Labs kick off and demand the transition towards a circular economy for lab plastics
An analysis by Green Labs Austria shows the amount and content of plastic waste generated by life science research. To reduce waste and help to address global plastic pollution, labs should proactively explore alternatives and recycling methods.
Published in EMBO reports https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1038/s44319-024-00360-x

Figure 3 from Weber, Michelsen and Kerou et al 2025 “What’s in our bin?”. The quantity and quality of lab plastic waste produced by different science labs. (A) Amounts of plastic waste and plastic types produced by seven labs (Lab A–G). For comparability the amount was normalized to the annual production in kilogram per researcher. The total waste of one week was divided by the people that worked in lab and their working hours. We assumed a 30-hour work week and 50 weeks per year. The plastic types PP, PS, PE, Nitrile and other (the latter referring to mixed plastic fractions such as packaging material) are indicated. (B) Stacked donut plot shows in the inner circle the fraction of the different plastic types (PP 39%, PS 33%, PE 8%, Nitril 10% and Other 10%) of five labs (in two of the seven laboratories, the waste was melted together during autoclaving and we were unable to determine the weight of the individual items) (Lab A, C, E, F, and G). The outer circle shows the contribution of the ten items that contribute to most weight: (1) Serological pipettes (16.1%), (2) Tip Boxes (15.0%), (3) Multiwell plates (12.2%), (4) Gloves (9.8%), (5) Plastic packaging (8.6%), (6) Pipette tips (8.5%), (7) Falcon tubes (8.2%), (8) Falcon lids (3.4%), (9) Eppendorf type tubes (2.3%), (10) Syringe barrels (2.3%). All data can be shared upon request.
You must be logged in to post a comment.