Hi Reader, would you share some of your experiences?
Whether it is switching freezers to −70°C, optimizing pipetting schemes, or reusing lab items, talking about it is key.
Only when we share what we have done can we motivate one another and build the case studies we need.
However, before you can change something, you need to document it. Here is how and why:
Today's Lesson: Documenting and Sharing
Why tracing our actions matters so much
Number of the Day
Even when working in sterile or S2 environments, it is possible to save a substantial amount of plastic waste. After documenting some of my trials, I found that I could save 35.7 g of plastic each time I transfected a neuronal culture. Eventually, I would be invited to publish this as a case study, saving about 65% of waste among the items that could be eliminated, without causing contamination, compromising time-sensitive steps, or requiring major protocol changes.
35.7
Why You Should Document
Sharing what we have achieved matters because one reported action rarely remains a single action.
This is taken from Alves et al., showing how many items they could save. Alves et al. and Kilcoyne et al. both documented what actually changed when laboratories measured their footprints, and their work is now something the rest of us can cite.
Yes, some people use their experiences as the basis for publications.
However, less formal case studies or even documentation created just for yourself are also valuable. Let me explain:
The Advantages of Tracking Your Actions
No matter how small the action, document what you did and the impact it had.
While this allows others to read about what is possible, you can also use the weight, energy, or volume you saved to estimate the reduction in your footprint, as well as the money you saved.
This is powerful for several reasons:
Data convinces
Clearly outlined actions and data are the best tools you have for convincing others.
A colleague can dismiss an opinion, but it is much harder to dismiss a figure that came from your own bench.
Once you document and estimate the impacts, you have everything you need to create graphics which, as we know, say so much more than a thousand words. The graph and data is taken from Weber et al.
It also means that you can support your claims when someone questions how significant a certain action might be.
Data tracks progress
Documentation helps keep you motivated because it provides a visual reminder of what you have achieved.
However, it also keeps you accountable, as you can review what has been done and where change may still be needed.
Data lets you report
Documentation will likely become more important in the future when you are required to report your progress.
Whether you are reporting to a sustainability office, a funder, or a head of department, you will run into difficulties if you have not collected any data.
Data helps others
Imagine that someone else is just starting out and does not know where to begin.
With data from different laboratories, they can compare one action with another.
This is the well-known publication by Urbina et al. that estimates 5.5 million tons of plastic waste. The estimate, published in a 169 word long correspondence in 2014, provides no information about how the underlying data were generated. Nevertheless, it demonstrates how influential sharing an observation can be, regardless of the approach.
Comparison is how you decide what to tackle first, rather than spending your energy on the thing that feels urgent instead of the thing that matters.
In essence, these insights turn a strong hunch into an estimate.
P.S. This might also apply to you if you change laboratories or fields.
It matters on a larger scale
Beyond day-to-day laboratory life, we need this data to:
Enable reviews and meta-analyses that build credibility and can be cited reliably.
Underpin policy by providing a basis for governmental and legislative action, as legislators need concrete data.
Refine guidelines, since publishers and funding bodies need a basis for setting their requirements.
Estimates Are Completely Fine
When you start documenting, please do not let concerns about precision hold you back.
Yes, it is important to record three key things precisely:
Metrics such as the weight of the items you saved, the volume of the reagents, or the details of your HPLC gradient.
The actions you took, including what your original workflow looked like and the circumstances under which taking action was possible.
When calculating savings, the assumptions you made, the metrics you used (such as conversion factors) and where you obtained them. It is also worth noting why you made these choices.
However, precision relates to your notes, not to your savings!
By that, I mean that the savings you calculate should be estimates.
Not all workflows are fully standardized, and you do not run the same number of assays every week.
Remember, once you have established a solid baseline, you can use it to extrapolate for years to come. Of course, it makes sense to take measurements two or three times to account for variations, but you do not need to weigh the waste you produce every single day. It is a one-time investment of effort that can pay off for years.
Do not worry about accounting for every circumstance or calculating a “precise” annualized number.
Even if you could obtain such a number, the problem is that these “results” could create a false sense of certainty.
