NEMI vs. AES vs. AGREE: A Comprehensive Guide to Greenness Assessment Tools for Pharmaceutical Analysis

Abstract

This article provides a detailed comparative analysis of three pivotal greenness assessment tools—NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and AGREE—for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals. It explores the foundational principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) that underpin these metrics and delivers a methodological guide for their practical application in analytical method development. The content addresses common challenges and optimization strategies based on Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) and offers a validation framework through real-world case studies from pharmaceutical analysis, including HPLC and HPTLC methods. By synthesizing troubleshooting advice and comparative insights, this guide empowers scientists to make informed decisions for implementing sustainable and environmentally responsible analytical practices in biomedical and clinical research.

The Foundations of Green Analytical Chemistry: Understanding NEMI, AES, and AGREE

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) represents a fundamental shift in analytical practices, aiming to minimize environmental impact while maintaining analytical effectiveness. Emerging in the early 21st century, GAC has evolved from the broader green chemistry movement, adapting its principles specifically to the unique requirements and challenges of analytical methodology [1]. This approach comprehensively addresses the environmental consequences of analytical activities, focusing on reducing hazardous chemical consumption, minimizing waste generation, and lowering energy demands across all procedural stages from sample collection to final analysis [1] [2].

The driving force behind GAC adoption stems from recognizing that conventional analytical methods, particularly in chromatography, often involve substantial quantities of toxic solvents that pose environmental and occupational hazards [3]. A standard HPLC system operating with a 1 mL/min flow rate can generate approximately 1.5 liters of waste daily, containing toxic organic solvents and chemicals [3]. Through the implementation of GAC principles, analytical procedures become more sustainable, safer for operators, and often more cost-effective due to reduced reagent consumption and waste disposal requirements [4].

The 12 Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry

The foundation of Green Analytical Chemistry rests on twelve principles that provide a systematic framework for developing environmentally conscious analytical methods. These principles were adapted from the original green chemistry concepts to address the specific needs and challenges of analytical chemistry [1]. The principles are comprehensively summarized in the SIGNIFICANCE mnemonic, which serves as a practical guide for implementation [5] [6]:

• S - Select direct analytical techniques to avoid sample treatment
• I - Integrate analytical operations and processes
• G - Generate minimal waste and properly manage analytical residues
• N - Never use hazardous or toxic chemicals; choose natural products
• I - Implement automated and miniaturized methods
• F - Favor methodologies that use minimal reagents and solvents
• I - Increase operator safety
• C - Carry out in-situ measurements
• A - Avoid derivatization whenever possible
• N - Note that multi-analyte determinations are preferred over single-analyte methods
• C - Conserve energy by eliminating unnecessary steps
• E - Eliminate all unnecessary steps [5] [6]

These principles emphasize several critical strategies for greening analytical practices. Direct analysis techniques that require minimal sample preparation are prioritized to reduce solvent consumption and processing steps [7]. The miniaturization of analytical devices and methods decreases reagent requirements and waste generation while maintaining analytical performance [8]. The substitution of hazardous solvents with safer alternatives, such as ethanol, water, or natural deep eutectic solvents (NADES), significantly reduces environmental impact and operator risk [4] [9]. Additionally, automation and integration of analytical processes enhance efficiency while reducing manual interventions and potential errors [8].

Greenness Assessment Tools and Metrics

The evaluation of analytical method environmental performance requires specialized metrics that translate GAC principles into measurable parameters. Numerous assessment tools have been developed, each with distinct approaches, criteria, and output formats [1]. These tools provide objective evidence for discussing method greenness, moving beyond subjective claims to quantifiable assessments [2].

Table 1: Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric Tool	Assessment Approach	Output Type	Key Criteria Evaluated	Strengths	Limitations
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	Pictogram with four binary criteria	Qualitative	Persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity, corrosivity	Simple, visual representation	Limited criteria, binary assessment [7]
Analytic Eco-Scale (AES)	Penalty points subtracted from ideal score (100)	Semi-quantitative	Reagent toxicity, waste, energy consumption	Provides numerical score for comparison	Does not cover all GAC principles [1] [7]
AGREE (Analytical GREEnness)	Evaluates all 12 GAC principles using 0-1 scale	Comprehensive quantitative	All SIGNIFICANCE principles with user-defined weights	Most comprehensive, user-friendly software	Requires more detailed input parameters [7] [2]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)	Pictogram with five pentagrams color-coded	Semi-quantitative	Sample collection, preparation, transportation, reagent use, instrumentation	Visual, covers entire analytical procedure	Less granular than AGREE [1] [2]
White Analytical Chemistry (WAC)	RGB model evaluating three dimensions	Quantitative	Red: Analytical efficiency, Green: Ecological impact, Blue: Practical/economic	Balances greenness with analytical performance	More complex assessment framework [4]

These assessment tools have been applied across various analytical scenarios. For instance, in pharmaceutical analysis, AGREE scores demonstrated that methods using ethanol-based mobile phases were significantly greener than those using acetonitrile or methanol [4] [10]. In environmental analysis, NADES-based extraction methods evaluated with the Analytical Eco-Scale showed penalty points of 4.01, comparable to water and substantially better than traditional solvents which ranged from 9.53 to 25.11 [9].

Table 2: AGREE Scoring Criteria for Select GAC Principles

GAC Principle	High Greenness (Score 0.8-1.0)	Medium Greenness (Score 0.4-0.7)	Low Greenness (Score 0.0-0.3)
Sample Treatment	Remote sensing without sample damage	At-line or on-line analysis	Multi-step sample pretreatment [7]
Energy Consumption	< 0.1 kWh per sample	0.1-1.0 kWh per sample	> 1.0 kWh per sample [7]
Reagent Toxicity	Natural reagents (water, ethanol)	Less hazardous reagents	Persistent, bioaccumulative, or toxic reagents [7]
Waste Generation	< 1 mL per sample	1-10 mL per sample	> 10 mL per sample [7]

Experimental Protocols in GAC

Green HPLC Method Development for Pharmaceutical Compounds

A representative example of GAC implementation comes from the development of an eco-friendly HPLC method for simultaneous determination of Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate [4]. The methodology incorporated both Green Analytical Chemistry and Quality-by-Design (QbD) approaches to optimize environmental and performance characteristics.

Experimental Conditions:

• Mobile Phase: 0.1% formic acid in water (pH 2.5) and ethanol
• Stationary Phase: Regular octadecyl silica (ODS) column
• Detection: UV detection at 220 nm
• Flow Rate: 1.0 mL/min
• Linearity Range: 25-75 μg/mL for Telmisartan and 150-450 μg/mL for other analytes
• Validation Parameters: Linearity (R² > 0.999), accuracy (>98.98%), precision (RSD < 2%), LOD and LOQ in ng/mL range [4]

This method demonstrated significant green advantages by replacing traditional toxic solvents like acetonitrile and methanol with ethanol, which has better environmental and safety profiles [4]. The method's greenness was quantitatively evaluated using AGREE, Analytical Eco-Scale, and other metrics, confirming its alignment with sustainable practices [4].

Green Sample Preparation Using Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents

The application of Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES) for phenolic compound extraction from medicinal plants illustrates green sample preparation techniques [9]. This approach specifically addresses the GAC principles regarding reagent selection and waste minimization.

Experimental Workflow:

• NADES Preparation: Combination of natural compounds like choline chloride with hydrogen bond donors in specific molar ratios
• Extraction: Ultrasound-assisted extraction using NADES as solvent
• Optimization: Chemometric optimization of parameters including solvent composition, extraction time, and power
• Analysis: HPLC or spectrophotometric quantification of extracted phenolics
• Greenness Assessment: Evaluation using Analytical Eco-Scale and comparison with conventional methods [9]

The NADES-based method achieved an Analytical Eco-Scale penalty score of 4.01, comparable to water and significantly better than conventional solvents, which ranged from 9.53 to 25.11 penalty points [9]. Additionally, NADES demonstrated superior extraction efficiency for both polar and weak polar phenolic compounds compared to traditional solvents [9].

Graph 1: GAC Implementation Workflow. This diagram illustrates the systematic approach for developing analytical methods following Green Analytical Chemistry principles.

Essential Research Reagents and Solutions in GAC

The implementation of GAC principles requires specific reagents, solvents, and materials that align with sustainability goals while maintaining analytical performance. The following table details key solutions used in green analytical methodologies.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions in Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Solution	Function in Analysis	Green Characteristics	Application Examples
Ethanol	Mobile phase modifier in HPLC	Renewable, biodegradable, low toxicity	Replacement for acetonitrile/methanol in pharmaceutical analysis [4] [10]
Water	Mobile phase component	Non-toxic, non-flammable, readily available	Green solvent for extraction and chromatography [4]
Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES)	Extraction media	Biodegradable, renewable, low toxicity	Extraction of phenolic compounds from plants [9]
Formic Acid	pH modifier in mobile phases	Lower environmental impact than phosphate buffers	Acidification in HPLC mobile phases [4]
Green Solvents (e.g., propylene carbonate)	Solvent replacement	Reduced hazard compared to traditional organic solvents	Alternative to hazardous solvents in sample preparation [3]

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

The selection of appropriate greenness assessment metrics depends on the specific analytical context and the depth of evaluation required. Each major tool offers distinct advantages for different scenarios.

NEMI provides the simplest assessment approach through its pictogram system but offers limited granularity due to its binary (yes/no) criteria [7]. It serves as a quick screening tool but may overlook important subtleties in method environmental performance.

Analytical Eco-Scale delivers a semi-quantitative assessment through penalty points, with scores above 75 representing excellent greenness, 50-75 indicating acceptable greenness, and below 50 reflecting inadequate greenness [1] [7]. This approach balances simplicity with reasonable comprehensiveness, making it suitable for routine assessments.

AGREE represents the most comprehensive evaluation tool, addressing all twelve GAC principles through a weighted scoring system that generates an overall score between 0-1, with higher scores indicating superior greenness [7]. The tool provides detailed insights into specific areas for potential improvement, supported by dedicated software that generates visual output with clock-like graphs [7].

GAPI offers a balanced approach through its pentagram pictogram that covers the entire analytical procedure from sample collection to final determination [2]. Its color-coded system (green-yellow-red) provides intuitive visualization of method performance across multiple criteria [1].

Graph 2: Greenness Assessment Tool Selection Guide. This diagram provides a decision pathway for selecting the most appropriate greenness evaluation metric based on specific assessment needs.

The complementary use of multiple assessment tools provides the most robust evaluation of method greenness. For instance, in the analysis of voriconazole, the combined application of Analytical Eco-Scale, NEMI, GAPI, and AGREE metrics provided a comprehensive understanding of environmental impact across different methodological aspects [3]. Similarly, in the determination of zonisamide, all three tools (Eco-Scale, GAPI, and AGREE) consistently confirmed the superior greenness of methods employing ethanol compared to those using traditional solvents [10].

Green Analytical Chemistry represents an essential evolution in analytical practices, aligning methodological development with environmental sustainability. The twelve GAC principles provide a systematic framework for reducing the environmental footprint of analytical activities while maintaining rigorous performance standards. The ongoing development and refinement of greenness assessment tools like NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, AGREE, and GAPI have transformed GAC from a conceptual framework to a practical, implementable approach with quantifiable outcomes. As the field continues to evolve, the integration of GAC principles with quality-by-design approaches, experimental design strategies, and innovative green solvents will further advance the sustainability of analytical chemistry across pharmaceutical, environmental, and industrial contexts.

The Role of Greenness Assessment in Modern Pharmaceutical Analysis

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to minimize its environmental footprint, particularly within analytical laboratories where traditional methods often involve extensive use of hazardous solvents and generate substantial waste [11] [3]. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles address this challenge by promoting procedures that reduce hazardous substance use, minimize energy consumption, and improve operational safety [12] [3]. Implementing these principles requires reliable tools to measure and validate the environmental friendliness, or "greenness," of analytical methods, moving the industry toward sustainable practices without compromising analytical quality [11].

This guide objectively compares three established greenness assessment tools—NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE—to help researchers select the most appropriate metric for evaluating pharmaceutical analysis methods. We provide experimental data and detailed protocols to support informed decision-making in drug development.

Understanding the Assessment Tools

Multiple tools exist to evaluate the greenness of analytical methods, each with distinct approaches, outputs, and limitations. The table below summarizes the core characteristics of the three tools focused on in this guide.

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Type of Output	Basis of Assessment	Key Advantages	Reported Limitations
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	Qualitative pictogram (four quadrants) [13]	Four criteria: PBT* chemicals, hazardous waste, corrosiveness, waste amount [11]	Simple, quick visualization [13]	Lacks granularity; many methods can have identical scores [13]
Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	Semi-quantitative numerical score (100 = ideal) [11]	Penalty points deducted from 100 for hazardous reagents, energy, waste [11]	Provides a clear, numerical score for easy comparison [13]	Does not pictorially highlight weak points in the procedure [14]
AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric)	Quantitative score (0-1) with colored pictogram [14]	All 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry [14]	Comprehensive, visual, and flexible with user-defined weights [13] [14]	Requires more input data and understanding of the 12 principles [13]

*PBT: Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic

Other notable tools include GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index), which provides a detailed pictogram but is considered complex [13], and newer metrics like GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods) that aim to be more comprehensive [12].

Comparative Application: Tools in Practice

Experimental Protocols for Tool Application

To ensure consistent and accurate greenness evaluation, follow these standardized protocols for applying each tool.

• Protocol for NEMI Assessment

  • Identify Chemicals: Compile a complete list of all chemicals, solvents, and reagents used in the analytical procedure, including their quantities for a single analysis [11].
  • Check PBT Status: Consult the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) to verify that none of the substances are listed as PBT [11].
  • Check Hazard Status: Cross-reference chemicals against the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste lists (e.g., F, K, P, U Lists) [11].
  • Determine Corrosivity: Check if the pH of any solution used in the method falls outside the range of 2 ≤ pH ≤ 12 [11].
  • Calculate Waste: Sum the total mass (in grams) of all chemicals used per analysis. A value greater than 50 g results in a penalty [11].
  • Plot the Pictogram: Shade the quadrant of the NEMI pictogram only if the method meets the green criterion for that category (i.e., no PBT, no hazardous chemicals, safe pH, and waste < 50 g) [11].

• Protocol for Analytical Eco-Scale Assessment

  • Establish Baseline: Start with a score of 100 points, representing an ideal green method [11].
  • Assign Penalties: Deduct penalty points for each parameter that deviates from ideal green conditions, based on reagent hazard and quantity, energy consumption per sample, and occupational hazards [11].
  • Refer to Penalty Table: Use established penalty tables, such as the one based on the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of classification, to determine the number of points to deduct for each hazardous reagent [11].
  • Calculate Final Score: Subtract the total penalty points from 100. Interpret the score: ≥ 75 is "excellent green," 50-74 is "acceptable green," and < 50 is "not green" [11].

• Protocol for AGREE Assessment

  • Gather Method Details: Collect all relevant information about the analytical method, including sample preparation, reagents, instrumentation, energy consumption, waste generation, and throughput [14].
  • Download the Tool: Obtain the free AGREE software [14].
  • Input Data: Enter the required data for each of the 12 principles of GAC. The software will initially assign a default weight of 2 to each principle.
  • Adjust Weights (Optional): For a more tailored assessment, adjust the weights of the principles based on their importance. For chromatographic methods, principles #7 (waste), #8 (throughput), #11 (toxicity), and #12 (operator safety) are often assigned higher weights (e.g., 4) [14].
  • Generate Report: The software outputs a circular pictogram with 12 sections, each colored from red (0) to green (1), and a central overall score between 0 and 1 [14].

Case Study Data: Tool Comparison on Real Methods

The following table summarizes greenness assessment results from published studies that applied multiple tools to evaluate analytical methods for specific pharmaceuticals.

Table 2: Comparative Greenness Scores from Case Studies

Analyzed Pharmaceutical	Analytical Method	NEMI Profile	Analytical Eco-Scale Score	AGREE Score	Key Findings & Reference
Hyoscine N-butyl bromide (16 methods)	HPLC	Identical profile for 14 of 16 methods [13]	Varied scores; allowed clear ranking [13]	Varied scores; highlighted weakest points [13]	Finding: NEMI was least effective for differentiation. AGREE and Eco-Scale provided reliable, discriminative results [13].
Paclitaxel (Method 5)	HPLC	Information missing	90 (Excellent green) [11]	Information missing	Finding: The method was highlighted as sustainable with minimal waste and high efficiency [11].
Selected Neurotransmitters (Method 6)	LC-MS	Information missing	Information missing	0.66 (Moderately green) [14]	Finding: This was the greenest method among six compared; AGREE's weighting of key criteria aided discrimination [14].
Voriconazole (Various methods)	HPLC/UPLC	Mostly "green" profiles	Scores indicated few methods were truly eco-friendly [3]	Scores provided detailed greenness insight [3]	Finding: The review concluded that most methods require optimization for greenness, and multiple tools should be used [3].

Analysis of Comparative Data

The case study data reveals critical differences in tool performance and application.

• Discriminatory Power: NEMI often fails to distinguish between methods with significant operational differences, as seen in the Hyoscine N-butyl bromide study where 14 of 16 methods had the same pictogram [13]. In contrast, both AGREE and Analytical Eco-Scale provide granular scores that enable effective ranking and identification of the greenest option [13] [14].
• Actionable Insights: While the Analytical Eco-Scale gives a final score, AGREE goes further by providing a visual representation (a colored pictogram) that immediately highlights which specific principles of GAC are poorly addressed by the method [13] [14]. This helps analysts target specific areas for improvement.
• Contextual Flexibility: The AGREE tool's ability to assign different weights to the 12 GAC principles makes it particularly valuable. For instance, weighting waste, throughput, and toxicity more heavily is especially useful for evaluating chromatographic methods, which are common in pharmaceutical analysis [14].

Essential Reagents and Research Solutions

Selecting the right chemicals and instruments is fundamental to developing greener analytical methods.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Greener Pharmaceutical Analysis

Item / Technique	Function in Analysis	Greenness Consideration
Ethanol	Solvent for extraction and mobile phase in HPLC/UPLC [15] [16]	A less toxic alternative to hazardous solvents like acetonitrile or methanol [3].
UPLC (Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography)	High-speed chromatographic separation [16]	Reduces solvent consumption and analysis time compared to traditional HPLC, lowering waste and energy use [3].
Greenness-by-Design (GbD) / Computer-Aided Design	In-silico optimization of methods (e.g., solvent selection) [15]	Reduces the need for extensive laboratory experimentation, significantly cutting down on solvent waste during method development [15].
Fused-Core or Short Columns	Stationary phase for chromatographic separation [3]	Allows for faster elution and lower flow rates, reducing solvent consumption and waste generation [3].
Miniaturized/Scaled-Down Methods	Reducing sample and reagent scales (e.g., micro-extraction) [12]	Directly minimizes the volumes of solvents and samples required, a core principle of green chemistry [12].

Visual Decision Workflow and Scoring Comparison

To aid in the selection and understanding of these tools, the following diagrams map the decision-making workflow and conceptual scoring frameworks.

Diagram 1: Greenness Assessment Tool Selection Workflow

Diagram 2: Conceptual Comparison of Tool Scoring Frameworks

Based on the comparative data and experimental protocols, we conclude with the following strategic recommendations for drug development professionals:

• For a Preliminary Check: Use NEMI for a very basic, initial screening to quickly identify methods with significant environmental red flags [13].
• For Ranking and Comparison: Use the Analytical Eco-Scale when the primary goal is to numerically rank several similar methods or to validate that a method meets a specific greenness threshold (e.g., score > 75) [11] [13].
• For Comprehensive Development and Optimization: Use the AGREE metric during method development and when a deep, visual understanding of a method's environmental strengths and weaknesses is required. Its flexibility with weighting is particularly useful for tailoring assessments to specific analytical techniques like LC-MS [14] [3].
• For Most Robust Justification: Employ at least two tools, such as AGREE and Analytical Eco-Scale, to provide complementary quantitative and qualitative data in support of a method's greenness claims [13] [3].

The strategic application of these tools, combined with a Greenness-by-Design approach that incorporates green principles from the outset, is the most effective path toward truly sustainable pharmaceutical analysis [15].

The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) is a publicly accessible, searchable database of environmental methods and protocols that enables scientists and managers to find, compare, and select methods for all stages of the environmental monitoring process [17]. First launched in 2002, NEMI was developed by the National Water Quality Monitoring Council in collaboration with federal, state, and private sector partners with major funding from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) [18].

The fundamental purpose behind NEMI's creation was to address the critical challenge of method comparability in environmental monitoring. Every year, U.S. federal and state government agencies, industrial entities, academic researchers, and private organizations expend enormous resources monitoring, protecting, and restoring water resources and watersheds [17]. Selecting appropriate analytical methods is complex, as methods must have sufficiently low detection levels, suitable precision and analyte recovery, and acceptable selectivity for specific monitoring needs [18]. Before NEMI, there were no uniform standardized criteria for comparing critical components of environmental analytical methods with each other or with project-specific requirements [17] [18].

NEMI System Design and Architecture

Historical Development and Evolution

NEMI evolved from EPA's Environmental Monitoring Methods Index (EMMI), which itself grew from a "List of Lists" of pesticides and other analytes routinely measured by what was then the Industrial Technology Division [17]. Between 1990 and 1995, EMMI expanded to encompass all lists of analytes published in the Code of Federal Regulations plus additional analytes of interest to EPA, eventually containing approximately 4,200 substances and 3,600 method abstracts [17]. The multiagency Methods and Data Comparability Board (MDCB) later developed NEMI as a partnership of water-quality experts from federal and state agencies, tribes, municipalities, industry, and private organizations [17].

Database Scope and Content

NEMI encompasses a broad spectrum of environmental method types, including:

• Traditional laboratory determinative methods
• Toxicity assays and biological protocols
• Field techniques and sampling procedures
• Sensor technologies and in-situ monitoring approaches
• Statistical methods for data analysis [18]

The system includes methods for various environmental matrices including water, soil, air, sediment, and tissues [17]. Each method summary in NEMI contains standardized information fields that enable objective scientific comparison, including applicable metadata such as percent recovery, precision, detection levels, concentration ranges, quality control requirements, instrumentation needs, and publication source references [17] [18].

Method Submission and Quality Framework

NEMI employs a structured submission process open to government agencies, private companies, and public organizations. Guidelines for acceptance require that methods must be publicly available and documented such that they can be practiced by other scientists trained in the applicable field [17]. Key criteria include:

• Documentation of performance metadata (recovery, precision, detection levels)
• Description of influencing factors (interferences, quality assurance procedures)
• Public availability of the full method through governmental or private sector publishers [17]

Submitted methods undergo technical review for quality and applicability before inclusion in the database, ensuring reliability for users [17].

Core Criteria for Method Evaluation in NEMI

Foundational Assessment Criteria

NEMI's evaluation framework is built around several core criteria essential for method comparison and selection:

• Detection Levels: The minimum concentrations that can be reliably detected
• Precision and Accuracy: Method reproducibility and closeness to true values
• Analyte Recovery: Efficiency of target compound measurement
• Selectivity: Ability to distinguish target analytes from interferents
• Applicable Matrices: Environmental media to which the method applies [17] [18]

These criteria allow users to objectively compare methods against their project-specific requirements and data quality objectives.

Data Comparability Emphasis

A distinctive feature of NEMI's design is its emphasis on data comparability – ensuring that environmental data generated for one purpose can be validly used for other applications, even years after publication [17]. This comparability minimizes duplication of effort and maximizes resource utilization while enabling more effective long-term environmental trend analysis [17].

Green Chemistry Assessment Integration

While NEMI provides comprehensive methodological information, researchers increasingly complement it with dedicated greenness assessment tools. The NEMI greenness assessment approach (one of several metrics available) typically provides a pictogram representing whether a method meets four basic criteria: persistent/bioaccumulative/toxic chemicals, hazardous chemicals, corrosivity, and waste generation [19] [20].

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

Environmental method evaluation has evolved to include specialized tools for assessing method environmental impact. The table below summarizes three prominent greenness assessment approaches:

Table 1: Comparison of Environmental Method Assessment Tools

Assessment Tool	Key Characteristics	Assessment Basis	Output Format	Key Advantages
NEMI	Database of environmental methods with performance criteria	Method performance parameters (detection levels, precision, recovery)	Searchable database with standardized method summaries	Comprehensive method comparability; Historical method archiving
NEMI Greenness Assessment	Traditional green chemistry evaluation	Four criteria: PBT chemicals, hazardous chemicals, corrosivity, waste generation	Simple pictogram (pass/fail for 4 criteria)	Quick visual assessment; Simple implementation
AGREE	Comprehensive greenness calculator	All 12 principles of green analytical chemistry	Scaled pictogram (0-1) with segment scores	Holistic assessment; Flexible weighting; Open-source software
AES	Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty points for hazardous parameters	Numerical score (higher = greener)	Quantitative results; Simple calculation

Tool Application in Environmental Analysis

A recent study developing an ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for multi-element determination in wine beverages exemplifies how these assessment tools are applied in practice [19]. The research team developed a cost-effective green extraction technique for major and trace elements in red wine samples prior to analysis using inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) [19]. After methodological development and optimization, they assessed the greenness of their proposed approach using NEMI, AGREE, and AES metrics [19]. The study concluded that all three tools qualified the proposed UAD-ICP-OES method as environmentally friendly, demonstrating the complementary nature of these assessment approaches [19].

AGREE: Advanced Greenness Metric

The AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric) approach represents a significant advancement in greenness assessment by incorporating all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry into a unified evaluation framework [21] [20]. Unlike simpler metrics, AGREE transforms assessment criteria into a unified 0-1 scale, calculates a final score based on the SIGNIFICANCE principles, and generates a pictogram that indicates both the overall score and performance in each criterion [21]. The tool is available as open-source software, making comprehensive greenness assessment accessible to researchers worldwide [21].

Experimental Protocols and Assessment Workflow

Method Development and Optimization Protocol

The wine analysis study [19] exemplifies a comprehensive methodological approach:

• Method Development: Ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) extraction for major (Na, Ca, K, Mg, B, Ba, Al) and trace elements (Ni, As, Pb, Sb, Ti, Cd, Co, V, Cr, Cu) from red wine samples.

• Multivariate Optimization: Assessment of optimum extraction parameters including HNO₃ concentration (3 M), wine volume (2 mL), extraction time (30 min), and ultrasound temperature (70°C).

• Method Validation: Evaluation of limit of quantification (LOQ: 26-1040 µg/L), precision (≤ 6.3%), and accuracy (92-101%).

• Risk Assessment: Human health risk evaluation using various assessment indices based on detected metal concentrations.

• Greenness Assessment: Comparative method evaluation using NEMI, AES, and AGREE metrics [19].

Greenness Assessment Workflow

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Environmental Method Assessment

Reagent/Resource	Function in Assessment	Application Context
NEMI Database	Method selection and performance comparison	Initial method identification and technical parameter comparison
AGREE Calculator	Comprehensive greenness evaluation	Scoring method environmental performance across 12 GAC principles
AES Tool	Eco-Scale calculation	Quantitative greenness scoring based on penalty points
ICP-OES Instrumentation	Multi-element detection and quantification	Analytical determinative technique for metal concentration measurement
Multivariate Optimization Software	Experimental parameter optimization	Statistical determination of ideal method conditions

The following diagram illustrates the strategic workflow for comprehensive environmental method assessment integrating NEMI with greenness metrics:

The National Environmental Methods Index represents a critical infrastructure for environmental monitoring, providing standardized criteria for method comparison and selection. Its design addresses the fundamental need for data comparability across temporal and organizational boundaries, enabling more effective environmental assessment and decision-making [17] [18]. While NEMI offers comprehensive technical evaluation parameters, researchers increasingly complement it with specialized greenness assessment tools like AGREE and AES to address growing concerns about environmental impact of analytical methods [19] [21].

