The paradox of the life sciences

The relevance of sustainable laboratory practices

“…Greenhouse gas emissions of molecular biology or chemistry research for example fall into four categories: real estate and infrastructure; travel and commuting; production, transport and disposal of equipment and chemicals; energy usage by heating, ventilation, and air conditioning of laboratory buildings. 7,27 Several individual disciplines or research institutes aim for complete footprints: astronomy reports about 18-37 tons CO 2 e annually per researcher, chemistry approximately 5.6-9.6 tons of CO 2 e, and life sciences about 4-15 tons of CO 2 e, each of those on top of personal emissions (i.e., private life). 3,7,25,43,44 The main sources are air travel, electricity use and computing (up to 22 tons CO 2 e).…”

“…This institutional change and acceptance will facilitate the implementation of future actions while ensuring continuity. 7 Effectively the initiative is then growing to a more organized arrangement, where the team gathers every 6-8 weeks, having a structured agenda, meeting notes and action points. It is also recommended to embrace a subgroup system, where not the whole green team but parts of it focus in separate subgroups on subtasks that require more time:…”

“…As grassroots groups are more agile than big institutions, exploration and piloting of new procedures and practices become easier, which then can be presented to the management as soon as they are established. 7 With the urgency of the climate crisis and necessity for a sustainable future scientists should not wait for an institution or company to change top-down but initiate efficient transformation as soon as possible. When top-down enforcements or bottom-up demands are met alone, they usually create tensions or face rejection.…”

“…5,6 Their research is mainly conducted in laboratories, which can be seen as the hubs of discovery and innovation. [7][8][9] At such research institutions, scientists have been at the forefront of ghting sideeffects of the Anthropocene, where in the recent decade climate change, fossil resource depletion, and pollution have taken more centre stage and received more funding. 10 Through the ground-breaking work of many scientists uncovering the dramatic extent and mechanistic underpinnings of climate change, society and political players have become more aware of the fact that the climate crisis represents one of the most pressing challenges ever faced by humanity.…”

“…1 All together the annual work-related footprint of a researcher correlates to 10 to 37 tons of CO 2 equivalents (CO 2 e), which is much higher than the Paris aligned annual carbon budget of 1.5 tons CO 2 e to maintain the climate. 1,7,16 It is in our very nature as scientists that we want to understand life, molecules, materials, physical principles, and its laws of naturehowever by our actions we are not only harming ourselves but also the planet surrounding us. [17][18][19] While we investigate environmental problems and recommend sustainable practices and solutions across several sectors, there clearly exists friction between our scientic practices and their potential contribution to mitigate climate change and meet the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).…”