Greenness Assessment Tools: A Comprehensive Guide for Biomedical Researchers and Drug Developers

Abstract

This article provides a systematic overview of the metrics and methodologies used to evaluate the environmental impact of analytical procedures in pharmaceutical and biomedical research. It explores the foundational principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), details the application of major assessment tools like AGREE, GAPI, and the emerging GEMAM, and offers a comparative analysis to guide method selection. Addressing the critical need for standardization and holistic evaluation, the content also covers troubleshooting common pitfalls and integrates greenness validation with traditional method performance checks. Aimed at researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, this guide serves as a strategic resource for implementing sustainable practices without compromising analytical quality, thereby aligning laboratory workflows with global sustainability goals.

The Principles and Evolution of Green Analytical Chemistry

The evolution of sustainable practices in analytical chemistry has progressed from a primary focus on environmental impact to a more comprehensive vision. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) established 12 principles aimed at minimizing the environmental footprint of analytical methods by reducing waste, energy consumption, and hazardous reagents [1] [2]. While pivotal, an exclusive focus on ecological aspects sometimes occurred at the expense of analytical performance and practical utility, potentially limiting the adoption of greener methods in routine settings such as quality control laboratories [3] [4].

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) has emerged as a holistic framework designed to reconcile the principles of GAC with the functionality required for a method to be truly effective and sustainable [3]. Introduced in 2021, WAC proposes 12 principles as an alternative to the 12 principles of GAC [3]. The term "white" is derived from the RGB (Red, Green, Blue) additive color model, where the combination of red, green, and blue light produces the perception of white light. Similarly, in WAC, a "white" method demonstrates a balanced and synergistic integration of analytical performance (Red), environmental impact (Green), and practical & economic considerations (Blue) [3] [4] [5]. This paradigm strives for a compromise that avoids an unconditional increase in greenness at the expense of functionality, thereby offering a more balanced approach closer to the ideal of sustainable development [3] [1] [6].

The Core RGB Model of White Analytical Chemistry

The RGB model forms the conceptual backbone of WAC, providing a three-dimensional perspective for method assessment.

The Green (G) Dimension: Environmental Sustainability

The green dimension encompasses the principles of GAC, focusing on minimizing the environmental and human health impact of analytical procedures [4]. Key criteria include:

• Prevention of waste generation during the analytical process.
• Use of safe and green solvents and reagents, reducing or eliminating the use of hazardous substances.
• Energy efficiency of instrumentation.
• Implementation of miniaturized and direct analytical techniques to reduce reagent consumption and waste [3] [4] [6].

The Red (R) Dimension: Analytical Performance

The red dimension ensures the method is functionally robust and fit-for-purpose, covering classic analytical validation parameters [4] [5]. Key criteria include:

• Sensitivity and Selectivity: The ability to accurately detect and quantify the analyte in the presence of potential interferents.
• Accuracy and Precision: Trueness of the results and reproducibility of the measurements.
• Linearity and Robustness: The reliability of the method across its defined range and its resilience to small, deliberate variations in method parameters [4].
• A method with strong "red" attributes delivers reliable, high-quality data.

The Blue (B) Dimension: Practicality and Economic Feasibility

The blue dimension addresses the practical aspects that determine a method's applicability in real-world laboratories, particularly in high-throughput environments like quality control [4] [5] [7]. Key criteria include:

• Cost-effectiveness of instrumentation and consumables.
• Analysis time and sample throughput.
• Simplicity of operation and ease of use, not requiring highly specialized training.
• Potential for automation [4].
• A method with strong "blue" attributes is practical, cost-efficient, and readily implementable.

The following diagram illustrates the synergistic relationship between GAC and WAC, and how the three RGB dimensions combine to form a "white" method.

Quantitative Evaluation and Metrics for WAC

The transition from a conceptual framework to a practical tool requires quantifiable metrics. The scientific community has developed various assessment tools to numerically and visually evaluate the greenness, redness, and blueness of analytical methods.

The RGB 12 Algorithm

A central quantitative tool in WAC is the RGB 12 algorithm [3]. This simple-in-use algorithm involves scoring each of the 12 principles of WAC (typically, four principles in each color dimension) on a 0 to 4 scale. The scores for each dimension are then used in a formula to calculate a "whiteness" percentage, providing a convenient parameter for comparing and selecting optimal methods [3]. This holistic score helps avoid the scenario where a method is perfectly green but functionally inadequate [3] [6].

Specialized Assessment Tools for Each Dimension

Complementing the overarching RGB 12 model, specialized metrics have been developed to deeply evaluate each individual dimension, and new tools continue to emerge [8].

Table 1: Key Assessment Metrics for the RGB Dimensions

Dimension	Metric Name	Acronym	Key Assessment Criteria	Output Format
Green	Analytical GREEnness	AGREE [6]	All 12 GAC principles	Pictogram (0-1 score)
	Green Analytical Procedure Index	GAPI [6]	Multiple stages of analytical process	Color-coded pictogram
	Analytical Eco-Scale	AES [9]	Reagent toxicity, energy, waste	Numerical score
Red	Red Analytical Performance Index	RAPI [9] [8]	Sensitivity, precision, accuracy, robustness, matrix effect	Pictogram (visual score)
Blue	Blue Applicability Grade Index	BAGI [5] [8]	Cost, time, simplicity, automation potential	Pictogram (numerical score)

Emerging and Complementary Tools

The field is dynamic, with recent tools aiming to address specific niches or integrate broader concepts:

• Violet Innovation Grade Index (VIGI): Evaluates the innovative strength of an analytical method across 10 criteria, including sample preparation, materials, and interdisciplinary [8].
• Graphical Layout for Analytical Chemistry Evaluation (GLANCE): A canvas-based template to promote clarity and coherence in communicating analytical methods, replacing lengthy prose with structured keywords [8].
• Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM): A comprehensive greenness metric based on the 12 GAC principles and 10 factors of green sample preparation, providing a score on a 0-10 scale [10].

The following diagram outlines the workflow for holistically evaluating an analytical method using these tools.

Experimental Protocols and Case Studies in WAC

The practical application of WAC principles is best illustrated through experimental protocols from recent scientific literature, demonstrating how the RGB balance is achieved and evaluated.

Case Study 1: Quantification of Pharmaceuticals in Nanoliposomes

A 2025 study developed and validated an HPLC-DAD method for the simultaneous quantification of Donepezil HCl and Curcumin in a co-formulated nanoliposome formulation [5].

• Analytical Protocol:
  • Separation: Zobrax Eclipse Plus C18 column (4.6*100 mm, 5 μm).
  • Mobile Phase: Gradient elution with 0.02 M phosphate buffer (pH 3.2) and ethanol.
  • Flow Rate: 1.5 mL/min.
  • Detection: Diode Array Detector (DAD) at 273 nm and 435 nm.
• Greenness (G) Assessment: The method was evaluated using AGREE and MoGAPI tools, which highlighted its eco-friendly attributes, primarily the use of ethanol as a greener solvent compared to more hazardous alternatives like acetonitrile or methanol [5].
• Whiteness (WAC) Assessment: The RGB algorithm was applied, demonstrating a balanced profile. The method scored high in the green dimension due to its reduced environmental impact, in the red dimension due to its validation according to ICH guidelines (proving accuracy, precision, linearity), and in the blue dimension due to its practicality for quality control laboratories [5].

Case Study 2: Simultaneous Assay of Gabapentin and Methylcobalamin

Another 2025 study presented an RP-HPLC method for the parallel quantification of Gabapentin and Methylcobalamin in pharmaceutical products, explicitly designed with sustainability and functionality in mind [7].

• Analytical Protocol:
  • Separation: Zorbax Eclipse C8 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 3.5 μm).
  • Mobile Phase: Potassium phosphate buffer (pH 6.9) and acetonitrile in a high ratio of 95:5 v/v.
  • Flow Rate: 2.0 mL/min.
  • Detection: UV at 210 nm.
  • Analysis Time: 10 minutes.
• Greenness (G) Assessment: The method's sustainability was validated by multiple metrics, including AGREE (score 0.70), AGREEprep (score 0.71), and Analytical Eco-Scale (score 80), confirming its superior greenness. The minimal use of acetonitrile (5%) was a key factor [7].
• Blueness (B) and Whiteness (WAC) Assessment: The method was also evaluated using BAGI to confirm its practicality and the RGB12 model for its overall whiteness. The authors concluded that the method was not only eco-friendly but also robust, cost-effective, and time-efficient, making it highly suitable for routine pharmaceutical quality control—a perfect embodiment of the WAC ideal [7].

Case Study 3: Determination of Metals in Food Samples

A 2023 study evaluated a method for determining Mn and Fe in beef using ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) and Microwave-Induced Plasma Atomic Emission Spectrometry (MP AES) [6].

• Analytical Protocol:
  • Extraction: Ultrasound bath (47 kHz) for 10 minutes using a mixture of diluted HNO₃ and HCl.
  • Analysis: MP AES, a technique recognized for its lower energy consumption compared to other atomic spectroscopy methods.
• Evaluation: The study compared the greenness profile using AGREE and AGREEprep tools and contrasted it with a holistic WAC assessment. The WAC approach successfully revealed the advantages of the analytical technique by balancing its analytical capabilities (successful validation, good trueness, and precision) with its practical aspects (simplicity, speed, low cost of UAE) and its green attributes (use of diluted acids, low energy consumption, minimal waste) [6].

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions in WAC-Conscious Analysis

Reagent / Material	Function in Analysis	WAC-Considered Alternatives & Rationale
Acetonitrile (HPLC)	Common organic mobile phase component.	Ethanol [5] or superheated water [4]. Less toxic, biodegradable, and renewable.
Chlorinated Solvents (e.g., CH₂Cl₂)	Extraction and chromatography.	Ethyl acetate or cyclopentyl methyl ether (CPME) [4]. Lower toxicity and environmental persistence.
Concentrated Mineral Acids	Sample digestion and hydrolysis.	Diluted acids [6] or enzymatic hydrolysis. Safer for operators, generates less hazardous waste.
Derivatization Reagents	To enable detection of non-chromophoric analytes.	Green derivatization agents or direct analysis using advanced detectors (e.g., CAD, MS) [10].
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) Sorbents	Sample clean-up and pre-concentration.	Fabric phase sorptive extraction (FPSE) [4] or magnetic nanoparticles [4]. Lower solvent consumption, reusable materials.

White Analytical Chemistry represents a significant and necessary evolution in the mindset of analytical scientists. It moves beyond the singular, albeit crucial, goal of environmental friendliness towards a holistic paradigm that equally values analytical excellence and practical feasibility. By adopting the RGB model and its associated quantitative tools like the RGB 12 algorithm, researchers and drug development professionals can systematically design, evaluate, and select methods that are not only greener but also robust, cost-effective, and readily applicable in real-world scenarios. This balanced "whiteness" is key to achieving truly sustainable and efficient analytical practices that can meet the demanding needs of modern scientific research and quality control without compromising on performance or planetary health. As the field continues to evolve, the integration of WAC principles is poised to become a standard for responsible and innovative analytical science.

A Practical Guide to Major Greenness Assessment Tools

The Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric is a comprehensive, user-friendly tool designed to evaluate the environmental impact of analytical procedures. Developed in 2020, AGREE represents a significant advancement in Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) by providing a standardized approach to assess how well analytical methods align with the 12 fundamental principles of GAC [11] [12]. Unlike earlier assessment tools that considered limited criteria or used binary scoring systems, AGREE offers a nuanced evaluation based on multiple environmental parameters, making it particularly valuable for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals seeking to implement sustainable laboratory practices [11] [12].

The tool emerged from the need for a more comprehensive metric system that could overcome the limitations of previous approaches like the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) and Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) [12]. While NEMI employed a simple pictogram with four binary criteria, and AES assigned penalty points subtracted from a base score of 100, both systems had significant constraints in their ability to provide detailed, multi-faceted environmental assessments [11] [12]. AGREE addressed these limitations by incorporating a wider range of assessment criteria and providing a more flexible, informative scoring system that generates an easily interpretable pictogram [11].

AGREE has gained widespread adoption in pharmaceutical analysis and other chemical fields due to its comprehensive nature and ability to facilitate direct comparisons between different analytical methods [13] [14] [15]. The metric aligns with the growing emphasis on sustainability in analytical laboratories, enabling researchers to make informed decisions that balance analytical efficiency with ecological responsibility [13].

Theoretical Foundation and the 12 GAC Principles

The AGREE metric is firmly grounded in the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, which provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating the environmental impact of analytical methods [11]. These principles, encapsulated in the acronym "SIGNIFICANCE," cover diverse aspects of analytical procedures from sample preparation to waste generation [11]. The development of AGREE was guided by four key requirements for an ideal metric system: comprehensiveness of input, flexibility of input importance, simplicity of output, and clarity of output [11].

Table 1: The 12 Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry in AGREE

Principle Number	GAC Principle	Description	Assessment Focus
1	Direct techniques	Apply direct analytical techniques to avoid sample treatment	Sample preparation approach and steps
2	Minimal sample size	Use minimal sample size and number of samples	Sample volume and quantity requirements
3	In-situ measurements	Perform in-situ measurements where possible	Analysis location and setup
4	Integration of steps	Integrate analytical operations and steps	Method workflow complexity
5	Automation	Automate methods where feasible	Level of manual intervention required
6	Derivatization avoidance	Avoid derivatization if possible	Use of chemical modification agents
7	Energy minimization	Minimize energy consumption in the process	Electricity and power requirements
8	Toxicity reduction	Use renewable, less toxic reagents	Chemical hazard profiles
9	Waste prevention	Prevent waste generation through miniaturization	Byproducts and disposal volumes
10	Reuse of materials	Reuse and recycle chemicals when possible	Material lifecycle management
11	Operator safety	Ensure operator safety with less hazardous chemicals	Health and safety considerations
12	Waste toxicity	Minimize toxicity of generated waste	Hazardous waste characteristics

Each principle is transformed into a score on a unified 0-1 scale, with the final assessment result calculated based on all 12 principles [11]. The system allows users to assign different weights to each criterion based on their relative importance in specific analytical scenarios, enhancing the flexibility and applicability of the tool across diverse methodological contexts [11].

AGREE Methodology and Implementation

Software and Calculation Framework

AGREE is implemented through open-source, freely available software that can be downloaded from https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE [11] [15]. The software features a user-friendly interface that guides analysts through the assessment process, with each of the 12 GAC principles evaluated individually based on specific parameters of the analytical method [11]. The calculation algorithm transforms diverse input variables (binary, discrete, or continuous) into normalized scores between 0 and 1, which are then aggregated according to user-defined weighting to produce a final overall score [11].

The AGREE output is presented as a circular pictogram (clock-like graph) with 12 segments corresponding to each GAC principle [11]. The color of each segment ranges from red (poor performance) through yellow to green (excellent performance), providing immediate visual feedback on the method's environmental performance across all principles [11]. The width of each segment reflects the weight assigned to that particular principle by the user, offering transparency into the assessment priorities [11]. The final composite score (0-1) appears in the center of the pictogram, with darker green colors indicating greener analytical procedures [11].