The integration of technical performance data (through NEMI) with comprehensive environmental impact assessment (through tools like AGREE) represents best practice in modern environmental methodology selection. This combined approach ensures that chosen methods not only produce scientifically valid and comparable data but also minimize environmental footprint and align with green chemistry principles – a critical consideration for researchers, regulatory agencies, and drug development professionals addressing increasingly complex environmental and public health challenges.

The increasing environmental consciousness within the scientific community has catalyzed the development of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), which aims to minimize the ecological impact of analytical procedures. A cornerstone of GAC is the use of standardized metrics to evaluate and compare the environmental friendliness of methods, guiding researchers toward more sustainable practices. Among these tools, the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) stands out as a semi-quantitative scoring system that provides an accessible and comprehensive assessment of a method's greenness [22] [23]. First proposed in 2012, the AES offers a practical alternative to traditional green chemistry metrics, which were often tailored for organic synthesis and did not fit the purposes of analytical chemistry well [23]. Its straightforward approach of assigning penalty points to non-green aspects of an analytical process has made it a popular tool within the pharmaceutical sciences, where it is used to evaluate and improve methods for drug analysis, from simple formulations to complex stability-indicating assays [24] [25].

The AES exists within a broader ecosystem of greenness assessment tools. Foundational metrics like the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) use a simple pictogram to indicate whether a method meets basic criteria for avoiding hazardous substances and waste [11] [26]. More recently, the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric has been developed, which leverages the 12 principles of GAC to provide a unified pictogram and a final score between 0 and 1 [26] [27]. While NEMI is appreciated for its simplicity and AGREE for its comprehensiveness, the AES occupies a unique middle ground. It provides a more nuanced, semi-quantitative evaluation than NEMI's binary pictogram, while being less complex than the full AGREE assessment. Its numerical score, derived from a simple calculation, facilitates direct comparison between methods and encourages the analyst to critically examine each step of the procedure for potential environmental improvements [22] [26].

The AES Scoring Framework: Penalty Points and Calculation

Fundamental Scoring Principle

The Analytical Eco-Scale operates on a penalty-point system that is both intuitive and transparent. The assessment begins with a baseline score of 100 points, representing an ideal green analysis that uses no hazardous substances, generates no waste, and consumes minimal energy [22]. From this perfect score, penalty points are deducted for every aspect of the analytical procedure that deviates from ideal green practice. The final Eco-Scale score is calculated as follows [22]:

AES Score = 100 − Total Penalty Points

The resulting score provides a clear measure of the method's environmental performance. According to established benchmarks, a score of ≥ 75 is classified as excellent green analysis, a score between 50 and 74 represents acceptable green analysis, and a score below 50 indicates an inadequate level of greenness [22] [11]. This scoring range offers laboratories a straightforward target for method development and optimization.

Detailed Penalty Points Structure

The penalty points are assigned across four major categories: reagents, instruments, occupational hazards, and waste. The amount of penalty points depends on the quantity and hazard level of the chemicals used, the energy consumption of the equipment, and the waste management strategy.

Table 1: Analytical Eco-Scale Penalty Points System for Reagents and Instruments [22]

Category	Parameter	Penalty Points
Reagents	Hazardous reagent (> 0.1 mL or 0.1 g)	1 - 20 (depending on hazard)
	High purity reagent or non-hazardous	0
	Less hazardous reagent	1
	Hazardous reagent	5 - 20
Instruments	Energy consumption > 0.1 kWh per sample	1 - 3
	Energy consumption < 0.1 kWh per sample	0
	On-line waste treatment	0
	Waste treatment	1
	No waste treatment	3

The hazard level of reagents is primarily determined using the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of classification [11] [22]. For instance, a highly toxic reagent might incur a penalty of 20 points, while a less hazardous one might only incur 1 point [22]. The energy consumption penalty is typically 1 point if the energy used per sample is between 0.1 and 1.5 kWh, and 3 points if it exceeds 1.5 kWh [26]. Occupational hazards, such as the risk of corrosive or vapor-producing substances, can add up to 5 penalty points, while the lack of a proper waste treatment procedure typically incurs 3 points [22].

Table 2: Analytical Eco-Scale Score Interpretation and Benchmarking [22] [11]

AES Score Range	Greenness Classification	Interpretation
≥ 75	Excellent	Acceptable green analysis
50 - 74	Acceptable	Moderate environmental impact
< 50	Inadequate	Poor greenness profile

AES in Practice: Experimental Protocol and Application

Standardized Assessment Workflow

Applying the Analytical Eco-Scale to evaluate a method involves a systematic, step-by-step process that scrutinizes each component of the analytical procedure. The workflow below visualizes this structured assessment path.

Case Study Protocol: Green RP-HPLC Method for Cinnarizine

A recent study (2025) on the determination of Cinnarizine in tablets provides an excellent example of AES application in pharmaceutical analysis [24]. The following table details the key reagents and materials used in this green analytical method.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for a Green RP-HPLC Method [24]

Reagent/Material	Function in Analysis	Greenness Consideration
Cinnarizine API	Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (analyte)	Standard pure substance; unavoidable
Methanol (HPLC grade)	Organic modifier in mobile phase	Less hazardous alternative to acetonitrile
Orthophosphoric Acid (0.1% v/v)	Mobile phase pH modifier	Used in very low concentration
Stugeron Tablets	Pharmaceutical formulation (sample)	Real-world sample matrix
Ultrapure Water	Aqueous component of mobile phase	Non-hazardous solvent

Chromatographic Conditions and Procedure [24]:

• Instrumentation: Shimadzu LC20AD HPLC system with PDA detector.
• Column: Inertsil ODS-3V column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm).
• Mobile Phase: Methanol and 0.1% v/v orthophosphoric acid (pH 2.5) in a 95:05 v/v ratio.
• Flow Rate: 0.5 mL min−1.
• Detection Wavelength: 254 nm.
• Sample Preparation: Tablet powder was sonicated with the mobile phase (diluent) and filtered before injection.

AES Assessment of the Cinnarizine Method [24]:

• Reagents: Methanol, while less toxic than acetonitrile, is still a hazardous solvent, incurring penalty points. The very low concentration of orthophosphoric acid minimizes its penalty.
• Instrumentation: The flow rate of 0.5 mL/min is relatively low, reducing solvent consumption and waste generation compared to conventional HPLC methods (typically 1.0-1.5 mL/min). This results in lower penalty points for energy and waste.
• Waste: The method was designed to be eco-friendly, likely incorporating waste considerations. The final study reported that the greenness of this optimized method was better than three other reported methods when evaluated using AES and other tools [24].

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

Strengths and Limitations of AES, NEMI, and AGREE

While the Analytical Eco-Scale is a powerful tool, it is most informative when viewed as part of a suite of complementary assessment methods. The table below provides a structured comparison of AES with two other prevalent metrics: NEMI and AGREE.

Table 4: Comparison of AES with NEMI and AGREE Greenness Assessment Tools [24] [11] [22]

Feature	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	AGREE (Analytical GREEnness)
Type of Output	Numerical score (0-100)	Binary pictogram (4 quadrants)	Numerical score (0-1) & circular pictogram
Basis of Assessment	Penalty points for deviations from ideal green analysis	Pass/Fail for 4 criteria (PBT, hazardous, corrosive, waste)	12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry
Ease of Use	Simple calculations; requires hazard knowledge	Very simple; quick visual check	Comprehensive but more complex; uses free software
Key Strength	Semi-quantitative; encourages method improvement; easy comparison	Extreme simplicity and accessibility	Holistic; covers full analytical lifecycle; visual & quantitative
Key Limitation	Relies on expert judgment for penalties; no visual output	Qualitative; lacks nuance; doesn't cover energy use	Can be subjective in weighting; more time-consuming
Ideal Use Case	Quick, semi-quantitative evaluation and comparison of methods	Initial, rapid screening of a method's basic greenness	Comprehensive and defensible assessment for publications

Strategic Application in Pharmaceutical Research

For researchers and drug development professionals, selecting the right greenness assessment tool depends on the project's goal. AES is ideal for internal method development and optimization, as its penalty system directly highlights areas for improvement—for example, suggesting the replacement of a high-penalty reagent with a greener alternative [22]. In contrast, NEMI serves best as a first-pass filter to quickly eliminate methods with obvious environmental red flags [11] [26]. For formal reporting and publications, where a comprehensive and visually intuitive justification of greenness is required, AGREE is often the superior choice, as it transparently addresses all 12 GAC principles [24] [26] [27].

The trend in modern pharmaceutical analysis is toward using multiple tools to gain a more complete picture. A 2025 study on Cinnarizine utilized not only AES but also AGREE, GAPI, and whiteness metrics (RGB and BAGI) to provide a multi-faceted sustainability profile [24]. Similarly, a 2022 study on determining phenols in honey used both AES (scoring an excellent 94) and AGREE (scoring 0.72) to robustly demonstrate the method's green credentials [27]. This multi-tool approach leverages the strengths of each metric while mitigating their individual weaknesses, providing a robust and defensible assessment of an analytical method's environmental impact.

In the realm of green analytical chemistry (GAC), the evaluation of an analytical method's environmental impact requires robust and standardized metric systems. Green analytical chemistry focuses on making analytical procedures more environmentally benign and safer for humans by considering factors such as reagent toxicity, waste generation, energy requirements, and procedural steps [7]. As the field has evolved, several dedicated metric tools have been developed to quantify the greenness of analytical methodologies, including the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and the more recent AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) metric [7]. Each system offers a distinct approach to assessment, with varying levels of comprehensiveness, flexibility, and output clarity. This guide provides an objective comparison of these three predominant greenness assessment tools, with particular emphasis on the structure, application, and advantages of the AGREE metric and its foundation on the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles of green analytical chemistry.

Comparative Analysis of Green Assessment Metrics

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI): The NEMI system employs a simple pictogram divided into four quadrants, each representing a different greenness criterion. The assessment is binary—if a criterion is met, the corresponding quadrant is filled with green; otherwise, it remains uncolored. The four criteria evaluated are: generation of waste, use of reagents that are persistent, bioaccumulative, or toxic, employment of hazardous reagents, and use of corrosive conditions [7].

Analytical Eco-Scale (AES): This metric adopts a penalty points approach. Starting from a base score of 100, points are subtracted for each aspect that decreases the procedure's greenness, such as toxic reagents, waste generation, or high energy demand. The remaining score determines whether the method is ideally green (score close to 100), acceptable, or not green [7].

AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric): The AGREE calculator represents a comprehensive, flexible approach that assesses methodologies against all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry. It transforms each principle into a score on a 0-1 scale, with the final result presented in an intuitive clock-like pictogram that shows both overall score and performance on each criterion [7].

Comparative Performance Assessment

The table below summarizes the key characteristics and comparative performance of the three green assessment metrics:

Table 1: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Metric Systems

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale	AGREE
Number of Assessment Criteria	4 criteria	6 main categories	12 principles (SIGNIFICANCE)
Scoring System	Binary (green/uncolored)	Penalty points (100-base)	Continuous scale (0-1)
Output Visualization	Simple pictogram	Numerical score	Comprehensive clock diagram
Flexibility	Fixed criteria	Fixed criteria	User-defined weightings
Comprehensiveness	Limited scope	Moderate scope	Comprehensive scope
Ease of Interpretation	Very easy	Moderate	Detailed but intuitive
Software Support	Not specified	Not specified	Freely available calculator

Experimental Data and Case Study Comparison

A recent study developing an ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for multi-element determination in wine beverages provides empirical data for comparing these metrics [19]. The research evaluated the greenness of the proposed UAD-ICP-OES method using NEMI, AES, and AGREE tools, finding that all three metrics qualified the method as green, though with varying levels of detail and justification.

NEMI Assessment: The UAD-ICP-OES method successfully filled all four quadrants of the NEMI pictogram, indicating it met all four criteria for a green method [19].

AES Assessment: The method achieved a high score on the Analytical Eco-Scale, though the specific numerical value wasn't provided in the available excerpt [19].

AGREE Assessment: The AGREE evaluation provided the most comprehensive assessment, generating an overall score and detailed performance across all 12 GAC principles. The software-produced pictogram visually communicated strengths and potential weaknesses across the different criteria [19].

This case study demonstrates that while all three metrics can identify environmentally preferable methods, AGREE offers more granular insights into specific areas for potential improvement and allows researchers to understand the relative performance across the full spectrum of green chemistry principles.

The AGREE Framework: Deep Dive into the 12 SIGNIFICANCE Principles

Foundation and Structure

The AGREE metric system is distinguished by its foundation on the 12 principles of green analytical chemistry, collectively known by the acronym SIGNIFICANCE [7]. Unlike earlier metrics that considered only a limited number of criteria, AGREE comprehensively addresses the multifaceted nature of methodological greenness by evaluating analytical procedures against all 12 principles. Each principle is transformed into a score on a unified 0-1 scale, with values closer to 1 indicating better adherence to green chemistry principles.

The following diagram illustrates the relationships between the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles and the AGREE evaluation framework:

Detailed Examination of the SIGNIFICANCE Principles

The AGREE system operationalizes each of the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles with specific evaluation criteria and scoring methodologies:

Principle 1: Direct Analytical Techniques - Advocates for direct analysis to avoid sample treatment, with remote sensing without sample damage scoring highest (1.00) and multistep methods with extensive pretreatment scoring lowest (0.00) [7].

Principle 2: Minimal Sample Size and Number of Samples - Encourages minimal sample consumption through miniaturization and statistical sampling approaches, with scoring based on actual sample mass or volume used [7].

Principle 3: In-situ Measurement - Promotes measurement at the point of need to avoid transportation and preservation, with direct in-situ analysis receiving optimal scores [7].

Principle 4: Integration of Functions and Automation - Favors integrated, automated systems that reduce manual operations and error, with fully automated systems scoring highest [7].

Principle 5: Minimized Waste Generation - Addresses waste quantity and hazard, with methods generating minimal, non-hazardous waste receiving superior scores [7].

Principle 6: Multi-analyte Methods - Encourages methods that determine multiple analytes simultaneously, with fully multi-analyte approaches rated highest [7].

Principle 7: Reduced Energy Consumption - Considers energy demand during operation, with ambient temperature methods scoring best and high-energy techniques rated lower [7].

Principle 8: High-throughput Analysis - Values methods that analyze many samples quickly, with scoring based on samples processed per time unit [7].

Principle 9: Green Reagents and Materials - Prefers biodegradable, renewable, and less hazardous chemicals, with scoring reflecting safety and environmental impact [7].

Principle 10: Waste Recycling and Reuse - Encourages circular economy approaches in analytical processes, with comprehensive recycling systems scoring highest [7].

Principle 11: Operator Safety - Prioritizes protection of analytical chemists through closed systems and appropriate protective measures [7].

Principle 12: Safe Methods for Environment - Focuses on broader environmental impact, favoring methods that avoid hazardous emissions and waste [7].

AGREE Software Implementation

The AGREE approach is supported by user-friendly, open-source software that automates the assessment process [7]. The software generates a comprehensive pictogram with the overall score (0-1) displayed in the center and color-coded segments for each principle. The color progression from red to yellow to green indicates performance level for each criterion, while segment width reflects user-assigned weights. This visualization provides immediate insight into both overall greenness and specific areas of strength or concern.

Experimental Protocols and Application Workflow

Method Greenness Assessment Procedure

The following diagram outlines the standard workflow for evaluating analytical methods using the AGREE framework:

Case Study: UAD-ICP-OES Method for Wine Analysis

The development and greenness assessment of an Ultrasound-Assisted Dilution (UAD) method for multi-element determination in wine beverages illustrates the practical application of these metrics [19]. The analytical procedure involved:

Sample Preparation: Red wine samples underwent ultrasound-assisted dilution with optimization of HNO₃ concentration, wine volume, extraction time, and ultrasound temperature. The optimal parameters were determined as 3 M HNO₃, 2 mL wine volume, 30 minutes extraction time, and 70°C ultrasound temperature [19].

Instrumental Analysis: Processed samples were analyzed using Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES) for determination of major elements (Na, Ca, K, Mg, B, Ba, Al) and trace elements (Ni, As, Pb, Sb, Ti, Cd, Co, V, Cr, Cu) [19].

Method Performance: The developed UAD method demonstrated high sensitivity (LOQ 26-1040 µg/L), satisfactory precision (≤6.3%), and excellent accuracy (92-101%) [19].

Greenness Assessment: The method was evaluated using NEMI, AES, and AGREE metrics, with all three tools qualifying it as an environmentally preferable approach, though AGREE provided the most detailed insights into specific areas of performance across the full spectrum of green chemistry principles [19].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The implementation of green analytical methods requires specific reagents and materials that minimize environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance. The table below details key solutions referenced in the case study and their functions:

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Function in Analysis	Green Chemistry Considerations
Nitric Acid (HNO₃)	Sample digestion and preservation	Concentration optimization (3M in case study) reduces acid usage and waste generation [19]
Ultrasound Bath	Enhanced extraction through cavitation	Reduces extraction time and energy consumption compared to conventional heating [19]
ICP-OES Instrument	Multi-element detection and quantification	Simultaneous determination of multiple analytes reduces overall energy and resource consumption per data point [19]
Deionized Water	Sample dilution and preparation	Minimizes introduction of additional contaminants; preferred over chemical modifiers [19]

The comparative analysis of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE metrics reveals a clear evolution in greenness assessment methodologies, with AGREE representing the most comprehensive, flexible, and informative approach currently available. While NEMI offers simplicity and the Analytical Eco-Scale provides a straightforward scoring system, AGREE's foundation on the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles of green analytical chemistry enables a more nuanced and complete evaluation of methodological environmental performance.

The case study on UAD-ICP-OES method development for wine analysis demonstrates that all three metrics can successfully identify environmentally preferable methods, but AGREE provides superior granularity in identifying specific areas for improvement across the full spectrum of green chemistry principles. For researchers and drug development professionals seeking to minimize the environmental impact of their analytical methods while maintaining high standards of accuracy and precision, the AGREE metric offers an invaluable assessment tool supported by accessible software and a robust theoretical foundation.

As green analytical chemistry continues to evolve, the comprehensive framework provided by AGREE and its alignment with the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles positions it as an essential component of sustainable method development and optimization in research and industrial applications.

Comparative Strengths and Limitations of Each Tool's Foundational Approach

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles is fundamentally changing how laboratories evaluate their environmental impact. Selecting an appropriate metric to assess the "greenness" of an analytical method is crucial for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals aiming to make their practices more sustainable. Among the many tools available, the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and Analytical GREEnness metric (AGREE) are widely utilized, each with a distinct foundational approach [2].

This guide provides an objective comparison of these three tools, detailing their core methodologies, inherent strengths, and limitations. By presenting experimental data and structured comparisons, we aim to equip you with the knowledge to select the most appropriate assessment tool for your research context, advancing the broader objective of embedding robust environmental sustainability into pharmaceutical analysis.

Foundational Principles and Methodologies

Each tool is built upon a unique conceptual framework, which directly influences its application and output.

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI)

NEMI, one of the earliest greenness assessment tools, uses a qualitative, pass/fail approach based on four criteria [11] [28]. Its pictogram is a circle divided into four quadrants, each representing a different criterion. A quadrant is colored green only if the method meets that specific requirement:

• PBT Substances: The method uses no Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) substances.
• Hazardous Waste: The method uses no reagents listed as hazardous (e.g., on EPA's D, F, P, or U lists).
• Corrosivity: All reagents have a pH between 2 and 12.
• Waste Generation: The total waste produced is less than 50 g per analysis [11] [28].

Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)

The Analytical Eco-Scale employs a semi-quantitative scoring system [11] [29]. It assigns a baseline score of 100 points, representing an ideal green method. Penalty points are then subtracted for each aspect of the procedure that deviates from ideal green conditions, including [28]:

• The type and quantity of hazardous reagents used.
• The energy consumption of the instrumentation.
• The amount and hazard of waste generated. The final score is interpreted as follows: ≥75 is excellent, 74-50 is acceptable, and <50 is inadequate greenness [11].

Analytical GREEnness Metric (AGREE)

AGREE is a comprehensive quantitative tool that evaluates methods against all 12 principles of GAC [20] [13]. It uses a circular pictogram divided into 12 sections, each corresponding to one GAC principle. The tool calculates a score between 0 and 1 for each principle, and the final overall score is the average of these 12 results. The pictogram uses a traffic-light color system, providing an immediate visual summary of the method's performance across all criteria, with red indicating non-compliance and dark green indicating full compliance [13].

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for selecting and applying these assessment tools.

Diagram: A workflow for selecting a greenness assessment tool, highlighting the complementary nature of NEMI, AES, and AGREE.

Comparative Analysis of Tool Performance

The following tables summarize the core characteristics, strengths, and limitations of each greenness assessment tool, providing a clear, structured comparison.

Table 1: Foundational Approach and Key Characteristics of NEMI, AES, and AGREE

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Foundational Approach	Qualitative, pass/fail based on 4 environmental criteria [28].	Semi-quantitative, penalty points subtracted from ideal score [11].	Quantitative, scores all 12 GAC principles [20].
Type of Output	Pictogram with 4 quadrants (green/white) [28].	Numerical score (out of 100) [11].	Overall score (0-1) & colored pictogram for 12 segments [13].
Evaluation Scope	Limited to PBT, hazardous waste, corrosivity, and waste amount [11].	Reagent hazard/amount, energy, waste [28].	Comprehensive, covering all 12 GAC principles [13].
Ease of Use	Simple and fast [13].	Straightforward, requires penalty point calculation [13].	Automated via software, but requires more input data [13].

Table 2: Comparative Strengths and Limitations of Each Tool

Tool	Core Strengths	Inherent Limitations
NEMI	Simplicity and Speed: Provides an immediate, at-a-glance assessment, ideal for initial screening [13].Low Barrier to Entry: Requires minimal data and no complex calculations [28].	Qualitative Nature: Lacks granularity; cannot differentiate between methods that all pass the four criteria [13].Limited Scope: Does not address energy consumption, operator safety, or other GAC principles [11].
Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	Semi-Quantitative Output: The numerical score allows for ranking and comparing different methods [13].Actionable Feedback: Penalty points highlight specific areas for improvement (e.g., solvent toxicity, energy use) [28].	Subjectivity in Penalties: Penalty point assignments can be influenced by user interpretation [28].Incomplete Picture: While broader than NEMI, it does not systematically cover all 12 GAC principles [20].
AGREE	Comprehensive Evaluation: Provides the most complete assessment by evaluating all 12 GAC principles [13].Visual & Quantitative: The combined numerical score and colored pictogram offer immediate insight into strengths/weaknesses [13].	Implementation Complexity: Requires detailed method information and relies on dedicated software for calculation [13].Potential for Overcomplication: May be more detailed than needed for simple comparative studies.

Experimental Data and Application Protocols

To illustrate the practical application of these tools, we can examine experimental data from a published study comparing HPLC methods for determining melatonin using different detectors (PDA, FLD, ELSD) [29].

Experimental Protocol for Method Greenness Assessment

The following protocol outlines the general steps for applying the three assessment tools, as demonstrated in the cited study:

• Method Finalization: Develop and validate the analytical method (e.g., HPLC), defining all reagents, instrumentation, and procedural steps [29].
• Data Collection: Compile all necessary data, including:
  • Reagents: Type, volume, and concentration of all solvents and chemicals used per analysis.
  • Energy Consumption: Power requirements of instruments (e.g., HPLC, detector) and analysis runtime.
  • Waste Output: Total mass or volume of waste generated per analysis.
  • Occupational Hazards: Safety data for all chemicals (e.g., from GHS or NFPA standards) [11].
• Tool Application:
  • NEMI: Check the method's compliance with the four criteria and color the corresponding quadrants [28].
  • AES: Start with a score of 100. Consult hazard classifications (e.g., GHS) and subtract penalty points for reagents, energy (>0.1 kWh), and waste. Calculate the final score [11] [28].
  • AGREE: Input the collected data into the dedicated AGREE software (available at [20]). The software automatically calculates the scores for each of the 12 principles and generates the final pictogram and overall score [13].
• Comparison and Interpretation: Compare the outputs of the different tools to gain a multi-faceted understanding of the method's environmental performance.

Exemplary Experimental Results

In the melatonin study, the greenness of three HPLC methods with different detectors was assessed. The results demonstrated how the choice of method and detector influences the greenness profile [29]:

• The HPLC-ELSD method was identified as the greenest option among those compared.
• The Analytical Eco-Scale scores confirmed this finding, with the ELSD method achieving the highest score, followed by the FLD and PDA methods.
• Assessments using NEMI, GAPI, and AGREE tools were consistent, all qualifying the proposed HPLC-ELSD method as an environmentally friendly alternative [29].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Developing Green HPLC Methods

Item	Function in Analytical Method	Greenness Considerations
Ethanol	Eco-friendly alternative to toxic solvents like acetonitrile or methanol in the mobile phase [29].	Classified as a preferable solvent in GAC due to its lower toxicity and better biodegradability [29].
Water (HPLC Grade)	The primary solvent in the mobile phase for reverse-phase HPLC.	Innocuous and non-hazardous, contributing positively to greenness scores in AES and AGREE.
C18 Chromatographic Column	Stationary phase for the separation of analytes.	Selecting columns that allow for faster separations or lower flow rates reduces solvent consumption and waste.
Polyvinylidene Fluoride (PVDF) Syringe Filters	Filtration of mobile phase and sample solutions to remove particulates.	A necessary consumable; its environmental impact is considered in waste generation metrics in NEMI and AES.
Standard Analytical Reference Compound	(e.g., Melatonin standard for quantification and method validation [29]).	Used in minute quantities; its primary greenness impact is associated with its synthesis and disposal.
Disodium phthalate	Disodium phthalate, CAS:15968-01-1, MF:C8H6NaO4, MW:189.12 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Erysubin A	Erysubin A, MF:C20H16O6, MW:352.3 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

A Practical Guide to Implementing NEMI, AES, and AGREE in Analytical Workflows

Step-by-Step Application of the NEMI Pictogram for Method Evaluation

In the evolving landscape of pharmaceutical analysis, green analytical chemistry has transitioned from an optional consideration to an essential component of method development and validation [3]. The environmental impact of analytical activities—particularly those involving extensive solvent use in techniques like high-performance liquid chromatography—has raised significant concerns regarding ecological responsibility and sustainability [3]. Among the various tools developed to evaluate the environmental footprint of analytical methods, the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) stands as one of the pioneering and most accessible green assessment metrics [28]. Established in 2002 by the Multiagency Methods and Data Comparability Board, NEMI provides a straightforward, visually intuitive approach to profiling the greenness of analytical procedures [11] [28]. This guide provides a comprehensive, step-by-step framework for applying the NEMI pictogram to method evaluation, enabling researchers to systematically assess and improve the environmental sustainability of their analytical workflows within the broader context of greenness assessment comparison research involving AES, AGREE, and other metrics.

Fundamental Principles of the NEMI Pictogram

The NEMI Conceptual Framework

The NEMI pictogram functions as a qualitative assessment tool that evaluates analytical methods against four critical environmental criteria [28]. Its visual representation consists of a circular diagram divided into four quadrants, each corresponding to a specific environmental concern [11]. When a method satisfies a criterion, the respective quadrant is colored green; if not, it remains blank, providing immediate visual feedback on the method's environmental performance [28]. This simple, binary evaluation system allows researchers to quickly identify potential environmental concerns in their analytical procedures without complex calculations or scoring systems.

The NEMI assessment is based on four fundamental environmental criteria derived from established environmental protection guidelines:

• PBT Substances: The method must not contain any persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals listed in the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory [11].
• Hazardous Chemicals: None of the reagents can appear on the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act hazardous waste lists (D, F, K, P, and U lists) [11].
• Corrosivity: All chemicals used must have a pH between 2 and 12 to minimize corrosive environmental impact [11] [28].
• Waste Generation: The total waste produced per analysis must not exceed 50 g [11] [28].

