Although we are all dedicated to conducting high-quality, cutting-edge research in the basic and applied biomedical sciences, it is important to acknowledge the environmental impact of our work. The biomedical research sector is a significant contributor to the production of non-degradable plastics, as well as toxic and chemical waste (Urbina et al., 2015). Additionally, this sector demands substantial energy, not only for experimental work but also for computing, communication and data science activities. We are now facing emerging health and climate challenges, including increased pollution, the pervasive presence of microplastics and a rise in climate-related health issues that stem, in part, from our research. In recognition of our responsibility to future generations, it is imperative that we work actively to minimize our environmental footprint (Freese et al., 2024).
Efforts need to be made in all sectors, including the biomedical research sector, to meet the UK's net zero CO2 emissions target by 2050. With this in mind, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI; one of the major funding agencies in the UK) recently co-produced a concordat for the Environmental Sustainability of Research and Innovation Practice (https://wellcome.org/what-we-do/our-work/environmental-sustainability-concordat), hosted by the Wellcome. A number of major funding bodies, such as Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and Wellcome, and universities are signatories. Some UK funding bodies, such as Wellcome and CRUK, have also recently started asking the labs of grant holders to reduce the environmental impact of their research, and we will likely see other funding bodies following suit.
Until very recently, most sustainability efforts have been driven by grassroots actions from a few labs (Dobbelaere et al., 2022). However, best sustainability practices are often not widely adopted because they remain for individual labs to develop and implement. This requires a considerable amount of time and knowledge from researchers. In addition, the exchange of best practices is largely through word-of-mouth between interested labs, although online forums and websites are now appearing (Box 1). Additionally, new practices and methods might raise suspicion and resistance if they have not been tested up to the exacting specifications required for high-quality science.
The Company of Biologists’ sustainability initiative. Launched in 2020, this initiative provides blog posts on the topic of sustainability. The Company of Biologists also offers grants to support sustainable conferencing events and a tree-planting scheme for every paper published. https://www.biologists.com/sustainability-hub/
The ‘lab concious’ blog. This site offers advice and tips on sustainability, such as recycling and reuse, and provides information on environmentally friendly lab supplies. It also has a list of useful websites from other green groups. https://www.labconscious.com/blog
The Laboratory Efficiency Assessment Framework (LEAF). Developed by UCL, this provides a framework to implement sustainability practices in research labs, with criteria associated with three levels of sustainability in labs. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/sustainable/take-action/staff-action/leaf/take-part-leaf
My Green Lab. A US-based organization that provides a blog, a podcast, information and a program with certification for labs to become more sustainable. https://www.mygreenlab.org/
Lab sustainability award from EMBO. EBMO recently launched this award to recognize pioneering progress in sustainability efforts in research. EMBO also publishes articles on sustainability in research. https://www.embo.org/the-embo-communities/embo-lab-sustainability-award/
University of Edinburgh sustainability website. The University of Edinburgh provides a comprehensive website offering information, training and advice on sustainable topics in the context of education and research. https://www.ed.ac.uk/sustainability
The Sustainable European Laboratories network. This offers information and best practices on sustainability in research in Europe. It aims to support the establishment of green initiatives and influence policymakers and key stakeholders to make a positive impact on lab practices. https://sels-network.org
It is becoming clear that research labs will be most successful in becoming more sustainable if all stakeholders are involved and supported (Woolston, 2024; Winter et al., 2023). Research institutions, universities and funders have an important role to play here in advising and supporting the research workforce, whether they are office or lab based, on how we can reduce our carbon footprint. At the moment, any efforts in making our workflows more sustainable usually come on top of the current existing workload of research staff. Sustainability workflows also have an upfront cost that needs to be met by funders: for example, although the reuse of lab consumables (such as glass pipettes and flasks) is considered to be more sustainable than using disposable or recyclable consumables, the costs associated with washing and reusing glass flasks or pipettes are often higher than those associated with the use of disposable counterparts (owing to the staff costs involved in running a washing-up facility). This highlights the crucial need for continued funding of core facilities within research institutions. In addition, research labs consume more energy than offices, due to their particular requirements for ventilation, negative pressure and temperature control. Research institutions therefore need to be forward thinking when designing new research buildings to make them more energy efficient (https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy08osti/29413.pdf) and mindful of the environment. Overall, all stakeholders – from those working in the lab to those providing funding and infrastructure – have an important role to play.