Assessment Criteria and Scoring System

The AGREE metric employs specific criteria and conversion methods to transform each GAC principle into a quantitative score [11]. For example, Principle 1 (direct analytical techniques) is scored based on the level of sample treatment required, with remote sensing without sample damage receiving the highest score (1.00) and external sample pre-treatment with numerous steps receiving the lowest score (0.00) [11]. Similarly, Principle 2 (minimal sample size) utilizes equations that convert sample mass or volume into normalized scores, encouraging miniaturization and reduced material consumption [11].

Table 2: AGREE Scoring Scale Interpretation

Overall Score Range	Color Representation	Greenness Interpretation
0.8 - 1.0	Dark Green	Excellent greenness
0.6 - 0.8	Green	Good greenness
0.4 - 0.6	Yellow	Moderate greenness
0.2 - 0.4	Orange	Poor greenness
0.0 - 0.2	Red	Very poor greenness

The scoring system is designed to be sensitive to variations in methodological parameters, allowing researchers to identify specific areas for improvement in their analytical procedures [11]. This granular approach distinguishes AGREE from earlier metric systems that offered limited differentiation between methods with varying environmental impacts [11] [12].

AGREE Assessment Workflow: This diagram illustrates the sequential process for evaluating an analytical method using the AGREE metric, from initial parameter definition to final pictogram generation.

Experimental Protocols for AGREE Assessment

Data Collection and Input Parameters

Implementing AGREE requires systematic collection of specific data points from the analytical method under evaluation. Researchers must gather quantitative and qualitative information across all stages of the analytical process, including sample preparation, reagent consumption, energy requirements, waste generation, and safety considerations [11]. For pharmaceutical applications, this typically involves documenting parameters such as mobile phase composition in chromatography, sample volume requirements, instrument power consumption, and waste treatment protocols [13] [14].

The assessment begins with compiling detailed information about the method's operational characteristics. This includes the nature and volume of solvents and reagents consumed per analysis, energy demands of instrumentation (often measured in kWh per sample), number of procedural steps, requirements for sample preservation and storage, generation of hazardous waste, and any special safety precautions needed for operators [11]. Accurate data collection is essential for generating a reliable AGREE assessment, as estimates or incomplete information can compromise the validity of the results [9].

Step-by-Step Assessment Procedure

• Method Characterization: Document all relevant parameters of the analytical procedure, including sample preparation technique, instrumentation, reagent types and volumes, energy consumption, and waste management approach [11].

• Principle Evaluation: Assess the method against each of the 12 GAC principles using the standardized conversion scales provided in the AGREE framework. For example, determine the score for Principle 1 based on the sample preparation approach (direct analysis, on-line analysis, at-line analysis, or off-line analysis) [11].

• Weight Assignment: Assign appropriate weights to each principle based on analytical priorities and environmental concerns. The default setting applies equal weighting, but users can adjust these based on specific assessment goals [11].

• Software Input: Enter the collected data and weight assignments into the AGREE software interface, ensuring all parameters are accurately represented [11] [15].

• Result Interpretation: Analyze the generated pictogram to identify methodological strengths and weaknesses. The visual output highlights which GAC principles are well-addressed and which require improvement [11].

• Method Optimization: Use the assessment results to guide modifications that enhance the method's greenness, such as solvent substitution, miniaturization, or waste reduction strategies [13] [14].

This systematic approach ensures consistent, reproducible evaluations that enable meaningful comparisons between different analytical methods and facilitate continuous improvement in environmental performance [11] [15].

Complementary Tools and Comparative Analysis

AGREEprep for Sample Preparation Evaluation

AGREEprep is a specialized complementary metric designed specifically for evaluating the environmental impact of sample preparation methods [16]. This tool focuses on the 10 principles of green sample preparation (GSP) and provides a focused assessment of this critical analytical stage, which often accounts for significant portions of solvent consumption, waste generation, and energy use in analytical workflows [16] [15]. The assessment follows a similar approach to AGREE, with ten assessment criteria corresponding to GSP principles and a user-friendly software interface that generates a pictogram with a final score between 0 and 1 [16].

The relationship between AGREE and AGREEprep is hierarchical, with AGREE providing a comprehensive evaluation of the entire analytical procedure, while AGREEprep offers granular assessment of the sample preparation component [16] [15]. For complex methods where sample preparation represents a significant portion of the environmental footprint, using both tools in conjunction provides the most complete picture of methodological greenness [15]. Research has demonstrated that microextraction techniques and other miniaturized sample preparation approaches typically achieve higher AGREEprep scores than conventional methods, highlighting the importance of innovation in this area for improving overall sustainability [15].

Comparison with Other Greenness Assessment Tools

AGREE represents one of several metrics available for evaluating the environmental performance of analytical methods, each with distinct characteristics, advantages, and limitations [10] [12]. The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) employs a simple pictogram with four binary criteria but lacks granularity and comprehensiveness [11] [12]. The Analytical Eco-Scale assigns penalty points to non-green attributes subtracted from a base score of 100, offering quantitative comparison but limited visual output [14] [12]. The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) provides a color-coded pictogram assessing the entire analytical process but doesn't generate an overall numerical score [17] [12].

Table 3: Comparison of AGREE with Other Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric Tool	Assessment Scope	Scoring System	Visual Output	Key Advantages
AGREE	Comprehensive (12 GAC principles)	0-1 scale with weighting	Circular pictogram with 12 segments	Comprehensive, flexible weighting, quantitative score
NEMI	Limited (4 criteria)	Binary (meets/doesn't meet)	Quadrant pictogram	Simple, intuitive
Analytical Eco-Scale	Moderate (multiple parameters)	Penalty points (0-100 scale)	Numerical score only	Quantitative, direct comparison
GAPI	Comprehensive (15 aspects)	Three-color scale	Multi-section pentagram	Detailed process evaluation
AGREEprep	Sample preparation focus	0-1 scale with weighting	Circular pictogram with 10 segments	Specialized for sample preparation

Recent studies have validated AGREE's utility in comparative greenness assessments. For example, research comparing chromatographic methods for cilnidipine analysis utilized AGREE alongside five other metrics and found it provided one of the most comprehensive environmental profiles [13]. Similarly, a study evaluating methods for ertugliflozin determination demonstrated that AGREE effectively differentiated between normal-phase and reversed-phase HPTLC approaches, with the latter achieving superior greenness scores [14].

Applications in Pharmaceutical Analysis and Case Studies

AGREE has been extensively applied in pharmaceutical analysis to evaluate and improve the environmental footprint of analytical methods used in drug development and quality control [13] [14]. The metric has proven valuable for comparing established methodologies with emerging approaches, guiding researchers toward more sustainable practices without compromising analytical performance [13].

In one representative case study, researchers evaluated twelve chromatographic methods for the analysis of cilnidipine (an antihypertensive medication) using AGREE and several other greenness assessment tools [13]. The AGREE assessment provided detailed insights into the environmental strengths and weaknesses of each method, highlighting factors such as solvent toxicity, energy consumption, and waste generation as critical differentiators between the approaches [13]. The study demonstrated how AGREE could identify specific areas for methodological improvement, such as substituting hazardous solvents with greener alternatives or implementing energy-efficient instrumentation [13].

Another application involved the development of a reversed-phase high-performance thin-layer chromatography (RP-HPTLC) method for the determination of ertugliflozin (an antidiabetic medication) [14]. The researchers used AGREE to compare the greenness profile of their new method with an established normal-phase HPTLC approach and various reported HPLC techniques [14]. The AGREE scores clearly demonstrated the superior environmental performance of the RP-HPTLC method, primarily due to its use of ethanol-water mobile phase instead of the more hazardous chloroform-methanol mixture employed in the normal-phase approach [14]. This case study illustrated how AGREE can validate claims of improved sustainability when introducing new analytical methods in pharmaceutical contexts [14].

Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Green Analytical Methods

Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Methods	Green Alternatives	Environmental Benefits
Ethanol-Water mixtures	Mobile phase in chromatography	Replacement for acetonitrile or methanol	Lower toxicity, biodegradability
Supercritical CO₂	Extraction solvent	Replacement for organic solvents	Non-flammable, non-toxic, recyclable
Ionic liquids	Specialty solvents for extraction	Replacement for volatile organic compounds	Low volatility, reduced air emissions
Bio-based solvents (e.g., limonene)	Extraction and separation	Petrochemical solvents	Renewable sourcing, biodegradability
Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) sorbents	Sample preparation and preconcentration	Replacement for liquid-liquid extraction	Solvent-free, minimal waste
Molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs)	Selective sample preparation	Conventional sorbents with poorer selectivity	Reusability, reduced consumption

The selection of appropriate reagents and materials represents a critical factor in developing greener analytical methods that achieve higher AGREE scores [11] [15]. Research has consistently demonstrated that solvent substitution—replacing hazardous solvents with safer alternatives—represents one of the most effective strategies for improving methodological greenness [14] [15]. For example, in chromatographic applications, ethanol-water mixtures have emerged as particularly promising green mobile phases that can replace more toxic acetonitrile or methanol compositions without compromising separation efficiency [14].

Miniaturized extraction techniques, including various forms of liquid-phase microextraction and solid-phase microextraction, have also shown significant potential for enhancing environmental performance [15]. These approaches typically consume minimal solvents, generate small waste volumes, and reduce energy requirements—all factors that contribute positively to AGREE assessments [15]. Additionally, the development and implementation of novel sorbent materials with enhanced selectivity and reusability further support the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry by reducing consumable consumption and waste generation [15].

AGREE Ecosystem: This diagram shows the relationship between AGREE, AGREEprep, and their foundation in Green Analytical Chemistry principles, illustrating how they work together to enable comprehensive method evaluation and optimization.

The Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric represents a significant advancement in the toolbox available for assessing and improving the environmental sustainability of analytical methods. Its comprehensive approach, based on all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, combined with user-friendly software implementation and intuitive visual output, has established AGREE as one of the most valuable and widely adopted greenness assessment tools in pharmaceutical analysis and other chemical fields [13] [14] [15].

The future development of AGREE and related metrics will likely focus on addressing current limitations and expanding assessment capabilities. Recent critical analyses have highlighted the need for greater standardization in evaluation practices and increased emphasis on empirical data collection rather than estimations [9]. The emerging concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which integrates greenness with practical applicability (blueness) and analytical performance (redness), represents a promising direction for more holistic method evaluation [17] [9]. Furthermore, the incorporation of life-cycle assessment principles and climate-specific metrics, such as carbon footprint calculations, may enhance the environmental relevance of future assessment tools [12].

For researchers and drug development professionals, AGREE provides a robust framework for evaluating and improving the environmental profile of analytical methods while maintaining scientific validity and practical utility. By implementing AGREE assessments during method development and optimization, laboratories can significantly contribute to broader sustainability goals while potentially reducing operational costs through decreased reagent consumption, energy use, and waste disposal requirements [13] [14]. As green chemistry principles continue to gain importance in regulatory and industrial contexts, tools like AGREE will play an increasingly vital role in shaping the future of analytical science.

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) is a critical discipline focused on minimizing the environmental footprint of analytical methods, aiming to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous substances, decrease energy consumption, and minimize waste generation [12]. The assessment of a method's greenness is no longer optional but a fundamental component of modern analytical science, ensuring that procedures are not only scientifically robust but also environmentally sustainable [18]. This evaluation requires specialized metrics, as traditional green chemistry metrics like E-Factor or Atom Economy are inadequate for assessing analytical procedures [12]. This guide provides a comprehensive, step-by-step framework for applying the most current greenness assessment tools to analytical methods, enabling researchers to quantify, evaluate, and improve the environmental profile of their workflows within the broader context of sustainable science.

The evolution of greenness metrics has progressed from basic binary tools to sophisticated, multi-criteria models that provide comprehensive environmental profiling [12]. The selection of an appropriate tool depends on the assessment's specific goals, the analytical method's characteristics, and the desired depth of evaluation. The most widely utilized and contemporary tools include AGREE, GAPI, and their derivatives, which offer complementary approaches to sustainability measurement [18].

Table 1: Key Greenness Assessment Tools and Their Characteristics

Tool Name	Type of Output	Assessment Scope	Key Advantages	Key Limitations
AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) [11]	Pictogram (clock-like graph) & numerical score (0-1)	Comprehensive, based on all 12 principles of GAC	Comprehensive; user-friendly software; allows weight assignment to different criteria	Does not fully account for pre-analytical processes; some subjectivity in weighting [12]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index) [12]	Color-coded pictogram (5 parts)	Entire analytical process (sample collection to detection)	Visually identifies high-impact stages within a method	Lacks an overall single score; color assignments can be subjective [12]
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index) [18] [12]	Simple pictogram (4 quadrants)	Four basic criteria (toxicity, waste, corrosiveness, hazardousness)	Simple and accessible	Binary assessment (yes/no) lacks granularity; limited criteria [11]
Analytical Eco-Scale [12]	Numerical score (100-point scale, penalty-based)	Reagent toxicity, waste, energy consumption, etc.	Quantitative; facilitates direct comparison between methods	Relies on expert judgment for penalties; lacks a visual component [12]
AGREEprep [18]	Pictogram & numerical score	Specifically for sample preparation steps	First dedicated tool for sample prep, often a high-impact stage	Must be used with another tool for full method evaluation [12]
AGSA (Analytical Green Star Analysis) [12]	Star-shaped diagram & numerical score	Multiple green criteria (toxicity, waste, energy, etc.)	Intuitive visualization; integrated scoring system for easy comparison	A newer tool, so established case studies may be limited

Step-by-Step Guide to Applying Greenness Tools

Step 1: Define the Goal and Scope of the Assessment

Before selecting a tool, precisely define the analytical method's boundaries. Determine whether the assessment will cover the entire workflow from sample collection to detection or focus on a specific segment, such as sample preparation. This clarity is essential for selecting the most appropriate metric and ensuring a consistent evaluation [19]. For instance, using AGREEprep is ideal if the goal is to optimize the sample preparation stage specifically [12].

Step 2: Gather All Necessary Method Data

A thorough assessment requires quantitative and qualitative data for the entire analytical procedure. Collect the following information systematically, as this raw data serves as the input for all subsequent steps and tool applications [11]:

• Reagents and Solvents: Types, exact quantities (in mL or g per sample), concentrations, and hazard classifications (e.g., GHS pictograms).
• Energy Consumption: Power requirements of instruments (in kWh) and operational duration.
• Waste Generation: Total volume (in mL) and composition of waste produced per sample, including any treatment protocols.
• Sample Treatment: Number of procedural steps, degree of automation (manual, semi-automated, fully automated), and whether the analysis is direct, in-field, on-line, at-line, or off-line [11].
• Operator Safety: Information on the use of corrosive conditions, volatile emissions, or required personal protective equipment.