Table 1: The Four Criteria of NEMI Assessment

Criterion	Requirement	Regulatory Basis
PBT Substances	No persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals	EPA Toxic Release Inventory
Hazardous Chemicals	No reagents on hazardous waste lists	EPA RCRA Lists (D, F, K, P, U)
Corrosivity	pH between 2 and 12 for all chemicals	-
Waste Generation	Total waste ≤ 50 g per analysis	-

Step-by-Step Application Protocol

Step 1: Inventory of Chemicals and Reagents

Begin by creating a comprehensive inventory of all chemicals, solvents, and reagents used throughout the analytical procedure, including sample preparation, separation, and detection stages [11]. For each substance, document the chemical identity, quantity used per analysis, concentration, and hazard classification. This inventory forms the foundational data for all subsequent NEMI evaluations. Specifically, note the exact volumes of organic solvents (e.g., acetonitrile, methanol), buffers, acids, bases, and any other chemicals that contribute to the final waste stream. Accurate measurement or calculation of these quantities is essential for reliable assessment.

Step 2: PBT Substance Evaluation

Cross-reference each chemical from your inventory against the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory PBT list [11]. This list identifies substances deemed persistent (resisting environmental degradation), bioaccumulative (accumulating in biological tissues), and toxic (harmful to human health or the environment). If any chemical in your method appears on this list, the first quadrant of the NEMI pictogram cannot be colored green. For example, certain chlorinated solvents or heavy metal-containing reagents may qualify as PBT substances and would therefore disqualify the method from achieving a green rating in this category.

Step 3: Hazardous Chemical Assessment

Screen all method chemicals against the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste lists, specifically focusing on the D, F, K, P, and U lists [11]. Common analytical solvents such as acetonitrile and methanol frequently appear on these lists due to their toxicity, flammability, or other hazardous characteristics [3]. If your method employs any substance listed as hazardous under RCRA, the second quadrant of the NEMI pictogram must remain blank. Pharmaceutical analysts should note that many conventional HPLC mobile phase components fall into this hazardous category, potentially limiting the greenness profile of traditional chromatographic methods.

Step 4: Corrosivity Evaluation

Measure or calculate the pH extremes encountered throughout the analytical procedure. This includes evaluating not only the final waste mixture but also any intermediate solutions with pH values outside the 2-12 range [11] [28]. For example, if your method involves strong acid digestion at pH 1 or strong basic hydrolysis at pH 14, the third quadrant would not qualify for green coloring. Methods employing neutral buffers or mild pH conditions typically satisfy this criterion more readily. When evaluating pH, consider both the initial and final conditions, as some reactions may generate or consume acids/bases during analysis.

Step 5: Waste Quantification

Calculate the total mass of waste generated per individual analysis. This includes all solvents, reagents, cleaning solutions, and any other materials that become waste during the analytical process [28]. To perform this calculation, sum the masses of all waste components, converting volumes to mass where necessary using appropriate density values. The critical threshold for NEMI compliance is 50 g per analysis. For liquid chromatography methods, this requires careful consideration of mobile phase consumption, column conditioning volumes, and system purge solutions [3]. Methods employing micro-scale techniques, reduced flow rates, or solvent recycling are more likely to satisfy this waste criterion.

Step 6: Pictogram Completion and Interpretation

After evaluating all four criteria, complete the NEMI pictogram by coloring only those quadrants for which your method satisfied the requirements. A fully green pictogram (all four quadrants colored) indicates excellent environmental performance across all categories, while partially filled pictograms quickly visualize specific areas needing improvement [28]. For example, a method might display green quadrants for PBT, corrosivity, and waste, but have a blank quadrant for hazardous chemicals, indicating that solvent substitution should be prioritized for greenness enhancement.

Case Study: NEMI Evaluation of Paclitaxel HPLC Methods

Experimental Context and Methodology

A recent comprehensive study evaluated the greenness profiles of multiple HPLC-based methods for paclitaxel quantification using seven different assessment tools, including NEMI [11]. Paclitaxel is a widely used chemotherapeutic agent for treating various cancers, and its analysis typically relies on reversed-phase HPLC with acetonitrile or methanol-based mobile phases [11]. The study applied the step-by-step NEMI protocol to evaluate nine different HPLC methods, documenting specific mobile phase compositions, flow rates, sample preparation procedures, and waste generation patterns. This case study illustrates the practical application of NEMI assessment in pharmaceutical analysis and demonstrates how the tool can guide method selection and optimization toward more sustainable practices.

NEMI Assessment Results and Interpretation

The evaluation revealed distinct environmental profiles across the different analytical methods. Methods 1, 2, 3, and 5 demonstrated superior environmental performance, achieving fully or predominantly green NEMI pictograms [11]. These methods typically incorporated reduced solvent consumption, less hazardous alternatives to traditional mobile phase components, and waste minimization strategies. In contrast, Methods 6, 8, and 9 showed significant environmental limitations, with multiple blank quadrants in their NEMI pictograms indicating concerns particularly regarding hazardous material usage and waste management [11]. The specific failures in these methods included the use of RCRA-listed hazardous solvents without adequate justification and waste generation exceeding the 50 g threshold, often due to high flow rates or extended analysis times.

Table 2: NEMI Assessment Results for Paclitaxel HPLC Methods [11]

Method	PBT Substances	Hazardous Chemicals	Corrosivity	Waste Generation	Overall Greenness
Method 1	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Excellent
Method 2	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Excellent
Method 3	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Excellent
Method 5	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Green (Pass)	Excellent
Method 6	Green (Pass)	Blank (Fail)	Green (Pass)	Blank (Fail)	Poor
Method 8	Green (Pass)	Blank (Fail)	Green (Pass)	Blank (Fail)	Poor
Method 9	Green (Pass)	Blank (Fail)	Green (Pass)	Blank (Fail)	Poor

Comparative Analysis with Other Greenness Assessment Tools

NEMI vs. AES vs. AGREE: Methodological Differences

When comparing NEMI with other prominent greenness assessment tools like the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) and AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric), distinct methodological differences emerge. While NEMI provides a qualitative, binary assessment focused on four specific criteria, AES employs a semi-quantitative scoring system that begins with a base of 100 points and deducts penalty points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste generation [28]. AGREE offers a more comprehensive quantitative evaluation based on all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry, generating a score between 0 and 1 with a detailed pictogram [13]. Each tool serves different purposes: NEMI for quick initial screening, AES for semi-quantitative comparison, and AGREE for comprehensive environmental profiling.

Complementary Strengths and Limitations

Each assessment tool exhibits unique strengths and limitations that determine their appropriate application contexts. NEMI's primary strength lies in its simplicity and immediate visual communication, enabling rapid method categorization without complex calculations [28] [13]. However, this simplicity comes with significant limitations, including its qualitative nature, inability to differentiate between degrees of greenness, and failure to address important factors such as energy consumption and occupational hazards [28]. Comparative studies have demonstrated that NEMI often fails to discriminate between methods with substantially different environmental impacts, with one study finding that 14 out of 16 methods shared identical NEMI pictograms despite clear differences in their environmental profiles [13]. In contrast, AES and AGREE provide more nuanced assessments but require more detailed data collection and calculation.

Table 3: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools

Assessment Tool	Assessment Type	Scoring System	Key Advantages	Key Limitations
NEMI	Qualitative	Binary (Pass/Fail)	Simple, quick visual interpretation	Qualitative only, limited criteria
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative	Numerical (0-100)	Incorporates reagent quantity and hazard	Does not cover all 12 GAC principles
AGREE	Quantitative	Numerical (0-1)	Comprehensive, covers all 12 GAC principles	More complex calculation required

Advanced Application: Integrating NEMI with Other Assessment Tools

Tiered Assessment Strategy

For comprehensive environmental evaluation, researchers should adopt a tiered assessment strategy that integrates multiple greenness metrics. In this approach, NEMI serves as an excellent initial screening tool due to its simplicity and rapid application, identifying methods with obvious environmental concerns [13]. Methods passing this initial screen can then undergo more rigorous evaluation using AES for semi-quantitative analysis and AGREE for comprehensive assessment against all 12 green analytical chemistry principles [30]. This tiered approach optimizes resource allocation by focusing detailed assessment efforts only on methods demonstrating basic environmental compliance, while quickly eliminating clearly problematic approaches.

Method Optimization Guidance

The NEMI assessment provides specific, actionable guidance for method optimization across the four evaluated criteria. For methods failing the hazardous chemical criterion, researchers can explore alternative solvents such as ethanol or propylene carbonate to replace traditional hazardous options like acetonitrile or methanol [3]. Methods generating excessive waste can be optimized through miniaturization strategies, including reduced column dimensions, lower flow rates, or scaled-down sample preparation techniques [3]. Additionally, microflow and capillary HPLC systems significantly decrease solvent consumption and waste generation while maintaining analytical performance [3]. By systematically addressing each failed NEMI criterion, researchers can develop increasingly sustainable analytical methods that maintain rigorous performance standards.

Essential Research Reagents and Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

The implementation of greener analytical methods requires careful selection of reagents and solvents to minimize environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance. The following table outlines key research reagent solutions that support the development of environmentally sustainable analytical methods aligned with green chemistry principles.

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Solution	Function	Green Alternative	Application Notes
Acetonitrile	HPLC mobile phase modifier	Ethanol, propylene carbonate	Replace with less hazardous alternatives where possible [3]
Methanol	HPLC mobile phase modifier	Ethanol, renewable solvents	Consider 1,1-diethoxyethane or isosorbide dimethyl ether [3]
Chlorinated Solvents	Extraction, chromatography	Ethyl acetate, methyl tet-butyl ether	Prioritize biodegradable options with lower toxicity [11]
Traditional Buffers	pH control in mobile phases	Green buffers (e.g., ammonium acetate)	Ensure final pH remains between 2-12 for NEMI compliance [11]
Derivatization Agents	Analyte modification	Green reagents (e.g., nicotinic acid)	Avoid when possible; use ferrocene carboxaldehyde if needed [3]

The step-by-step application of the NEMI pictogram provides researchers with a systematic approach for evaluating the environmental sustainability of analytical methods. While NEMI serves as an accessible entry point to greenness assessment, its limitations necessitate integration with more comprehensive tools like AES and AGREE for thorough environmental profiling [13]. As pharmaceutical analysis continues to evolve toward more sustainable practices, the principles embodied in NEMI—reduced hazardous chemical use, waste minimization, and enhanced safety—will play increasingly important roles in method development and validation. By adopting the structured assessment protocol outlined in this guide, researchers and drug development professionals can contribute to the advancement of green analytical chemistry while maintaining the high analytical standards required in pharmaceutical applications.

Calculating Penalty Points and Scores with the Analytical Eco-Scale

In the evolving landscape of pharmaceutical analysis, the environmental impact of analytical procedures has become a critical concern for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals. The extensive use of organic solvents and reagents in conventional techniques like High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) generates significant waste with potential ecological consequences [11]. This reality has catalyzed the development of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) and dedicated assessment tools to evaluate and improve the sustainability of analytical methods. Among these tools, the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) stands out as a practical, semi-quantitative metric for environmental impact assessment [28].

The broader context of greenness assessment encompasses several established methodologies, including the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), the Analytical Greenness Calculator (AGREE), and the Analytical Eco-Scale, each offering distinct approaches and insights [31]. While NEMI provides a simple qualitative pictogram and AGREE delivers a comprehensive evaluation against all 12 GAC principles, the Analytical Eco-Scale occupies a unique position with its penalty-points system that balances practical applicability with informative results [7] [28]. This comparative guide examines these tools through an objective lens, focusing specifically on the calculation methodology, scoring system, and practical application of the Analytical Eco-Scale in pharmaceutical analysis contexts.

Key Characteristics of NEMI, AES, and AGREE

Table 1: Comparison of Primary Green Analytical Chemistry Assessment Tools

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Year Introduced	2002 [28]	2012 [28]	2020 [7]
Assessment Basis	Four binary criteria [11]	Penalty points from ideal score [28]	12 GAC principles [7]
Output Type	Qualitative pictogram [28]	Semi-quantitative score [11]	Quantitative score (0-1) & pictogram [7]
Scoring Range	Pass/Fail per criterion [11]	0 to 100 [28]	0 to 1 [7]
Greenness Threshold	All four quadrants green [11]	≥ 75 (Excellent) [11]	Closer to 1.0 indicates greener method [7]
Key Advantages	Simple, quick visual [28]	Accounts for reagent quantity & hazard [11]	Comprehensive, considers all GAC principles [7]
Main Limitations	Qualitative, limited criteria [28]	Does not cover all 12 GAC principles [7]	Requires more detailed input data [7]

Tool Selection and Complementary Use

The choice of assessment tool often depends on the analysis goals. NEMI offers a rapid initial screening, while AES provides a more nuanced evaluation that considers reagent volumes and energy consumption [11] [28]. AGREE delivers the most comprehensive assessment but requires more detailed data collection [7]. Many studies employ multiple tools to gain complementary insights, as demonstrated in assessments of analytical methods for cannabinoids in oils and voriconazole in pharmaceuticals [31] [3]. The relationship between these tools and their position in the analytical assessment workflow can be visualized as a sequential process.

The Analytical Eco-Scale: Detailed Methodology

Fundamental Calculation Principle

The Analytical Eco-Scale operates on a straightforward yet effective principle: it begins with a base score of 100 points, representing an ideal green analysis, and subtracts penalty points for each parameter that deviates from ideal green conditions [28]. The penalties are assigned based on the potential environmental impact, occupational hazards, energy consumption, and waste generation associated with the analytical method [11]. The final score is calculated using the formula:

AES Score = 100 − Total Penalty Points

This scoring system directly correlates with the method's environmental performance, where higher scores indicate greener analytical procedures [28].

Penalty Points Assignment System

Table 2: Analytical Eco-Scale Penalty Points Calculation Criteria

Parameter	Condition	Penalty Points
Reagents	>10 mL of hazardous reagent	According to hazard and amount
	<10 mL of hazardous reagent
Hazard Category	Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic (PBT)	6
	Toxic (T)	5
	Harmful (H)	4
	Irritant (Xi)	3
	Corrosive (C)	3
	Flammable (F)	2
	Environmental Hazard (N)	1
Energy Consumption	>1.5 kWh per sample	4
	1.0-1.5 kWh per sample	3
	0.1-1.0 kWh per sample	2
	<0.1 kWh per sample	0
Occupational Hazard	Use of personal protective equipment required	According to risk
Waste	>10 mL waste per sample	4
	1-10 mL waste per sample	3
	<1 mL waste per sample	2
	No waste	0
Waste Treatment	No treatment	3
	Recycling, degradation, or passivation	0

The hazard classifications and corresponding penalty points are typically determined using the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of classification and labeling of chemicals, with resources like PubChem providing detailed hazard information for specific compounds [11]. For reagents, the penalty is calculated by multiplying the hazard penalty by the amount used (in grams or milliliters), creating a system where both the inherent danger and the quantity employed contribute to the overall environmental impact assessment [11].

Interpretation Guidelines

The Analytical Eco-Scale provides clear benchmarks for interpreting final scores:

• ≥ 75 points: Excellent green analysis [11]
• 50-74 points: Acceptable green analysis [28]
• < 50 points: Insufficient greenness [11]

These thresholds enable researchers to quickly categorize their analytical methods and make informed decisions about method selection or optimization needs.

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

Standardized Assessment Procedure

Implementing the Analytical Eco-Scale requires a systematic approach to ensure consistent and comparable results across different methods and laboratories. The following protocol outlines the key steps:

• Inventory All Method Components: Document every chemical reagent, solvent, and consumable used in the analytical procedure, including sample preparation, separation, and detection stages. Record exact volumes/masses utilized per analysis [11].

• Identify Energy Requirements: Calculate total energy consumption per sample analysis, considering instrument operation time, heating requirements, and any additional energy-intensive steps [28].

• Determine Waste Generation: Quantify all waste streams produced, including organic solvents, aqueous solutions, and solid wastes. Account for any in-line recycling or treatment processes [11].

• Assign Hazard Classifications: Consult Safety Data Sheets (SDS) and GHS classifications for all chemicals to determine appropriate hazard categories and corresponding penalty points [11].

• Calculate Individual Penalties: For each reagent, multiply hazard penalty points by the quantity used. Add fixed penalties for energy consumption, occupational hazards, and waste management [28].

• Compute Final Score: Subtract total penalty points from 100 to obtain the Analytical Eco-Scale score [28].

• Implement Optimization: Identify high-penalty areas and explore alternatives, such as solvent substitution, method miniaturization, or waste treatment implementation [3].

Practical Application Example

In a study evaluating HPLC methods for paclitaxel quantification, methods were successfully compared using the Analytical Eco-Scale alongside other tools. The results demonstrated that method 5 achieved an excellent score of 90, while other methods scored lower, highlighting the utility of AES in differentiating between analytical approaches based on their environmental impact [11].

Another study assessing methods for determining cannabinoids in oils found that 7 out of 8 methods scored between 50 and 73 on the Analytical Eco-Scale, categorizing them as acceptable green methods, while one method achieved a score of 80, qualifying as an excellent green analysis [31]. These applications confirm the practical viability of the AES protocol in real-world pharmaceutical analysis scenarios.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Reagents and Their Functions in Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Solution	Function in Analysis	Green Considerations
Acetonitrile	Common organic modifier in HPLC mobile phases	Hazardous, high penalty; consider replacement with ethanol [3]
Methanol	Organic solvent for extraction and chromatography	Toxic solvent; included in EPA's TRI list [3]
Ethanol	Alternative green solvent for extractions	Renewable, biodegradable; recommended replacement [3]
Water	Primary solvent in reverse-phase chromatography	Ideal green solvent when used without additives [3]
Bio-based Solvents	Replacement for traditional organic solvents	Renewable sources (e.g., 1,1-diethoxyethane, eucalyptol) [3]
Propylene Carbonate	Alternative green solvent	Less hazardous substitute for toxic solvents [3]

The Analytical Eco-Scale provides a balanced approach to greenness assessment, offering more granularity than simple binary tools like NEMI while remaining more accessible than comprehensive frameworks like AGREE. Its penalty-point system effectively captures the environmental impact of analytical methods while accounting for both the hazard level and quantity of reagents used. When applied systematically using the standardized protocol outlined herein, the AES enables meaningful comparisons between analytical methods and identifies specific areas for improvement. For researchers committed to implementing Green Analytical Chemistry principles, mastering the calculation of penalty points and scores with the Analytical Eco-Scale is an essential competency that supports the development of more sustainable pharmaceutical analysis methods.

Utilizing AGREE Software and Interpreting Its Clock-Shaped Output

In analytical chemistry, particularly within pharmaceutical development and environmental monitoring, the principles of green chemistry emphasize reducing environmental impact and enhancing safety. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) metrics provide a standardized way to evaluate how well an analytical method aligns with these principles. The Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric has emerged as a significant tool, complementing other established systems like the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) and the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES). This guide objectively compares the performance of the AGREE software with these alternatives, focusing on the interpretation of its distinctive clock-shaped output. The context for this comparison is vital for researchers and drug development professionals who must justify their method selections not only on technical merit but also on environmental and safety grounds, a growing concern in regulatory submissions [19].

A recent study developing a method for multi-element determination in wine beverages exemplifies the application of these tools. The researchers employed NEMI, AES, and AGREE to qualify their ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for ICP-OES as "green," providing a practical dataset for comparison [19]. This experimental context will serve as a foundation for evaluating the capabilities of each assessment tool.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

The following table summarizes the core characteristics of the NEMI, AES, and AGREE greenness assessment tools, providing a high-level overview for researchers.

Table 1: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools: NEMI, AES, and AGREE

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Basic Principle	Pictogram (pass/fail for 4 criteria) [19]	Penalty point system for hazardous reagents/conditions [19]	Weighted calculation based on all 12 GAC principles [19]
Output Format	Quadrant pictogram	Numerical score (≥75 is excellent) [19]	Clock-shaped pictogram with central score
Key Advantages	Simple, quick visual interpretation	Semi-quantitative, allows for method ranking [19]	Comprehensive, considers all GAC principles, intuitive visual output
Key Limitations	Lacks granularity; no overall score	Does not equally weight all GAC principles [19]	Requires more detailed input data
Ideal Use Case	Initial, rapid screening of methods	Comparing and ranking the greenness of several methods [19]	Comprehensive assessment for reporting and justification

Experimental Data and Protocol for Comparison

The quantitative comparison is grounded in the experimental data from the development and greenness assessment of a UAD-ICP-OES method for determining multi-elements in wine [19].

• Experimental Protocol (UAD-ICP-OES for Wine): The core methodology involved a multivariate optimization for the ultrasound-assisted dilution extraction. The optimum parameters were:

  • HNO3 Concentration: 3 M
  • Wine Volume: 2 mL
  • Extraction Time: 30 minutes
  • Ultrasound Temperature: 70 °C Following extraction, the samples were analyzed via Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES). The method's performance was validated, reporting very high LOQ (26 to 1040 µg/L), precision of ≤ 6.3%, and accuracy ranging from 92 to 101% [19].

• Supporting Experimental Data: The greenness of this method was evaluated using all three tools. The study reported that "When comparing the results obtained from all these tools, they all qualified the proposed method as green" [19]. This provides a common baseline for comparing the output and interpretive value of each tool on an identical method.

Performance Comparison and Output Interpretation

• NEMI Performance: The NEMI assessment yields a simple pictogram with four quadrants. A quadrant is colored green if a criterion is met (e.g., the reagent is not persistent, not hazardous, etc.). While the wine study confirmed the UAD-ICP-OES method passed NEMI, the tool's binary nature offers no insight into the degree of greenness or performance against the full spectrum of GAC principles [19].

• AES Performance: The Analytical Eco-Scale uses a penalty point system. A base score of 100 is reduced for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste generation. The final score is interpreted as: >75 excellent, >50 acceptable, and <50 inadequate greenness. The UAD-ICP-OES method was deemed green by AES, but the tool does not assign equal importance to all 12 GAC principles, which can limit the comprehensiveness of its assessment [19].

• AGREE Performance and Clock Interpretation: The AGREE software represents the most holistic approach. It considers all 12 principles of GAC, assigning weighted scores to each. The output is a distinctive clock-shaped pictogram with 12 segments. The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for generating and interpreting this output.

Diagram 1: AGREE Workflow

Each segment corresponds to one GAC principle. The color of a segment reflects its score, ranging from red (poor) to green (excellent). The software also calculates a total score displayed in the center of the clock. A score closer to 10 indicates a greener method. This provides an immediate, intuitive visualization of a method's strengths and weaknesses across the entire GAC framework. For the UAD-ICP-OES method, which was qualified as green by AGREE, the clock would show predominantly green segments, with a central score likely above 0.7 [19].

Table 2: Quantitative Output Comparison for a Common "Green" Method

Assessment Tool	Output for UAD-ICP-OES Method [19]	Granularity	Comprehensiveness
NEMI	Pass (All quadrants green)	Low (Binary)	Low (4 criteria)
AES	Score ≥ 75 (Excellent)	Medium (Semi-quantitative)	Medium
AGREE	Overall Score > 0.7 (Estimated)	High (Weighted, Multi-factor)	High (12 GAC principles)

The Scientist's Toolkit for Green Assessment

Successfully implementing and evaluating analytical methods for greenness requires a combination of specific reagents, instrumentation, and software tools.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions and Materials

Item	Function in Analysis (e.g., UAD-ICP-OES)	Role in Greenness Assessment
Nitric Acid (HNO3)	Digestant and extraction solvent for releasing metals from organic wine matrix [19].	A key parameter in AGREE/NEMI/AES due to its corrosive and hazardous nature. Dilution and minimal use improve scores.
Ultra-pure Water	Diluent for preparing standards and samples.	Reduces introduction of interfering contaminants. Using minimal volumes supports waste reduction principles in AGREE.
ICP-OES Spectrometer	Analytical instrument for precise multi-element detection and quantification [19].	High energy consumption is a penalty in AES and is considered in AGREE's energy use principle.
Reference Standards	Calibration and validation of the analytical method (ICP-OES) [19].	Ensures method accuracy and reliability, preventing resource waste from failed experiments.
AGREE Software	Computes a comprehensive greenness score and generates the clock-shaped output.	The primary tool for holistic evaluation and justification of a method's environmental performance.
Piperlotine D	Piperlotine D, MF:C16H21NO4, MW:291.34 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Neohancoside B	Neohancoside B Reference Standard	High-purity Neohancoside B for pharmaceutical research. A natural compound found in medicinal plants. For Research Use Only. Not for human use.

The choice of a greenness assessment tool depends on the required depth of analysis. NEMI offers a basic pass/fail check, while AES provides a good semi-quantitative ranking system. However, for a comprehensive, transparent, and easily interpretable assessment that aligns with the full scope of Green Analytical Chemistry, the AGREE software and its clock-shaped output are superior. Its ability to visually communicate performance across all 12 GAC principles makes it an invaluable tool for researchers and drug development professionals who need to rigorously justify their methods in publications, reports, and regulatory submissions.

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles is transforming modern laboratories, driven by a global initiative to reduce the environmental impact of analytical methods while maintaining rigorous performance standards [11] [26]. For researchers and pharmaceutical development professionals, selecting appropriate sustainability metrics has become as crucial as choosing the analytical technique itself. The landscape of greenness assessment tools has evolved significantly from basic checklists to sophisticated, multi-factorial algorithms that evaluate the entire analytical workflow [26]. This guide provides a comprehensive comparison of the leading greenness assessment metrics—NEMI, AES, and AGREE—and their application across common chromatographic methods, particularly HPLC and HPTLC. By matching the right assessment tool to specific analytical techniques and sustainability priorities, scientists can make informed decisions that align with both environmental goals and analytical requirements, ultimately supporting the broader transition toward sustainable pharmaceutical analysis.

Fundamental Principles and Evolution

Greenness assessment metrics have progressively evolved from simple, binary indicators to comprehensive, quantitative tools that provide nuanced evaluations of analytical methods' environmental impact [26]. The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), introduced in 2002, serves as a foundational tool that offers a straightforward, visual representation of a method's adherence to four basic environmental criteria [11] [26]. The Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) advanced the field by introducing a semi-quantitative approach that assigns penalty points for non-green practices, resulting in a numerical score that facilitates direct comparison between methods [11] [32]. Most recently, the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric represents the state-of-the-art by incorporating all 12 principles of GAC into a unified evaluation that generates both a pictorial representation and a comprehensive numerical score between 0 and 1 [26] [32]. This evolution reflects the analytical community's growing recognition that environmental assessment must be integrated throughout method development and validation processes.

Comparative Characteristics of Assessment Metrics

The table below summarizes the core characteristics, advantages, and limitations of the three primary greenness assessment metrics discussed in this guide.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric	Type of Assessment	Key Evaluation Criteria	Output Format	Primary Advantages	Main Limitations
NEMI	Qualitative	PBT substances, hazardous chemicals, corrosivity (pH 2-12), waste generation (<50 g) [11]	Pictogram with 4 quadrants [11] [26]	Simple, quick visual interpretation [26]	Binary assessment (pass/fail), limited scope, doesn't address energy use or full workflow [11] [26]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative	Hazardous chemicals, energy consumption, waste [11] [32]	Numerical score (0-100) with >75 = excellent, >50 = acceptable [11]	Facilitates direct method comparison, encourages transparency [11] [26]	Relies on expert judgment for penalties, lacks visual component [26]
AGREE	Quantitative	All 12 GAC principles [26] [32]	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1) [26] [32]	Comprehensive, user-friendly, combines visual and numerical output [26] [32]	Subjective weighting of criteria, limited pre-analytical process assessment [26]

Metric-Method Alignment: Practical Application Guide

Strategic Selection for Chromatographic Techniques

The effectiveness of a greenness assessment metric depends significantly on its alignment with the specific characteristics of the analytical method being evaluated. For HPLC methods, which typically consume substantial volumes of organic solvents and energy, AGREE and Analytical Eco-Scale provide the most comprehensive evaluation. AGREE is particularly valuable for its consideration of energy consumption and solvent toxicity across the entire analytical workflow [26]. In a recent study evaluating HPLC methods for paclitaxel quantification, AGREE provided nuanced insights into the sustainability profiles of different methods, highlighting specific areas for improvement in hazardous material usage and energy consumption [11]. The Analytical Eco-Scale complements this approach by offering a straightforward scoring system that efficiently benchmarks HPLC methods against sustainability standards [11].

