Delaware’s electricity wires and other transmission infrastructure. 

In a press statement touting the agreement, state officials claim that energy from the US Wind offshore site will produce enough power to lower electric rates in Delaware by $253 million over 20 years.

“We are ready to reap the environmental, health, workforce, energy cost and community benefits from this needed transition to renewable energy,” Carney said in the statement. 

How a Maryland county tried to sway a Delaware vote on offshore wind is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.