Step 3: Select the Appropriate Assessment Tool

Choose a tool that aligns with the goal defined in Step 1. For a quick, high-level overview, NEMI might suffice. For a comprehensive evaluation that aligns with the 12 principles of GAC, AGREE is the preferred choice. To identify which specific parts of a process have the highest environmental impact, GAPI is highly effective. For a focused look at sample preparation, AGREEprep is recommended. Often, using multiple complementary tools (e.g., AGREE for a score and GAPI for a detailed breakdown) provides the most holistic view [12].

Step 4: Apply the AGREE Tool

AGREE is currently one of the most comprehensive tools, and its application can be broken down into a clear workflow. The following diagram illustrates the step-by-step process of using the AGREE calculator to evaluate an analytical method.

AGREE Workflow

• Score Each of the 12 GAC Principles: Using the data gathered in Step 2, evaluate the method against each of the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles. The AGREE software provides a conversion scale for each principle. For example:
  • Principle 1 (Directness): A method using remote sensing without sample damage scores 1.0, while off-line analysis scores 0.48, and methods involving external sample treatment with a large number of steps score 0.0 [11].
  • Principle 2 (Sample Size): The score is calculated based on the sample size in grams or milliliters, with smaller volumes receiving higher scores [11].
• Assign Weights: A key feature of AGREE is the ability to assign a weight (from 0.1 to 1.0) to each of the 12 principles based on their relative importance in your specific context. This introduces flexibility, allowing you to emphasize factors like energy consumption or waste generation if they are of particular concern [11].
• Input Data into Calculator: Use the freely available AGREE software (https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE). Input the scores and weights for all 12 principles.
• Generate and Interpret the Output: The tool generates a circular pictogram. The overall score (0 to 1) is displayed in the center, with 1 being ideal. The color of each segment (red-yellow-green) indicates performance for that principle. The width of each segment reflects the assigned weight [11]. This visual output makes it easy to identify both the overall greenness and the specific areas needing improvement.

Step 5: Apply the GAPI Tool

The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) provides a complementary view by detailing the environmental impact at each stage of the analytical process. The application process is structured as follows.

GAPI Application Steps

• Deconstruct the Method into 5 Stages: GAPI evaluates the entire analytical workflow through five sections in its pictogram, covering sample collection, preservation, transportation, preparation, and the final determination [12].
• Evaluate Each Stage Against Criteria: For each stage, assess specific criteria such as reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste generation, and safety. For instance, in the "sample preparation" section, you would evaluate the quantity and hazard of solvents used.
• Assign a Color Code: For each criterion within a section, assign a color based on a three-level scale:
  • Green (favorable): Assigned for practices that align with GAC, such as using negligible amounts of non-toxic solvents.
  • Yellow (moderate): For practices that have some environmental drawbacks.
  • Red (unfavorable): For practices that significantly contradict GAC principles, such as using large volumes of hazardous solvents [12].
• Construct the Pictogram: Fill in the five-section GAPI pictogram with the assigned colors.
• Interpret the Results: The completed pictogram provides an immediate visual summary. Sections with a high concentration of red or yellow colors indicate "hotspots" or areas where the method has the greatest environmental impact and should be prioritized for optimization [12].

Case Study: Evaluation of a SULLME Method

A case study evaluating a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method for determining antiviral compounds demonstrates the practical application of multiple tools to gain a multidimensional understanding [12].

Table 2: Case Study Results for SULLME Method Using Multiple Metrics

Tool Applied	Resulting Score	Key Strengths Identified	Key Weaknesses Identified
MoGAPI (Modified GAPI)	60/100	Use of green solvents; microextraction (<10 mL solvent); no further treatment	Specific storage needs; moderately toxic substances; vapor emissions; >10 mL waste without treatment
AGREE	56/100	Miniaturization; semiautomation; no derivatization; small sample volume (1 mL)	Use of toxic/flammable solvents; low throughput (2 samples/hour); moderate waste
AGSA	58.33/100	Semi-miniaturization; avoidance of derivatization	Manual handling; pretreatment steps; 6+ hazard pictograms; no waste management
CaFRI	60/100	Low analytical energy consumption (0.1-1.5 kWh/sample)	No renewable energy; no CO2 tracking; long-distance transport; >10 mL organic solvents

Interpretation: The case study shows that while the SULLME method performs well in miniaturization and solvent reduction, it has significant weaknesses in waste management, reagent safety, and energy sourcing. This highlights the importance of using multiple metrics to avoid a one-sided assessment and to identify specific, actionable areas for improvement, such as implementing waste treatment and sourcing safer solvents [12].

Essential Reagents and Materials for Green Analytical Chemistry

The practical implementation of greener analytical methods often relies on specific classes of reagents and materials designed to reduce environmental impact.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Chemistry	Green Alternative & Function
Organic Solvents (e.g., methanol, acetonitrile)	Extraction, mobile phase in chromatography, cleaning	Bio-based Solvents (e.g., ethanol, ethyl acetate): Renewable, often less toxic. Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES): Biodegradable, low-toxicity solvents for extraction [12].
Derivatization Agents	Chemically modifying analytes for detection	Avoidance via Direct Analysis: Using highly selective detectors (e.g., MS) to eliminate this step entirely, reducing reagent use and waste [11].
Sorbents (for SPE)	Extracting and concentrating analytes from samples	Biobased Sorbents: Sorbents derived from renewable sources. Electrospun Nanofibrous Polymeric Sorbents: Enable miniaturized, efficient extraction with less material [18].
Chemical Reagents	Digesting, precipitating, or reacting with samples	Green Synthesized Reagents: Reagents produced via sustainable synthesis methods. Thymol-based Natural DES: Used in microextraction to replace hazardous solvents [18].

Applying greenness assessment tools is a systematic process that transforms subjective environmental goals into quantifiable, comparable, and actionable metrics. The step-by-step framework of defining goals, gathering data, and applying tools like AGREE and GAPI empowers researchers to critically evaluate their methods, identify environmental hotspots, and make informed decisions to advance sustainability. The case study demonstrates that using multiple, complementary tools provides the most holistic and useful insight. As the field evolves, future metrics are expected to integrate lifecycle assessment more deeply and further simplify evaluations, embedding environmental responsibility as a non-negotiable pillar of analytical method development [12]. By adhering to this practice, researchers and drug development professionals can significantly contribute to the broader adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry.

Overcoming Challenges and Implementing Green Practices

Common Pitfalls in Greenness Evaluation and How to Avoid Them

In the pursuit of sustainable scientific practices, Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) and broader green chemistry principles have become central to modern research and development, particularly in pharmaceuticals [2] [12]. The evaluation of method greenness is crucial for adhering to sustainability goals and environmental precautions, driving the development of numerous assessment metrics [12]. However, the proliferation of these tools has outpaced the establishment of standardized guidelines, leading to significant challenges in their application. Inaccurate or misleading greenness assessments can undermine sustainability efforts, misdirect research priorities, and create an illusion of environmental progress where little exists. This technical guide identifies common pitfalls encountered during greenness evaluation of analytical methods and synthetic pathways, providing evidence-based strategies to avoid them. Framed within a broader overview of greenness assessment tools, this document equips researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals with the critical knowledge needed to implement rigorous, transparent, and meaningful environmental evaluations of their methodologies.

Fundamental Concepts in Greenness Assessment

The Color-Coded Framework for Holistic Method Evaluation

Modern sustainability assessment in analytical chemistry has evolved beyond a singular focus on environmental impact to embrace a multidimensional approach often visualized through color-coded dimensions [9] [12]. The Green component focuses specifically on environmental sustainability, encompassing factors such as waste generation, energy consumption, and reagent toxicity [12]. The Red dimension evaluates analytical performance and functionality, ensuring that method validation parameters (e.g., detection limit, sensitivity, accuracy) meet required standards [9] [20]. The Blue dimension assesses methodological practicality and economic viability, including factors such as cost, time per analysis, and operational complexity [12] [20]. These three dimensions collectively contribute to the White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) concept, where "whiteness" represents the optimal balance between greenness, analytical performance, and practical applicability [9] [12].

The landscape of greenness assessment tools has expanded significantly from early basic tools to more sophisticated contemporary metrics. Table 1 summarizes the key metrics used in greenness evaluation, their primary focuses, and their main limitations.

Table 1: Common Greenness Assessment Metrics and Their Characteristics

Metric Tool	Primary Focus	Output Type	Key Limitations
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	General Greenness	Pictogram (Binary)	Limited discrimination (binary); lacks comprehensive workflow assessment [12]
Analytical Eco-Scale	General Greenness	Numerical Score	Relies on expert judgment for penalties; no visual component [12]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)	General Greenness	Pictogram	No overall score; somewhat subjective color assignments [12]
AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric)	General Greenness	Pictogram & Numerical (0-1)	Does not sufficiently account for pre-analytical processes [12]
AGREEprep	Sample Preparation	Pictogram & Numerical	Focuses only on sample preparation [12]
BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index)	Practicality & Economics	Numerical Score	Does not cover environmental or performance aspects alone [20]
RGB Model	Holistic (Green, Red, Blue)	Numerical & Visual	Requires multiple assessments for full picture [9]
GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods)	General Greenness	Pictogram & Numerical (0-10)	Newer metric with limited track record [10]

Common Pitfalls in Greenness Evaluation

Overreliance on Oversimplified Metrics and Binary Thinking

A fundamental pitfall in greenness assessment is the excessive dependence on overly simplistic metrics that reduce complex environmental impacts to binary classifications [21]. The "red/green mindset" – where green is automatically considered good and red is bad – can cause researchers to miss important signals about method performance and environmental impact [21]. This approach fails to capture the continuous nature of environmental impact, where a method consuming 0.9 kWh per sample may be rated identically to one using 0.5 kWh (both falling under a "<1.0 kWh" threshold), while a method using 1.1 kWh is categorized differently despite minimal practical difference [9]. Such arbitrary thresholds, while simplifying evaluation, can obscure meaningful differences between methods and create false distinctions that don't correspond to real environmental impact gradients.

Subjectivity and Arbitrary Assumptions in Scoring

Many popular assessment models incorporate significant subjective elements that introduce variability and reduce comparability between studies [9] [20]. For instance, the amount of electricity needed to analyze one sample (kWh per sample) is a common criterion in greenness metrics, yet this value is "almost never measured directly with appropriate meters" but is instead "approximated more or less scrupulously" through estimations [9]. Similarly, penalty point assignments in tools like the Analytical Eco-Scale and weighting factors in AGREE depend on user judgment, creating opportunities for conscious or unconscious bias that can skew results in favor of a preferred method [9] [20]. The absence of uncertainty estimates for individual criteria scores further compounds this issue, making it difficult to determine whether differences between methods are statistically meaningful or merely artifacts of assessment variability [20].

Inadequate Scope and System Boundary Definition

Many assessments fall prey to incomplete system boundaries that omit significant environmental impacts. Most metrics focus exclusively on the analytical procedure itself while ignoring pre-analytical processes such as reagent synthesis, instrument manufacturing, or probe preparation [12] [20]. This creates a truncated environmental accounting that underestimates the true footprint of analytical methods. Additionally, specialized metrics designed for specific techniques (e.g., HPLC-EAT for liquid chromatography) cannot be validly applied to other analytical platforms, yet researchers sometimes misapply them beyond their intended scope [10]. The frequent neglect of the sample preparation stage in earlier metrics represented a particularly significant gap, as this step often involves substantial solvent consumption, energy use, and hazardous reagents [2] [12]. While newer tools like AGREEprep have emerged to address this specific gap, many researchers continue to use assessment tools that don't fully capture the sample preparation impact [12].

Problematic Weighting and Scoring Systems

The assignment of weights to different criteria presents another common challenge in greenness evaluation. Most available metric tools either do not explicitly consider weights or assign equal weights to all decision criteria, implicitly treating all factors as equally important despite their potentially varying environmental impacts [20]. When weights are adjustable (as in AGREE and AGREEprep), default values are typically applied without justification for the specific context, potentially misrepresenting method greenness for particular applications [20]. Furthermore, many tools use simplified scoring functions (e.g., binary or three-level responses) that lack the granularity to discriminate meaningfully between methods with moderate environmental differences [20]. This coarse quantification fails to capture the continuous nature of environmental impact parameters and can cluster methods with substantially different footprints into identical scoring categories.

Diagram: Relationship Between Common Pitfalls and Avoidance Strategies in Greenness Evaluation

Strategies for Avoiding Evaluation Pitfalls

Implement Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) Principles

To address common challenges in greenness assessment, researchers should implement Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) principles designed to enhance reliability, transparency, and usefulness [9]. These five general rules provide a framework for robust assessment:

• Use quantitative indicators based on empirical data alongside comprehensive models with varied structures. Direct measurements should replace estimations whenever possible [9].
• Ensure proper selection of the metric tool that matches the assessment purpose, considering whether a general or specific tool is most appropriate [9].
• Conduct the assessment with care and honesty, acknowledging limitations and avoiding selective reporting that overstates greenness [9].
• Present results transparently with clear documentation of all assumptions, data sources, and calculation methods [9].
• Interpret results cautiously, recognizing that metric outputs are supporting information rather than definitive verdicts on method environmental impact [9].

Employ Multiple Complementary Assessment Tools

Given that no single metric perfectly captures all aspects of environmental impact, employing multiple complementary assessment tools provides a more robust and nuanced evaluation [9] [12]. A strategic combination of metrics with different structures, scoring schemes, and underlying assumptions helps compensate for individual tool limitations and creates a more comprehensive environmental profile [9]. For example, researchers might combine AGREE (which provides a comprehensive overview based on the 12 GAC principles) with AGREEprep (specifically focused on sample preparation) and CaFRI (evaluating carbon footprint) to obtain a multidimensional perspective [12]. This approach helps identify inconsistencies and provides a more balanced view of method greenness, as strengths and weaknesses across different metrics can reveal important trade-offs that might be overlooked when using a single tool.

Utilize Directly Measurable Empirical Data

To combat subjectivity and estimation errors, researchers should prioritize directly measurable empirical data for quantitative indicators of environmental impact [9]. Table 2 presents key measurable indicators that provide objective foundations for greenness assessment.