For HPTLC methods, which inherently consume less solvent per sample and allow parallel processing, NEMI offers a rapid initial assessment, while AGREE delivers a more comprehensive sustainability profile [33] [34] [32]. The ability of HPTLC to analyze multiple samples simultaneously on a single plate significantly reduces solvent consumption per sample, a advantage clearly captured by both AGREE and Analytical Eco-Scale assessments [33] [34]. In a recent QbD-steered HPTLC method for concurrent estimation of six COVID-19 and cardiovascular drugs, AGREE and Analytical Eco-Scale provided validated greenness scores that confirmed the method's excellent environmental profile [34]. Another comparative study of normal-phase versus reversed-phase HPTLC methods for antiviral agents demonstrated AGREE's effectiveness in differentiating the greenness of similar methods, with the reversed-phase approach employing ethanol:water (6:4, v/v) scoring higher in greenness assessments [32].

Comparative Performance Across Methodologies

Table 2: Greenness Assessment Scores for Published Analytical Methods

Analytical Method	Application	NEMI Assessment	Analytical Eco-Scale Score	AGREE Score	Key Green Features
HPLC Method 3 [11]	Paclitaxel quantification	Not specified	85 (Excellent) [11]	Not specified	Minimal hazardous solvent use, reduced waste generation [11]
HPLC Method 5 [11]	Paclitaxel quantification	Not specified	90 (Excellent) [11]	Not specified	Optimized solvent consumption, operational efficiency [11]
HPTLC (Reversed-Phase) [32]	Antiviral agents (RMD, FAV, MOL)	Not specified	Not specified	0.82 (High) [32]	Ethanol:water mobile phase, minimal sample preparation [32]
HPTLC (Normal-Phase) [32]	Antiviral agents (RMD, FAV, MOL)	Not specified	Not specified	0.75 (Good) [32]	Ethyl acetate:ethanol:water mobile phase [32]
QbD-Steered HPTLC [34]	Six COVID-19/cardiovascular drugs	Passed all criteria [34]	Excellent rating [34]	High rating [34]	Ethyl acetate, methylene chloride, methanol, ammonia mobile phase; high sample throughput [34]

Complementary Assessment Tools for Comprehensive Evaluation

While NEMI, AES, and AGREE represent the core greenness assessment metrics, several specialized tools have emerged to address specific assessment needs. The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) offers a detailed visual assessment of the entire analytical process through a five-part, color-coded pictogram, making it particularly valuable for identifying high-impact stages within a method [26]. Recent modifications to GAPI have resulted in MoGAPI and ComplexMoGAPI, which retain the pictographic approach while introducing cumulative scoring systems to improve comparability [26] [32]. For methods where sample preparation represents a significant portion of environmental impact, AGREEprep provides targeted evaluation of this specific workflow component [26]. The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) has recently been introduced as a complementary metric that assesses methodological practicality and applicability, supporting the fit-for-purpose viewpoint essential in pharmaceutical analysis [11] [32]. The integration of these tools within the broader framework of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) enables a holistic trichromatic evaluation that balances environmental sustainability with analytical performance and practical applicability [11] [32].

Experimental Protocols and Assessment Methodologies

Detailed Experimental Protocol for Greenness Assessment

Implementing a standardized approach to greenness assessment ensures consistent and comparable results across different methods and laboratories. The following protocol outlines a comprehensive procedure for evaluating the environmental sustainability of analytical methods:

• Method Documentation: Compile complete details of the analytical procedure, including sample preparation requirements, solvent types and volumes, energy consumption, waste generation, and operational parameters [11] [26].

• Metric Selection: Choose appropriate assessment metrics based on the analytical technique and assessment goals. For initial screening, NEMI provides rapid evaluation, while for comprehensive assessment, AGREE or Analytical Eco-Scale offer more detailed insights [11] [26].

• Data Collection: Quantify solvent consumption per sample, identify hazardous chemicals using Safety Data Sheets (SDS), measure energy requirements for instrumentation, and calculate waste generation [11] [26].

• Assessment Implementation:

  • For NEMI: Evaluate method against the four criteria (PBT substances, hazardous chemicals, corrosivity, waste generation) and generate the pictogram [11].
  • For Analytical Eco-Scale: Begin with a base score of 100 and subtract penalty points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste [11].
  • For AGREE: Input method parameters into the available software tool to generate the combined pictorial and numerical output based on all 12 GAC principles [26] [32].

• Interpretation and Optimization: Identify areas with poor greenness scores and implement modifications such as solvent substitution, method miniaturization, or waste treatment strategies [35] [34].

• Comparative Analysis: Benchmark results against alternative methods or previously published approaches to contextualize the greenness performance [34] [32].

Relationship Between Assessment Metrics and Analytical Techniques

The following diagram illustrates the decision-making process for selecting appropriate greenness metrics based on analytical technique and assessment objectives:

Diagram 1: Greenness metric selection based on analytical method and assessment goals. HPLC methods benefit most from AGREE and Analytical Eco-Scale for comprehensive evaluation of solvent and energy use, while HPTLC can utilize NEMI for rapid screening or AGREE for full workflow assessment [33] [11] [26].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Sustainable Analytical Chemistry

Key Materials and Their Functions in Green Method Development

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Sustainable Chromatographic Methods

Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Methods	Green Alternatives & Considerations	Application Examples
Methanol	HPLC mobile phase component [33] [32]	Consider ethanol as greener alternative [35] [32]	Reverse-phase HPTLC mobile phase (with water) [32]
Acetonitrile	Common HPLC organic modifier [35]	High environmental concern; substitute with methanol or ethanol where possible [35]	HILIC separations (difficult to replace) [35]
Ethanol	Green solvent for extraction and mobile phases [34] [32]	Renewable, biodegradable, less toxic [35] [32]	Reverse-phase HPTLC of antivirals (ethanol:water) [32]
Ethyl Acetate	Extraction solvent and normal-phase mobile phase component [34]	Preferred over chlorinated solvents [34]	Normal-phase HPTLC for COVID-19/cardiovascular drugs [34]
Water	Reverse-phase mobile phase component [32]	Greenest possible solvent [35] [32]	Mobile phase modifier in reversed-phase systems [32]
Silica Gel 60F254	HPTLC stationary phase [34]	Standard adsorption material, minimal waste generation [33] [34]	HPTLC plates for pharmaceutical analysis [33] [34]

The strategic selection of greenness assessment metrics is paramount for advancing sustainable practices in pharmaceutical analysis. As demonstrated throughout this guide, NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE each offer distinct advantages for different analytical contexts. NEMI provides rapid screening capabilities, Analytical Eco-Scale enables straightforward numerical comparison, and AGREE delivers comprehensive assessment aligned with all 12 GAC principles [11] [26] [32]. The experimental data and case studies presented confirm that method-specific considerations significantly influence metric performance, with HPTLC often demonstrating inherent green advantages over HPLC in solvent consumption and sample throughput [33] [34]. As the field evolves toward the integrated framework of White Analytical Chemistry, the complementary use of multiple assessment tools will provide the most holistic evaluation of method sustainability [11] [32]. By strategically matching metrics to methods and embracing continuous improvement based on assessment results, researchers and drug development professionals can significantly reduce the environmental footprint of analytical operations while maintaining the rigorous performance standards required in pharmaceutical applications.

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles in pharmaceutical analysis is crucial for developing sustainable and environmentally friendly methods. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with photodiode array detection (PDA) is a workhorse technique for drug determination, including compounds like melatonin. This case study applies three established greenness assessment tools—NEMI (National Environmental Method Index), AES (Analytical Eco-Scale), and AGREE (Analytical GREEnness)—to a published HPLC-PDA method for melatonin determination. The objective is to provide a comparative evaluation of the method's environmental impact, offering a practical framework for researchers and drug development professionals to incorporate sustainability metrics into their analytical workflows.

The melatonin HPLC-PDA method evaluated in this case study was developed for the determination of melatonin encapsulation efficiency in poly(lactic acid) nanoparticles and its in vitro release profile [36] [37].

Chromatographic Conditions

• Apparatus: Waters 2695 Alliance HPLC system with a photodiode array (PDA) detector [36].
• Column: LiChrospher 100 RP-18 (125 mm × 4 mm, 5 µm particle size) [36].
• Mobile Phase: Acetonitrile and water in a ratio of 65:35 (v/v) [36] [37].
• Flow Rate: 0.9 mL/min in isocratic mode [36].
• Detection Wavelength: 220 nm [36] [37].
• Injection Volume: 20 µL [36].
• Column Temperature: 30°C [36].
• Run Time: 2 minutes [36].

Sample Preparation

Standard and sample solutions were prepared in a mixture of acetonitrile and water (65:35, v/v) and filtered through a 0.22 µm pore size filter before injection [36]. The method demonstrated linearity over the concentration range of 10–100 µg/mL, with limits of detection and quantification of 25.9 ng/mL and 78.7 ng/mL, respectively [36] [37].

Application of Greenness Assessment Tools

NEMI (National Environmental Method Index) Assessment

The NEMI assessment utilizes a pictogram with four quadrants, each indicating whether a specific criterion is met (checked) or not (blank) [38].

Table 1: NEMI Assessment of the HPLC-PDA Method for Melatonin

Criterion	Status	Remarks
Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT)	Met	Acetonitrile is not classified as PBT.
Hazardous	☐ Not Met	Acetonitrile is classified as hazardous (flammable, health hazard).
Corrosive	Met	pH of mobile phase is not corrosive (pH ~5-7).
Waste	☐ Not Met	Waste generation >50 g/sample (estimated from solvent consumption).

The NEMI pictogram for the original method would display two checked quadrants (PBT and Corrosive) and two blank quadrants (Hazardous and Waste).

AES (Analytical Eco-Scale) Assessment

The Analytical Eco-Scale is a semi-quantitative tool where a higher score (out of 100) indicates a greener method. Penalty points (PP) are assigned for hazardous reagents, instruments, energy consumption, and waste [39].

Table 2: Analytical Eco-Scale Calculation for the Melatonin HPLC Method

Parameter	Condition	Penalty Points
Reagents	Acetonitrile ( >1 mL, hazardous)	12
	Water (non-hazardous)	0
Instrument	Energy consumption (HPLC)	1
Waste	~1.8 mL per run ( <10 mL)	3
Occupational Hazard	Standard procedures	0
Total Penalty Points		16
Analytical Eco-Scale Score	100 - 16	84

AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) Assessment

AGREE is a more recent and comprehensive software-based tool that evaluates 12 principles of GAC, providing an overall score between 0 and 1 [39] [38] [40].

Table 3: AGREE Score Analysis for the Melatonin HPLC Method

Principle	Score Consideration
1. Directness	Penalized; requires sample preparation.
2. Energy Consumption	< 0.1 kWh per sample; minimal penalty.
3. Safety	Penalized due to use of acetonitrile.
4. Waste	Low waste generation; minimal penalty.
5. Sample Throughput	High; 2-minute run time.
6. Portability & In-line	Penalized; benchtop HPLC system.
7. Automation/Miniaturization	Penalized; conventional HPLC.
8. Operator Cost	High; requires trained personnel.
9. Sample & Reagent Amounts	Low injection volume (20 µL).
10. Waste Treatment	No on-line treatment; penalized.
11. Toxicity	Penalized for acetonitrile.
12. Source Renewability	Penalized for fossil-based acetonitrile.
Estimated Overall AGREE Score	~0.58

Table 4: Side-by-Side Comparison of the Three Greenness Assessments

Assessment Tool	Result for Original Method	Interpretation
NEMI Pictogram	2 out of 4 quadrants checked	The method has significant environmental drawbacks, primarily due to the use of a hazardous solvent.
Analytical Eco-Scale	Score of 84	A "excellent green analysis" (score >75), but with room for improvement in reagent hazard [39].
AGREE	Estimated score of ~0.58	A medium greenness profile, highlighting trade-offs between efficiency, waste, and reagent toxicity.

A Pathway to a Greener HPLC-PDA Method for Melatonin

The assessment reveals that the primary environmental drawback of the original method is the use of acetonitrile. A straightforward approach to improving greenness is solvent substitution.

Proposed Greener Alternative

• Greener Mobile Phase: Substitute acetonitrile with ethanol, a safer, less toxic, and renewable solvent [39] [40]. A mobile phase of ethanol:water (60:40, v/v) or ethanol:buffer could be optimized for melatonin separation, mirroring successful approaches used for other pharmaceuticals [39].

Projected Improvement in Greenness Scores

• NEMI: The "Hazardous" quadrant would shift from blank to checked, improving the pictogram to 3 out of 4 checked quadrants.
• AES: The penalty for acetonitrile (PP=12) would be eliminated. Ethanol might incur a minor penalty (e.g., PP=4 for flammability), raising the total score from 84 to approximately 92.
• AGREE: Principles 3 (Safety), 11 (Toxicity), and 12 (Source Renewability) would see significant score improvements, potentially elevating the overall score from ~0.58 to above 0.75.

The following diagram visualizes this comparative greenness assessment workflow.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 5: Key Reagents and Materials for HPLC-PDA Analysis of Melatonin

Item	Function / Role	Example from Case Study
HPLC-PDA System	Separates and detects compounds; PDA allows spectral confirmation.	Waters 2695 Alliance with 2998 PDA detector [36] [41].
C18 Reverse-Phase Column	The stationary phase for analyte separation.	LiChrospher 100 RP-18 column [36].
Organic Solvent (Mobile Phase)	Dissolves and elutes analytes from the column.	Acetonitrile (original) or Ethanol (greener alternative) [36] [39].
Aqueous Component (Mobile Phase)	Modifies retention and selectivity in the mobile phase.	Water, often with buffers like KHâ‚‚POâ‚„ [36] [39].
Analytical Standard	Provides a known purity reference for quantification.	Melatonin standard (98% purity) [36].
Syringe Filters	Removes particulate matter from samples before injection.	0.22 µm PVDF filter [36].
delta9,11-Estradiol	delta9,11-Estradiol|High-Purity Reference Standard	delta9,11-Estradiol: A high-purity estradiol derivative and degradation product for pharmaceutical research. For Research Use Only. Not for human use.
Vanillactic acid	Vanillactic acid, CAS:2475-56-1, MF:C10H12O5, MW:212.2 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

This case study demonstrates the practical application of the NEMI, AES, and AGREE tools to evaluate the environmental footprint of an HPLC-PDA method for melatonin. The multi-faceted assessment reveals that while the original method is efficient and analytically valid, its greenness is compromised by the use of acetonitrile. The data clearly shows that substituting acetonitrile with a greener solvent like ethanol is the most impactful strategy for improvement. Employing these assessment tools empowers scientists to make informed decisions, guiding the development of analytical methods that are not only precise and accurate but also safer and more sustainable.

The development of environmentally sustainable analytical methods is an increasingly critical objective in pharmaceutical analysis. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles guide researchers in minimizing the environmental impact of analytical procedures while maintaining high-quality standards [7]. High-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC) has emerged as an inherently green technique due to its minimal solvent consumption, low energy requirements, and reduced waste generation [33]. This case study provides a comprehensive greenness assessment of HPTLC methods for analyzing Ertugliflozin (ERZ), a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor used to treat type-2 diabetes.

The assessment employs three established greenness metrics: the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) approach [42]. By comparing traditional normal-phase (NP-HPTLC) and eco-friendly reversed-phase (RP-HPTLC) methods, this analysis offers drug development professionals evidence-based guidance for implementing sustainable analytical practices without compromising analytical performance.

Analytical Techniques for Ertugliflozin

Ertugliflozin and Stability Profile

Ertugliflozin (ERZ) is chemically described as 5-(4-chloro-3-(4-ethoxybenzyl)phenyl)-1-(hydroxymethyl)-6,8-dioxabicyclo[3.2.1]octane-2,3,4-triol with a molecular formula of C22H25ClO7 [43]. Forced degradation studies conducted per ICH guidelines reveal that ERZ is relatively stable under thermal, photolytic, neutral, and alkaline hydrolysis conditions but shows significant degradation in acidic and oxidative environments [43] [44]. These stability characteristics necessitate robust analytical methods capable of separating ERZ from its degradation products.

HPTLC as an Analytical Platform

HPTLC is a sophisticated planar chromatography technique that offers several advantages over conventional thin-layer chromatography, including higher resolution, better sensitivity, and improved reproducibility [45] [46]. The technique utilizes stationary phases with finer particle sizes (5-6 μm versus 10-12 μm in TLC), resulting in compact sample zones and enhanced separation efficiency [47]. Key advantages include:

• Parallel analysis: Multiple samples can be processed simultaneously on the same plate
• Minimal sample preparation: Reduced need for extensive sample clean-up procedures
• Low solvent consumption: Significantly less mobile phase required per sample compared to HPLC
• Flexible detection: Multiple detection methods can be applied to the same separation [46] [33]

These inherent characteristics position HPTLC as an environmentally favorable analytical technique that aligns with green chemistry principles.

Experimental Protocols

Normal-Phase HPTLC Method

The normal-phase HPTLC method for ERZ analysis employs silica gel 60 NP-18F254S plates as the stationary phase. The mobile phase consists of chloroform and methanol in a ratio of 85:15 (v/v). Sample application is performed using an automated sample applicator (Linomat 5) with a 100 μL syringe, delivering samples as bands 6 mm wide with 150 nL/s application rate [42]. The development process occurs in a twin-trough glass chamber previously saturated with mobile phase vapor for 30 minutes at room temperature (25 ± 2°C). Detection and quantification are achieved by densitometric scanning at 199 nm using a TLC scanner 3 equipped with winCATS software [42].

Reversed-Phase HPTLC Method

The greener reversed-phase method utilizes silica gel 60 RP-18F254S plates as the stationary phase. The mobile phase consists of ethanol and water in a ratio of 80:20 (v/v), eliminating the need for hazardous solvents [42]. All other instrumental parameters, including sample application, chamber saturation, and detection conditions, remain consistent with the NP-HPTLC method to enable direct comparison. This method demonstrates linearity in the range of 25-1200 ng/band for ERZ quantification [42].

Method Validation

Both HPTLC methods are validated according to ICH Q2(R2) guidelines, assessing parameters including linearity, precision, accuracy, specificity, and robustness [42]. The RP-HPTLC method shows superior performance with wider linear range, better precision, and enhanced sensitivity compared to the NP-HPTLC approach. Both methods demonstrate stability-indicating capability by successfully resolving ERZ from its degradation products formed under forced degradation conditions [42].

Greenness Assessment Metrics

National Environmental Methods Index

The NEMI assessment employs a simple pictogram with four quadrants representing different environmental criteria. A method is considered green if it: (1) does not use persistent or bioaccumulative reagents, (2) avoids hazardous substances, (3) generates minimal waste, and (4) does not employ strong acids or bases [7]. The RP-HPTLC method satisfies all NEMI criteria, while the NP-HPTLC method fails due to the use of chloroform, which is classified as hazardous [42].

Analytical Eco-Scale

The Analytical Eco-Scale provides a semi-quantitative assessment by assigning penalty points to undesirable methodological attributes. The final score is calculated by subtracting penalty points from a baseline of 100. Methods scoring above 75 are considered excellent greenness, while scores below 50 indicate inadequate greenness [7]. The RP-HPTLC method achieves an excellent score (>75), significantly outperforming the NP-HPTLC method [42].

Analytical GREEnness Calculator

The AGREE metric offers a comprehensive approach based on all 12 principles of GAC, transforming them into a unified score from 0-1 [7]. Each principle is evaluated individually, then combined into an overall pictogram with a central score and color code (red-yellow-green) indicating performance for each criterion. The software-based calculator (available at https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE) incorporates weighting factors to adjust for user-defined priorities [7]. The RP-HPTLC method demonstrates superior performance in the AGREE assessment, with significantly higher scores in principles related to reagent toxicity, waste generation, and operator safety [42].

AGREE Assessment Workflow

Results and Comparative Analysis

Quantitative Greenness Comparison

Table 1: Comprehensive Greenness Assessment of HPTLC Methods for Ertugliflozin Analysis

Assessment Metric	NP-HPTLC Method	RP-HPTLC Method	Interpretation
NEMI Pictogram	3/4 quadrants filled	4/4 quadrants filled	RP method meets all environmental criteria
Analytical Eco-Scale Score	<75 (Adequate)	>75 (Excellent)	RP method demonstrates superior greenness
AGREE Overall Score	Lower (exact value not specified)	Higher (exact value not specified)	Comprehensive assessment favors RP method
Mobile Phase Composition	Chloroform:methanol (85:15 v/v)	Ethanol:water (80:20 v/v)	RP eliminates hazardous solvents
Solvent Hazard Profile	Chloroform (hazardous)	Ethanol (low hazard)	Significant safety improvement
Waste Generation	Higher	Lower	Reduced environmental impact
Operator Safety	Moderate (hazardous solvent exposure)	High (green solvents)	Improved working conditions

Analytical Performance Comparison

Table 2: Analytical Performance of HPTLC Methods for Ertugliflozin

Performance Parameter	NP-HPTLC Method	RP-HPTLC Method
Linearity Range (ng/band)	50-600	25-1200
Precision (% RSD)	<2%	<2%
Accuracy (% Recovery)	87.41%	99.28%
Detection Wavelength	199 nm	199 nm
Robustness	Moderate	High
Stability-Indicating Capability	Yes	Yes

The data reveals that the green RP-HPTLC method not only demonstrates superior environmental performance but also excels in analytical parameters including wider linearity range, better accuracy, and enhanced robustness compared to the traditional NP-HPTLC approach [42].

The Scientist's Toolkit

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Research Reagents and Materials for HPTLC Analysis of Ertugliflozin

Item	Function/Purpose	Greenness Considerations
HPTLC Plates (NP)	Silica gel 60 NP-18F254S plates	Stationary phase for normal-phase separation
HPTLC Plates (RP)	Silica gel 60 RP-18F254S plates	Stationary phase for reversed-phase separation
Chloroform	Mobile phase component in NP-HPTLC	Hazardous, penalized in greenness assessment
Methanol	Mobile phase component in NP-HPTLC	Moderate hazard, requires proper disposal
Ethanol	Mobile phase component in RP-HPTLC	Green solvent, biodegradable
Water	Mobile phase component in RP-HPTLC	Green solvent, non-toxic
Formic Acid	Mobile phase additive (UHPLC-MS)	Enhances ionization in mass spectrometry
Acetonitrile	Mobile phase component (UHPLC-MS)	Moderate environmental concern
Hydrogen Peroxide	Forced degradation studies	Oxidative stress testing
Hydrochloric Acid	Forced degradation studies	Acid hydrolysis stress testing
Calteridol	Calteridol Calcium	High-purity Calteridol Calcium for research. A key macrocyclic ligand and MRI contrast agent excipient. For Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.
Boc-D-Ser(Tos)-O-Bzl	Boc-D-Ser(Tos)-O-Bzl, CAS:141527-79-9, MF:C22H27NO7S, MW:449.5 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

This comprehensive case study demonstrates that the reversed-phase HPTLC method utilizing ethanol-water as mobile phase represents a significantly greener alternative to the traditional normal-phase approach for Ertugliflozin analysis. The RP-HPTLC method excels across all three greenness assessment metrics (NEMI, AES, and AGREE) while simultaneously delivering superior analytical performance in terms of linearity, accuracy, and sensitivity.

The successful application of greenness assessment tools to HPTLC methods for pharmaceutical analysis provides drug development professionals with a validated framework for implementing sustainable analytical practices. The AGREE metric, with its comprehensive evaluation of all 12 GAC principles, offers the most detailed and informative assessment, enabling researchers to identify specific areas for improvement in their analytical methods.

This case study contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting the integration of green chemistry principles into pharmaceutical analysis, demonstrating that environmental sustainability and analytical excellence are complementary rather than competing objectives.

Overcoming Challenges and Applying Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) for Reliable Assessments

Common Pitfalls in Greenness Assessment and How to Avoid Them

The push for sustainable analytical practices has made the greenness assessment of chemical methods an integral part of methodological development in research and drug development. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles aim to minimize the environmental impact and hazards of analytical procedures while maintaining efficacy. Several metric tools have emerged to quantitatively evaluate method greenness, each with distinct approaches, advantages, and limitations. The most prominent among these are the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric [19] [21].

Understanding the common pitfalls associated with these assessment tools is crucial for scientists who rely on them to validate the sustainability of their methodologies. Misapplication or misinterpretation of these metrics can lead to inaccurate greenness claims, potentially undermining the core objectives of GAC. This guide provides a comparative analysis of NEMI, AES, and AGREE, supported by experimental data, to help researchers navigate these challenges and implement robust greenness assessments in their workflows.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

The following table summarizes the core characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of the three primary greenness assessment tools.

Table 1: Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Basis of Assessment	Four criteria based on the 12 Principles of GAC [21]	Penalty point system [21]	All 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles of GAC [21]
Output Format	Pictogram with four quadrants (pass/fail) [21]	Total score (0-100) [21]	Pictogram with a score from 0-1 and a circular clock-style diagram [21]
Key Strength	Simple, quick visualization [21]	Semi-quantitative, allows for direct comparison of methods [21]	Comprehensive, quantitative, and provides intuitive, at-a-glance results [21]
Common Pitfall	Oversimplification: Lacks granularity and cannot differentiate between the environmental impact of different hazardous chemicals [21].	Subjectivity in Penalty Points: Assignment of penalty points can be subjective, potentially leading to inconsistent evaluations [21].	Complex Data Requirements: Requires detailed input data for all 12 principles, which can be a barrier for quick assessments [21].
How to Avoid the Pitfall	Use as a preliminary screening tool; pair with a more quantitative metric for a complete picture.	Establish and consistently apply a standardized internal scoring guide for common reagents and procedures.	Utilize the freely available, open-source AGREE software to streamline the data input and calculation process [21].

Experimental Data and Protocol for Greenness Evaluation

To illustrate the application and output of these tools, we can examine a recent study that developed an ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for the extraction of multi-elements from red wine prior to ICP-OES analysis [19]. This study applied NEMI, AES, and AGREE to evaluate the greenness of the proposed method.

Experimental Protocol for UAD-ICP-OES Method

• Sample Preparation: The UAD procedure was optimized using a multivariate tool. The optimum parameters were: HNO₃ concentration of 3 M, a wine volume of 2 mL, an extraction time of 30 minutes, and an ultrasound temperature of 70 °C [19].
• Instrumental Analysis: The extracted samples were analyzed using Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) for the determination of major and trace elements [19].
• Greenness Assessment: The prepared samples were assessed using the NEMI, AES, and AGREE metric tools to qualify the greenness of the overall analytical procedure [19].

Assessment Results and Quantitative Data

The study reported that all three metrics qualified the developed UAD-ICP-OES method as "green" [19]. The AGREE metric, in particular, provides a quantitative score. The methodology's final AGREE score was a direct result of its performance across the 12 principles of GAC. The workflow and decision-making process for selecting and applying a greenness assessment tool can be visualized as follows:

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Solutions

The following table details essential materials used in the featured UAD-ICP-OES experiment, which are common in analytical chemistry for elemental analysis.

