13 January 2025
Within research labs there are several recognisable appliances which use a considerable amount of energy. These appliances include freezers for storing samples, incubators for optimising growing conditions and ovens for sterilising equipment. Additionally, there are hidden energy-demanding sources, which may often go overlooked. Ventilation systems and accessories, including fume hoods, may use up to 35% of the energy use in a modern lab. The ventilation systems are there to protect the researchers by exchanging the air in the lab every 5 to 8 minutes and to provide perfect experimental conditions that allow for high reproducibility but uses high amounts of energy by constantly moving, heating/cooling and humidification of the air. In addition, operating systems such as computers and servers are required to be constantly on, adding to the energy footprint.
Maintaining suitable working conditions in research labs, therefore, comes at a significant energy cost. Interestingly, for many labs in Europe where the focus was historically on heating, there has been a noticeable shift towards cooling systems over the last decade. This is primarily due to modern research buildings being better insulated and more airtight, with equipment in labs often providing enough indirect heat to keep the building at the perfect temperature. This is offset by the worldwide changing climate that has increased the need for cooling systems.
How can we find the right trade-off without compromising on safety and human health?
Many new ventilation systems are adaptive and can be controlled by time or motion sensors. Switching between a steady state of operation and full capacity can save up to 35% of the energy consumption. In addition to the circulation of air, many aeration systems require the constant production of water vapour to maintain a controlled environment. This has traditionally been achieved by gas boilers. Setting a slightly wider range of humidity often does not affect experiments and finding other ways of heating without gas can reduce the footprint by more than 50%. Although often difficult to retrofit, very efficient ventilation systems exist and, if implemented, would help in both protecting the environment and saving lab running costs.
One further point to consider is the source of electrical energy, which is country specific. The footprint of electricity can vary significantly between countries, especially where the footprint of gas and oil is comparable. Although many countries are moving towards more of a green electricity mix, it is still important to be informed about energy sources and what barriers there may be to changing to a greener provider.
In conclusion, optimising the energy usage in labs is a long-term project. It is important to make researchers aware of the hidden environmental impact and to give researchers the skills, environment and tools to participate in planning the lab of the future. Finding the right incentives to stimulate change will be a key catalyst in the move towards sustainable labs.
The next blog will evaluate how lab equipment might be impacting the environment and what we can do to mitigate this impact. In the previous blog, I discussed an overview of sustainability in academia.