Both the work by De Paepe et al, as well as Farley and Benoit are good examples where assumptions matter a whole lot. So, yes, there is quite some literature that provides good estimates but does not do a good job of emphasizing that they are estimates. Again, numbers are rarely perfectly generalizable and they do not need to be in order to support guidelines or decisions. Too often, we have to deal with a plethora of variables and assumptions. Therefore, a single piece of work is insufficient for us to draw clear conclusions, but if we have ten, we will very likely see a trend.
Just measure and report. That is all you have to do - keep it simple and quick. Do not overthink it.
Applying the Knowledge
You might worry that you do not know which guidelines to follow when documenting your actions.
Do not worry. Just write down what you did and why you did it.
Having enough “scattered” documentation is what allows us to estimate impacts and determine what level of rigor or transparency is realistic.
We cannot set sensible standards until we have seen enough real attempts to understand what such an attempt actually looks like.
It is entirely up to you whether you take notes in Word, Notion, Google Sheets, or another tool. Choose the software, layout, and formatting that work best for you. What matters is that you document your work.
Now that you have read this far, here is the one small step I am asking you to take: click “Reply” to this email.
Then, type in your estimate of what you saved. Alternatively, simply list what you have done in bullet points.
Not a report, not a manuscript - just one action and, if you have an estimate, roughly what it saved.
If you do not have anything to report, tell me what you think might be possible.
Thank you! Hearing from you makes newsletters like this possible.
How We Feel Today
References
Penndorf, P., 2024. Reducing plastic waste in scientific protocols by 65%—practical steps for sustainable research. FEBS Letters, 598(11), pp.1331–1334. doi:10.1002/1873-3468.14909.
Alves, J., et al., 2021. A case report: insights into reducing plastic waste in a microbiology laboratory. Access Microbiology, 3(3), p.000173. doi:10.1099/acmi.0.000173.
Kilcoyne, J., et al., 2022. Reducing environmental impacts of marine biotoxin monitoring: A laboratory report. PLOS Sustainability and Transformation, 1(3), p.e0000001. doi:10.1371/journal.pstr.0000001.
Urbina, M., et al., 2015. Labs should cut plastic waste too. Nature, 528, p.479. doi:10.1038/528479c.
Weber, P.M., et al., 2025. What’s in our bin? EMBO Reports, 26, pp.297–302. doi:10.1038/s44319-024-00360-x.
De Paepe, M., et al., 2024. Purchases dominate the carbon footprint of research laboratories. PLOS Sustainability and Transformation, 3(7), p.e0000116. doi:10.1371/journal.pstr.0000116.
Farley, M., et al., 2023. Re-use of laboratory utensils reduces CO₂-equivalent footprint and running costs. PLOS ONE, 18(4), p.e0283697. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0283697.
If you have a wish or a question, feel free to reply to this Email. Otherwise, wish you a beautiful week! See you again on the 30th : )
Edited by Patrick Penndorf Connection@ReAdvance.com Lutherstraße 159, 07743, Jena, Thuringia, Germany Data Protection & Impressum If you think we do a bad job: Unsubscribe
Personal Note from Patrick, the Editor Hi Reader, today, I have an exciting development to share with you. After covering sustainability in tips, gloves, HPLC, and much more, we can finally talk about gas chromatography. I noticed that Agilent had made progress in that area. So, I reached out, and luckily, through sponsoring this piece, they gave me deeper insight into the how and why behind their innovations. Even if you don’t use GC, the following will give you an idea of current innovation...
Personal Note from Patrick, the Editor Hi Reader, have you heard about science-based targets? Almost every large company with corporate sustainability goals has SBTs - from AstraZeneca to Eppendorf. And some like Johnson & Johnson got theirs revoked... But what are those targets actually about? Let’s find out what they include and what that means for you. Today's Lesson: Science Based Targets What SBT and the SBTi are and how they work Number of the Day WAs of recently, there were11 458...
Personal Note from Patrick, the Editor Hi Reader, the following is quite unsettling. We think of plastics as a problem due to the waste. However, it seems some also bias our experiments. I couldn’t really believe my eyes as I went through the literature, but it seems quite clear that some plastics affect your data. Let’s discover in how far the contents of your tubes, tips, and plates leach into your samples. Today's Lesson: Leachables from Plastics To what extend do our lab items affect our...