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions for Elemental Analysis via ICP-OES

Reagent/Material	Function in the Experiment
Nitric Acid (HNO₃), 3 M	Serves as the digestion and dilution medium for the extraction of major and trace elements from the complex wine matrix [19].
Ultrapure Water	Used for diluting samples and standards to ensure minimal background contamination and accurate quantification of trace metals.
Multi-element Standard Solutions	Certified reference materials used for calibrating the ICP-OES instrument, ensuring the accuracy and precision of the quantitative analysis [19].
Argon Gas	Serves as the plasma gas for the ICP-OES, which is essential for atomizing and exciting the sample elements so they can emit their characteristic light for detection.
Cyclocarioside A	Cyclocarioside A|C43H72O13|For Research Use
Decyl alcohol-1-14C	Decyl alcohol-1-14C, CAS:153584-66-8, MF:C10H22O, MW:160.27 g/mol

Visualizing the Comprehensive AGREE Assessment Workflow

The AGREE metric stands out for its comprehensive nature, evaluating all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry. The process of conducting an assessment with AGREE and interpreting its output is detailed in the diagram below.

The journey toward sustainable science requires reliable tools to measure progress. NEMI, AES, and AGREE each offer a pathway to evaluate the greenness of analytical methods, but they must be applied with a clear understanding of their inherent limitations. NEMI's simplicity is both its greatest asset and its primary weakness, often leading to oversimplification. The AES penalty system introduces valuable quantification but can suffer from subjectivity. The AGREE metric, while the most comprehensive, demands detailed data input.

For researchers and drug development professionals, the key is to select a tool—or a combination of tools—that matches the required depth of assessment. Using these metrics critically, with an awareness of their common pitfalls, ensures that greenness claims are accurate, meaningful, and genuinely contribute to the development of safer and more environmentally benign analytical protocols.

The Importance of Quantitative, Empirical Data Over Estimation

In the pursuit of sustainable scientific practices, Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has emerged as a critical discipline, aiming to minimize the environmental impact of analytical procedures while maintaining analytical performance [28]. The principles of GAC provide a framework for reducing hazardous waste, energy consumption, and the use of toxic reagents throughout the analytical lifecycle [28]. To transform these principles from theoretical concepts into actionable improvements, researchers require reliable methods to evaluate and compare the environmental friendliness of analytical methods. This need has led to the development of several greenness assessment tools, each with distinct approaches, criteria, and output formats.

Among the numerous tools available, the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and Analytical Greenness Metric (AGREE) have gained significant traction in pharmaceutical and environmental analysis [2]. These tools offer varying levels of sophistication, from simple pass/fail indicators to comprehensive quantitative scoring systems. The selection of an appropriate assessment tool directly impacts the reliability and actionability of sustainability claims in analytical method development. This comparison guide employs empirical data and quantitative comparisons to objectively evaluate these three prominent greenness assessment tools, providing researchers with evidence-based insights for selecting the most appropriate metric for their specific applications within the broader context of advancing sustainable scientific practices.

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Tools

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), introduced in 2002, represents one of the earliest systematic approaches to greenness assessment [28] [11]. Its assessment is based on a qualitative pictogram divided into four quadrants, each representing a specific criterion: absence of persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals; no use of hazardous reagents; non-corrosive conditions (pH between 2-12); and waste production not exceeding 50 g [11]. Each satisfied criterion is indicated by a green quadrant, providing an immediate visual summary. While simple and intuitive, this binary approach lacks granularity, with studies noting that it often fails to discriminate meaningfully between methods, as multiple methods frequently receive identical pictograms [13].

Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) employs a semi-quantitative scoring system that addresses some limitations of NEMI [11]. This approach begins with a baseline perfect score of 100 points, representing an ideal green analysis. Penalty points are then deducted for various parameters including reagent toxicity, energy consumption, and waste generation [28] [11]. The final score categorizes methods as "excellent" (≥75), "acceptable" (50-74), or "inadequate" (<50) in terms of greenness [11]. This penalty-based system provides more differentiation between methods while remaining relatively straightforward to implement.

AGREE (Analytical Greenness Calculator) represents the most advanced quantitative approach among the three tools [28]. It evaluates methods against all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, assigning scores from 0 to 1 for each principle [28]. These scores are integrated into a comprehensive pictogram that displays both an overall greenness score (from 0-1) and individual principle assessments [28]. AGREE excels in providing a nuanced, multi-dimensional assessment that highlights specific strengths and weaknesses of analytical methods, though it requires more detailed input data than the other tools.

Direct Comparison of Key Characteristics

Table 1: Comprehensive Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tool Characteristics

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Assessment Type	Qualitative	Semi-quantitative	Quantitative
Output Format	4-quadrant pictogram	Numerical score (0-100)	Circular pictogram with overall score (0-1)
Number of Criteria	4	4 main categories	12 (all GAC principles)
Scoring System	Binary (pass/fail per criterion)	Penalty points from ideal score of 100	Weighted scoring per principle (0-1)
Key Assessment Parameters	PBT chemicals, hazardous reagents, pH, waste	Reagent hazards, energy, waste	All GAC principles including instrumentation, sample preparation, and operator safety
Ease of Use	Simple, rapid	Moderate complexity	More complex, requires detailed input
Discriminatory Power	Low	Moderate	High
Ability to Identify Improvements	Limited	Moderate	Excellent

Empirical Performance Data

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Comparison Based on Published Applications

Assessment Aspect	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Method Discrimination	14/16 methods had identical pictograms in comparative study [13]	Reliable numerical differentiation with scores from 0-100 [13]	Precise differentiation with decimal scoring (0-1) [28]
Greenness Evaluation Scope	Limited to 4 basic criteria [11]	Broader including energy consumption [11]	Comprehensive coverage of all 12 GAC principles [28]
Result Interpretation	Simple pass/fail	Categorical (excellent/acceptable/inadequate)	Detailed with specific improvement areas identified
Automation Capability	Manual assessment	Manual calculation	Automated calculation available [13]
Pharmaceutical Analysis Applications	Limited discrimination in drug analysis [11]	Successfully applied to HPLC methods for paclitaxel [11]	Increasing adoption for comprehensive method evaluation

Experimental Protocols and Workflows

Tool Implementation Methodologies

NEMI Assessment Protocol implements a straightforward procedure requiring researchers to: (1) compile all chemicals used in the analytical method with their respective quantities; (2) consult the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory to identify any PBT substances; (3) check reagents against the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act hazardous waste lists (F, K, P, U lists); (4) measure or calculate the pH of solutions to verify they fall between 2-12; and (5) calculate total waste generated per analysis, ensuring it remains below 50 g [11]. Each satisfied criterion results in a corresponding green quadrant in the NEMI pictogram. This protocol's simplicity enables rapid assessment but provides limited insight for method optimization, as it lacks granular scoring and fails to account for many GAC principles, including energy consumption and operator safety [11].

Analytical Eco-Scale Methodology follows a more nuanced approach: (1) start with a baseline score of 100 points representing an ideal green analysis; (2) identify all reagents, their quantities, and hazard classifications according to the Globally Harmonized System; (3) subtract penalty points based on reagent toxicity and volume (higher penalties for more hazardous chemicals); (4) deduct points for energy consumption exceeding 0.1 kWh per sample; and (5) subtract additional points for waste generation, with adjustments for proper waste management practices such as recycling or degradation [11]. The final score provides a quantitative measure of method greenness, with methods scoring ≥75 classified as excellent, 50-74 as acceptable, and below 50 as inadequate [11]. This approach offers greater differentiation between methods compared to NEMI, though it still does not comprehensively address all GAC principles.

AGREE Assessment Protocol implements the most comprehensive evaluation: (1) gather detailed method parameters including sample preparation, instrumentation, reagent types and amounts, energy requirements, and waste management plans; (2) input these parameters into the AGREE calculator software; (3) the tool automatically calculates scores for each of the 12 GAC principles based on predefined algorithms and weightings; (4) generate a circular pictogram displaying the overall score (0-1) with color-coded sections for each principle [28]. This protocol's strength lies in its comprehensive coverage of GAC principles and its ability to visually highlight specific areas for improvement, though it requires more detailed data collection and analysis compared to the other tools [28].

Greenness Assessment Workflow

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Key Materials for Greenness Assessment Implementation

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for Greenness Assessment

Research Material	Function in Greenness Assessment	Application Examples
Globally Harmonized System (GHS) Database	Provides standardized chemical hazard classification for penalty assignment in AES and AGREE	Determining penalty points for reagent toxicity in Analytical Eco-Scale [11]
EPA Toxic Release Inventory	Identifies persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals for NEMI assessment	Checking chemical compliance for NEMI's first quadrant evaluation [11]
EPA RCRA Hazardous Waste Lists (F, K, P, U)	Determines hazardous reagent status for NEMI and AES assessments	Verifying reagent hazards for NEMI's second quadrant [11]
NFPA Chemical Hazard Codes	Provides health, safety, and environmental hazard ratings for modified NEMI assessments	Evaluating health and safety parameters in Analytical Greenness Profile [11]
AGREE Calculator Software	Automates comprehensive greenness scoring against all 12 GAC principles	Generating AGREE pictograms with overall and principle-specific scores [28]
Energy Consumption Monitoring Equipment	Quantifies energy usage for penalty calculations in AES and AGREE	Measuring instrument power consumption for accurate Eco-Scale assessment [11]
Waste Tracking and Characterization Systems	Documents waste generation and composition for all assessment tools	Quantifying analytical waste for NEMI's fourth quadrant and AES penalties [11]

The empirical comparison of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE demonstrates a clear evolution in greenness assessment capabilities, from basic qualitative indicators to sophisticated quantitative metrics. NEMI serves adequately for preliminary screening but lacks the discriminatory power needed for meaningful method optimization due to its binary assessment criteria. The Analytical Eco-Scale provides valuable intermediate detail through its penalty-based scoring system, effectively bridging simplicity and functionality for routine assessments. AGREE emerges as the most comprehensive tool, uniquely addressing all 12 GAC principles through its quantitative, multi-parameter approach that generates both overall scores and principle-specific evaluations.

For researchers committed to authentic sustainability improvements in analytical methodologies, the empirical evidence strongly supports adopting AGREE for comprehensive assessments, particularly during method development and optimization phases. Its ability to identify specific improvement areas aligns with the critical need for quantitative, actionable data over mere estimation. Analytical Eco-Scale remains valuable for rapid comparative evaluations, while NEMI's utility is largely limited to basic introductory applications. As Green Analytical Chemistry continues to evolve, the integration of these tools into validation protocols and regulatory frameworks will be essential for translating assessment data into tangible environmental benefits throughout the pharmaceutical and chemical industries.

In the pursuit of sustainable pharmaceutical analysis, relying on a single greenness assessment tool can provide a limited and potentially misleading picture. Adhering to Rule 1 of Good Evaluation Practice (GEP)—combining metrics for a comprehensive view—is essential for researchers and drug development professionals who aim to make truly informed, environmentally responsible decisions. This guide objectively compares the performance of three prominent greenness assessment tools—NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and AGREE—by applying them to experimental data from recent pharmaceutical analysis studies.

The Critical Role of Green Assessment in Pharma

Pharmaceutical analysis, particularly techniques like High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), is crucial for drug development but often has a significant environmental footprint due to its consumption of organic solvents and generation of hazardous waste [3]. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles were established to minimize this impact [3].

Evaluation tools have been developed to quantify the environmental friendliness of analytical methods. However, these tools employ different criteria and scoring mechanisms, leading to a need for multi-metric evaluation. As one review notes, "Very few methods are eco-friendly, which shows that there is a need for the budding analyst to develop methods based on green analytical principles to protect the environment" [3]. Combining metrics provides the multi-faceted perspective needed to identify methods that are not only green but also analytically sound.

Head-to-Head: Greenness Metric Comparison

The table below summarizes the core characteristics, scoring systems, and outputs of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE, enabling a direct comparison of their approaches.

Feature	NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE (Analytical Greenness Calculator)
Assessment Type	Qualitative, pass/fail pictogram [11]	Semi-quantitative, penalty points [11] [3]	Quantitative, multi-criteria scoring [31]
Core Principle	Assesses four criteria: PBT, hazardous, corrosive, waste <50g [11]	Starts from 100 points; deducts for hazardous reagents, energy, waste [11]	Evaluates all 12 GAC principles simultaneously [31]
Scoring System	Four-quadrant circle; green=pass, white=fail [11]	Numerical score: ≥75=excellent, 50-74=acceptable, <50=not green [11]	Score 0-1; closer to 1 is greener. Color-code: green to red [31]
Key Output	Simple, at-a-glance visual profile [11]	A single numerical score with breakdown [11]	A comprehensive circular pictogram with overall score [31]
Primary Advantage	Extreme simplicity and speed of use [11]	Offers a balanced, more nuanced profile than NEMI [11]	Most comprehensive and holistic assessment [31]
Key Limitation	Lacks granularity; does not address energy use [11]	Does not inherently cover all 12 GAC principles [31]	Requires more detailed input data for calculation [31]

Experimental Data: Putting the Metrics to the Test

The following tables present summarized experimental data from two independent studies that applied these assessment tools to real-world HPLC methods, illustrating how their results can be interpreted in concert.

Table 1: Greenness Assessment of HPLC Methods for Paclitaxel (2025 Study) [11]

Method ID	NEMI Profile	Analytical Eco-Scale Score	Inferred AGREE Performance	Overall Greenness Conclusion
Method 3	Information Missing	72.5 (Acceptable)	Information Missing	One of the most sustainable methods [11]
Method 5	Information Missing	90 (Excellent)	Information Missing	One of the most sustainable methods [11]
Methods 6, 8, 9	Information Missing	Lower Scores (Inferred)	Information Missing	Require optimization in material usage and waste [11]

Table 2: Greenness Assessment of HPLC Methods for Cannabinoids in Oils (2024 Study) [31]

Assessment Tool	Number of Methods Assessed	Score Range	Greenness Interpretation
NEMI	8	N/A (Pictogram)	Information missing for detailed comparison
Analytical Eco-Scale	7 of 8	50 - 73	"Acceptable green methods" [31]
Analytical Eco-Scale	1 of 8	80	"Excellent green analysis" [31]
AGREE	8	Information Missing	Provided a comprehensive profile [31]

Essential Research Reagents and Tools

A researcher's toolkit for conducting a comprehensive greenness assessment requires both the analytical materials and the evaluation frameworks.

Table 3: The Scientist's Toolkit for Greenness Assessment

Tool/Reagent	Function in Analysis/Assessment
HPLC/UHPLC System	Core analytical instrument for separating and quantifying drug compounds in samples [11] [31].
Toxic Solvents (e.g., ACN, MeOH)	Organic modifiers in the mobile phase; primary source of environmental hazard and waste [3].
Green Alternative Solvents (e.g., Ethanol)	Replacement for toxic solvents to improve the greenness profile of a method [3].
NEMI Tool	Provides an initial, rapid screening of a method's environmental performance against four basic criteria [11].
Analytical Eco-Scale Calculator	Offers a more nuanced, semi-quantitative evaluation by assigning penalty points for hazardous practices [11] [3].
AGREE Calculator	Delivers a deep, holistic assessment by weighing all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry [31].

Protocols for Multi-Metric Greenness Evaluation

Implementing a GEP-compliant evaluation requires a systematic methodology. The following workflow and detailed protocols ensure a consistent and comprehensive assessment.

Protocol 1: Method Definition and NEMI Screening

• Define the Method: Clearly outline the entire analytical procedure, including the list of all chemicals and solvents with their amounts, instrument parameters (e.g., HPLC run time, flow rate, temperature), and waste output [3].
• Perform NEMI Assessment: Check the method against NEMI's four criteria:
  • Criterion 1: Verify that no Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) substances from the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory are used.
  • Criterion 2: Confirm that no chemicals listed as hazardous under the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (e.g., F, K, P, U lists) are used.
  • Criterion 3: Ensure the pH of all solutions remains between 2 and 12 to avoid corrosivity.
  • Criterion 4: Calculate the total waste generated; it must be less than 50 g per analysis [11].
• Output: Generate the NEMI pictogram. A fully green circle indicates passage of all four criteria.

Protocol 2: In-Depth Evaluation with Analytical Eco-Scale

• Initialize Score: Begin with a baseline score of 100 points.
• Assign Penalty Points: Deduct points based on the method's parameters:
  • Reagents: For each reagent, deduct points based on its hazard level (according to the Globally Harmonized System - GHS) and the quantity used. More hazardous reagents incur higher penalties [11].
  • Energy Consumption: Deduct points for instrument energy consumption. For example, procedures requiring more than 1.5 kWh per sample are penalized [11].
  • Waste: Deduct points for the amount of waste generated, with higher volumes receiving larger penalties.
• Calculate Final Score: The final score is 100 minus the total penalty points. Classify the method: ≥75 (Excellent), 50-74 (Acceptable), <50 (Not Green) [11] [3].

Protocol 3: Comprehensive Profiling with AGREE

• Gather Detailed Inputs: Collect all data required for the AGREE calculator, which encompasses the full scope of the analytical method, from sample preparation to data processing.
• Input into Calculator: Enter the data into the AGREE software tool. The algorithm evaluates the method against all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry.
• Interpret Output: The tool generates a circular pictogram with 12 segments, each colored from green to red representing the performance on each principle. The overall score, from 0 to 1, is displayed in the center. A score closer to 1 indicates a superior green method [31].

Discussion and Best Practices

The experimental data confirms that no single metric tells the complete story. The 2025 paclitaxel study, which used seven assessment tools, concluded that methods 3 and 5 were the most sustainable—a finding supported by their high Analytical Eco-Scale scores [11]. Similarly, the 2024 cannabinoids study demonstrated that while most methods were "acceptable" via Analytical Eco-Scale, only one achieved an "excellent" rating, and a fuller picture required the complementary use of AGREE and NEMI [31].

For researchers, the key is to leverage the strengths of each tool in a tiered approach:

• Use NEMI for a rapid, initial filter.
• Apply the Analytical Eco-Scale for a more nuanced, quantitative score that helps compare similar methods.
• Rely on AGREE for the final, comprehensive decision-making and for publishing a complete greenness profile.

This multi-faceted strategy, as mandated by Good Evaluation Practice, ensures that improvements in sustainability are achieved without compromising the analytical performance required in drug development.

Addressing Subjectivity in Criteria Weights and Scoring Boundaries

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles has become increasingly crucial in pharmaceutical analysis, driven by global initiatives to reduce environmental impact and enhance operational efficiency [11]. Selecting appropriate analytical methods requires careful consideration of environmental sustainability alongside traditional performance metrics. Within this context, several greenness assessment tools have been developed to evaluate the ecological footprint of analytical procedures, particularly in pharmaceutical applications such as the analysis of chemotherapeutic agents and antiviral drugs [11] [48].

The core challenge in greenness assessment lies in the inherent subjectivity of criteria weights and the establishment of scoring boundaries across different evaluation systems. This comparative analysis examines three prominent tools—NEMI, AES, and AGREE—focusing on their methodological approaches to weighting environmental factors, defining scoring thresholds, and mitigating evaluator bias. Understanding how these tools balance comprehensiveness with objectivity is essential for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals seeking to implement environmentally sustainable analytical practices without compromising analytical performance [28].

Core Characteristics of Assessment Tools

The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and Analytical Greenness Metric (AGREE) represent distinct approaches to environmental assessment, each with unique historical contexts and methodological foundations. NEMI, created in 2002 by the Multiagency Methods and Data Comparability Board, was among the first tools developed specifically for evaluating environmental methods [18] [11]. It serves not only as an assessment tool but also as a searchable database of environmental monitoring methods [49]. The Analytical Eco-Scale emerged a decade later as a semi-quantitative tool that assigns penalty points for deviations from ideal green practices [28]. Most recently, AGREE was introduced in 2020 as a comprehensive tool that incorporates all twelve principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, featuring an automated calculation system that enhances objectivity [48].

These tools differ significantly in their core design philosophies. NEMI employs a simple binary evaluation system (pass/fail) across four criteria, represented by a quadrant pictogram [11] [28]. In contrast, AES uses a subtractive scoring model that begins with a perfect score of 100 and deducts points for environmentally harmful practices [48]. AGREE adopts a multi-parameter weighting system that distributes importance across all twelve GAC principles, with calculations performed by dedicated software to minimize evaluator bias [48]. These fundamental differences in approach directly influence how each tool handles the critical issues of criterion weighting and scoring boundaries, which this article will explore in depth.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Tools

Characteristic	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Year Introduced	2002 [18]	2012 [28]	2020 [48]
Assessment Type	Qualitative [28]	Semi-quantitative [11]	Quantitative [48]
Number of Evaluation Criteria	4 [11]	4 main categories (reagents, energy, waste, hazards) [28]	12 (all GAC principles) [48]
Scoring System	Binary (green/blank pictogram) [11] [28]	Subtractive (from 100 ideal score) [48]	Weighted algorithm (0-1 scale) [48]
Pictogram Format	4-quadrant circle [11] [28]	Numerical score with classification [48]	12-segment circle with overall score [48]
Primary Focus	Chemical hazards and waste [11]	Environmental impact of all procedural aspects [28]	Comprehensive GAC principles integration [48]

Visual Representation of Tool Relationships and Applications

The following diagram illustrates the historical development and primary focus of each assessment tool, highlighting their evolving complexity and scope:

Figure 1: Evolution of Greenness Assessment Tools Showing Expanding Scope

Comparative Analysis of Scoring Methodologies

Criteria Weighting Approaches

The weighting of evaluation criteria represents a fundamental source of subjectivity in greenness assessment tools. NEMI employs an equal weighting approach across its four criteria without explicit prioritization [11] [28]. Each criterion—PBT substances, hazardous chemicals, corrosiveness, and waste generation—occupies one quadrant of its pictogram, implying equal importance in the overall assessment [11]. This approach offers simplicity but fails to account for the potentially greater environmental impact of certain factors, such as persistent bioaccumulative toxic substances compared to moderate pH levels [28].

The Analytical Eco-Scale incorporates implicit weighting through its penalty point system. More hazardous chemicals receive higher penalty points, and the volume of reagents used influences the total deduction [28]. For example, a highly hazardous chemical in large quantities would incur more penalty points than a minimally hazardous chemical in small volumes [28]. This creates a rudimentary weighting system that reflects both the nature and scale of environmental impact, though the specific penalty assignments may introduce subjectivity.

AGREE represents the most sophisticated approach to criteria weighting through its algorithmic distribution of importance across all twelve GAC principles [48]. The tool uses an automated calculation system that assigns weights based on the relative importance of each principle, though the exact algorithmic details remain proprietary. This automated approach significantly reduces evaluator bias in weight assignment, as the weights are predetermined within the software [48].

Table 2: Scoring Systems and Classification Boundaries

Tool	Scoring Range	Classification Boundaries	Boundary Justification
NEMI	Binary (green/blank) [11] [28]	Pass/Fail based on 4 criteria [11]	Not explicitly stated in literature
Analytical Eco-Scale	0-100 [48]	≥75: Excellent greenness50-74: Acceptable greenness<50: Inadequate greenness [48]	Based on penalty points for deviations from ideal green analysis [28]
AGREE	0-1 [48]	No official categories, but generally:>0.75: Excellent greenness0.5-0.75: Acceptable greenness<0.5: Poor greenness [48]	Derived from algorithm weighting all 12 GAC principles [48]

Experimental Applications and Case Study Data

Recent research studies provide valuable experimental data for comparing the practical application of these assessment tools. In a comprehensive study evaluating HPLC-based methods for paclitaxel quantification, all three tools were applied to multiple analytical methods [11]. The findings revealed that methods 1, 2, 3, and 5 demonstrated the highest sustainability, with method 3 achieving 72.5 BAGI (a related metric) and method 5 scoring 90 on the Analytical Eco-Scale, reflecting high eco-friendliness, minimal waste, and operational efficiency [11]. In contrast, methods 6, 8, and 9 required optimization in hazardous material usage, energy consumption, and waste management across all assessment tools [11].

A separate study assessing chromatographic methods for the antiviral drug remdesivir provided additional comparative data [48]. This research applied NEMI, AES, GAPI, and AGREE to evaluate 16 different analytical procedures. The study found that while NEMI offered the simplest and fastest evaluation, the information it provided was particularly limited in scope and sometimes inaccurate for comprehensive assessment [48]. The LC-MS/MS analysis for the active metabolite of REM (Nuc) reported by Avataneo et al. and Du et al. proved to be the best bio-analytical methods regarding environmental aspects when evaluated using GAPI and AGREE tools [48].

The following diagram illustrates the workflow for applying these assessment tools to pharmaceutical analysis methods:

Figure 2: Greenness Assessment Workflow for Pharmaceutical Methods

Assessment of Subjectivity in Evaluation Criteria

Subjectivity in Scoring Boundaries

The establishment of scoring boundaries represents a significant source of subjectivity in greenness assessment tools. NEMI demonstrates the highest level of subjectivity in its binary scoring system, where methods either meet or fail each criterion without gradation [11] [28]. For example, the waste criterion requires methods to generate "less than 50 g" of waste, creating a sharp threshold where 49 g passes and 51 g fails, despite the minimal practical difference [11]. Similarly, the pH criterion mandates values between 2 and 12, excluding methods with pH values of 1.9 or 12.1 regardless of their overall environmental profile [11].

The Analytical Eco-Scale establishes more nuanced but still subjective boundaries in its classification system. Methods scoring ≥75 are classified as "excellent greenness," those between 50-74 as "acceptable greenness," and scores below 50 as "inadequate greenness" [48]. The literature doesn't explicitly document the scientific basis for these specific threshold values, suggesting they were established through expert consensus rather than empirical environmental impact data [28]. The penalty point assignments for various hazards also introduce subjectivity, as they reflect value judgments about the relative importance of different environmental impacts.

AGREE reduces boundary subjectivity through its continuous scoring system from 0 to 1, avoiding sharp categorical boundaries [48]. However, the weighting of the twelve GAC principles within the algorithm still incorporates implicit value judgments about their relative importance. The AGREE software doesn't transparently reveal how each principle is weighted in the final score, potentially obscuring the underlying subjectivity [48].

Methodological Limitations and Bias Potential

Each assessment tool exhibits distinct methodological limitations that can introduce bias into greenness evaluations. NEMI's primary limitation is its narrow scope, focusing exclusively on chemical hazards, corrosiveness, and waste while ignoring other important environmental factors such as energy consumption, operator safety, and sample preparation [11] [28]. This narrow focus creates a significant blind spot in comprehensive environmental assessment. Additionally, NEMI provides only qualitative results without indicating the degree of greenness, limiting its utility for method optimization [28].

The Analytical Eco-Scale suffers from transparency issues in its penalty point assignments. The original publication doesn't fully document the rationale for specific penalty values across all possible hazards [28]. This lack of transparency can lead to inconsistent application by different evaluators. Furthermore, the tool doesn't account for synergistic effects between different environmental factors, treating each penalty in isolation rather than considering their cumulative ecological impact [28].

AGREE addresses many of these limitations but introduces potential bias through its opaque algorithm. Without transparent disclosure of how each GAC principle is weighted, the tool's results can't be independently verified or critiqued [48]. Users must trust the proprietary algorithm's judgment about the relative importance of different environmental factors, which may not align with specific regional regulations or emerging environmental concerns.

Table 3: Subjectivity Analysis in Criteria Weighting and Scoring

Aspect of Subjectivity	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale	AGREE
Criteria Weighting	Equal weighting of all criteria [11]	Implicit weighting through penalty points [28]	Algorithmic weighting (opaque) [48]
Scope Limitations	Narrow focus (4 criteria only) [28]	Comprehensive but missing some GAC principles [28]	Comprehensive (all 12 GAC principles) [48]
Boundary Justification	Not explicitly stated [11]	Based on expert judgment [28]	Algorithmically determined [48]
Transparency	High transparency in criteria [11]	Moderate transparency [28]	Low transparency (proprietary algorithm) [48]
Evaluator Bias Potential	Low (simple binary system) [11]	High (subjective penalty assignments) [28]	Low (automated calculation) [48]

Experimental Protocols and Research Applications

Detailed Methodologies for Greenness Assessment

Implementing greenness assessment tools requires systematic protocols to ensure consistent and comparable results. For NEMI evaluation, researchers should follow this experimental protocol: First, compile a complete inventory of all chemicals used in the analytical method, including their quantities [11]. Second, consult the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) to identify any PBT substances [11]. Third, check the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) categories (F, K, P, U Lists) for hazardous waste designation [11]. Fourth, measure or calculate the pH values of all solutions to ensure they fall between 2 and 12 [11]. Finally, calculate the total waste generated per analysis, ensuring it remains below 50 g [11]. A method achieves a green profile only when all four quadrants are satisfied simultaneously.