Table 2: Quantitative Indicators for Objective Greenness Assessment

Indicator	Measurement Method	Environmental Significance
Electricity consumption	Wattmeter measurement of specific instruments during complete analytical cycle	Direct energy impact; can be converted to carbon footprint using local grid emissivity data [9]
Carbon footprint	Calculation from energy consumption × grid emissivity (gCO₂ kW⁻¹h⁻¹)	Climate change impact contribution [9] [12]
Mass/volume of waste generated	Direct measurement of all waste streams from reagent preparation to analysis completion	Resource efficiency and waste management impact [9]
Mass/volume of hazardous reagents	Inventory of specifically identified hazardous substances	Toxicity and environmental pollution potential [9]
Water consumption	Measurement of tap, distilled, and ultrapure water volumes used	Water resource utilization efficiency [9]
Analysis time	Direct timing of procedural steps from sample preparation to result generation	Operational efficiency and indirect energy impacts [9]

Apply Appropriate Weighting and Critical Analysis

Rather than accepting default weighting schemes uncritically, researchers should apply context-appropriate weighting that reflects the specific environmental priorities of their application [20]. For pharmaceutical methods where operator safety is paramount, increased weighting for hazardous reagent use might be justified. For methods in regions with carbon-intensive energy grids, greater emphasis on energy efficiency metrics would be appropriate. Additionally, researchers should implement statistical process behavior analysis to distinguish meaningful signals from natural variation in metric results, moving beyond simplistic red/green dichotomies [21]. This approach helps identify when a "green" metric represents a statistically significant improvement versus when it merely reflects normal system variation, enabling more meaningful comparisons and targeted improvement efforts.

Experimental Protocols for Rigorous Greenness Assessment

Comprehensive Method Evaluation Workflow

A standardized workflow ensures consistent and thorough greenness assessment. The following protocol provides a structured approach:

• System Boundary Definition: Clearly document all processes included in the assessment (sample collection, storage, preparation, analysis, data processing) and excluded processes (reagent synthesis, instrument manufacturing, facility infrastructure) with justifications for boundaries [10].
• Data Collection: For each process within system boundaries, collect directly measured empirical data following the indicators in Table 2. Use calibrated instruments for energy, volume, and mass measurements. Record all assumptions for estimated values [9].
• Multi-Metric Application: Select and apply at least three complementary assessment tools representing different approaches (e.g., one comprehensive tool like AGREE, one specialized tool relevant to the technique, and one simplified tool for verification) [9] [12].
• Transparent Documentation: Record all input data, weighting factors, scoring decisions, and computational steps in sufficient detail to enable reproduction [9].
• Uncertainty Assessment: Identify major sources of uncertainty in the evaluation (measurement error, estimation uncertainty, model limitations) and perform sensitivity analysis on critical assumptions [20].
• Comparative Analysis: When comparing methods, ensure consistent system boundaries, data quality, and assessment approach across all evaluated methods [9].

Case Study: Evaluation of a SULLME Method

A case study evaluating a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method for determining antiviral compounds demonstrates the application of multiple metrics [12]. The method was assessed using MoGAPI (score: 60/100), AGREE (score: 56/100), AGSA (score: 58.33/100), and CaFRI (score: 60/100) [12]. The multi-metric approach revealed a consistent pattern: the method showed strengths in miniaturization and avoidance of derivatization but weaknesses in waste management, reagent safety, and energy sourcing [12]. This comprehensive assessment provided specific, actionable insights for improving the method's environmental profile that would have been less evident from any single metric alone.

Diagram: Greenness Assessment Protocol Workflow

Software and Calculation Tools

Several specialized software tools have been developed to facilitate greenness assessment. AGREE and AGREEprep offer freely available calculators that streamline the application of these metrics [12]. The recently introduced GEMAM software is also freely available at https://gitee.com/xtDLUT/Gemam/releases/tag/Gemam-v1, providing an additional option for comprehensive method assessment [10]. These digital tools help standardize calculations and reduce computational errors, though researchers should remain aware of the underlying assumptions and limitations embedded in each software implementation.

Reference Materials and Databases

Critical to rigorous greenness assessment is access to reliable reference data for reagent toxicity, energy emissivity factors, and waste classification. Researchers should consult safety data sheets (SDS) for authoritative hazard information, regional energy grid emission factors from environmental agencies, and chemical databases for comprehensive substance properties. The CHEM21 solvent selection guide provides validated data for green solvent assessment [22], while tools like SUSSOL (Sustainable Solvents Selection and Substitution Software) offer databases of approximately 500 solvents with 118 characterized as "green" based on the CHEM21 methodology [22].

Effective greenness evaluation requires moving beyond superficial application of assessment tools toward critical, rigorous implementation. By recognizing and avoiding common pitfalls—including oversimplification, subjectivity, inadequate scope, and problematic weighting—researchers can generate more meaningful and reliable environmental assessments of their methods. The strategies outlined in this guide, centered on Good Evaluation Practice principles, empirical data collection, multi-metric approaches, and transparent documentation, provide a pathway to more robust sustainability claims in pharmaceutical research and analytical method development. As greenness assessment continues to evolve, researchers should maintain a critical perspective on both existing and emerging metrics, recognizing that these tools provide valuable but imperfect support for environmental decision-making rather than definitive verdicts on sustainability.

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles has become a critical objective for researchers and drug development professionals seeking to minimize the environmental impact of their analytical workflows. Greenness assessment tools provide a structured framework for evaluating and improving the sustainability of laboratory methods, focusing on factors such as reagent toxicity, waste generation, energy consumption, and operational hazards. The AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) metric exemplifies a modern assessment approach, translating the 12 core principles of GAC into a comprehensive, easy-to-interpret score [11]. This whitepaper details three pivotal technical strategies—miniaturization, sustainable solvent selection, and waste management—that directly address these assessment criteria to significantly improve the greenness profiles of analytical methods.

These strategies align with the core tenets of GAC, which emphasize reducing or eliminating hazardous substances, minimizing energy consumption, and implementing real-time analysis for pollution prevention [2] [11]. By focusing on these levers, scientists can systematically enhance their methodology sustainability while maintaining, or even improving, analytical performance. The following sections provide an in-depth technical exploration of each strategy, complete with quantitative data, experimental protocols, and practical implementation guidance tailored for research and pharmaceutical development environments.

Miniaturization of Analytical Systems

Miniaturization represents a paradigm shift in analytical chemistry, directly enhancing greenness scores by drastically reducing reagent consumption, waste generation, and energy requirements. The principle of "minimal sample size and minimal number of samples" is a cornerstone of GAC, and miniaturization is its primary technological enabler [11].

Miniaturized Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Spectroscopy

The development of miniaturized NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) systems demonstrates the profound impact of hardware miniaturization. Traditional NMR spectrometers rely on large superconducting magnets and sizable electronics, but recent advances have yielded portable systems with dramatically reduced footprints.

• NMR-on-a-Chip Technology: A leading innovation involves integrating the entire NMR transceiver onto a single application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC). This NMR-on-a-chip approach achieves an extreme degree of miniaturization, with complete transceivers occupying footprints as small as 1 mm² [23]. These custom chips not only reduce size but can also enhance performance and functionality while lowering power consumption to as little as 2 W for a full spectrometer system [24].
• Performance in Extreme Conditions: Miniaturized NMR spectrometers have been successfully deployed for relaxometry measurements under challenging conditions of 150 °C and 900 bar, while requiring sample volumes below 20 µL [24]. This capability, once exclusive to large, complex laboratory systems, opens new possibilities for in-field and in-process monitoring.
• High-Throughput Analysis: CMOS-based NMR technology enables the development of systems with arrays of micro-coils on a single chip. This architecture facilitates high-throughput bimolecular analysis, which is crucial for accelerating drug discovery processes by allowing simultaneous analysis of multiple samples [25].

Table 1: Impact of NMR Miniaturization on Key Green Metrics

Metric	Traditional NMR	Miniaturized NMR	Greenness Improvement
Sample Volume	500-600 µL [26]	< 20 µL [24]	> 25x reduction
Power Consumption	Kilowatts (cryogenics)	~2 W (portable systems) [24]	Orders of magnitude reduction
Instrument Footprint	Full laboratory room	Hand-portable, single-board [24]	Drastic space and resource savings
Throughput	Single sample analysis	Potential for on-chip coil arrays [25]	Reduced analysis time & energy

Miniaturized Separation Techniques

In separation sciences, miniaturization has primarily focused on liquid chromatography (LC), yielding techniques like capillary LC, nano-LC, and chip-based LC.

• Solvent Consumption Reduction: Miniaturized Liquid Chromatography (M-LC) systems operate with flow rates in the nL to µL per minute range, reducing solvent consumption by up to 1000 times compared to conventional High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) [27]. This directly minimizes waste generation and reagent costs.
• Enhanced Performance: Beyond green benefits, M-LC offers higher chromatographic resolution, improved sensitivity due to reduced dilution, and better compatibility with mass spectrometry [27]. These systems are increasingly applied in food safety, environmental monitoring, and proteomics [27].
• Portability for On-Site Analysis: The development of compact, portable HPLC systems housed in small enclosures enables on-site analysis [27]. This aligns with the GAC principle of conducting measurements directly at the sample source to avoid transportation and complex logistics, thereby reducing the overall environmental footprint [11].

Sustainable Solvent Selection Strategies

Solvent choice is one of the most significant factors in a method's environmental impact, influencing reagent hazards, waste toxicity, and energy requirements for evaporation or disposal. Strategic solvent selection directly addresses multiple principles within greenness assessment frameworks.

Green Solvent Alternatives

A critical evaluation of solvent properties allows chemists to replace hazardous solvents with safer, more sustainable alternatives.

• Deuterated Solvents in NMR: While deuterated chloroform (CDCl₃) is a common NMR solvent due to its low cost and easy evaporation, high-boiling solvents like DMSO-d6 and DMF-d7 are advantageous for solubilizing challenging compounds [26]. The historical drawback of difficult sample recovery from these solvents has been overcome by new evaporation technologies, making them viable green choices for precious samples [26].
• Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES): These solvents, formed from natural primary metabolites, are emerging as biodegradable and low-toxicity alternatives for extraction and sample preparation [28]. Their use significantly reduces the environmental and health hazards associated with traditional organic solvents.
• Supercritical Fluid Chromatography (SFC): SFC utilizes supercritical carbon dioxide as the primary mobile phase [28]. This replaces large volumes of organic solvents with a non-toxic, reusable, and readily available substance, drastically improving the greenness profile of chromatographic separations.

Table 2: Comparison of Common and Green Alternative Solvents

Solvent / Technique	Key Properties	Greenness Advantages	Common Applications
CDCl₃ (Common)	Low BP (61.2°C), inexpensive [26]	Baseline; relatively easy to remove	Standard NMR solvent
DMSO-d6 (Alternative)	High BP (189°C), good solubilizing power [26]	Enables analysis of difficult samples; low volatility	NMR for polar compounds
NADES	Biodegradable, low toxicity [28]	Reduces hazardous waste, safer for analysts	Extraction, sample prep
SFC with CO₂	Non-toxic, reusable mobile phase [28]	Minimizes organic solvent use by >90%	Chiral separations, natural products

Solvent Selection Experimental Protocol

Objective: To systematically evaluate and select the greenest solvent for a given analytical measurement, focusing on maximizing solubility while minimizing environmental, health, and safety impacts.

• Solubility Screening:

  • Prepare a small amount (~2-10 mg) of the analyte in several candidate deuterated solvents (e.g., CDCl₃, DMSO-d6, D₂O, acetone-d6) in a standard NMR tube. The goal is a solute concentration that yields a sample depth of at least 4.5 cm [26].
  • Use a low-field NMR spectrometer to acquire a quick ¹H NMR spectrum to confirm solubility and ensure the solvent peak does not critically overlap with analyte signals of interest.

• Greenness Profiling:

  • For each candidate solvent that provides adequate solubility, compile data on:
    • Toxicity: LD50, carcinogenicity, environmental impact.
    • Hazard: Flammability, corrosivity.
    • Energy Cost: Boiling point (as a proxy for energy required for removal/recovery).
    • Waste Impact: Biodegradability and potential for recycling.
  • Input this data into a greenness assessment tool like the AGREE calculator [11] to generate a comparative score.

• Sample Recovery Validation:

  • For the preferred green solvent, validate the sample recovery process. For high-boiling solvents like DMSO-d6, use a specialized evaporator (e.g., Smart Evaporator with "Spiral Plug" technology) to gently remove the solvent and retrieve the analyte [26].
  • Weigh the recovered analyte to determine recovery yield and check its integrity (e.g., via a follow-up NMR or LC-MS analysis) to ensure the process does not degrade the sample.

Waste Management and Sample Recovery

Effective waste management transforms analytical procedures from linear (use-dispose) to circular (use-recover-reuse) processes, directly improving scores on greenness metrics that penalize waste generation and hazardous by-products.

Microextraction Techniques for Sample Preparation

Sample preparation is often a major source of waste. Microextraction techniques address this by minimizing or eliminating solvent use.

• Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME): This technique uses a fiber coated with a stationary phase to extract analytes from a sample without using solvents. It integrates sampling, extraction, and concentration into a single step, dramatically reducing solvent waste [28] [29].
• Liquid-Phase Microextraction (LPME): LPME uses minimal volumes of solvent (often in the µL range) to extract analytes from aqueous samples. This provides high enrichment factors while reducing solvent consumption by orders of magnitude compared to traditional liquid-liquid extraction [28].

Integrated Analysis and Solvent Recycling

• On-Line Analysis: Coupling extraction or reaction systems directly to analytical instruments via on-line interfaces allows for real-time, in-process monitoring [28]. This avoids the need for multiple, discrete sample preparation steps, which collectively generate significant waste. This approach aligns with the first GAC principle of employing direct analytical techniques to avoid sample treatment [11].
• Advanced Solvent Evaporation: Technologies like the Smart Evaporator enable the recovery of valuable analytes from high-boiling-point solvents like DMSO, which were previously considered "dead ends" for samples [26]. This prevents the forced disposal of precious synthetic compounds or rare natural products along with the solvent, reducing both hazardous waste and the economic and environmental costs of resynthesizing materials.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents & Materials

The following table details key solutions and materials that are instrumental in implementing the green strategies discussed in this guide.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Greener Analytical Chemistry

Item	Function	Greenness Benefit
NMR-on-a-Chip Transceiver [23]	A miniaturized integrated circuit that performs RF transmission and signal reception for NMR.	Drastically reduces instrument size, cost, and power consumption compared to consoles.
Deuterated DMSO (DMSO-d6) [26]	A high-boiling-point solvent for NMR spectroscopy that solubilizes a wide range of compounds.	Prevents sample loss due to poor solubility; enables recovery of precious samples with modern evaporators.
Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES) [28]	Biodegradable solvents typically made from natural compounds like choline chloride and sugars.	Replace toxic organic solvents in extraction, reducing environmental impact and health hazards.
Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) Fiber [28] [29]	A fiber for extracting and concentrating analytes directly from liquid or gas samples.	Eliminates the need for large volumes of organic solvents in sample preparation.
Smart Evaporator [26]	An instrument for gentle, bump-free evaporation of solvents, including high-boiling-point ones.	Enables quantitative recovery of valuable analytes from solvents, minimizing waste and resource loss.
Capillary/Nano-LC Column [27]	A separation column with internal diameters in the micrometer range for liquid chromatography.	Reduces mobile phase consumption by up to 1000-fold compared to conventional HPLC.

The principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) have revolutionized how scientists evaluate the environmental impact of analytical methods, particularly sample preparation, which is often the most resource-intensive step. Green Sample Preparation (GSP), guided by ten core principles, establishes a roadmap for developing sustainable methodologies by emphasizing the use of safe solvents, renewable materials, waste minimization, and procedure simplification [30]. The overarching goal is to enhance sustainability by reducing the consumption of hazardous organic solvents and energy throughout the analytical process [31].

To quantify and compare the environmental performance of analytical methods, several specialized assessment tools have been developed. These metrics transform the qualitative principles of GAC into quantitative and visual evaluations, enabling researchers to make informed decisions when designing or optimizing methods. Key tools include the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), which assigns penalty points to non-green attributes; AGREE, which calculates a score based on the 12 principles of GAC; and the Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI), which provides a color-coded pictogram of the entire analytical process [32] [12]. More recent advancements include tools like AGREEprep, focused specifically on sample preparation, and the Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI), which estimates a method's carbon emissions [12]. This case study leverages these tools to systematically assess and optimize a sample preparation method for the analysis of Olmesartan medoxomil, demonstrating a practical pathway to higher greenness.

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

Selected Sample Preparation Techniques

The optimization process evaluated several common sample preparation techniques for their environmental impact and practicality. The following protocols were selected based on their prevalence in pharmaceutical analysis and their potential for greening.

• Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) Protocol: This method involves passing an aqueous sample through a cartridge containing a solid sorbent. The analytes are adsorbed onto the sorbent, and interfering matrix components are washed away. The target analytes are then eluted using a small volume of a strong organic solvent, leading to their concentration. Key steps include: conditioning the sorbent with methanol and water; loading the sample; washing with a mild solvent to remove impurities; and eluting the analytes with a solvent like acetonitrile or methanol. The green advantage of SPE lies in its reduced solvent consumption compared to traditional liquid-liquid extraction [31].

• QuEChERS Extraction Protocol: The name is an acronym for "Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe." This methodology, introduced in 2002, is renowned for its efficiency and minimal solvent use. The procedure involves two main stages. First, solvent extraction is performed by vigorously shaking the sample with acetonitrile in the presence of salts like anhydrous magnesium sulfate and sodium chloride, which promotes phase separation. Second, a sample clean-up step is conducted using dispersive Solid Phase Extraction (dSPE) to remove matrix interferences such as fatty acids and pigments. The minimal solvent requirement and high throughput make QuEChERS a fundamentally green technique [31].

• Direct Analysis Protocol: The greenest approach is often to eliminate sample preparation entirely. This is feasible only for clean samples. The protocol involves minimal steps such as filtration, dilution, or centrifugation to make the sample compatible with the analytical instrument. For instance, the determination of pesticides in water samples can sometimes be achieved via direct injection into a liquid chromatography system after a simple filtration step, completely avoiding the use of extraction solvents [31].

Analytical Determination Techniques

The prepared samples were analyzed using a range of chromatographic and spectroscopic techniques to evaluate the impact of the detection method on the overall greenness assessment.

• High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC): A workhorse for pharmaceutical analysis, it typically uses significant volumes of organic solvents in the mobile phase.
• Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC): An advanced form of HPLC that operates at higher pressures, allowing for faster analysis and reduced solvent consumption.
• Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS & UPLC-MS): Highly sensitive and selective techniques, but with higher energy demands due to the mass spectrometer.
• High-Performance Thin-Layer Chromatography (HPTLC): Generally uses less solvent than HPLC as the mobile phase is not pumped through a column.
• UV-Spectrophotometry: A simple, low-energy technique that often requires minimal solvent use [32].

Greenness Assessment Methodology

The greenness of each combined sample preparation and analytical method was evaluated using three primary metrics:

• Analytical Eco-Scale (AES): A base score of 100 is set, and penalty points are subtracted for hazardous reagents, large waste generation, high energy consumption, and operator risk. A score above 75 represents an excellent green analysis, while a score below 50 indicates an inadequate level of greenness [32] [12].
• AGREE Metric: This tool evaluates the method against the 12 principles of GAC. It outputs a score between 0 (least green) and 1 (most green) and provides a circular pictogram for visual interpretation [32] [12].
• BAGI Metric: The recently introduced Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) assesses the practicality of a method, complementing the environmental focus of other tools [32].

Table 1: Key Research Reagent Solutions and Their Functions in Sample Preparation

Reagent/Material	Primary Function in Sample Preparation	Greenness Considerations
Acetonitrile	Common extraction solvent (QuEChERS) and elution solvent (SPE); also used in HPLC mobile phases.	Hazardous, toxic; minimization is a key goal.
Solid Sorbents (e.g., C18, PSA)	Retain analytes (SPE) or remove interferences (dSPE in QuEChERS).	Can be single-use, generating solid waste; reusable sorbents are greener.
Magnesium Sulfate (MgSO₄)	Anhydrous salt used to bind water in the sample, improving analyte partitioning into the organic solvent (QuEChERS).	Generally considered low hazard.
Sodium Chloride (NaCl)	Used to induce salting-out, further separating organic and aqueous phases (QuEChERS).	Abundant, inexpensive, and low hazard.

Results and Discussion

Quantitative Greenness Assessment of Base Methods

The initial assessment of various analytical techniques for Olmesartan medoxomil, which incorporates standard sample preparation, reveals significant variations in greenness. The summarized results provide a baseline for understanding the impact of the analytical technique itself.

Table 2: Comparative Greenness Scores for Olmesartan Analytical Methods [32]

Analytical Technique	AES Score	AGREE Score	BAGI Score
UV-Spectrophotometry	79 - 86	0.60 - 0.71	77.5 - 82.5
HPLC	72 - 84	0.55 - 0.65	72.5 - 82.5
HPTLC	66 - 68	0.58 - 0.65	75 - 77.5
UPLC	77	0.62	80
LC-MS	75 - 89	0.65 - 0.66	75 - 80
UPLC-MS	67 - 75	0.68 - 0.69	80

UV-Spectrophotometry and UPLC consistently show high AES scores, indicating lower penalties for hazardous chemicals and energy use. LC-MS and UPLC-MS show the highest AGREE scores, suggesting they may better fulfill the broader principles of GAC, possibly due to high selectivity and sensitivity reducing the need for extensive sample preparation. However, their high energy consumption is a drawback. The following workflow diagram illustrates the logical process for selecting and assessing a method, from choosing the analytical technique to interpreting its greenness score.

Case Study: Multi-Tool Assessment of an Optimized Method

A detailed case study of a Sugaring-out Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (SULLME) method for antiviral compounds demonstrates the power of using complementary metrics. This method represents an optimized, miniaturized approach to sample preparation.

Table 3: Multi-Metric Greenness Assessment of the SULLME Method [12]

Assessment Tool	Calculated Score	Key Strengths	Key Weaknesses
MoGAPI	60/100	Use of green solvents; microextraction (<10 mL solvent); no further treatment.	Specific storage needs; moderately toxic reagents; >10 mL waste; no waste treatment.
AGREE	0.56/1.00	Miniaturization; semi-automation; no derivatization; small sample volume (1 mL).	Use of toxic/flam. solvents; low throughput (2 samples/hr); mod. waste generation.
AGSA	58.33/100	Semi-miniaturization; avoidance of derivatization.	Manual handling; multiple pretreatment steps; 6+ hazard pictograms; no waste management.
CaFRI	60/100	Low energy use (0.1–1.5 kWh/sample); no energy-intensive equipment.	No renewable energy; no CO₂ tracking; long-distance transport; >10 mL organic solvent.

The data reveals a consistent profile: the method's miniaturization is a major strength, but its waste generation, use of hazardous reagents, and lack of waste management are recurring drawbacks. The AGREE pictogram provides an immediate visual summary of performance across the 12 principles of GAC, while CaFRI adds the crucial dimension of climate impact.

Optimization Strategies for Higher Greenness

Based on the identified weaknesses, the following optimization pathways are recommended to transition a method from moderate to high greenness.

• Prioritize Miniaturization and Solvent Reduction: The most effective strategy is to reduce the scale of extraction. Techniques like micro-extraction (as seen in the SULLME case study) and the use of smaller SPE cartridges can drastically cut solvent consumption to below 10 mL per sample, directly improving AES, AGREE, and CaFRI scores [31] [12]. This aligns with the GSP principles of miniaturization and waste minimization [30].

• Substitute Hazardous Reagents with Green Alternatives: A critical step is to replace toxic and flammable solvents (e.g., acetonitrile, chloroform) with safer alternatives. Where possible, biobased reagents, water, or solvents with better environmental, health, and safety (EHS) profiles should be selected. This substitution directly addresses penalties in AES and low scores in the "reagent toxicity" sections of AGREE and AGSA [12].

• Integrate Automation and Improve Energy Sourcing: Automating the sample preparation process enhances throughput and improves operator safety by reducing exposure, aligning with GSP principles [30]. Furthermore, powering analytical instruments with renewable energy sources and tracking CO₂ emissions are advanced strategies that directly boost the CaFRI score and the overall sustainability of the laboratory [12].

• Implement a Waste Management Plan: No analytical method is truly green without an end-of-life plan for its waste. Implementing procedures for waste segregation, recycling, or treatment is essential. This was a noted weakness in the SULLME case study, and addressing it would significantly improve scores across all metrics, particularly AES and AGSA [12].

The following diagram summarizes the strategic relationship between identified weaknesses in a method's profile and the corresponding optimization actions that lead to a greener outcome.

This case study demonstrates that optimizing a sample preparation method for higher greenness is a systematic and multi-faceted process. The journey begins with a comprehensive baseline assessment using complementary tools like AES, AGREE, and AGSA, which provide both quantitative scores and visual insights into a method's environmental profile. The subsequent optimization, guided by the principles of Green Sample Preparation, focuses on concrete actions: miniaturizing procedures to reduce solvent volume, substituting hazardous reagents with safer alternatives, automating for efficiency and safety, and implementing robust waste management. The integration of newer tools like CaFRI further ensures that climate impact becomes a central consideration in method development. By adopting this structured approach, researchers and drug development professionals can decisively move from merely assessing greenness to actively achieving it, ensuring their analytical practices are not only scientifically robust but also environmentally responsible and sustainable.

Selecting the Right Tool: Comparative Analysis and Validation Strategies

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) represents a significant shift in modern laboratories, moving analytical practices toward greater environmental responsibility. GAC aims to minimize the negative impacts of analytical procedures on human health and the environment by reducing or eliminating hazardous solvents, reagents, and waste while promoting energy-efficient methodologies [12]. The concept, formally introduced in 2000, has evolved from a theoretical framework into an applied science, driven by a growing awareness of the ecological footprint of analytical operations [10] [12].

Assessing a method's greenness is crucial for ensuring adherence to sustainability goals. Traditional green chemistry metrics, such as E-Factor or Atom Economy, proved inadequate for the specific and multi-stage processes of analytical chemistry [12]. This limitation stimulated the development of specialized GAC metrics, which provide standardized tools for chemists to evaluate, compare, and select methods based on their environmental performance. The progression of these metrics—from simple binary checklists to comprehensive, quantitative scoring systems—highlights the field's maturation and its increasing alignment with broader global sustainability objectives [12]. This overview provides a technical guide to the key greenness assessment tools, offering researchers a structured framework for evaluating their analytical practices.

The Evolution and Principles of Greenness Assessment

The development of greenness assessment tools mirrors the increasing sophistication of GAC itself. The foundational framework for this field is built upon the 12 principles of GAC (often referenced by the mnemonic "SIGNIFICANCE") and the 10 principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) [10]. These principles provide a comprehensive roadmap, advocating for direct analysis, miniaturization, reduced energy consumption, safer reagents, and proper waste management [12].

Early metrics were characterized by their simplicity and ease of use. The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), for instance, introduced a straightforward pictogram that indicated whether a method met four basic environmental criteria related to toxicity, waste, and safety [12]. While accessible, its binary (yes/no) nature lacked the granularity to distinguish between degrees of greenness or to assess the entire analytical workflow [12].

Subsequent tools introduced a more nuanced, quantitative approach. The Analytical Eco-Scale applied penalty points to non-green attributes, subtracting them from a base score of 100 to facilitate method comparison [12]. A significant advancement came with the introduction of pictogram-based tools like the Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI), which used a color-coded diagram to visualize environmental impact across five stages of the analytical process, from sample collection to final detection [12].

The field's evolution continues toward more holistic and user-friendly assessments. Modern metrics such as Analytical Greenness (AGREE) and the Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM) integrate the 12 GAC principles into a unified output, providing both a visual pictogram and a numerical score [10] [12]. Recent innovations like the Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI) and the Analytical Green Star Analysis (AGSA) further refine these assessments by incorporating lifecycle and climate impact considerations [12]. This progression enables chemists to make more informed, data-driven decisions to design and select methods that are both scientifically robust and ecologically sustainable.

Comparative Analysis of Key Greenness Metrics

A clear understanding of the strengths, limitations, and specific applications of each metric is essential for selecting the appropriate tool. The following table provides a side-by-side comparison of the most prominent greenness assessment metrics.

Table 1: Comparative Overview of Key Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric Name	Primary Output	Scope of Assessment	Key Strengths	Inherent Weaknesses
NEMI [12]	Qualitative pictogram (4 criteria)	Basic environmental criteria	Simple, accessible, user-friendly	Binary assessment; lacks granularity; limited scope.
Analytical Eco-Scale [12]	Quantitative score (0-100)	Reagents, energy, waste	Quantitative result; facilitates direct comparison.	Relies on expert judgment for penalties; lacks visual component.
GAPI [12]	Semi-quantitative color pictogram (5 sections)	Entire analytical process	Visualizes impact across workflow stages; more comprehensive.	No overall score; some subjectivity in color assignment.
AGREE [12]	Quantitative score (0-1) & pictogram	12 principles of GAC	Comprehensive; user-friendly; combines score and visual.	Subjective weighting; insufficient pre-analytical coverage.
AGREEprep [12]	Quantitative score (0-1) & pictogram	Sample preparation only	First dedicated tool for sample prep; visual and quantitative.	Must be used with another tool for full method evaluation.
GEMAM [10]	Quantitative score (0-10) & pictogram	12 GAC principles & 10 GSP factors	Simple, flexible, and comprehensive; covers sample to waste.	Weights can be subjective; requires detailed method data.
AGSA [12]	Quantitative score & star diagram	Reagent toxicity, waste, energy, etc.	Intuitive visualization; integrated scoring system.	Novel metric with less established track record.
CaFRI [12]	Carbon footprint score	Carbon emissions of analytical procedures	Aligns with climate goals; focuses on carbon footprint.	Narrow focus on carbon, not overall greenness.

For researchers requiring a high-level, quantitative overview, AGREE and GEMAM are among the most comprehensive options. AGREE is notable for its balance of a unified score and an intuitive pictogram based directly on the 12 GAC principles [12]. GEMAM differentiates itself by also incorporating the 10 factors of green sample preparation, resulting in a highly detailed assessment presented on a 0-10 scale [10]. Its pictogram features a central hexagon for the overall score surrounded by six hexagons representing key dimensions (Sample, Reagent, Instrument, Method, Waste, and Operator), each evaluated against 21 specific criteria with adjustable weights [10].