So what can be done in your lab to make an impact?
Grassroots engagement is key to reducing the lab's carbon footprint
The lab users – postdocs, PhD students, research staff – who work day-to-day in the lab will have a good idea of what workflows can be changed to reduce the energy used and the waste generated. There could be discussions within a group and/or a committee setup representing the individual groups within an institute or department. The decision-making and implementation process works best when all relevant parties feel engaged. The goals and targets must be clear, measurable and achievable for everyone. Setting targets, monitoring the reduction in energy, plastics or waste and having a reward system helps recognize people's efforts and contributions. It can also motivate people to further reduce their carbon footprint.
Collective action and the sense of working towards a common goal can also provide a focal point for a department or institution, bringing people together. Websites and noticeboards hosted by the research institution, unit or department are useful ways to communicate initiatives and information both locally and more widely with labs at other institutions.
Principal investigators can make a unique contribution
Although it is important that people in the lab make their research practices more sustainable, there is regular lab turnover such that information or training might get lost. The principal investigator, however, will often have a good overview of the lab's history and a deeper understanding of the health and safety measures in place and how compatible they are with making workflows more sustainable. Even though they might spend less time in the lab, they might notice practices that can be improved. Waste reduction and sustainability should not be done at the expense of safety, but instead should work together to make our research programs more environmentally friendly.
Additionally, some researchers and early-career scientists joining the lab might also suffer from eco-anxiety, which can cause mental health issues (Pearson, 2024; Lawrance, 2024) and could affect laboratory practices negatively. Supporting individuals to channel that anxiety and turn it into action towards sustainability goals, within the lab or department, will have a positive impact on the local research community and is a powerful way to look after everyone's mental health.
Lower the threshold to make new policies and workflows easy for people to adopt
Changing people's habits is difficult. For people to get engaged, the new workflow must be easy to implement. Ideally, the long-term goals and cost-benefits have to be clear. It also helps if there is training, a reward system, and an explicit long-term vision that mobilizes staff.
Ten easy tips to help your lab make an impact
Of course, you might think that if it is only your lab doing this, then the reduction in carbon footprint will be negligible. However, if many labs worldwide start adopting more ecological workflows, the impact will become significant. Below, are some easy tips that can help you and your lab get started:
Plan your experiment! The most efficient and sustainable way to carry out an experiment is to design it well, so that it works first time.
Switch the temperature of the ULT freezer from −80°C to −70°C. This saves around 28% energy consumption (https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/atoms/files/efficient_ult_freezer_storage.pdf). Organize your freezers and make an inventory of their contents to minimize the time they are open for when searching for a reagent. Not only will you save energy, you will also save time and reduce frustration! Regularly defrost the freezers so they consume less energy.
Put your equipment on a timer, so that it switches on and off automatically when possible, and switch off non-sensitive equipment in the evening. Ensure all lab members switch off non-essential equipment when they have finished using it.
Label bottles (e.g. of solutions) with their contents, the date made and the person who made it. Record any chemicals that are ordered and the date they are received. This helps with managing the chemicals in the lab/institution and facilitates correct waste disposal. Work with your safety office to provide clear and accessible information about waste disposal. Make a list of commonly used lab chemicals and their waste disposal routes and make this list easily accessible to all researchers. A list of chemicals that cannot be disposed of via the sink should be posted in the lab. For some substances, only small volumes of these should be disposed of via sinks and they should be diluted.
Use glass rather than plastic pipettes and flasks where possible. This significantly reduces the CO2 equivalent footprint (Farley and Nicolet, 2023), and the cost of glass washing is lower than the cost of using single-use plastic, once washing-up facilities are in place.