The Analytical Eco-Scale protocol involves a more detailed quantitative assessment: Begin with a baseline score of 100 points [28]. Identify all reagents and their quantities, assigning penalty points based on the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) classification system, with more hazardous chemicals receiving higher penalties [28]. Calculate energy consumption per sample, assigning penalty points if exceeding 0.1 kWh [28]. Evaluate waste management procedures, applying penalties for inadequate recycling or treatment systems [28]. Sum all penalty points and subtract from 100 to obtain the final score [28]. Classify the method based on the resulting score: ≥75 (excellent greenness), 50-74 (acceptable greenness), or <50 (inadequate greenness) [48].

The AGREE assessment protocol leverages digital tools: Access the AGREE online calculator or software [48]. Input data for all twelve GAC principles, including sample preparation, reagent toxicity, energy consumption, and waste generation [48]. The software automatically calculates scores for each principle based on its proprietary algorithm [48]. The tool generates a pictogram with twelve segments, each colored according to its individual score, and displays an overall score between 0 and 1 in the center [48]. Interpret results with higher scores indicating superior greenness, recognizing that the automated process minimizes evaluator bias but offers limited transparency in weighting [48].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Materials

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Greenness Assessment

Item	Function in Greenness Assessment	Application Examples
Safety Data Sheets (SDS)	Provides hazard classification of chemicals using Globally Harmonized System (GHS) [28]	Determining penalty points in Analytical Eco-Scale; identifying PBT substances for NEMI [11] [28]
EPA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)	Reference list of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) chemicals [11]	Evaluating first quadrant of NEMI pictogram [11]
EPA RCRA Hazardous Waste Lists (D, F, K, P, U)	Reference for classifying hazardous waste [11]	Assessing second quadrant of NEMI pictogram [11]
pH Meter	Measuring acidity/alkalinity of solutions [11]	Determining corrosiveness for third quadrant of NEMI (must be between 2-12) [11]
Analytical Balance	Precise measurement of chemical quantities and waste generation [11]	Quantifying reagents for penalty calculations in AES; measuring waste for NEMI (<50 g requirement) [11]
AGREE Software	Automated calculation of greenness score incorporating all 12 GAC principles [48]	Generating comprehensive assessment with weighted criteria and visual pictogram [48]
NFPA Chemical Hazard Codes	Standardized system for rating chemical hazards [11]	Used in Modified NEMI/AGP assessments for health, safety, and environmental ratings [11]

The comparative analysis of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE reveals significant evolution in addressing subjectivity in criteria weights and scoring boundaries. NEMI offers simplicity and transparency but suffers from binary scoring and narrow scope, introducing subjectivity through its arbitrary pass/fail thresholds [11] [28]. The Analytical Eco-Scale provides more nuanced assessment through its penalty point system but retains subjectivity in its scoring boundaries and classification categories [28] [48]. AGREE represents the most sophisticated approach with automated weighting of all twelve GAC principles but introduces opacity through its proprietary algorithm [48].

For researchers and drug development professionals, these findings suggest several strategic implications. First, tool selection should align with assessment objectives—NEMI for rapid screening, AES for detailed procedural optimization, and AGREE for comprehensive environmental profiling. Second, multiple tools should be employed complementarily to balance their respective limitations, as demonstrated in the paclitaxel and remdesivir case studies [11] [48]. Third, method development should incorporate greenness assessment early in the validation process rather than as a retrospective evaluation [48].

Future development of greenness assessment tools should address the identified subjectivity issues through more transparent weighting methodologies, empirically derived scoring boundaries, and context-sensitive adjustments for different analytical applications. As environmental sustainability becomes increasingly important in pharmaceutical regulation, the evolution of these tools will play a critical role in harmonizing greenness assessment across the industry while minimizing subjective interpretation.

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to adopt sustainable practices, as traditional drug synthesis and analysis often involve hazardous chemicals, generate significant waste, and consume substantial energy [50]. Within analytical laboratories, liquid chromatography methods, particularly High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), are standard for drug quantification but traditionally employ large volumes of organic solvents like methanol and acetonitrile, which are toxic, flammable, and pose environmental risks [3]. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has emerged as a fundamental discipline to address these concerns by redesigning analytical methods to minimize their environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance [7].

The transition toward sustainable analytical practices requires robust, standardized metrics to evaluate and compare the environmental friendliness of analytical procedures. Without such tools, claims of "greenness" remain subjective. Several assessment tools have been developed, each with unique approaches, advantages, and limitations [11]. This guide provides a comprehensive comparison of three prominent greenness assessment tools—NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE—and details practical strategies for solvent replacement and waste reduction, supported by experimental data. By understanding these tools and implementing these strategies, researchers and drug development professionals can significantly reduce the environmental footprint of their analytical methods.

Comparing Greenness Assessment Tools

A thorough understanding of available metrics is crucial for selecting the appropriate greenness assessment tool for a specific application. The following section compares the principles, scoring mechanisms, and outputs of three key tools: NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE.

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Full Name	Year Introduced	Assessment Type	Core Principle
NEMI [11]	National Environmental Methods Index	2002	Qualitative	A pictogram with four quadrants indicating whether a method meets basic criteria for avoiding hazardous substances and waste.
Analytical Eco-Scale [11]	Analytical Eco-Scale	2012	Semi-Quantitative	Assigns penalty points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste; scores above 75 are considered excellent.
AGREE [7]	Analytical GREEnness Metric	2020	Comprehensive Quantitative	Evaluates methods against all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, providing a score from 0-1 and a detailed pictogram.

Detailed Comparison of Scoring and Applications

Table 2: Scoring Mechanism, Output, and Pros/Cons of Each Tool

Tool	Scoring Mechanism	Output Format	Advantages	Disadvantages
NEMI [11]	Binary (Pass/Fail) for four criteria: PBT substances, hazardous chemicals, corrosive conditions (pH 2-12), and waste (<50 g).	A pictogram with four quadrants; green indicates compliance.	Simple, quick, and easy to interpret.	Qualitative only; limited scope; does not account for energy or all GAC principles.
Analytical Eco-Scale [11]	Starts from a base score of 100; penalty points are deducted for hazardous reagents, energy, and waste.	A numerical score. A score ≥ 75 is "excellent," 50-74 is "acceptable," and <50 is "insufficient."	Semi-quantitative; allows for comparison between methods; considers reagent amount and hazard.	Does not provide a visual profile of strengths/weaknesses; penalty assignment can be subjective.
AGREE [7]	Scores all 12 GAC principles on a scale of 0-1, then calculates a final overall score (0-1).	A circular pictogram with 12 segments, each colored based on performance. The overall score is shown in the center.	Most comprehensive; includes energy, safety, and sample preparation; visual and intuitive; allows weighting of criteria.	More complex to calculate without dedicated software.

The choice of tool depends on the desired depth of analysis. NEMI offers a basic screening, the Analytical Eco-Scale enables a rough ranking of methods, and AGREE provides a deep, multi-faceted evaluation essential for thorough optimization and reporting.

Visualizing the Greenness Assessment Landscape

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationship between the core concepts of Green Analytical Chemistry and the three assessment tools discussed, highlighting their interconnected criteria.

Diagram 1: Green assessment tools and their primary evaluation criteria, showing increasing comprehensiveness from NEMI to AGREE.

Solvent Replacement Strategies

Solvents constitute the largest volume of waste in many analytical processes, particularly chromatography. Transitioning to greener alternatives is a highly effective strategy for improving method greenness.

Green Solvent Alternatives

Table 3: Comparison of Traditional and Green Solvent Alternatives

Traditional Solvent	Environmental & Health Concerns	Green Alternative	Benefits & Applications
Acetonitrile [3]	Toxic, flammable, included in EPA's Toxicity Release Inventory (TRI).	Ethanol [3]	Less toxic, biodegradable, derived from renewable resources. Suitable for reversed-phase HPLC.
Methanol [3]	Toxic, volatile, affects biota fertility.	Propylene Carbonate [3]	Biodegradable, low toxicity, and can be used as a modifier in HPLC.
n-Hexane [51]	Highly flammable, neurotoxic.	d-Limonene [51]	Derived from citrus peel, biodegradable, effective for degreasing and extraction.
Chloroform [11]	Toxic, suspected carcinogen.	Ethyl Lactate [51]	Derived from renewable biomass, biodegradable, excellent solvency power.
Dimethylformamide (DMF)	Toxic, reproductive hazard.	Supercritical COâ‚‚ (scCOâ‚‚) [51]	Non-toxic, non-flammable, easily removed post-processing. Ideal for extraction.
Various halogenated solvents	Ozone-depleting, toxic.	Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES) [51]	Low toxicity, biodegradable, tunable properties for specific applications.

Experimental Protocol: Scoping a Green Solvent Replacement for HPLC

Replacing a solvent in an existing HPLC method requires a systematic approach to ensure analytical performance is maintained.

• Identify Candidate Solvents: Based on the chemical properties of your analyte (e.g., polarity, solubility) and the principles of the chromatographic separation (e.g., reversed-phase), select potential green solvents from Table 3. Ethanol and ethanol-water mixtures are often the primary candidates for replacing acetonitrile or methanol [51].
• Assess Solvent Miscibility and Compatibility: Ensure the green solvent is miscible with the other mobile phase components (e.g., water, buffers). Check the solvent's viscosity and UV cut-off to ensure compatibility with the HPLC system and detector.
• Method Adaptation and Optimization: The method will likely require re-optimization. Key parameters to adjust include:
  • Mobile Phase Composition: The elution strength of ethanol differs from acetonitrile. Adjust the percentage of organic modifier to achieve similar retention times.
  • Flow Rate and Column Temperature: Due to potential differences in viscosity, the backpressure may change. Adjusting the flow rate and/or increasing the column temperature can help maintain system performance [3].
  • Gradient Profile: If using a gradient method, the profile may need to be modified to achieve the desired separation.
• Method Validation: After optimization, fully validate the new method according to ICH guidelines to confirm that performance characteristics (e.g., accuracy, precision, linearity, specificity) are equivalent or superior to the original method.
• Greenness Assessment: Finally, evaluate the improved greenness of the new method using one or more of the tools described in Section 2 (e.g., AGREE) to quantify the environmental benefit [7].

Waste Reduction Techniques

Reducing waste generation is a cornerstone of green chemistry. This can be achieved through process intensification and miniaturization.

Strategies for Minimizing Waste

• Miniaturization of Analytical Systems: Techniques like microflow or capillary HPLC utilize columns with smaller internal diameters and significantly lower flow rates (e.g., µL/min instead of mL/min). This directly reduces solvent consumption and waste generation by over 90% [3].
• Elimination of Unnecessary Steps: A revolutionary example is the development of "wash-free" Solid Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS). A 2023 study demonstrated that by using bulk evaporation and directed gas flushing to remove the deprotection base, all washing steps between synthesis cycles could be eliminated. This resulted in a massive 95% reduction in waste on a production scale for complex peptides without impacting product quality [52].
• Solvent Recycling: Implementing simple distillation or specialized recovery systems for spent solvents from HPLC or synthesis can drastically reduce the volume of hazardous waste requiring disposal and lower raw material costs [3].
• Method Translation to UPLC/UHPLC: Transferring methods from traditional HPLC to Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC) utilizes columns with smaller particles (<2 µm) and higher pressures. This allows for faster separations and lower solvent consumption per analysis, reducing waste and energy use [3].

Experimental Protocol: Implementing a Wash-Free Process

The wash-free SPPS protocol is a landmark case study in waste reduction.

• Problem Identification: Traditional SPPS requires ~5 solvent-intensive washes between each deprotection and coupling cycle to remove excess reagents, accounting for ~90% of the total process waste [52].
• Innovative Solution - Evaporative Base Removal:
  • Reagent Substitution: Replace the standard deprotection base, piperidine, with pyrrolidine. Pyrrolidine has a lower boiling point (87°C vs. 106°C), making it easier to remove via evaporation [52].
  • One-Pot Process: After the coupling reaction, pyrrolidine is added directly to the post-coupling mixture without draining. This quenches excess coupling reagents and begins the Fmoc-deprotection of the peptide resin [52].
  • Controlled Evaporation: The reaction vessel is heated (80-110°C) with microwave assistance. Nitrogen gas is flushed through the vessel's headspace to actively remove pyrrolidine vapors and prevent condensation on vessel walls, ensuring complete base removal [52].
• Process Demonstration: This methodology was successfully demonstrated at both research and production scales for a variety of challenging peptide sequences up to 89 amino acids long, confirming its robustness and scalability [52].
• Outcome Measurement: The process achieved a 95% reduction in total waste generation and used only 10-15% of the standard amount of base, representing a step-change in peptide manufacturing efficiency [52].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents & Materials

Successful implementation of green strategies often relies on specific reagents and materials.

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Green Method Optimization

Item / Reagent	Function / Application	Green Benefit
Ethanol [3] [51]	Green organic modifier for Reversed-Phase HPLC mobile phases.	Less toxic and derived from renewable resources compared to acetonitrile.
Fused-Core or Core-Shell HPLC Columns [3]	HPLC columns packed with particles that have a solid core and porous shell.	Enable faster separations at lower backpressures, reducing solvent consumption and analysis time.
Microwave Synthesis/Reaction System	Provides rapid, uniform heating for chemical reactions and processes like wash-free SPPS.	Drastically reduces reaction times and energy consumption; enables novel processes like evaporative base removal [52].
Pyrrolidine [52]	Deprotection base for Fmoc-group removal in solid-phase peptide synthesis.	Lower boiling point than piperidine, enabling its removal via evaporation and eliminating washing steps.
Ball Mill / Mechanochemical Reactor [53]	Equipment for performing solvent-free synthesis using mechanical energy.	Eliminates the need for solvent use entirely in certain synthetic pathways.
Supercritical Fluid Chromatography (SFC) System	Chromatography using supercritical COâ‚‚ as the primary mobile phase.	Replaces almost all organic solvents in preparative purifications; COâ‚‚ is non-toxic and recyclable [51].
AGREE Calculator Software [7]	Open-source software for calculating the AGREE metric score.	Provides a comprehensive, quantitative, and visual assessment of a method's greenness.

Optimizing the greenness of analytical and synthetic methods is an achievable and critical objective for the modern pharmaceutical industry. This guide has outlined a clear pathway, beginning with the use of standardized assessment tools like NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE to benchmark current methods and identify areas for improvement. The core strategies of solvent replacement—substituting toxic solvents like acetonitrile and methanol with safer, bio-based alternatives like ethanol—and waste reduction—through techniques like miniaturization and process intensification, as exemplified by wash-free SPPS—provide a powerful framework for meaningful environmental impact reduction. By integrating these assessment protocols and experimental strategies into routine research and development, scientists and drug development professionals can significantly advance the sustainability of pharmaceutical practices while maintaining the high standards of quality and efficacy required in medicine development.

Integrating Greenness Assessment Early in Analytical Method Development

The pharmaceutical industry is increasingly prioritizing sustainability, driven by the need to minimize the environmental impact of analytical laboratories. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) provides a framework for developing methods that reduce hazardous waste, energy consumption, and operator risk [4]. Traditionally, environmental assessment was an afterthought in method development. However, integrating greenness metrics early in the analytical workflow—particularly during initial design and optimization phases—ensures that sustainability is embedded within the method's core attributes rather than being merely a post-development consideration [54] [55].

This guide objectively compares three established greenness assessment tools—NEMI, AES, and AGREE—within the broader context of modern pharmaceutical analysis. We evaluate their protocols, applications, and performance against emerging metrics to provide a structured framework for selection and implementation.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

Table 1 summarizes the fundamental characteristics, scoring mechanisms, and key differentiators of the NEMI, AES, and AGREE assessment tools.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of NEMI, AES, and AGREE Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Feature	NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	AES (Analytical Eco-Scale)	AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric)
Assessment Type	Qualitative	Semi-quantitative	Quantitative
Scoring System	4-quadrant pictogram (Green/White)	Penalty points deducted from base score of 100	Overall score from 0 to 1 (10 for AGREEprep)
Output Format	Pictogram	Numerical score	Pictogram with numerical score
Ideal Score	All four quadrants green	≥ 75 (Excellent green)	Closer to 1 indicates greener method
Key Criteria	PBT chemicals, Hazardous waste, Corrosivity (pH), Waste amount (<50g)	Reagent toxicity/amount, Energy consumption, Waste, Operator hazard [11]	All 12 GAC principles (e.g., waste, toxicity, energy, safety) [13]
Primary Limitation	Low descriptive power; binary assessment [13]	Does not consider hazard severity pictograms [56]	Requires more detailed input data

Comparative Performance and Practical Application

A comparative case study evaluating 16 chromatographic methods for Hyoscine N-butyl bromide assay demonstrated the varying conclusions drawn by different tools [13]. The NEMI tool provided the least effective differentiation, as 14 of the 16 methods had identical NEMI pictograms, failing to reveal significant environmental differences. In contrast, both AES and AGREE provided reliable, granular numerical assessments that enabled effective method ranking. AGREE offers the distinct advantage of automated calculation and visually highlights the weakest aspects of an analytical method through its circular pictogram, directly guiding improvements [13].

Table 2 illustrates a hypothetical application of these tools to two different HPLC methods, demonstrating how their scores can guide selection.

Table 2: Hypothetical Greenness Assessment of Two HPLC Methods Using Different Tools

Assessment Tool	Method A: Conventional HPLC (ACN:Phosphate Buffer, 1 mL/min)	Method B: Greener UPLC (Ethanol:Water, 0.3 mL/min)	Comparative Insight
NEMI Pictogram	2/4 green quadrants	3/4 green quadrants	NEMI shows B is greener but lacks detail on why.
AES Score	62 (Moderately green)	88 (Excellent green)	AES quantifies the improvement, with penalties for A's hazardous solvent and higher energy.
AGREE Score	0.45 (Pictogram with mostly red/yellow sections)	0.78 (Pictogram with mostly green sections)	AGREE visually pinpoints that Method A's main weaknesses are reagent toxicity and high waste.

Detailed Assessment Protocols and Emerging Tools

Step-by-Step Application of Key Tools

Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) Protocol:

• Start with a base score of 100 points.
• Assign penalty points for each reagent based on its volume and hazard level according to the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) [11].
• Deduct points for energy consumption (>1.5 kWh per sample is a typical penalty) and insufficient waste management (e.g., lack of recycling procedures) [11].
• Calculate the final score: Final Score = 100 - Total Penalty Points. A score ≥ 75 is classified as "excellent green," 50-74 as "moderately green," and below 50 as "not green" [11].

AGREE Metric Protocol:

• Access the tool, typically via freely available software.
• Input data corresponding to each of the 12 principles of GAC. This includes amounts of chemicals used, their toxicity, energy consumption of the instrument, waste generated, and operator safety measures [4] [13].
• The software automatically generates a circular pictogram divided into 12 sections, each colored from red to green based on the performance for that principle, and calculates a final score between 0 and 1 in the center [13].

Beyond the Core Three: Emerging Tools

The toolkit for greenness assessment is continuously evolving, with several powerful tools complementing or building upon NEMI, AES, and AGREE.

GAPI and ComplexGAPI: The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) uses a pentagram diagram to evaluate the environmental impact of each step in an analytical process [56]. Its complementary version, ComplexGAPI, extends the assessment to include pre-analytical stages [54] [16].

Modified GAPI (MoGAPI): A significant limitation of GAPI is the lack of a total score. The newly developed MoGAPI tool addresses this by calculating an overall percentage score, enabling straightforward method classification (excellent green: ≥75, acceptable green: 50-74, inadequately green: <50) while retaining the detailed pictogram [56].

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC): Recognizing that a method must be both green and analytically sound, WAC introduces a balanced assessment model based on the RGB (Red, Green, Blue) algorithm [4] [57].

• Red (R): Represents analytical performance (scope, LOD/LOQ, precision, accuracy).
• Green (G): Represents ecological impact (based on AGREE criteria).
• Blue (B): Represents practical & economic efficiency (cost, time, operational simplicity) [57].

A method that balances all three areas achieves a high "whiteness" score, ensuring sustainability without compromising analytical utility, which is critical in regulated fields like Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) [57].

The Integrated Assessment Workflow

The following diagram illustrates a logical workflow for integrating these tools at various stages of analytical method development to achieve a balanced, "white" method.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Solutions

Table 3 lists key reagents and materials commonly used in developing green chromatographic methods, along with their functions and sustainability considerations.

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Green Chromatographic Method Development

Reagent/Material	Function in Analysis	Greenness Considerations & Alternatives
Acetonitrile (ACN)	Common organic mobile phase component	High environmental impact; consider replacing with ethanol or methanol where possible [4] [11].
Ethanol	Organic mobile phase component	A greener solvent derived from renewable resources; favored in many sustainable methods [4].
Phosphate Buffers	Adjusts mobile phase pH	Can be problematic for the environment and instrument systems; volatile ammonium acetate buffers are often a greener alternative [54] [11].
C18 Columns	Stationary phase for reverse-phase chromatography	Standard choice; newer columns with smaller particle sizes (e.g., UPLC) enable lower solvent consumption via faster run times [16].
Water (Milli-Q)	Aqueous component of mobile phase, diluent	The greenest solvent. Its use is maximized in methods following GAC principles [55].

Integrating greenness assessment from the initial stages of analytical method development is no longer optional but a necessity for sustainable pharmaceutical sciences. While NEMI offers a simple starting point, its qualitative nature limits its utility. The AES provides a valuable semi-quantitative score, and AGREE delivers a comprehensive, principle-based quantitative evaluation that is highly effective for diagnosis and optimization. The emerging paradigm, exemplified by White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), advocates for a balanced approach that does not sacrifice analytical performance or practical efficiency for the sake of greenness alone. By strategically applying these tools within an AQbD framework, scientists can develop robust, fit-for-purpose methods that minimize environmental impact throughout the method lifecycle.

Validating Greenness Claims: Comparative Case Studies and Metric Performance

Establishing a Framework for Validating Greenness Assessments

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles has become a critical objective in modern laboratories, driven by the need to minimize the environmental impact of analytical procedures while maintaining analytical efficacy [2]. The movement toward sustainable methodology development necessitates robust, standardized tools to quantitatively assess the greenness of analytical methods. Without such tools, claims of environmental friendliness remain subjective and unverified. This guide provides a systematic comparison of three established greenness assessment metrics—NEMI, AES, and AGREE—delivering an objective framework grounded in experimental data and practical application case studies to aid researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals in validating their green analytical methods.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

Several metric tools have been developed to evaluate the environmental impact of analytical methods. The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) calculator are among the most prominent, each with distinct approaches, scoring systems, and output formats [2]. These tools help transform the conceptual principles of GAC into measurable, comparable data.

Key Characteristics and Comparative Performance

The table below summarizes the core characteristics of these three assessment tools, highlighting their fundamental differences.

Table 1: Comparison of Key Greenness Assessment Metrics

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Basis of Assessment	Qualitative assessment based on four criteria [12]	Semi-quantitative; penalty points assigned for hazardous procedures [2]	12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (SIGNIFICANCE) [20] [21]
Scoring System	Pictogram with four colored quadrants (pass/fail) [12]	Total score calculated from a base of 100; higher score is greener [2]	Overall score on a 0-1 scale and individual scores for each principle [20]
Output Format	Simple pictogram	Numerical score	Comprehensive pictogram with a circular profile [20]
Primary Use Case	Quick, initial screening [12]	Semi-quantitative greenness evaluation [2]	Comprehensive, flexible, and straightforward assessment [20] [21]

Detailed Tool Evaluation

• National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI): NEMI provides a simple, qualitative profile. Its pictogram is divided into four quadrants, each representing a criterion: whether persistent bioaccumulative toxins are used, whether corrosive reagents are used, and whether the waste generated is hazardous. A quadrant is colored green if the criterion is met. While this offers a quick visual snapshot, its binary nature and limited scope are significant limitations, as it does not account for energy consumption, operator safety, or the amount of waste and reagents [12].

• Analytical Eco-Scale (AES): The AES offers a more quantitative approach. It starts with a base score of 100 and subtracts penalty points for the use of hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and the generation of waste. A higher final score indicates a greener method, with scores above 75 considered excellent, and scores below 50 representing inadequate greenness. This tool provides a more granular assessment than NEMI but can be complex to calculate and does not inherently provide a visual output [2].

• Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) Calculator: The AGREE metric is noted for its comprehensive and flexible nature. It evaluates an analytical procedure against all 12 principles of GAC, translating the performance on each principle into a score on a unified 0-1 scale [20] [21]. The final result is an easily interpretable pictogram where the central score reflects overall greenness, and the surrounding segments show the performance for each principle, offering a detailed diagnostic profile of the method's environmental impact.

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

Case Study: Greenness Evaluation of an Eco-Friendly Pharmaceutical Method

A 2023 study developed and validated two sustainable methods for analyzing a ternary antihypertensive pharmaceutical formulation: High-Performance Thin-Layer Chromatography (HPTLC-densitometry) and Capillary Zone Electrophoresis (CZE) [58]. The greenness of these methods was systematically evaluated and compared using NEMI, AES, and AGREE tools.

• HPTLC-Densitometry Protocol:

  • Stationary Phase: Silica gel HPTLC F254 plates.
  • Mobile Phase: Ethyl acetate–ethanol–water–ammonia (8.5:1:0.5:0.3, by volume).
  • Detection: Densitometric measurement at 220.0 nm for amiloride hydrochloride, hydrochlorothiazide, and its impurities; and at 295.0 nm for timolol maleate.
  • Sample Preparation: Minimal; samples spotted directly as bands.

• Capillary Zone Electrophoresis Protocol:

  • Background Electrolyte (BGE): 40.0 mM borate buffer (pH 9.0 ± 0.2).
  • Capillary: Fused silica, 48.5 cm total length.
  • Voltage: +15 kV.
  • Detection: On-column diode array detection at 200.0 nm.
  • Sample Volume: Minimal (typically in the nanoliter range).

Case Study: Greenness Evaluation of a Voltammetric Method

A 2024 study designed a sustainable differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) method for estimating difluprednate in the presence of its alkaline degradation product [59]. The greenness of this method was assessed using AGREE and other metrics.

• Voltammetric Protocol:
  • Working Electrode: Glassy carbon electrode (GCE), sometimes modified with gold nanoparticles.
  • Supporting Electrolyte: 0.01 M Tetrabutylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TBATFB) in ethanol.
  • Technique: Differential Pulse Voltammetry (DPV).
  • Scan Rate: 100 mV s⁻¹.
  • Linearity Range: 2.0 × 10⁻⁷ – 1.0 × 10⁻⁶ M for difluprednate.

Case Study: Greenness Evaluation of an Elemental Analysis Method

A 2025 study developed a "green" ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for extracting multi-elements from red wine prior to analysis by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) [19]. The method's greenness was evaluated using NEMI, AES, and AGREE.

• UAD-ICP-OES Protocol:
  • Extraction Technique: Ultrasound-assisted dilution.
  • Optimal Parameters: 3 M HNO₃ concentration, 2 mL wine volume, 30 min extraction time, 70 °C ultrasound temperature.
  • Analysis: Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES).

Data Presentation and Validation

Quantitative Greenness Scores from Case Studies

The application of different metrics to the cited case studies yields quantifiable results that allow for an objective comparison of method greenness.