For a more targeted analysis, specialized metrics are more appropriate. AGREEprep is the tool of choice for deeply evaluating the sample preparation stage, which is often the most resource-intensive part of the workflow [12]. Conversely, CaFRI is uniquely valuable for understanding a method's alignment with corporate or regulatory climate targets, as it focuses specifically on estimating and reducing carbon emissions [12].

The limitations of each tool must be considered. Simpler metrics like NEMI lack the detail needed for robust comparative analysis [12]. While more advanced, metrics like AGREE and GEMAM still involve a degree of subjectivity in the weighting of different criteria [10] [12]. Therefore, using a combination of complementary metrics often provides the most multidimensional and realistic view of a method's environmental profile.

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

Applying greenness metrics effectively requires a standardized methodology. The following section outlines detailed protocols for implementing two of the most comprehensive metrics, AGREE and GEMAM.

Protocol for Assessment Using the AGREE Metric

The AGREE metric evaluates an analytical method against the 12 principles of GAC. The output is a circular pictogram with 12 sections, each corresponding to one principle, and an overall score between 0 and 1.

1. Data Collection: Gather complete details of the analytical procedure, including: * Sample Preparation: Type and volume of solvents, reagents, sample size, number of steps, and potential for direct analysis. * Instrumentation: Energy consumption per analysis (kWh), level of automation, and miniaturization. * Method Performance: Sample throughput (samples per hour), number of analytes determined per run, and derivation requirements. * Waste Generation: Volume of waste produced per sample and any waste treatment procedures. * Operator Safety: Details on reagent toxicity, flammability, and the hermetic sealing of the process.

2. Scoring and Weighting: Using the AGREE calculator software, input the collected data. The tool assigns a score from 0 to 1 for each of the 12 principles. The user can adjust the weight of each principle based on its relative importance to the specific assessment, though default weights are provided.

3. Pictogram Generation and Interpretation: The software generates a circular pictogram where each section's color (from red to green) and the overall score reflect the method's greenness. A score closer to 1 indicates a greener method. The pictogram allows for immediate visual identification of which GAC principles are well-addressed and which are not.

Protocol for Assessment Using the GEMAM Metric

GEMAM provides a detailed evaluation based on 21 criteria across six key sections, resulting in a score from 0 to 10.

1. Define System Boundaries and Weights: Clearly define the analytical workflow to be assessed, from sample collection to waste disposal. The evaluator can accept the default weights for the six main sections (Sample: 10%, Reagent: 25%, Instrument: 15%, Method: 15%, Waste: 25%, Operator: 10%) or adjust them to reflect specific environmental priorities [10].

2. Criterion Evaluation: Score each of the 21 criteria on a scale from 0 to 10. The GEMAM software guides this process with predefined transformations for quantitative and qualitative data. For example [10]: * Criterion 1 (Sample preparation site): In-line=1, On-line=0.75, On-site=0.5, Ex-situ=0.25. * Criterion 8 (Score of reagents): A composite score based on the volume, toxicity, and renewability of all reagents used. * Criterion 14 (Energy consumption): Score is inversely proportional to the kWh consumed per analysis.

3. Score Calculation and Visualization: The software calculates the total score using the following equations [10]: Score of each section = Σ [10 × (weight of criterion_i) × (score of criterion_i)] for all n criteria in the section. Total GEMAM score = Σ [Score of section_i × Weight of Section_i] for all six sections. The result is displayed as a hexagonal pictogram, with the central hexagon showing the final score and the six surrounding hexagons colored based on the performance in each section.

Case Study: Evaluating a SULLME Method

A 2025 case study evaluating a Sugaring-Out Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (SULLME) method for determining antiviral compounds demonstrates the value of a multi-metric approach [12].

• MoGAPI assigned a score of 60/100, highlighting strengths in green solvent use and miniaturization (<10 mL solvent) but noting weaknesses in waste generation (>10 mL without treatment) and use of moderately toxic substances [12].
• AGREE yielded a similar score of 56/100, praising miniaturization and automation but confirming the drawbacks of toxic solvents and moderate waste [12].
• AGSA provided a score of 58.33, with its star diagram visualizing strengths in miniaturization but weaknesses in manual handling and the number of hazard pictograms associated with reagents [12].
• CaFRI focused on climate impact, giving a score of 60. It noted low analytical energy consumption (0.1–1.5 kWh/sample) as a positive, but flagged the lack of renewable energy, long transportation distances, and absence of waste disposal as significant negatives [12].

This multidimensional evaluation reveals that while the SULLME method is strong in miniaturization, its primary sustainability weaknesses lie in waste management, reagent safety, and energy sourcing—insights that would be less clear if only a single metric were used.

Visualizing the Assessment Workflow

The logical process of selecting and applying greenness metrics can be visualized as a decision workflow. The diagram below outlines the key steps and considerations for researchers.

Diagram 1: Greenness Metric Selection Workflow.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents & Materials

The practical implementation of green analytical methods relies on a suite of specialized reagents, materials, and software tools. The following table details key components of a modern green chemistry laboratory.

Table 2: Essential Reagents, Materials, and Software for Green Analysis

Item Name	Category	Function in Green Analysis
Bio-based Solvents	Reagent	Replace traditional, petroleum-derived toxic solvents (e.g., hexane, chlorinated solvents) with safer, renewable alternatives (e.g., ethanol, ethyl lactate).
Ionic Liquids	Reagent	Serve as designer solvents for extraction with low volatility, reducing solvent loss and inhalation hazards, thus enhancing operator safety [12].
Microextraction Devices	Apparatus	Enable miniaturization of sample preparation, drastically reducing solvent and sample consumption in line with GAC principles [10].
Automated Sample Preparation Systems	Instrumentation	Increase throughput, improve reproducibility, and reduce manual handling, minimizing errors and operator exposure to hazards [10].
In-line/On-line Analyzers	Instrumentation	Allow for direct analysis and continuous monitoring, eliminating the need for extensive sample transport, storage, and preparation [10].
Energy-Efficient Chromatographs	Instrumentation	Reduce the overall energy consumption of the analytical process, addressing the GAC principle of minimizing energy use.
AGREE Calculator	Software	Free software that computes the AGREE score and generates the corresponding pictogram based on user-inputted method parameters.
GEMAM Software	Software	Freely available tool that performs a comprehensive greenness assessment based on 21 criteria across six sections [10].

The landscape of greenness assessment metrics has evolved from simple checklists to sophisticated, quantitative tools that provide a multidimensional view of an analytical method's environmental impact. Core metrics like AGREE and GEMAM offer comprehensive evaluations based on the foundational principles of GAC, while specialized tools like AGREEprep and CaFRI provide deep dives into specific areas such as sample preparation and carbon footprint. The case study on the SULLME method clearly demonstrates that employing a combination of these complementary metrics yields the most robust and actionable insights, revealing both strengths and weaknesses across different environmental dimensions.

For researchers and drug development professionals, mastering these tools is no longer optional but a critical component of modern, responsible laboratory practice. By integrating these assessments into method development and validation protocols, scientists can make data-driven decisions that significantly reduce the environmental footprint of their work. This proactive approach to sustainability, guided by clear and standardized metrics, is essential for advancing the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry and contributing to a more sustainable future for the field.

Integrating Greenness Assessment with Analytical Method Validation (ICH Guidelines)

The pharmaceutical industry and analytical laboratories are increasingly embracing sustainability alongside traditional requirements for analytical reliability and regulatory compliance. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles aim to minimize the environmental impact of analytical methods by reducing hazardous waste, energy consumption, and the use of dangerous substances [1]. Simultaneously, the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) provides the foundational framework for analytical method validation, ensuring that analytical procedures are fit for their intended purpose, with recent updates emphasizing a more scientific, risk-based approach [33].

This technical guide provides a comprehensive framework for integrating modern greenness assessment tools with established analytical method validation protocols as per ICH Q2(R2) and ICH Q14. By bridging this gap, we empower researchers and drug development professionals to develop methods that are not only regulatorily compliant and scientifically sound but also environmentally responsible.

Core Principles and Regulatory Framework

Fundamentals of ICH Method Validation

The integrity of analytical data in pharmaceutical development is governed by ICH validation guidelines, which have recently evolved from a prescriptive checklist to a holistic, lifecycle-oriented approach.

• ICH Q2(R2): Validation of Analytical Procedures: This revised guideline is the global benchmark for validating analytical procedures. It expands upon its predecessor to include modern analytical technologies and reinforces a science- and risk-based approach. It defines the core validation parameters essential for demonstrating a method is fit-for-purpose [34] [33].

• ICH Q14: Analytical Procedure Development: This complementary guideline introduces a systematic framework for method development. Its cornerstone is the Analytical Target Profile (ATP), a prospective summary of the method's required performance characteristics. Defining the ATP at the outset ensures the method is designed to meet its intended purpose from the beginning [33].

This modernized framework facilitates a more flexible and robust validation process, creating a natural synergy with the proactive goals of greenness assessment.

Principles of Greenness Assessment

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) is an environmentally conscious methodology that seeks to mitigate the detrimental effects of analytical techniques. Its implementation is guided by the 12 principles of GAC, which provide a roadmap for minimizing environmental impact across the entire analytical workflow [1] [10].

The concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) has emerged as a holistic evaluation model, integrating three critical dimensions: the red (analytical performance), the green (environmental impact), and the blue (practicality and economic feasibility) [1] [12]. A truly sustainable method must achieve a balance among all three components.

Numerous metrics have been developed to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the greenness of analytical methods. The following table summarizes the key tools relevant to pharmaceutical analysis.

Table 1: Key Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric Name	Type of Output	Key Basis/Principles	Strengths	Limitations
Analytical Eco-Scale [12]	Numerical score (0-100)	Penalty points for non-green parameters	Simple, quantitative, allows direct comparison	Relies on expert judgment; lacks a visual pictogram
Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) [1] [12]	Color-coded pictogram	Entire analytical process from sampling to detection	Comprehensive visual assessment; identifies high-impact stages	No overall score; some subjectivity in color assignment
Analytical Greenness (AGREE) [1] [12]	Pictogram & numerical score (0-1)	12 principles of GAC	User-friendly, comprehensive, facilitates comparison	Does not fully account for pre-analytical processes
AGREEprep [35] [12]	Pictogram & numerical score (0-1)	Dedicated to sample preparation	Focuses on often most polluting step; quantitative output	Must be used with another tool for full method assessment
Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) [35]	Numerical score	Evaluates practical applicability	Assesses practicality (the "blue" component in WAC)	Does not cover environmental or performance aspects alone
Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM) [10]	Pictogram & numerical score (0-10)	12 GAC principles & 10 GSP factors	Comprehensive, flexible weight assignment, detailed criteria	Relatively new; broader adoption still ongoing

Table 2: Quantitative Greenness Scores from a Representative Case Study [12]

Assessment Metric	Reported Score	Interpretation	Key Positive Findings	Key Negative Findings
Modified GAPI (MoGAPI)	60/100	Moderate greenness	Use of green solvents; microextraction (<10 mL solvent)	Toxic substances; >10 mL waste; no waste treatment
AGREE	0.56	Moderate greenness	Miniaturization; semi-automation; no derivatization	Toxic/flammable solvents; low throughput; waste generation
Analytical Green Star (AGSA)	58.33/100	Moderate greenness	Semi-miniaturization; avoided derivatization	Manual handling; hazardous reagents; no waste management
Carbon Footprint (CaFRI)	60/100	Moderate footprint	Low energy consumption (0.1–1.5 kWh/sample)	No renewable energy; long transport distances; organic solvents

Integration Strategy: A Procedural Workflow

The following diagram illustrates a systematic workflow for integrating greenness assessment with the analytical method lifecycle, from development to validation.

Step-by-Step Integration Protocol

• Define the Analytical Target Profile (ATP) with Green Objectives: The process begins with the ATP, as per ICH Q14. In addition to defining the analyte, concentration range, and required accuracy/precision, the ATP should explicitly include initial green objectives. These could be qualitative (e.g., "avoid highly toxic solvents") or quantitative (e.g., "achieve an AGREE score > 0.7") [33].

• Risk-Based Method Development: Using the ATP, conduct a risk assessment (as described in ICH Q9) to identify variables critical to both method performance and environmental impact. This includes choices of solvents, energy consumption of equipment, and scale of operation. Actively select green alternatives, such as:

  • Replacing acetonitrile with methanol or ethanol in HPLC [36].
  • Implementing miniaturized techniques (e.g., micro-extraction) to reduce solvent consumption [10].
  • Automating processes to improve precision and reduce solvent waste [10].

• Method Validation and Parallel Greenness Evaluation: Once the method is developed, perform a full validation per ICH Q2(R2) core parameters (accuracy, precision, specificity, etc.) [34] [33]. In parallel, conduct a formal greenness assessment using one or more of the metrics from Table 1. This evaluation should be documented alongside the traditional validation report.

• Holistic Review and Decision Using White Analytical Chemistry (WAC): Critically review the validation results and the greenness scores together. A method with excellent validation parameters but a poor green profile is not truly sustainable, and vice versa. The WAC model provides a balanced framework for this decision, ensuring the method is effective (Red), sustainable (Green), and practical (Blue) [1] [36]. If the method fails this holistic review, the workflow returns to the development stage.

• Lifecycle Management and Continuous Improvement: After implementation, the method enters the lifecycle management phase. Any proposed changes to the method should be evaluated for their impact on both validation parameters (as per ICH Q12) and the greenness profile, fostering continuous improvement towards sustainability [33].

Experimental Protocols and Application Case Studies

Case Study 1: Green HPLC Method for Antihypertensive Combinations

This study developed an HPLC method for simultaneous determination of Nebivolol, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine, integrating Quality-by-Design (QbD) and GAC [36].

• Experimental Protocol:

  • Chromatography: A conventional ODS column was used.
  • Mobile Phase: A mixture of 0.1% formic acid in water (pH 2.5) and ethanol. This is a key green improvement, substituting the more toxic acetonitrile with ethanol.
  • Detection: UV detection at 220 nm.
  • Validation: The method was validated for linearity, accuracy, precision, LOD, LOQ, and robustness as per ICH guidelines.
  • Greenness Assessment: The method's greenness was evaluated using the AGREE metric and the Analytical Eco-Scale, confirming its alignment with sustainable practices [36].

• Outcome: The method successfully separated four drugs without using traditional hazardous buffers and organic solvents, demonstrating that green principles can be effectively integrated into robust, multi-analyte pharmaceutical methods.

Case Study 2: Green Sample Preparation for Anthocyanin Extraction

This research provides a direct comparison of Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE) and Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction (UAE) for anthocyanins from purple corn, using sustainable solvents (o-phosphoric acid, ethanol, water) [35].

