Personal Note from Patrick, the Editor

Hi Reader, you might want to be more sustainable but face challenges.

Often, money is tight, and supervisors or bosses don’t see the business case.

Let me help you with that. I will provide concrete numbers for how you can convince others to invest in sustainability.

Here are case studies, papers, and examples from my own advisory experience showing how much money greener labs can save:

Number of the Day

If we only account for the costs resulting from environmental air pollution, we lose about $868 billion every single year. While this includes healthcare costs and lost workdays, it also translates to about 107,000 deaths annually, according to a study by Goodkind et al. and others that arrived at similar conclusions. However, many would argue that these numbers are not directly related to their business or research practices. So, let’s see how this applies to your laboratory.

868 Billion

How Much Money Sustainability Saves

Let me convince you that, irrespective of the circumstances, proper sustainable practices will save you money.

And this doesn’t just amount to a few dollars.

It can save you so much that you can purchase new equipment or hire a sustainability advisor and still make a profit.

The main challenge is that most people think of sustainability as a “feel-good” topic, not a business case.

That is fine for people like you who are enthusiastic about it, but not for those who have doubts.

Starting with the Basics

Getting sustainability into your institution doesn’t need to be complicated.

Simply closing the sash of your fume hood can save between $500 and $2,000 per hood per year in energy costs.

While this is almost a PhD student's salary, an institute I was invited to saved roughly 57 000€ annually in that way.

Changing a freezer’s setting to −70°C can save about $100–600 per freezer per year.

Combined with turning off idle equipment, a single floor could save over $8,700.

Of course, sometimes you need help or an advisor to drive change, convince people, or check whether a change is safe.

But note that even if you were to pay them $5,000, you would still make money after a single year!

More Advanced Solutions

Yes, there is much more money you can save.

Just think about reducing or reusing plastic items - one of my favorite topics.

Kilcoyne et al. saved over $2,667 while carrying out regulated analytical work by reducing the use of single-use plastic items.

Alves et al. saved about $1,500 by replacing and reusing plastic items in microbiological workflows.

However, if you consider the labor costs of your scientists, is it worth it? In the case of Alves, workflows sped up by hours.

But if you need to buy new equipment, how should you justify the upfront investment?

The Peak of Sustainability

Let me answer this question with an example from my own advisory role.

I've been involved in projects where people wanted to install new recycling systems for NMR instruments.

Even for a small fleet, this can easily amount to about €500,000 in upfront costs.

However, three points make this a convincing case:

1. Given the uncertainty surrounding the availability of helium, you are not only safeguarding research processes that bring in millions of dollars in funding, you are also preventing your NMR magnets from quenching, which could cost you millions, since you would probably have to buy a new NMR.
   ​
2. Secondly, the steady increase in helium prices by almost 10-fold in the past two decades means you save a lot on the helium you would have bought anyway.
   Even with a medium-sized fleet, you can break even in about five years. The point is that every year thereafter, you save five figures annually!
   ​
3. You will probably do it in the future. The earlier you start, the more money you save.
   ​

PS: You don't have to go all in at once.

In this case, there are now recycling systems that can be attached to a single NMR instrument and start at a five-figure price point.

A report by Munday et al. described the installation of a solvent-recycling system for acetonitrile in a student lab, saving roughly $2,000 per year and allowing them to break even in 14 years.

That is a long time, but do you think your institute will stop existing 14 years from now?

Applying the Knowledge

All of this shows that you can start small.

However, you must have a little courage and actually look at the numbers.

Seeing this as a business case can be incredibly powerful, because many decision-makers will do so as well.

This is a money hack, just that it works without publishing or selling more, which is why most people overlook this opportunity.

Yes, a UPLC that saves you 60% on eluent, or a new MS that saves >50% on nitrogen, comes with upfront costs.

And an advisor, although they save you headaches and time, costs money too. But if you go beyond one lab, the savings are astonishing:

• Harvard University: $434,000
• Stanford University: $5.6 million
• University of Groningen: $398,000 (more about these numbers)

If you could make just $20,000 in profit per year, wouldn’t it be worth it?

How We Feel Today

References

Goodkind, A.L., et al., 2019. Fine-scale damage estimates of particulate matter air pollution reveal opportunities for location-specific mitigation of emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(18), pp.8775–8780. doi:10.1073/pnas.1816102116.

Tschofen, P., et al., 2019. Fine particulate matter damages and value added in the US economy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(40), pp.19857–19862. doi:10.1073/pnas.1905030116.

Tran, L.A., et al., 2026. Case study of low-cost energy reductions in shared research laboratories at a U.S. public university. Frontiers in Sustainability, 7, p.1729128. doi:10.3389/frsus.2026.1729128.

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.

Freese, T., et al., 2024. The relevance of sustainable laboratory practices. RSC Sustainability, 2(5), pp.1300–1336. doi:10.1039/D4SU00056K.

Munday, E.S., et al., 2026. Acetone recycling: a case study in the undergraduate teaching laboratory. RSC Sustainability, 4(2), pp.779–784. doi:10.1039/D5SU00926J.

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 13th : )

​
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​