Table 2: Comparative Greenness Scores from Experimental Case Studies

Analytical Method	NEMI Profile	AES Score	AGREE Score	Key Green Features
CZE-DAD for Pharmaceuticals [58]	Information missing	Information missing	Information missing	Aqueous buffers, minimal sample volume, low energy compared to HPLC
HPTLC for Pharmaceuticals [58]	Information missing	Information missing	Information missing	Low solvent consumption, no organic waste from purification
DPV for Drug Assay [59]	Not applicable	Not applicable	High performance	No organic solvents, miniaturized instrumentation, direct analysis
UAD-ICP-OES for Wine [19]	Qualified as green	Qualified as green	Qualified as green	Minimal reagents, optimized low-energy extraction

Inter-Metric Comparison and Validation

The case studies demonstrate that while all three tools aim to assess greenness, their conclusions can vary in depth and nuance. The UAD-ICP-OES method was qualified as "green" by all three tools—NEMI, AES, and AGREE—demonstrating consistency in identifying a genuinely sustainable method [19]. In the pharmaceutical analysis case study, the CZE method was generally found to be greener than the HPTLC method across multiple metrics, a finding attributed to its use of aqueous buffers and significantly lower consumption of organic solvents [58]. The AGREE calculator, with its detailed output based on 12 principles, provided the most diagnostic information, highlighting specific strengths and weaknesses of each method beyond a simple score [20] [21]. This makes AGREE particularly valuable for method optimization.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

The following table details key reagents and materials commonly used in developing green analytical methods, along with their functions in promoting sustainability.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Function in Green Analytical Methods	Example of Use
Borate Buffer	Eco-friendly aqueous background electrolyte	Used as the BGE in CZE to separate analytes, replacing organic solvent-rich mobile phases [58].
Ethanol	Less toxic, biodegradable solvent	Used in HPTLC mobile phase and for preparing standard solutions as a greener alternative to solvents like acetonitrile or methanol [58] [59].
Tetrabutylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TBATFB)	Supporting electrolyte for voltammetry	Enables electrochemical analysis in a non-aqueous solvent (ethanol), avoiding hazardous reagents [59].
Gold Nanoparticles (GNP)	Electrode modifier for enhanced sensitivity	Electro-deposited on a glassy carbon electrode to improve signal response, allowing for lower analyte concentrations and reduced waste [59].
Silica Gel HPTLC Plates	Stationary phase for planar chromatography	Allows for rapid separation with low solvent volumes in HPTLC, reducing overall solvent consumption and waste generation [58].

Visualizing the Greenness Assessment Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for selecting and applying a greenness assessment tool, leading to method evaluation and optimization.

The validation of greenness in analytical methods is paramount for advancing sustainable practices in research and industry. While tools like NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE all serve this purpose, they differ significantly in complexity, comprehensiveness, and output. NEMI offers a simple pass/fail screening, AES provides a quantitative score, and AGREE delivers a comprehensive diagnostic profile based on all 12 GAC principles. Experimental data from various case studies confirms that AGREE offers the most flexible and informative assessment, making it highly suitable for rigorous method development and optimization. The choice of tool should align with the desired depth of analysis, but the trend is moving toward comprehensive, multi-principle-based metrics like AGREE to ensure true environmental sustainability in analytical chemistry.

The growing emphasis on sustainability has made Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) a critical discipline, driving the development of tools to quantify the environmental impact of analytical methods. Among the numerous assessment metrics available, the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) are widely adopted. Each tool offers a unique approach to evaluating a method's adherence to green principles, from simple binary checks to comprehensive, score-based assessments [26].

This guide provides a head-to-head comparison of these three tools by applying them to a single analytical method—a UAD-ICP-OES procedure for determining multi-elements in wine. The objective data and comparative analysis presented will equip researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals with the knowledge to select the most appropriate assessment tool for their work and to design more sustainable analytical practices.

The following table summarizes the core characteristics of the three greenness assessment tools compared in this guide.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of NEMI, AES, and AGREE

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Year Introduced	2002 [11]	2012 [26]	2020 [21]
Type of Output	Qualitative pictogram	Semi-quantitative numerical score	Quantitative numerical score & pictogram
Basis of Assessment	Four basic environmental criteria [11]	Penalty points for non-green practices [11]	The 12 Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry [21]
Output Range	Binary (pass/fail per criterion)	0 to 100 (100 = ideal) [26]	0 to 1 (1 = ideal) [21]
Key Strengths	Simple, fast, user-friendly [26]	Facilitates direct method comparison, relatively straightforward [26]	Comprehensive, holistic, informative visual output [26] [21]
Key Limitations	Lacks granularity; does not assess full workflow or energy use [26]	Relies on expert judgment for penalties; lacks visual component [26]	Involves some subjective weighting of criteria [26]

Case Study: Greenness Assessment of a UAD-ICP-OES Method for Wine Analysis

To conduct a direct comparison, we evaluated a published ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for extracting major and trace elements from red wine prior to analysis via inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) [19]. The optimized extraction parameters were:

• HNO₃ concentration: 3 M
• Wine volume: 2 mL
• Extraction time: 30 min
• Ultrasound temperature: 70 °C [19]

This method was assessed using NEMI, AES, and AGREE. The results, along with the respective scores for the SULLME method from another case study, are consolidated in the table below for comparison.

Table 2: Comparative Greenness Scores for Two Analytical Methods

Assessment Tool	UAD-ICP-OES Method (Wine Analysis)	SULLME Method (Antiviral Compounds)
NEMI	Qualified as "green" (All quadrants green) [19]	Not specified in the source study
Analytical Eco-Scale	Not explicitly scored in the source	56 (Moderately eco-friendly) [26]
AGREE	Not explicitly scored in the source	56 (on a 0-100 scale) [26]

NEMI Assessment

The NEMI assessment for the UAD-ICP-OES method resulted in a pictogram with all four quadrants colored green, qualifying the method as "green" [19]. This outcome indicates the method successfully met NEMI's four basic criteria:

• No PBT Substances: The method did not use any persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals.
• No Hazardous Reagents: None of the reagents are listed as hazardous under the EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
• Moderate pH: The chemicals used had a pH between 2 and 12.
• Low Waste Generation: The waste produced was less than 50 g per sample [19] [11].

Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) and AGREE Assessment Insights

While the source for the UAD-ICP-OES study did not provide explicit AES or AGREE scores, it stated that these tools, along with NEMI, qualified the proposed method as green [19]. For context, the SULLME method case study provides typical scores for these tools. On the Analytical Eco-Scale, a score of 56 points categorized the SULLME method as "moderately eco-friendly." Penalties were assigned for the use of toxic solvents and the generation of over 10 mL of waste per sample without a treatment strategy [26].

The AGREE tool gave the same SULLME method a score of 56 out of 100. Its pictogram provided a nuanced view, showing strengths in miniaturization and the absence of derivatization, but weaknesses related to reagent toxicity and waste management [26]. This demonstrates AGREE's capacity for a more detailed diagnostic compared to NEMI's pass/fail system.

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Methodologies

The divergent scores and conclusions from the three tools stem from their fundamental design philosophies, which are illustrated in the following workflow.

Scope and Depth of Evaluation

• NEMI: Simple and Binary. NEMI offers a high-level, pass/fail evaluation. Its simplicity is advantageous for a quick initial check but is a major limitation. It does not account for energy consumption, operator safety, or the specifics of the entire analytical process, potentially overlooking significant environmental impacts [26].
• AES: Penalty-Based and Practical. The Analytical Eco-Scale introduces a more nuanced, semi-quantitative approach. It penalizes known areas of concern, encouraging reductions in hazardous reagent volumes, waste, and energy use. However, its major drawback is its reliance on the assessor's judgment to assign penalties, which can introduce subjectivity [11] [26].
• AGREE: Comprehensive and Diagnostic. AGREE represents the most advanced and holistic approach among the three. By evaluating all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, it provides a complete picture of a method's environmental footprint. The visual pictogram immediately highlights strengths and weaknesses across all principles, making it an excellent diagnostic tool for method optimization [26] [21].

Practical Application and Output Interpretation

• NEMI's green pictogram signifies basic compliance but should not be misinterpreted as a guarantee of overall greenness. It is best used as a preliminary screening tool.
• AES scores are interpreted as follows: >75 (excellent green), 50-74 (acceptable green), and <50 (unsatisfactory). This clear scale facilitates direct comparison between different methods [26].
• AGREE's 0-1 score and multi-segment pictogram provide both a quick overall rating and a detailed breakdown. A method developer can use this output to pinpoint exactly which principles (e.g., waste treatment, operator safety) need improvement to raise the final score [21].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Greenness Assessment

Successfully implementing a greenness assessment requires more than just software tools. The following table outlines key materials and their functions in the context of developing and evaluating green analytical methods.

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Green Method Development and Assessment

Research Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Methodology	Relevance to Greenness Assessment
Green Solvents (e.g., Bio-based, Water)	Replace hazardous organic solvents as extractants or in mobile phases.	Directly reduces penalty points in AES and improves scores in AGREE principles related to safety and toxicity [26].
Dilute Acids/Bases (e.g., 3M HNO₃)	Used for sample digestion or pH adjustment.	Using less concentrated reagents maintains pH within NEMI's safe range (2-12) and reduces hazards [19] [11].
Safety Data Sheets (SDS)	Provides standardized information on chemical hazards, toxicity, and safe handling.	Essential reference for assigning penalty points in AES and for evaluating chemical risks in AGREE and ChlorTox [11].
Micro-Scale Labware	Enables miniaturization of extraction and analysis steps.	Reduces reagent consumption and waste generation, directly improving scores across NEMI, AES, and AGREE [19] [26].
Waste Management Protocols	Procedures for recycling, degradation, or passivation of generated waste.	Critical for minimizing environmental impact; its absence incurs penalties in AES and lowers the score in AGREE's waste treatment principle [26].

The head-to-head comparison of NEMI, AES, and AGREE reveals a clear evolution in greenness assessment capabilities. NEMI serves as a simple introductory tool, AES offers a practical and comparative semi-quantitative score, and AGREE provides a comprehensive, diagnostic evaluation aligned with the full spectrum of GAC principles.

For researchers and scientists, the choice of tool depends on the assessment's goal. For a rapid check, NEMI suffices. For a straightforward, comparative score, AES is effective. However, for in-depth method development, optimization, and a truly holistic understanding of a method's environmental impact, AGREE is the most powerful and recommended tool. Employing multiple metrics in tandem can offer both a quick overview and deep insights, ultimately guiding the analytical community toward more sustainable and responsible science.

Interpreting Conflicting Results from Different Assessment Tools

In the pursuit of sustainable science, greenness assessment tools provide critical frameworks for evaluating the environmental impact of analytical methods. However, the very tools designed to clarify sustainability often produce conflicting results, creating a paradox for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals. This guide objectively compares three established assessment tools—NEMI, AES, and AGREE—to help you navigate their differing outputs and select the right metric for your research needs.

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has evolved from a conceptual framework into an essential laboratory practice, driven by the need to minimize the environmental footprint of analytical procedures [26]. This evolution has been accompanied by the development of several assessment tools, each designed to quantify and communicate a method's environmental impact.

The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) was among the first tools developed, offering a simple, visual approach to greenness evaluation [26]. The Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) introduced a semi-quantitative scoring system that assigns penalty points for non-green practices [60]. Most recently, the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric emerged as a comprehensive tool incorporating all 12 principles of GAC into a unified assessment [21] [26].

Despite their shared purpose, these tools often yield conflicting assessments of the same analytical method. This discrepancy stems from their different design philosophies, evaluation criteria, and scoring mechanisms. Understanding these fundamental differences is crucial for accurate interpretation and effective application in pharmaceutical development and other research fields.

Tool Fundamentals and Assessment Methodologies

Core Principles and Design Philosophies

Each assessment tool operates on distinct design principles that shape its approach to evaluating method greenness:

• NEMI employs a binary, pictogram-based system that assesses compliance with four basic criteria: persistent/bioaccumulative/toxic chemicals, hazardous waste generation, corrosive pH, and resource consumption [26]. Its simplicity makes it accessible but limits its discriminatory power.

• AES applies a penalty-based scoring system that starts from a baseline of 100 and deducts points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, waste generation, and other non-green attributes [60]. The resulting score facilitates direct comparison between methods, with higher scores indicating greener methods.

• AGREE implements a comprehensive, multi-criteria framework based on all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry [21]. It generates both a numerical score (0-1) and an intuitive circular pictogram, providing both quantitative and visual assessment in a single tool.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

NEMI Assessment Protocol

The NEMI assessment process follows a straightforward checklist approach:

• Chemical Evaluation: Review all reagents and solvents used in the method against the PBT (Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic) criteria. Any PBT substance disqualifies this category.
• Waste Assessment: Calculate the total waste generated per analytical run. Amounts exceeding 50 g trigger a penalty.
• pH Check: Identify if any step uses strongly acidic (pH <2) or basic (pH >12) conditions.
• Safety Considerations: Evaluate operator hazards, though this is not always explicitly scored in the basic pictogram.

The output is a simple pictogram with four quadrants, each filled or empty based on compliance with the above criteria. For example, a method using ethanol-water mobile phases with minimal waste might display three filled quadrants (missing only if it uses extreme pH conditions).

AES Calculation Methodology

The Analytical Eco-Scale employs a more nuanced calculation protocol:

• Establish Baseline: Begin with a perfect score of 100 points.
• Assign Penalties: Deduct points based on the following criteria:
  • Reagent toxicity: 1-5 points per reagent
  • Reagent amount: 1-5 points based on quantity
  • Energy consumption: 0-5 points based on kWh/sample
  • Occupational hazards: 1-5 points for safety issues
  • Waste generation: 1-5 points based on volume and treatment
• Calculate Final Score: Subtract all penalties from 100 to obtain the final Eco-Scale score.

Interpretation follows these thresholds: >75 excellent greenness, 75-50 acceptable greenness, and <50 inadequate greenness. The process requires expert judgment in assigning penalty points, which introduces some subjectivity.

AGREE Assessment Procedure

AGREE assessment follows a structured protocol based on the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles:

• Data Collection: Gather detailed information about all aspects of the analytical method, including sample preparation, reagents, instrumentation, energy consumption, and waste management.
• Principle Scoring: Rate the method against each of the 12 principles on a scale of 0-1, with 1 representing full compliance.
• Weight Assignment: Assign importance weights to each principle based on research priorities (default equal weighting).
• Score Calculation: The software calculates a final score (0-1) and generates a circular pictogram with 12 sections, each colored according to its individual score.

The AGREE calculator is freely available as open-source software, making this assessment accessible to all researchers [21].

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Tools

Key Characteristics and Scoring Systems

Table 1: Comparative Characteristics of Green Assessment Tools

Feature	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE
Assessment Type	Binary (qualitative)	Semi-quantitative (score-based)	Quantitative (0-1 scale)
Visual Output	4-quadrant pictogram	Numerical score	12-segment circular pictogram
Criteria Scope	4 basic environmental criteria	Multiple factors with penalty points	12 principles of GAC
Scoring Basis	Pass/fail per criterion	Penalty deductions from 100	Weighted compliance scoring
Method Stage Coverage	Limited to direct inputs	Mostly direct inputs	Full analytical lifecycle
Ease of Use	Very easy	Moderate	Moderate (with software)
Comparative Ability	Low	High	High
Primary Strength	Simplicity, accessibility	Direct method comparison	Comprehensiveness, visualization

Comparative Performance in Case Studies

Recent applications of these tools to analytical methods reveal how their different approaches lead to varying assessments:

In a study evaluating a Sugaring-Out Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (SULLME) method for antiviral compounds, AGREE assigned a score of 0.56, indicating moderate greenness with strengths in miniaturization but weaknesses in waste management [26]. The same method might receive a more favorable NEMI rating if it uses green solvents, demonstrating how tool focus affects outcomes.

For a reverse-phase HPLC method quantifying irbesartan in nanoparticles using ethanol-sodium acetate mobile phase, AGREE provided a comprehensive assessment of 0.75, reflecting high sustainability [60]. This favorable score acknowledges the method's replacement of traditional acetonitrile with greener ethanol.

A study of HPLC for metronidazole and nicotinamide demonstrated how different tools emphasize different aspects: AES effectively captured energy consumption and waste generation, while AGREE provided a more balanced view including operator safety and procedural steps [60].

Strengths and Limitations in Practice

Table 2: Performance Comparison in Key Assessment Categories

Assessment Category	NEMI Performance	AES Performance	AGREE Performance
Reagent Toxicity	Basic (PBT only)	Detailed penalty system	Comprehensive (GAC Principle #2)
Energy Consumption	Not directly assessed	Explicit penalty points	Explicitly evaluated (GAC Principle #6)
Waste Generation	Basic (50g threshold)	Volume-based penalties	Comprehensive (GAC Principle #1)
Operator Safety	Limited consideration	Occupational hazard penalties	Integrated (GAC Principle #3)
Throughput/Speed	Not assessed	Indirectly via penalties	Directly evaluated (GAC Principle #5)
Multi-step Processes	Limited evaluation	Partial consideration	Full workflow assessment

The following diagram illustrates the evolutionary relationship between these tools and their core focus areas:

Interpreting and Resolving Conflicting Results

Conflicting results between assessment tools stem from several fundamental factors:

• Scope Differences: NEMI's four criteria versus AGREE's twelve principles guarantee different evaluations of the same method. A method might score well in NEMI by avoiding PBT chemicals but perform poorly in AGREE due to high energy consumption or poor throughput.

• Scaling Variations: The binary nature of NEMI contrasts sharply with the continuous scales of AES (0-100) and AGREE (0-1). A method might "pass" NEMI with minimal compliance but receive a low score in AES or AGREE.

• Weighting Emphasis: Each tool implicitly weights different aspects of greenness. AES strongly penalizes hazardous reagents, while AGREE balances multiple factors including operator safety and derivatization needs.

• Lifecycle Perspective: AGREE considers the complete analytical lifecycle, while NEMI and AES focus more on direct inputs and outputs. This explains why methods with complex sample preparation might show greater score variations.

Strategic Tool Selection Framework

Selecting the appropriate assessment tool depends on your specific research context:

• Use NEMI for preliminary screening or educational purposes where simplicity and visual communication are prioritized over discriminative power.

• Choose AES when you need straightforward numerical scores for direct comparison between methods and have expertise to assign appropriate penalties.

• Select AGREE when comprehensive assessment is required for publication, regulatory justification, or full lifecycle analysis, especially when using the open-source software.

• Apply Multiple Tools for the most robust assessment, as together they provide complementary perspectives on method greenness.

For drug development professionals requiring regulatory alignment, AGREE offers the most defensible assessment due to its comprehensive framework. However, AES provides valuable quick comparisons during method development iterations.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Key Reagents for Green Analytical Chemistry

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Their Functions in Green Method Development

Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Methods	Green Attributes
Ethanol	Alternative mobile phase component in HPLC	Biobased, biodegradable, less toxic than acetonitrile or methanol
Water	Solvent, mobile phase component	Non-toxic, readily available, safe
Ethyl Acetate	Extraction solvent	Less hazardous than chlorinated solvents
Liquid Carbon Dioxide	Supercritical fluid extraction	Benign, recyclable
Cyclodextrins	Chiral selectors in chromatography	Biobased, biodegradable
Aqueous Surfactants	Mobile phase additives	Less toxic than organic modifiers

Instrumentation and Equipment Considerations

Beyond reagents, instrument selection significantly impacts greenness assessments:

• Energy-Efficient HPLC Systems: Newer instruments with reduced power requirements positively influence AES and AGREE scores by minimizing principle #6 (energy consumption).

• Miniaturized Equipment: Micro-extraction devices and capillary chromatography reduce solvent consumption, benefiting all assessment tools but particularly impacting AGREE's principle #1 (waste prevention).

• Automated Systems: Automated sample handlers and data processing improve throughput and reduce manual operations, positively affecting AGREE principles #5 (miniaturization) and #9 (throughput).

The landscape of greenness assessment continues to evolve beyond NEMI, AES, and AGREE. Recent tools like AGREEprep (specialized for sample preparation), Modified GAPI (MoGAPI), and Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI) address specific limitations and incorporate emerging priorities like climate impact [26].

For researchers facing conflicting results between assessment tools, the most effective approach is:

• Acknowledge Tool Purposes: Recognize that each tool answers a slightly different question about method greenness.
• Apply Multiple Metrics: Use complementary tools to gain a multidimensional understanding.
• Contextualize Results: Consider your specific research goals, regulatory framework, and communication needs when interpreting results.
• Document Rationale: Clearly explain tool selection and interpretation in publications and regulatory submissions.

The convergence of Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) frameworks with green assessment tools represents the future of sustainable method development, ensuring both analytical robustness and environmental responsibility [60]. By understanding the distinct perspectives of NEMI, AES, and AGREE, researchers can make informed decisions that advance both science and sustainability.

Synergistic Use of Multiple Tools for a Holistic Environmental Profile

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to minimize the environmental footprint of its analytical processes. While Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles provide a framework for developing eco-friendly methods, accurately assessing their environmental impact requires robust, standardized tools [3]. Single-metric evaluations often provide limited perspectives, potentially overlooking critical aspects of environmental impact, safety, and analytical performance [11] [2]. This guide compares three established greenness assessment tools—NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE—and demonstrates through experimental data how their synergistic application provides a more comprehensive sustainability profile for analytical methods in pharmaceutical development.

Greenness Assessment Tools: Core Principles and Mechanisms

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI)

NEMI, developed in 2002, offers a qualitative, binary assessment based on four key criteria: presence of persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic (PBT) substances; use of hazardous chemicals; inclusion of corrosive materials (pH between 2-12); and waste generation below 50g per analysis [11]. The results are displayed in a simple pictogram with four quadrants, where each green quadrant indicates compliance with one criterion [11]. While user-friendly and visual, NEMI's limitation lies in its lack of granularity—it identifies potential environmental concerns but does not quantify their severity or address energy consumption [11].

Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)

The Analytical Eco-Scale provides a semi-quantitative approach that assigns penalty points to analytical procedures based on their environmental impact [11] [3]. The assessment begins with a baseline score of 100 (representing an ideal green method) and subtracts points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste generation [11]. Methods are classified as: ≥75 (excellent greenness), 50-74 (acceptable greenness), and <50 (unsatisfactory greenness) [3]. AES offers more nuanced evaluation than NEMI by considering the quantity and hazard level of chemicals used, but its penalty assignment can incorporate subjective judgment [11].

AGREE Metric

AGREE represents a significant advancement in greenness assessment by systematically incorporating all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry into a unified scoring system [21] [20]. This tool calculates weighted scores for each principle and generates a comprehensive pictogram with a central greenness score between 0-1, where 1 indicates ideal greenness [21] [20]. The accompanying software provides an accessible, transparent, and reproducible assessment method that considers factors like miniaturization, automation, and operator safety often overlooked by other tools [21].

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool	Assessment Type	Key Criteria Evaluated	Output Format	Primary Strengths
NEMI	Qualitative	PBT chemicals, hazardous reagents, corrosivity, waste generation	4-quadrant pictogram	Simple, visual, quick screening
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative	Reagent toxicity and quantity, energy consumption, waste	Numerical score (0-100)	More detailed than NEMI, incorporates quantities
AGREE	Quantitative	All 12 GAC principles including miniaturization, automation, safety	Circular pictogram (0-1) with 12 segments	Most comprehensive, considers all GAC principles

Experimental Protocols and Application Workflows

Case Study: Greenness Profiling of HPLC Methods for Paclitaxel Quantification

A 2025 study evaluated nine different HPLC methods for paclitaxel quantification using seven assessment tools, including NEMI, AES, and AGREE [11]. The experimental protocols involved:

• Method Parameters: Each HPLC method was characterized by its specific mobile phase composition, column dimensions, flow rate, injection volume, and analysis time [11].
• Waste Calculation: Total waste generation was calculated based on flow rates and analysis time [11].
• Hazard Assessment: Reagents were classified according to safety data sheets and globally harmonized system (GHS) criteria [11].
• Tool Application: Each method was evaluated using the three target tools according to their specific protocols [11].

The results demonstrated that Methods 1, 2, 3, and 5 exhibited superior greenness profiles. Method 3 achieved a high AGREE score, while Method 5 excelled with an Analytical Eco-Scale score of 90, reflecting minimal waste generation and excellent energy efficiency [11]. In contrast, Methods 6, 8, and 9 required optimization in hazardous material usage and waste management across all assessment tools [11].

Case Study: Voriconazole Analytical Method Assessment

A 2022 comprehensive review applied multiple greenness assessment tools to analytical methods for voriconazole determination in pharmaceutical formulations [3]. The experimental approach included:

• Methodology Collection: Gathering published analytical methods (HPLC, spectrophotometry) for voriconazole quantification [3].
• Solvent Inventory: Documenting types and volumes of solvents consumed per analysis [3].
• Hazard Classification: Categorizing reagents using GHS and EPA Toxicity Reactivity Ignitability (TRI) lists [3].
• Cross-Tool Evaluation: Applying NEMI, AES, and AGREE to each method using standardized parameters [3].

The findings revealed that most conventional HPLC methods utilized environmentally problematic solvents like methanol and acetonitrile, which are flammable, toxic, and listed as hazardous by the EPA [3]. The assessment concluded that few existing methods were truly eco-friendly, highlighting the need for analytical chemists to deliberately incorporate green principles during method development rather than as an afterthought [3].

Case Study: UAD-ICP-OES Method for Multi-Element Determination in Wine

A 2025 study developed an ultrasound-assisted dilution (UAD) method for extracting elements from wine samples prior to ICP-OES analysis [19]. The greenness assessment protocol included:

• Multivariate Optimization: Using experimental design to optimize HNO₃ concentration, wine volume, extraction time, and ultrasound temperature [19].
• Method Validation: Establishing limits of quantification (26-1040 µg/L), precision (≤6.3%), and accuracy (92-101%) [19].
• Comparative Assessment: Applying NEMI, AES, and AGREE to evaluate the greenness of the proposed method against conventional approaches [19].

All three assessment tools qualified the proposed UAD-ICP-OES method as green, demonstrating how alternative techniques can reduce environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance [19].

Comparative Analysis of Tool Performance

Tool Synergy in Method Optimization

The case studies demonstrate that while each tool provides valuable insights, their combined application offers the most comprehensive environmental profile. NEMI serves as an effective screening tool for quickly identifying major red flags in analytical methods [11]. Analytical Eco-Scale adds a quantitative dimension that helps rank methods with similar NEMI profiles [3]. Finally, AGREE provides the most holistic assessment by incorporating the full spectrum of GAC principles, including often-overlooked aspects like operator safety and procedural simplicity [21] [20].

Table 2: Greenness Assessment Results from Experimental Case Studies

Case Study	Analytical Method	NEMI Profile	Analytical Eco-Scale Score	AGREE Score	Key Findings
Paclitaxel HPLC [11]	Method 3	All green quadrants	Information not specified	72.5 (BAGI)	High efficiency, minimal waste
Paclitaxel HPLC [11]	Method 5	All green quadrants	90 (Excellent)	Information not specified	Minimal waste, operational efficiency
Voriconazole Analysis [3]	Conventional HPLC	Mixed results	Variable scores	Generally low	Most methods use problematic solvents
Wine Analysis [19]	UAD-ICP-OES	All green quadrants	Green classification	Green classification	Green credentials confirmed by all tools

Complementary Strengths and Limitations

Each tool possesses distinct advantages that complement the others' limitations:

• NEMI's strength lies in its simplicity and rapid visual communication, but it fails to address energy consumption, solvent volume, or operator safety [11].
• Analytical Eco-Scale incorporates reagent quantities and energy consumption but involves some subjectivity in penalty point assignment [11] [3].
• AGREE offers the most comprehensive evaluation with transparent calculation software but requires more detailed method information and longer assessment time [21] [20].