• Experimental Protocol:

  • Sample Preparation: Purple corn powder was mixed with diatomaceous earth for PLE.
  • PLE Conditions: Extraction used 2% o-PA in EtOH:water (1:1) at 95°C and 1500 psi for 3 min in one static cycle.
  • UAE Conditions: Optimization was carried out using a multivariate design.
  • Analysis: Anthocyanins were identified and quantified using HPLC-UV-MS/MS.
  • Validation: Both protocols were validated following FDA guidelines, demonstrating excellent linearity (R² ≥ 0.9992), precision (RSD ≤ 5.4%), and accuracy (recoveries 97.1–101.9%).
  • Greenness & Applicability Assessment: The sample preparation steps were evaluated using AGREEprep (greenness) and BAGI (practical applicability) [35].

• Outcome: AGREEprep scores were 0.73 (PLE) and 0.76 (UAE), while BAGI scores were 77.5 (PLE) and 72.5 (UAE), confirming both as sustainable and practical for routine analysis. PLE offered higher throughput, while UAE minimized waste and energy.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Item/Category	Function in Analysis	Green & Practical Considerations
Ethanol	Extraction solvent; HPLC mobile phase	Biobased, less toxic alternative to acetonitrile or methanol [36] [35].
Water (Acidified)	Extraction solvent; HPLC mobile phase	Non-toxic, renewable. Can be modified with food-grade acids (e.g., o-phosphoric acid) for pH control [35].
o-Phosphoric Acid	pH modifier in mobile phase/extraction	Used with food-grade solvents to create safer, eco-friendly analytical systems [35].
Diatomaceous Earth	Dispersion solid support for PLE	Inert, reusable material that aids in efficient solid-phase extraction [35].
Micro-Scale Columns	Chromatographic separation	Reduce solvent consumption by enabling narrower bore columns and smaller flow rates.
Automated/Semi-Automated Extraction Systems (e.g., PLE, UAE)	Sample preparation	Improve efficiency, reproducibility, and safety while often reducing solvent volumes [35] [10].

The integration of greenness assessment with ICH-compliant method validation is no longer a theoretical ideal but a practical and achievable standard for modern laboratories. The advent of powerful quantitative metrics like AGREE, GAPI, and GEMAM provides the necessary tools to objectively measure and document environmental impact. By adopting the integrated workflow outlined in this guide—anchored in the ATP, supported by risk-based development, and evaluated through the holistic lens of White Analytical Chemistry—researchers can systematically develop analytical methods that are simultaneously regulatorily sound, scientifically valid, and environmentally responsible. This synergy is crucial for advancing sustainable practices in pharmaceutical development and analytical science.

The field of analytical chemistry has witnessed a significant paradigm shift from focusing solely on analytical performance to embracing more comprehensive evaluation frameworks. The introduction of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) established the foundation for assessing environmental impact, but a critical gap remained in balancing sustainability with practical utility and innovation. The White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) concept emerged to address this need through its RGB model, which evaluates methods based on three pillars: Red (analytical performance), Green (environmental impact), and Blue (practicality and economy). While numerous tools were developed to assess the green component, comparable metrics for practicality and innovation were lacking until recently.

The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) and Violet Innovation Grade Index (VIGI) represent the latest evolution in holistic method assessment, filling crucial gaps in the analytical chemist's toolkit. These complementary tools enable researchers to evaluate critical aspects that determine whether a method can be successfully implemented in real-world scenarios, particularly in demanding fields like pharmaceutical analysis and drug development where both practicality and innovation are paramount.

Theoretical Foundations: The RGB Model and Beyond

The White Analytical Chemistry Framework

The RGB model forms the cornerstone of White Analytical Chemistry, operating on the principle that optimal methods should balance all three attributes, much as white light combines red, green, and blue wavelengths [8] [37]. According to WAC principles, a "whiter" method demonstrates a superior compromise between all three attributes and is better suited to its intended application than methods that excel in only one dimension. This framework acknowledges that an environmentally perfect method is useless if it lacks the analytical performance required for accurate results or the practicality needed for routine implementation.

The conceptual relationship between these assessment dimensions can be visualized as follows:

The Critical Assessment Gap

Before the introduction of BAGI and VIGI, analytical chemists lacked standardized tools to quantitatively assess the practicality and innovation of their methods. While established metrics like AGREE (Analytical GREEnness metric) and GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index) effectively evaluated environmental impact, and validation parameters addressed analytical performance, the practical applicability and innovative character of methods were often subjectively assessed [38] [37]. This created a significant barrier to method selection and development, particularly for industrial applications where practical considerations like cost, throughput, and ease of implementation often determine success.

BAGI emerged as a dedicated tool for assessing "blue" criteria, focusing on practical applicability, while VIGI was developed to evaluate the innovative aspects of analytical methods, represented by the violet spectrum [8]. Together, these tools provide a more complete picture of a method's overall value beyond traditional metrics.

The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI): A Practicality Assessment Tool

Theoretical Framework and Design Principles

The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) is a recently proposed complementary tool that addresses the practical and economic aspects of analytical methods [38] [37]. Designed as a "sister" tool to greenness assessment metrics, BAGI evaluates ten major attributes that determine a method's practicality in real-world settings. The tool was created in response to the recognition that environmental friendliness alone does not guarantee that a method will be widely adopted—it must also be practical to implement [38].

BAGI is available as open-source software through mostwiedzy.pl/bagi and as a web application at bagi-index.anvil.app, making it accessible to researchers worldwide [38]. The assessment produces both a numerical score (ranging from 25 to 100) and a colored pictogram, with higher scores indicating greater practicality. A score above 60.0 is generally recommended for a method to be considered practical for routine application [38].

Assessment Criteria and Scoring System

BAGI's evaluation encompasses ten critical parameters that collectively determine a method's practical utility. These criteria cover both sample preparation and instrumental analysis aspects:

Table 1: BAGI Assessment Criteria and Evaluation Parameters

Category	Assessment Criteria	Evaluation Basis
Analysis Type	Qualitative vs. Quantitative	Applicability to analytical need
Multianalyte Capacity	Number of simultaneous analytes	Efficiency for target application
Sample Throughput	Analysis time per sample	Operational efficiency
Reagent Usage	Type, toxicity, and quantity	Safety and cost considerations
Instrumentation	Complexity and availability	Accessibility and resource requirements
Sample Preparation	Steps, time, and complexity	Labor intensity and error potential
Automation Potential	Degree of automation possible	Reproducibility and personnel cost
Operator Skill Level	Required expertise	Training requirements and implementation barrier
Cost Considerations	Per analysis expense	Economic feasibility
Safety Aspects	Hazard management	Workplace safety requirements

The BAGI workflow follows a systematic process to evaluate methods against these criteria:

BAGI Implementation Protocol

Protocol 1: Practicality Assessment Using BAGI

• Method Documentation Compilation

  • Collect complete methodological details including sample preparation steps, reagent consumption, instrumentation requirements, analysis time, and operator requirements
  • Quantify all consumables and energy requirements per sample

• Software Input

  • Access the BAGI assessment tool through mostwiedzy.pl/bagi or the web application
  • Input method parameters through the drop-down menus for each of the ten criteria

• Assessment Execution

  • The software automatically calculates scores for each criterion based on the input parameters
  • The algorithm weights each criterion according to its impact on overall practicality

• Result Interpretation

  • Review the numerical score (0-100 scale) displayed in the center of the pictogram
  • Analyze the colored segments to identify strengths and weaknesses in practicality
  • Compare results against the threshold of 60.0 for practical method classification

• Method Optimization

  • Use the assessment to identify practical limitations
  • Implement modifications to address low-scoring criteria
  • Reassess optimized method to demonstrate improvement

Pharmaceutical Application Case Study

BAGI has been successfully applied to evaluate microextraction techniques for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in food and water samples [38]. In this comprehensive assessment, thirty-four microextraction protocols were evaluated, resulting in scores ranging from 50.0 to 77.5. These findings indicated significant room for improvement in method practicality, driving further optimization efforts.

In another pharmaceutical application, a GC-MS method for simultaneous analysis of paracetamol and metoclopramide achieved a BAGI score of 82.5, confirming its high practicality for routine quality control and pharmacokinetic studies [39]. The method demonstrated excellent performance with tablet recovery rates of 102.87 ± 3.605% for paracetamol and 101.98 ± 3.392% for metoclopramide, coupled with a rapid 5-minute runtime that contributed to its high practicality score.

The Violet Innovation Grade Index (VIGI): An Innovation Assessment Tool

Theoretical Framework and Design Principles

The Violet Innovation Grade Index (VIGI) introduces a novel perspective to method assessment by emphasizing innovation, complementing existing green, blue, and red metrics [8]. This tool recognizes that methodological progress depends not only on current performance and practicality but also on innovative character that drives the field forward. VIGI integrates ten distinct criteria that collectively capture the innovative aspects of analytical methods, providing a comprehensive evaluation that looks toward future potential rather than just present utility.

VIGI employs a survey-based visual tool that helps identify the innovative strength of analytical methods, generating a pictogram shaped like a 10-pointed star with varying violet intensities to facilitate rapid interpretation and comparison between methods [8]. This visualization quickly communicates which methods incorporate cutting-edge approaches and which rely on established but potentially outdated technologies.

Assessment Criteria and Scoring System

VIGI evaluates innovation across ten dimensions that represent the forefront of analytical chemistry:

Table 2: VIGI Innovation Assessment Criteria

Innovation Dimension	Assessment Focus	Innovation Indicators
Sample Preparation	Novelty of approach	New materials, simplified workflows, integrated systems
Instrumentation	Technological advancement	Novel detection principles, improved capabilities
Data Processing	Software and algorithm innovation	AI/ML integration, novel data treatment approaches
WAC Integration	Holistic method optimization	Balance of red, green, and blue attributes
Regulatory Compliance	Novel compliance strategies	Innovative approaches to meeting regulatory requirements
Materials & Reagents	Novel material applications	New sorbents, solvents, catalysts, or reagents
Miniaturization	Scale reduction approaches	Microfluidic systems, portable devices, reduced consumption
Automation	Automated workflow innovation	Robotics, automated sample handling, smart systems
Interdisciplinarity	Cross-field integration	Incorporation of concepts from other scientific disciplines
Sensitivity & Selectivity	Performance breakthrough	Novel approaches achieving superior analytical figures of merit

Each parameter in VIGI is evaluated on a three-tiered scale (low, medium, high), generating a comprehensive innovation profile. Methods that incorporate advanced materials, miniaturized devices, and automation typically score highly, reflecting their contributions to advancing analytical chemistry [8]. Conversely, methods lacking advanced data processing or interdisciplinary applications score lower, highlighting areas for potential improvement.

VIGI Implementation Protocol

Protocol 2: Innovation Assessment Using VIGI

• Innovation Inventory

  • Document novel aspects of the method across all ten VIGI criteria
  • Compare against existing state-of-the-art methods to establish baseline innovation

• Criteria Evaluation

  • Assess each innovation dimension using the three-tiered scale (low, medium, high)
  • Provide justification for each rating based on methodological advancements

• Pictogram Generation

  • Input assessments into the VIGI framework
  • Generate the 10-pointed star pictogram with violet intensity representing innovation level

• Innovation Gap Analysis

  • Identify dimensions with low innovation scores
  • Develop strategies for incorporating innovative approaches in these areas

• Research Direction Planning

  • Use assessment to guide future method development toward higher innovation
  • Balance innovation with practical applicability and analytical performance

Integrated Application in Pharmaceutical Analysis

Complementary Assessment Framework

BAGI and VIGI provide complementary perspectives that, when combined with greenness and performance metrics, enable truly holistic method evaluation. The integration of these tools creates an assessment ecosystem that guides researchers toward developing methods that are not only environmentally sustainable and analytically sound but also practical to implement and innovative in their approach.

This integrated framework is particularly valuable in pharmaceutical analysis and drug development, where methods must balance regulatory requirements, practical constraints, and the need for continuous improvement. The following workflow demonstrates how these tools can be systematically applied:

Comparative Method Assessment Case Study

In a comprehensive study comparing methods for determining atorvastatin in pharmaceuticals, researchers applied multiple assessment tools including AGREE, Analytical Eco-Scale, BAGI, and the WAC RGB model [40]. The analytical eco-score ranged from 79-91, AGREE scores from 0.54-0.86, and BAGI pictogram index from 75-82.5, suggesting good practical applicability of the reported methods.

This multi-tool assessment demonstrated that applying multiple assessment tools to evaluate analytical methods provides synergistic results and enhances understanding of both Green Analytical Chemistry and White Analytical Chemistry principles [40]. The study confirmed that BAGI provided unique insights into practical applicability that complemented the environmental and performance assessments, enabling researchers to select methods that balanced all critical attributes.

Strategic Implementation in Drug Development

For pharmaceutical researchers, the combined application of BAGI and VIGI offers strategic advantages throughout the drug development pipeline:

• Early Discovery Phase: VIGI helps identify innovative analytical approaches that can accelerate screening and characterization
• Preclinical Development: BAGI ensures practical methods are selected for pharmacokinetic and toxicological studies
• Clinical Trial Phase: Combined assessment guarantees methods are both innovative enough for complex biomatrix analysis and practical enough for high-throughput applications
• Quality Control: BAGI prioritizes practical methods for manufacturing environments while VIGI drives continuous improvement

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of BAGI and VIGI assessments requires specific reagents, software tools, and analytical materials. The following table details key solutions essential for conducting comprehensive method evaluations:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions for Method Assessment

Category	Specific Items	Function in Assessment	Application Context
Software Tools	BAGI Software (mostwiedzy.pl/bagi)	Practicality scoring and pictogram generation	Method evaluation and optimization
Software Tools	VIGI Assessment Framework	Innovation dimension evaluation	Method innovation profiling
Software Tools	AGREE Calculator	Environmental impact assessment	Greenness quantification
Software Tools	RAPI Software (mostwiedzy.pl/rapi)	Analytical performance assessment	Method validation profiling
Reference Materials	Certified Reference Standards	Method validation and performance verification	All analytical applications
Reference Materials	Quality Control Materials	Inter-laboratory comparison	Method transfer studies
Laboratory Equipment	Automated Sample Preparation Systems	Practicality assessment for automation criterion	High-throughput methods
Laboratory Equipment	Miniaturized Analytical Instruments	Innovation assessment for miniaturization	Field-portable methods
Chemical Reagents	Green Solvent Alternatives	Environmental impact assessment	Solvent replacement studies
Chemical Reagents	Novel Sorbent Materials	Innovation assessment for materials	Microextraction methods

The advent of BAGI and VIGI represents a significant advancement in the holistic evaluation of analytical methods. By providing standardized, quantitative assessments of practicality and innovation, these tools fill critical gaps in the analytical chemist's toolkit alongside established greenness and performance metrics. The pharmaceutical industry stands to benefit substantially from adopting these complementary assessment tools, as they enable more informed method selection, drive innovation, and ensure that analytical procedures are not only scientifically valid and environmentally responsible but also practical to implement and innovative in their approach.