Share and fix equipment within your department. Take steps to make equipment accessible to multi-users. The benefits are that the costs for maintenance and repair can be shared. A booking system can facilitate the coordination and tracking of users.
Inactivate biological material rather than autoclave it. All biological waste is incinerated for biosafety reasons, so autoclaving is often unnecessary. Replacing autoclaving with inactivation where possible saves energy.
Reuse should always be the top choice, with recycling the second option. Much of the packaging used for life science consumables can be reused, with some providers allowing returns of polystyrene (Winter et al., 2023) and packages for this purpose. Distributors are also moving away from plastic and polystyrene packing, thanks to the community's demands for biodegradable packaging. Insulated packaging is become increasingly eco-friendly. For example, hemp, paper straw and sheep wool are easily recycled but can also be used for other projects.
Offer an induction to students and laboratory newcomers to explain the laboratory's sustainable practices. Ideally the institution or department will offer this training on a regular basis as there is a fast turnover within academia.
Adopt a climate-conscious approach to travel and collaborations – think about where and how often you travel, and what mode of transport you use; find collaborations and networks that are accessible via low-carbon travel. These often work well because you might be able to meet and discuss science in person more frequently or be in the same time zone to setup online discussions. Local collaborations also facilitate the transfer of knowledge and expertise between early career researchers because such interactions can be more spontaneous.
Conferences, collaborations and in-person meetings
The lockdowns during COVID showed us how important communication and social interactions are to humans. It also taught many of us about the power of online discussion and meetings. During the lockdowns, we all participated in virtual meetings that enabled us to remain connected, work together and facilitate knowledge exchange. Since then, virtual and hybrid meetings have become commonplace. However, this shift also highlighted the limitations of online meetings and seminars compared to their in-person counterparts. When attending events online, many distractions can make it challenging to maintain focus. Additionally, engaging with other scientists online does not replicate the valuable and often spontaneous discussions that occur during coffee breaks or while queuing for lunch at in-person events. These spontaneous interactions often spark innovative ideas and foster collaborations, underscoring the irreplaceable nature of face-to-face meetings. Attending meetings is essential for keeping up to date with the advancements of the field and in-person attendance at meetings is particularly important for early-career researchers to build their networks. Nonetheless, when organizing an in-person conference or event, there are many aspects that can be improved to reduce its CO2 carbon footprint.
For example, meeting organizers can select food that has a lower environmental impact while respecting people's dietary requirements. To reduce plastic waste, ask the caterers to provide fruit, biscuits and cakes that are freshly made, rather than biscuits and snacks in individual wrapping. Food could also be locally sourced and there could be a significant proportion of vegetarian food. It is important to select minimally processed food, as many highly processed items have non-conventional ingredients to which people might be intolerant or allergic (for example, pea, soya or buckwheat are increasingly common allergens) as well as tending to have a higher carbon footprint.
In terms of the scientific program, it is possible to invite a keynote speaker to speak remotely. One can also encourage participants to travel by low-carbon transport, ideally by train. There are also alternatives to traditional in-person meetings. Multi-hub meetings, for example, are a new and interesting meeting model, whereby a meeting is run remotely in different countries with local in-person hubs that foster real interactions (Lowell et al., 2022). To support such incentives, it is possible to raise funding to provide travel awards to participants; EMBO and The Company of Biologists have funds to support greener travel and they are also open to funding innovative ways to make conferences sustainable. Further support, including advice and funding opportunities, can also be found at The Company of Biologists' sustainability hub (Box 1).
Conclusions
Improving sustainability within our research workflows will substantially reduce our environmental impact and lower our carbon footprint. Additionally, it has the potential to foster greater inclusivity and enhance the engagement of our research communities. By involving all researchers and funding bodies that provide support for sustainable practices and national standards, our sector can transform biomedical research into a discipline that is significantly and positively sustainable.