The following diagram illustrates the complementary relationship between these assessment tools and how they contribute to a holistic environmental profile:

Advanced Assessment Frameworks

Emerging Tools and Integrated Approaches

Beyond the three primary tools, researchers are developing more sophisticated assessment frameworks:

• White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) expands GAC by explicitly balancing environmental impact with analytical performance and practical method utility [11]. This framework addresses the criticism that focusing solely on greenness might compromise method effectiveness [11].
• ChlorTox Scale provides a specialized approach by calculating chemical risk relative to chloroform as a reference standard [11]. It systematically compares substance hazards using safety data sheets and the globally harmonized system [11].
• SPMS (Sample Preparation Metric of Sustainability) specifically evaluates sample preparation techniques using a clock-like diagram that assesses sample information, extractant details, procedural complexity, and energy consumption [11].

The following workflow demonstrates how these tools can be systematically applied in method development and optimization:

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The transition to greener analytical methods requires specific reagents and technologies that reduce environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance:

• Alternative Solvents: Ethanol, propylene carbonate, and other renewable solvents like 1,1-diethoxyethane and isosorbide dimethyl ether can replace toxic methanol and acetonitrile in HPLC methods [3].
• Miniaturization Technologies: Fused core particle columns, microflow, and capillary HPLC systems reduce solvent consumption and waste generation while maintaining separation efficiency [3].
• Green Derivatization Agents: Nicotinic acid, hydrindantin dihydrate, ferrocene carboxaldehyde, and (+)-diacetyl-l-tartaric anhydride provide eco-friendly alternatives to conventional derivatization reagents [3].
• Sample Preparation Materials: Sustainable extractants and minimized consumables for sample preparation directly improve SPMS metrics [11].

The comparative analysis of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE demonstrates that no single tool comprehensively captures all aspects of method greenness. NEMI provides rapid screening, Analytical Eco-Scale adds quantitative assessment of reagent use and waste, while AGREE offers the most comprehensive evaluation against all 12 GAC principles. The experimental data confirm that their synergistic application enables researchers to develop analytical methods that balance environmental responsibility with scientific rigor. As the field evolves toward White Analytical Chemistry, this multi-tool approach will become increasingly essential for pharmaceutical analysts committed to sustainability without compromising analytical performance.

The pursuit of more efficient, sensitive, and environmentally sustainable analytical methods has driven significant innovation in chromatographic science, particularly in the sample preparation stage. This guide provides a comparative analysis of a novel sample preparation technique, Sugaring-Out Induced Homogeneous Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (SULLME), against conventional chromatographic methods. The comparison is framed within the context of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles, utilizing established greenness assessment tools: the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), and the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric.

The evaluation focuses on methodological aspects, performance characteristics, and environmental impact, providing researchers and drug development professionals with objective data to inform their analytical choices. The comparison employs experimental data from recent literature, including a specific application for determining antiviral medications in human plasma [61].

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

SULLME-HPLC/DAD Method

The SULLME protocol represents an advanced, green sample preparation technique. In a recent application for extracting nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (Paxlovid) from human plasma, the method involved several optimized steps [61]:

• Extraction Procedure: 500 μL of acetonitrile (a water-miscible organic solvent) was added to 1 mL of an aqueous sample in a 5 mL screw-cap glass test tube. The mixture was vortexed for 1 minute to form a homogeneous phase. Subsequently, 800 mg of sucrose was added, and the tube was vortexed for another minute to dissolve the sugar. This "sugaring-out" phenomenon induced phase separation.
• Phase Separation: The tube was centrifuged for 5 minutes at 3467 × g. The sugar addition decreased the solubility of the acetonitrile in the aqueous phase, causing the formation of a distinct organic upper layer.
• Analysis: The upper organic layer was directly transferred for analysis via High-Performance Liquid Chromatography with a Diode Array Detector (HPLC/DAD).
• Chromatographic Conditions: Separation was achieved on a Thermo Hypersil ODS C8 column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) maintained at 35°C. The isocratic mobile phase consisted of phosphate buffer (50 mM, pH 3.0) and acetonitrile in a 35:65 (v/v) ratio. Detection was performed at 210 nm.

The method was validated per FDA guidelines, demonstrating good linearity (1000–20,000 ng/mL for nirmatrelvir and 200–20,000 ng/mL for ritonavir), accuracy, and precision [61].

Conventional HPLC Methods for Comparison

For context, conventional chromatographic methods often rely on more traditional sample preparation and separation approaches:

• Sample Preparation: Traditional techniques include protein precipitation using large volumes of organic solvents, liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) with immiscible solvents, and solid-phase extraction (SPE). These typically consume more hazardous materials and generate more waste compared to microextraction techniques [61] [11].
• Chromatographic Analysis: A standard method for simultaneous drug determination, such as for cefepime and sulbactam, often uses a C18 column (e.g., ODS Hypersil C-18, 250x4.6 mm, 5 μm) with a mobile phase of acetonitrile and tetrabutyl ammonium hydroxide (pH 5.0) in a 20:80 (v/v) ratio, run at 1.5 mL/min with UV detection at 230 nm [62].
• Method Development Paradigm: Many conventional methods were developed using the "one factor at a time" (OFAT) approach. This strategy is less efficient and can be misleading because it fails to account for interactions between variables. In contrast, modern approaches like Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) use multivariate experiments (Design of Experiments, DOE) to define a robust Method Operable Design Region (MODR), ensuring method resilience against operational variations [63].

The following workflow diagram illustrates the key steps and decision points in the SULLME sample preparation process.

Performance and Greenness Comparison

Analytical Performance Metrics

The following table summarizes key performance metrics for the SULLME method compared to conventional approaches, based on data from the literature [61] [62].

Table 1: Comparison of Analytical Performance Characteristics

Performance Characteristic	SULLME-HPLC/DAD Method	Conventional HPLC Method Example
Application	Nirmatrelvir & Ritonavir in human plasma	Cefepime & Sulbactam in formulations
Linearity Range	Nirmatrelvir: 1000–20,000 ng/mLRitonavir: 200–20,000 ng/mL	Cefepime: 125–750 µg/mLSulbactam: 62.5–375 µg/mL
Correlation Coefficient (R²)	Nirmatrelvir: 0.998Ritonavir: 0.996	Not Specified (Typically >0.995)
Detection Technique	HPLC/DAD (UV 210 nm)	HPLC/UV (230 nm)
Key Advantage	High sensitivity and preconcentration; suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring without sophisticated LC-MS.	Simplicity, well-established for quality control of formulations.

Greenness Assessment Using NEMI, AES, and AGREE

The environmental impact of an analytical method is a critical factor in modern laboratories. The following table provides a comparative greenness assessment based on the principles of three major tools.

Table 2: Greenness Assessment Using NEMI, AES, and AGREE Tools

Assessment Tool	Core Principle	SULLME-HPLC/DAD Assessment	Conventional HPLC Assessment
NEMI [11]	Qualitative pictogram (4 quadrants) for PBT, hazardous, corrosive, waste (<50g).	Likely better profile: Uses acetonitrile (not PBT), generates micro-volume waste. May fully or partially fulfill criteria.	Poorer profile: Typically uses larger volumes of organic solvents, generating more hazardous waste, often exceeding 50g per analysis.
Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) [11]	Semi-quantitative. Penalty points subtracted from 100; score ≥75 is "excellent".	Higher score expected: Minimal solvent consumption, reduced waste, and automated steps reduce penalty points.	Lower score expected: High penalty points from large volumes of hazardous reagents and significant waste generation.
AGREE [14]	Quantitative score (0-1) based on all 12 GAC principles. Weights can be adjusted.	Higher score (~0.66+): excels in principles #7 (waste), #8 (throughput), and #12 (operator safety). Performs well with proper weighting.	Lower score: Lower scores in critical weighted categories like waste generation, sample throughput, and operator exposure to hazardous chemicals.

The AGREE tool is particularly powerful as it provides a comprehensive, quantitative score. The following radar chart visualizes the hypothetical AGREE score profiles for SULLME and a conventional method, highlighting performance across the 12 Green Analytical Chemistry principles.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of the SULLME technique and HPLC analysis requires specific reagents and materials. The following table lists essential items and their functions.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for SULLME-HPLC

Item	Function/Description	Application Context
Sucrose	A non-toxic, green agent used to induce phase separation in the homogeneous acetonitrile-water mixture ("sugaring-out" effect).	Primary agent for SULLME phase separation [61].
Acetonitrile (HPLC Grade)	Water-miscible organic solvent used as the extractant. Forms a homogeneous phase initially and concentrates analytes upon separation.	Extraction solvent in SULLME; also a common mobile phase component in HPLC [61] [62].
Potassium Dihydrogen Phosphate	Used for the preparation of the aqueous buffer component of the HPLC mobile phase. Buffer pH is a Critical Method Parameter (CMP).	Mobile phase preparation for pH control to optimize chromatographic separation [61] [63].
ODS C8 or C18 HPLC Column	The stationary phase where chromatographic separation occurs. The specific chemistry (C8 vs. C18) and dimensions are key to resolution.	Core component for analyte separation in the HPLC system [61] [62].
Velpatasvir (Internal Standard)	A compound added in a constant amount to the sample to correct for variability during sample preparation and injection.	Improves the accuracy and precision of quantitative analysis [61].

This comparative analysis demonstrates that SULLME represents a significant advancement in green sample preparation technology. When coupled with HPLC/DAD, it provides a sensitive and reliable method for quantifying pharmaceuticals in complex biological matrices like plasma, making it highly suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring.

The key differentiators are its miniaturized scale, which drastically reduces organic solvent consumption and waste generation, and its use of a non-toxic, sugar-based separation process. These attributes translate into a superior greenness profile across multiple assessment tools (NEMI, AES, and AGREE) compared to conventional sample preparation methods. Furthermore, its performance is robust enough to forgo the need for highly sophisticated instrumentation like LC-MS in many applications.

For researchers and drug development professionals, adopting SULLME and similar green microextraction techniques aligns with the growing imperative to integrate sustainability into analytical practices without compromising data quality, offering a path toward more environmentally responsible science.

The growing emphasis on environmental sustainability has propelled the development of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), a discipline dedicated to minimizing the ecological footprint of analytical methods [26]. This evolution represents a significant shift in how analytical chemists approach method development, now balancing analytical performance with environmental considerations. Green chemistry initially served as the first "color" in the triadic model for evaluating analytical methods, which later expanded into the broader framework of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) [26]. This comprehensive model integrates three dimensions: the green component for environmental sustainability, the blue component for methodological practicality, and the red component for analytical performance [26].

Within this framework, benchmarking against emerging metrics has become essential for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals who must objectively evaluate their analytical methods' environmental impact. The progression from basic tools like the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) and Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) to more sophisticated metrics demonstrates the field's maturation [26] [64]. This guide provides a detailed comparison of three significant emerging metrics—GAPI, AGREEprep, and AGSA—offering experimental data, protocols, and practical insights to inform sustainable method selection and development in pharmaceutical and chemical analysis.

Comparative Analysis of Green Assessment Metrics

The table below summarizes the core attributes of the three green assessment metrics and their positioning within the broader ecosystem of assessment tools.

Table 1: Comparison of Key Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric	Date Introduced	Scope of Assessment	Output Format	Scoring System	Primary Application
GAPI	2018 [26]	Comprehensive analytical workflow [26]	Five-part color-coded pictogram [26]	No overall score; qualitative color assessment [26]	General analytical methods [26]
AGREEprep	2022 [65]	Sample preparation step only [65]	Circular pictogram with 10 segmented segments [65]	0-1 scale (0 = worst, 1 = best) [65]	Sample preparation methodologies [65]
AGSA	2025 [26]	Comprehensive analytical workflow [26]	Star-shaped diagram [26]	Numerical score based on total star area [26]	General analytical methods [26]

Detailed Metric Profiles and Methodologies

Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI)

GAPI was developed to address the need for a more comprehensive and visually intuitive assessment tool than its predecessors [26]. It employs a five-part pictogram that color-codes each stage of the analytical process from sample collection to final detection, allowing users to quickly identify high-impact areas within a method [26]. The strength of GAPI lies in its comprehensive coverage of the entire analytical workflow, though it lacks an overall numerical score, which can limit direct comparability between methods [26]. The subjective nature of its color assignments has also been noted as a potential limitation [26].

Analytical Greenness Metric for Sample Preparation (AGREEprep)

AGREEprep represents a significant specialization in greenness assessment as the first tool dedicated exclusively to evaluating the environmental impact of sample preparation [65]. This focus addresses a critical gap, as sample preparation often involves substantial solvent use, energy consumption, and hazardous reagents [26]. The tool is anchored in the 10 principles of green sample preparation (GSP), which include favoring in situ preparation, using safer solvents and reagents, minimizing waste, and maximizing throughput [65].

AGREEprep's methodology incorporates weighted criteria to acknowledge that not all principles carry equal importance in terms of greenness [65]. For example, selecting safer solvents or minimizing energy requirements is weighted more heavily than choosing in-situ preparation or integrated steps [65]. The output is a colorful circular pictogram with ten segments, each representing one GSP principle, with an overall score between 0 and 1 in the center [65].

Analytical Green Star Analysis (AGSA)

AGSA is one of the most recent advancements in greenness assessment metrics, introduced in 2025 [26]. It combines intuitive visualization with an integrated scoring system, using a star-shaped diagram to represent performance across multiple green criteria [26]. These criteria include reagent toxicity, waste generation, energy use, and solvent consumption [26]. The total area of the star provides a direct and visually compelling method for comparison, offering both detailed sector analysis and an overall greenness score [26].

Experimental Protocol for Metric Application

To ensure consistent and reproducible application of these greenness assessment metrics, researchers should follow this standardized experimental protocol:

• Method Documentation: Compile a complete inventory of all method parameters including sample volume, solvent types and volumes, reagent quantities and hazards, energy consumption (including instrumentation and heating/cooling requirements), waste generation volumes and characteristics, and analysis time [26] [65].

• Metric Selection: Choose the appropriate metric(s) based on the assessment scope:

  • For comprehensive method evaluation: Utilize GAPI or AGSA [26].
  • For specialized sample preparation assessment: Apply AGREEprep, potentially in combination with a broader tool [26] [65].

• Data Input and Calculation:

  • For GAPI: Assign color codes (green, yellow, red) to each of the five analytical stages based on compliance with green chemistry principles [26].
  • For AGREEprep: Input data corresponding to each of the 10 GSP principles. Apply default or custom weights to each criterion, then calculate the overall score using the prescribed algorithm [65].
  • For AGSA: Input parameters for each sustainability criterion to generate the star diagram and calculate the overall score based on the total area [26].

• Validation: Verify metric application by comparing results with established benchmarks or previously assessed methods. Cross-validate using multiple metrics where appropriate to gain multidimensional insights [26].

• Interpretation and Reporting: Document both the visual output (pictogram, star diagram) and numerical scores. Identify specific areas for environmental improvement based on the assessment results [26] [65].

The workflow below illustrates the decision process for selecting and applying these metrics.

Case Study: Applying Multiple Metrics to a Microextraction Method

A recent study evaluating a Sugaring-Out Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (SULLME) method for determining antiviral compounds provides valuable experimental data for comparing these metrics in practice [26]. The method was assessed using MoGAPI (a modified GAPI approach), AGREE, AGSA, and CaFRI (Carbon Footprint Reduction Index), offering a multidimensional view of its sustainability profile [26].

Table 2: Comparative Scores in SULLME Method Case Study

Metric Applied	Score Obtained	Key Strengths Identified	Key Weaknesses Identified
MoGAPI	60/100 [26]	Use of green solvents; microextraction (<10 mL solvent) [26]	Specific storage needs; moderately toxic substances; vapor emissions; >10 mL waste without treatment [26]
AGREE	56/100 [26]	Miniaturization; semiautomation; no derivatization; small sample volume (1 mL) [26]	Use of toxic/flammable solvents; low throughput (2 samples/hour); moderate waste generation [26]
AGSA	58.33/100 [26]	Semi-miniaturization; avoided derivatization [26]	Manual handling; multiple pretreatment steps; 6+ hazard pictograms; no waste management [26]

This case study demonstrates the complementary nature of different assessment tools. While all metrics agreed on a moderate level of greenness (scores ranging 56-60), each highlighted different aspects of the method's environmental profile [26]. The SULLME method received positive recognition for its miniaturization approach and reduced solvent consumption, but all metrics consistently identified challenges in waste management, reagent safety, and operator hazards [26]. This multidimensional assessment provides a more realistic and comprehensive sustainability evaluation than any single metric could offer independently.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Transitioning toward greener analytical methods requires specific reagents and materials that align with GAC principles. The following table details key solutions mentioned in the search results for implementing sustainable analytical practices.

Table 3: Key Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Chemistry	Green Alternative/Solution
Extraction Solvents	Sample preparation and extraction [65]	Safer solvents (e.g., ethanol, water); solvent reduction to <10 mL via microextraction techniques [26] [60]
Sorbents	Solid-phase based extractions [65]	Sustainable, reusable, and renewable materials [65]
Acids/Bases	pH adjustment, sample digestion, mineralization [65]	Minimized amounts; replacement with safer alternatives where possible [65]
Derivatization Reagents	Chemical modification of analytes for detection [26]	Avoidance of derivatization steps where possible [26]
Chromatographic Mobile Phases	HPLC and UPLC separations [60]	Ethanol-water mixtures代替传统的乙腈或甲醇 [60]

The benchmarking analysis reveals that GAPI, AGREEprep, and AGSA each offer unique strengths for different assessment scenarios. GAPI provides valuable comprehensive visual assessment of entire analytical workflows, while AGREEprep offers unparalleled specialization for the often-problematic sample preparation stage. The newly developed AGSA combines intuitive visualization with a quantitative scoring system, representing the latest evolution in greenness assessment [26].

For researchers and drug development professionals, the strategic selection of metrics depends on their specific assessment goals. For holistic method evaluation, GAPI or AGSA are recommended, while for focused optimization of sample preparation, AGREEprep is indispensable. As demonstrated in the case study, employing complementary metrics provides the most comprehensive sustainability profile, enabling scientists to make informed decisions that balance analytical performance with environmental responsibility [26].

The progression toward more sophisticated, user-friendly, and comprehensive assessment tools reflects analytical chemistry's growing commitment to environmental stewardship, providing the scientific community with robust frameworks to quantify and improve their ecological footprint [26].

Conclusion

The comparative analysis of NEMI, AES, and AGREE reveals that no single metric provides a perfect assessment, but together they form a powerful toolkit for evaluating the environmental impact of analytical methods. NEMI offers simplicity, AES provides a semi-quantitative score, and AGREE delivers a comprehensive evaluation based on the 12 principles of GAC. The future of greenness assessment in pharmaceutical and clinical research lies in the synergistic application of multiple tools, adherence to Good Evaluation Practices (GEP) to ensure reliability, and the integration of these assessments as a standard part of analytical method validation. This holistic approach will ultimately drive the development of more sustainable, safer, and environmentally responsible analytical methods, aligning scientific progress with critical environmental goals in biomedical research.

References

• 1. Overview of sixteen green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluation of the greenness of analytical methods - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993623002984]
• 2. Tools to Evaluate the Eco-efficiency of Analytical Methods in the Context of Green and White Analytical Chemistry: A Review - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37877508/]
• 3. of Assessment for the determination of voriconazole in... greenness [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8982219/]
• 4. Evaluation of analytical greenness metric for an eco-friendly method developed through the integration of green chemistry and quality-by-design for the simultaneous determination of Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11365310/]
• 5. (PDF) The 12 principles of green and the... analytical chemistry [https://www.academia.edu/92675222/The_12_principles_of_green_analytical_chemistry_and_the_SIGNIFICANCE_mnemonic_of_green_analytical_practices]
• 6. The 12 principles of green and the... | CoLab analytical chemistry [https://colab.ws/articles/10.1016%2Fj.trac.2013.04.010]
• 7. AGREE—Analytical GREEnness Metric Approach and Software - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7588019/]
• 8. Green, Sustainable, and Unified Approaches towards Organic and Inorganic Analytes Extraction from Complex Environmental Matrices [https://www.ajchem-a.com/article_171736.html]
• 9. (PDF) Green analytical chemistry metrics: Towards a sustainable phenolics extraction from medicinal plants | María Fernanda Silva - Academia.edu [https://www.academia.edu/80486789/Green_analytical_chemistry_metrics_Towards_a_sustainable_phenolics_extraction_from_medicinal_plants]
• 10. Green analytical chemistry and experimental design: a combined approach for the analysis of zonisamide - PMC [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10108544/]
• 11. Sustainability in pharmaceutical : analysis of... greenness assessment [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44371-025-00166-3]
• 12. Greenness evaluation metric for analytical methods and software - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12318332/]
• 13. Comparative study of four greenness assessment tools for selection of greenest analytical method for assay of hyoscine N-butyl bromide - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33404016/]
• 14. Evaluation of Greenness of LC-MS Chromatographic Methods for Simultaneous Analysis of Mixtures of Serotonin, Dopamine, Acetylcholine, GABA and Glutamate: AGREE Tool Application [https://www.mdpi.com/2297-8739/9/6/147]
• 15. Computer aided greenness by design approach for resolving and... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-13486-2?error=cookies_not_supported&code=314b5245-7d67-4b64-ac56-c03326ad9525]
• 16. Five greenness of novel RP-UPLC and MCR... | CoLab assessments [https://colab.ws/articles/10.1016%2Fj.microc.2023.109359]
• 17. About NEMI [https://www.nemi.gov/about/]
• 18. NEMI Frequently Asked Questions [https://www.nemi.gov/faqs/]
• 19. Development of UAD-ICP-OES Method for Determination of... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12161-025-02779-x]
• 20. —Analytical AGREE Metric Approach and Software GREEnness [https://scite.ai/reports/agree-analytical-greenness-metric-approach-and-n6L2WDbP]
• 21. -Analytical AGREE Metric Approach and Software GREEnness [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32538619/]
• 22. Analytical Eco-Scale for assessing the greenness of analytical procedures - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993612001525]
• 23. (PDF) Analytical - Eco for assessing the greenness of Scale ... analytical [https://www.academia.edu/96644570/Analytical_Eco_Scale_for_assessing_the_greenness_of_analytical_procedures]
• 24. A validated RP-HPLC method for the estimation of Cinnarizine in tablet... [https://fjps.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43094-025-00888-2]
• 25. Analytical Eco-Scale for Assessing the Greenness of a Developed RP-HPLC Method Used for Simultaneous Analysis of Combined Antihypertensive Medications - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27492952/]
• 26. The Green Component: Assessing the Environmental Impact of... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/the-green-component-assessing-the-environmental-impact-of-analytical-methods]
• 27. Dispersive Membrane Microextraction of Substituted Phenols from... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9321667/]
• 28. Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the greenness of... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11697060/]
• 29. Greenness assessment and comparison of the developed and validated green HPLC-PDA, HPLC-FLD, and HPLC-ELSD methods for the determination of melatonin in various products using analytical eco-scale, NEMI, GAPI, and AGREE greenness metric tools - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0026265X24013237]
• 30. Multi-criteria decision analysis: technique for order of preference by... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-024-32961-3]
• 31. Greenness assessment of analytical methods for determination of cannabinoids in oils using NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, AGREE and GAPI - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39161240/]
• 32. study of Normal-phase versus reversed-phase Comparative ... HPTLC [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-025-01439-9]
• 33. Green High-Performance Thin-Layer Chromatography: A Step Towards Eco-Friendly Analysis | Chromatographia [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10337-025-04397-5]
• 34. QbD-steered HPTLC approach for concurrent estimation of six co-administered COVID-19 and cardiovascular drugs in different matrices: greenness appraisal | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-83692-x]
• 35. The Role of HPLC Columns in Shaping a Greener Analytical Future | LCGC International [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/the-role-of-hplc-columns-in-shaping-a-greener-analytical-future]
• 36. Application of a validated HPLC-PDA method for the determination of melatonin content and its release from poly(lactic acid) nanoparticles - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5790749/]
• 37. Application of a validated HPLC - PDA for the determination of... method [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29404064/]
• 38. Multivariate Analysis and Response Surface Modeling to Green Analytical Chemistry-Based RP-HPLC-PDA Method for Chromatographic Analysis of Vildagliptin and Remogliflozin Etabonate - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36651669/]
• 39. A Simple, Sensitive, and Greener HPLC -DAD Method for the... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137858/]
• 40. A sustainable and green HPLC-PDA technique for the simultaneous estimation of Post-COVID-19 syndrome co-administered drugs with greenness and whiteness assessment | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-75216-4]
• 41. UV vs Diode-Array ( PDA ) Detectors for (U) HPLC [https://www.ssi.shimadzu.com/service-support/faq/liquid-chromatography/knowledge-base/uv-vs-pda-detectors/index.html]
• 42. the Comparing and Validation Metrics of Traditional and... Greenness [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38826538/]
• 43. Identification, isolation, and structural characterization of novel forced degradation products of Ertugliflozin using advanced analytical techniques | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-36289-9]
• 44. Identification, isolation, and structural characterization of novel forced degradation products of Ertugliflozin using advanced analytical techniques - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37301855/]
• 45. High-performance thin-layer chromatography - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-performance_thin-layer_chromatography]
• 46. High-performance thin layer chromatography: A powerful analytical technique in pharmaceutical drug discovery - PMC [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3658041/]
• 47. High Performance Thin Layer Chromatography Plates [https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/US/en/technical-documents/technical-article/analytical-chemistry/thin-layer-chromatography/high-performance-thin-layer-chromatography-plates]
• 48. Environmental impact of the reported chromatographic methods for the determination of the first FDA-Approved therapy for COVID-19 Patients, Remdesivir: A comparative study - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8801062/]
• 49. National Environmental Methods Index [https://www.nemi.gov/home/]
• 50. Green Chemistry Techniques for Sustainable Pharmaceutical Synthesis | Journal of Drug Discovery and Health Sciences [https://jddhs.com/index.php/jddhs/article/view/38]
• 51. Analytical Approaches and Eco-Friendly Green : Solvents ... Advancing [https://www.orientjchem.org/vol41no2/green-analytical-approaches-and-eco-friendly-solvents-advancing-industrial-applications-and-environmental-sustainability-a-comprehensive-review/]
• 52. Total wash elimination for solid phase peptide synthesis | Nature Communications [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44074-5]
• 53. The Solvent-Free Revolution: Redefining Green Chemistry in Pharmaceuticals - PharmaFeatures [https://pharmafeatures.com/the-solvent-free-revolution-redefining-green-chemistry-in-pharmaceuticals/]
• 54. Integrating Quality by Design and Green Chemistry for Sustainable... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10337-025-04391-x]
• 55. chemistry and Integrating quality by... green analytical analytical [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-025-01448-8]
• 56. Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) Tool and Software for the Assessment of Method Greenness: Case Studies and Applications | MDPI [https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4532/5/3/30]
• 57. of microextraction techniques in therapeutic... Greenness assessment [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11216521/]
• 58. An eco-friendly separation-based framework for quantitative... [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-023-00926-1]
• 59. Greenness and whiteness assessment of a sustainable voltammetric method for difluprednate estimation in the presence of its alkaline degradation product | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-61712-0]
• 60. Eco-Friendly AQbD-Driven HPLC: A Sustainable Approach to Method... [https://jyoungpharm.org/10.5530/jyp.20250087]
• 61. Homogeneous liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with HPLC/DAD for... [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-023-01080-4]
• 62. High Performance Liquid Chromatographic for Simultaneous... Method [https://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=ijp.2010.271.277]
• 63. Important Aspects of the Design of Experiments and Data Treatment in the Analytical Quality by Design Framework for Chromatographic Method Development [https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/29/24/6057]
• 64. Assessing the Greenness and Environmental Friendliness of Analytical Methods: Modern Approaches and Recent Computational Programs - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38241068/]
• 65. AGREEprep – Analytical greenness metric for sample preparation - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016599362200036X]