As the field continues to evolve, the integration of BAGI and VIGI into routine method development and validation protocols will promote the adoption of whiter methods that balance analytical performance, environmental impact, practical applicability, and innovation. This comprehensive approach ultimately advances the pharmaceutical industry's ability to develop safer, more effective medicines through robust, sustainable, and practical analytical methods.

Benchmarking and Setting Internal Greenness Standards for Your Lab

In the modern scientific landscape, environmental responsibility is no longer an optional consideration but a core component of operational excellence, particularly in research and drug development. For laboratories aiming to quantify and improve their environmental performance, benchmarking provides the essential framework for continuous improvement. Benchmarking is the engine behind continuous improvement and competitive advantage, enabling organizations to measure their performance, compare it against internal standards or external leaders, and uncover opportunities for growth and innovation [41]. In the context of laboratory sustainability, this involves systematically evaluating processes, equipment, and methodologies against established standards to minimize environmental impact while maintaining scientific integrity.

The drive toward Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) emphasizes minimizing the environmental impact of analytical procedures by reducing waste, energy consumption, and harmful reagents [2]. This whitepaper provides a comprehensive technical guide for implementing a robust benchmarking system tailored to establishing internal greenness standards, framed within the broader context of greenness assessment tools overview research.

Foundations of Laboratory Benchmarking

Core Benchmarking Types for Labs

Benchmarking in a laboratory environment can be categorized into four distinct types, each serving a unique purpose in the assessment ecosystem. The table below outlines these core benchmarking approaches and their laboratory applications.

Table 1: Core Benchmarking Types and Their Laboratory Applications

Benchmarking Type	Primary Focus	Data Collected	Laboratory Application Example
Performance Benchmarking [41]	Quantitative comparison of metrics and KPIs	Energy consumption (kWh), solvent waste volume (L), plastic consumables (kg)	Identifying that Lab A uses 30% more energy per sample than Lab B.
Practice Benchmarking [41]	Qualitative comparison of processes and methods	Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), equipment usage protocols, waste segregation practices	Comparing how different labs handle acetone disposal to identify best practices.
Internal Benchmarking [41]	Comparing units/departments within the same organization	Shared metrics across multiple lab groups, cross-departmental sustainability reports	Comparing solvent recovery rates across all analytical chemistry labs within a pharmaceutical company.
External Benchmarking [41]	Comparing metrics and/or practices with other organizations	Industry best practices, third-party benchmark data (e.g., My Green Lab data)	Comparing your lab's cold storage energy use against industry averages provided by My Green Lab.

The Benchmarking Cycle for Green Labs

Implementing a successful benchmarking initiative is a cyclic process that requires careful planning, execution, and refinement. The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for establishing and maintaining internal green standards.

Greenness Assessment Tools and Metrics

Established Green Chemistry Principles

The 12 Principles of Green Chemistry provide the foundational framework for evaluating and improving chemical processes and analytical methods [42]. These principles include waste prevention, atom economy, designing safer chemicals, and developing energy-efficient processes. The American Chemical Society's Committee on Professional Training (CPT) now requires that approved undergraduate chemistry programs include these principles in their curricula, emphasizing their critical role in modern chemical education and practice [42].

Quantitative Greenness Assessment Tools

Several standardized tools have been developed to quantitatively assess the environmental impact of analytical methods. These tools provide both numerical scores and visual representations to facilitate comparison and decision-making.

Table 2: Key Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Assessment Tool	Output Format	Key Criteria Evaluated	Advantages	Primary Use Case
AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) [8]	Pictogram (0-1 scale)	All 12 GAC principles	Comprehensive, open-access software	Evaluating overall method greenness
GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods) [43]	Pictogram (0-10 scale)	12 GAC principles + 10 sample prep factors	Simple, flexible, easy to interpret	Methods where sample preparation is significant
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index) [1]	Pictogram (4 quadrants)	Persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity, waste	Simple, quick assessment	Rapid screening of method environmental impact
Eco-Scale Assessment (ESA) [1]	Numerical score (0-100)	Reagents, instruments, energy, waste	Penalty-based system; higher score = greener	Comparative analysis between methods
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index) [1]	Pictogram (5 pentagrams)	Sample collection, preparation, transportation, reagents, waste	Comprehensive lifecycle approach	Detailed evaluation of each method step

Beyond Greenness: Holistic Method Assessment

Modern analytical chemistry has evolved to include not just environmental impact but also analytical performance (Red) and practicality (Blue) in what is termed White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) [8]. The RGB model provides a balanced evaluation system, but new tools are emerging to address additional dimensions:

• VIGI (Violet Innovation Grade Index): Evaluates innovation across 10 criteria including sample preparation, instrumentation, data processing, and miniaturization, generating a 10-pointed star pictogram with varying violet intensities [8].
• GLANCE (Graphical Layout for Analytical Chemistry Evaluation): A canvas-based visualization template that condenses complex method descriptions into 12 standardized blocks for enhanced clarity and reproducibility [8].

Implementing Internal Green Standards: A Step-by-Step Methodology

Establishing Baseline Performance

The first critical step in setting internal standards is conducting a comprehensive baseline assessment of current laboratory operations. The following workflow outlines this foundational process.

Experimental Protocol: Baseline Establishment

• Inventory Documentation: Catalog all analytical methods, including sample preparation steps, reagents, equipment, and energy requirements.
• Data Collection: Quantify resource consumption for each method, including solvent volumes, energy usage, waste generation, and personnel time.
• Tool Application: Apply relevant assessment tools (AGREE, GEMAM, etc.) to each method using standardized input parameters.
• Score Normalization: Convert all assessment scores to a standardized internal scale (e.g., 0-100) for cross-method comparison.
• Hotspot Identification: Use statistical analysis (e.g., Pareto analysis) to identify the 20% of methods contributing to 80% of environmental impact.

Developing Laboratory-Specific Standards

With baseline data established, laboratories can develop internal standards tailored to their specific research focus and operational constraints.

Table 3: Tiered Internal Standard Framework for Analytical Methods

Performance Tier	Greenness Score Range (0-100)	Allowable Waste Volume per Sample	Maximum Energy Consumption	Permitted Solvent Toxicity Class	Documentation Requirements
Gold Standard	≥ 85	< 10 mL	< 0.5 kWh	Low (water, ethanol, acetone)	Full AGREE/GEMAM assessment + innovation report
Silver Standard	70-84	10-50 mL	0.5-2 kWh	Medium (methanol, acetonitrile)	AGREE assessment + waste audit
Bronze Standard	55-69	50-100 mL	2-5 kWh	High (chlorinated solvents with justification)	GAPI assessment + solvent recovery plan
Unacceptable	< 55	> 100 mL	> 5 kWh	Very high (benzene, CCl₄ prohibited)	Method requires immediate revision or replacement

Sustainable Procurement and Equipment Selection

Integrating green criteria into procurement decisions represents a significant opportunity for improving laboratory sustainability. The ACT Ecolabel, developed by My Green Lab, provides a science-based, 100-point weighted score evaluating products based on manufacturing practices, energy and water consumption, chemicals, waste, and packaging [44] [45]. This certification is recommended by the U.S. EPA and aligned with EU regulations, supporting sustainable procurement across global markets [45].

Case Study: Siemens Healthineers Siemens Healthineers earned ACT Ecolabel Certification for more than 150 immunoassay and clinical chemistry reagents, becoming the first IVD manufacturer to achieve this for both reagents and analyzers [44]. Their Atellica analyzers demonstrated up to 48% energy reduction in reported use cases, while new packaging reduced volume and replaced plastic inlays with cardboard, eliminating 39 annual tons of polystyrene plastics and saving 161 tons of CO₂ [44].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Sustainable Laboratories

Reagent/Material	Function	Green Alternatives	ACT Ecolabel Certified Options
High-Sensitivity Troponin I Assay [44]	Aid heart attack diagnosis and risk assessment	First available U.S. assay with ACT Ecolabel certification	Siemens Healthineers Troponin I assay
Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) Test [44]	Prognostic test for disease progression in MASH	Recognized as breakthrough immunoassay innovation	Siemens Healthineers ELF Test
Safer Solvents [46]	Extraction, reaction media, chromatography	Water, ethanol, ethyl acetate, 2-methyl-THF	Refer to Beyond Benign's Greener Solvent Guide
Specialty Laboratory Reagents [44]	Various diagnostic and research applications	New packaging reduces volume and replaces plastic	150+ Siemens Healthineers certified reagents

Continuous Improvement and Verification

Establishing internal standards is not a one-time event but requires ongoing monitoring and refinement. Laboratories should implement a regular review cycle, typically quarterly or biannually, to:

• Reassess method greenness using established metrics
• Evaluate new technologies and methodologies
• Review progress toward sustainability targets
• Update internal standards based on technological advancements

Experimental Protocol: Verification and Compliance Testing

• Randomized Method Audits: Select 10-15% of laboratory methods quarterly for independent greenness assessment.
• Comparative Analysis: Benchmark internal method scores against published literature and industry best practices.
• Technology Scanning: Systematically evaluate emerging green technologies (e.g., solvent recovery systems, energy-efficient equipment).
• Staff Training: Implement regular training sessions on green chemistry principles and assessment tools.
• Documentation and Reporting: Maintain detailed records of all assessments, improvements, and compliance with internal standards.

Implementing a robust system for benchmarking and setting internal greenness standards enables laboratories to systematically reduce their environmental footprint while maintaining scientific excellence. By leveraging established assessment tools, creating tiered internal standards, and incorporating sustainable procurement practices, research organizations can demonstrate environmental leadership while potentially realizing significant operational efficiencies. The frameworks and methodologies presented provide a comprehensive roadmap for laboratories committed to integrating sustainability as a core component of their research identity.

Conclusion

The adoption of greenness assessment tools is no longer optional but a critical component of modern, responsible analytical science in drug development and biomedical research. This overview demonstrates that while a single perfect metric does not exist, a strategic combination of tools like AGREE, GAPI, and AGREEprep provides a robust framework for evaluating and improving environmental sustainability. The future points toward more integrated, automated, and holistic systems that balance greenness with analytical performance and practicality, as seen in the White Analytical Chemistry framework. For researchers, the imperative is clear: proactively incorporate greenness metrics into method development and validation protocols. This not only reduces environmental impact and operational costs but also future-proofs analytical methods against tightening regulatory and societal pressures. Embracing these tools is a definitive step towards achieving both scientific excellence and sustainability in the pharmaceutical industry.

References

• 1. Green metrics and green analytical applications [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000685]
• 2. Comprehensive review of greenness, whiteness, and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577425000060]
• 3. White Analytical Chemistry: An approach to reconcile ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993621000455]
• 4. White Analytical Chemistry: Balancing Performance ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/white-analytical-chemistry-balancing-performance-sustainability-and-practicality-in-modern-methods]
• 5. Assessment of greenness, blueness, and whiteness profiles of ... [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-024-01377-y]
• 6. Should we think about green or white analytical chemistry ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10589838/]
• 7. Green and white analytical approach for parallel ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-07056-9]
• 8. Emerging Tools for Holistic Evaluation of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/emerging-tools-for-holistic-evaluation-of-analytical-methods]
• 9. How to correctly evaluate greenness, whiteness and other ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc00615e]
• 10. Greenness evaluation metric for analytical methods and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12318332/]
• 11. AGREE—Analytical GREEnness Metric Approach and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7588019/]
• 12. Assessing the Environmental Impact of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/the-green-component-assessing-the-environmental-impact-of-analytical-methods]
• 13. A comparative greenness assessment of chromatographic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000211]
• 14. Comparing the Greenness and Validation Metrics of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137692/]
• 15. Comparison of the Greenness Assessment ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4532/4/4/32]
• 16. A Tutorial on AGREEprep an Analytical Greenness Metric ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772582022000225]
• 17. Comparative statistical evaluation of greenness, blueness ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-96091-7]
• 18. Green metric tools for analytical methods assessment ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993623002832]
• 19. Key Considerations for Flowchart Accessibility - MN.gov [https://mn.gov/mnit/about-mnit/accessibility/news/?id=38-436349]
• 20. A Perspective on Current and Future Metric Tools - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12590457/]
• 21. How We Can Easily Miss Signals in Our Metrics When We ... [https://www.leanblog.org/2019/09/how-we-can-miss-signals-in-our-metrics-when-we-rely-on-red-green-analysis/]
• 22. The Promise and Pitfalls of Artificial Intelligence in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12456399/]
• 23. Progress in miniaturization and low-field nuclear magnetic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090780720301786]
• 24. A miniaturized spectrometer for NMR relaxometry under ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-47634-2]
• 25. A Multidisciplinary Approach to High Throughput Nuclear ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/16/6/850]
• 26. NMR solvent selection - that also allows sample recovery [https://biochromato.com/nmr-solvent-selection/]
• 27. Advances in Miniaturized Liquid Chromatography for the ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2297-8739/12/11/312]
• 28. Recent Advances In Green Chromatography Techniques ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772391725000830]
• 29. A Comprehensive Review On The Miniaturized Analytical ... [https://journals.stmjournals.com/article/article=2025/view=232774/]
• 30. The ten principles of green sample preparation [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993622000139]
• 31. Green Approaches to Sample Preparation Based on ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7180442/]
• 32. Critical review on the assessments of green metric tools for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772391725000404]
• 33. ICH and FDA Guidelines for Analytical Method Validation [https://www.labmanager.com/ich-and-fda-guidelines-for-analytical-method-validation-34252]
• 34. ICH Q2(R2) Validation of analytical procedures [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/ich-q2r2-validation-analytical-procedures-scientific-guideline]
• 35. Green sample preparation for anthocyanin extraction from ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12276115/]
• 36. Evaluation of analytical greenness metric for an eco ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024114077]
• 37. Red analytical performance index (RAPI) and software [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc05298f]
• 38. Practicality evaluation of novel microextraction techniques ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003267025002582]
• 39. BAGI-assessed green GC-MS method for rapid analysis of ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-25388-4]
• 40. Comparative Studies of GAC Metric Tools AGREE, ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40411436/]
• 41. What are the Four Types of Benchmarking? [https://www.apqc.org/resources/blog/what-are-four-types-benchmarking]
• 42. ACS Adds Green Concepts to Approval Guidelines [https://www.acs.org/education/policies/acs-approval-program/news/green-chemistry-guidelines.html]
• 43. Greenness evaluation metric for analytical methods and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40756999/]
• 44. Siemens Healthineers Sets New Sustainability Benchmark [https://www.siemens-healthineers.com/en-us/press-room/press-releases/sustainable-clinical-lab-testing-assays-analyzers]
• 45. The ACT Ecolabel: Setting the Standard for Lab Product ... [https://mygreenlab.org/programs/act-ecolabel/]
• 46. 6 Essential Higher-Ed Green Chemistry Resources for the ... [https://www.beyondbenign.org/news/6-essential-higher-ed-green-chemistry-resources-for-the-2025-2026-academic-year/]