article · Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy
Existing tools for evaluating the environmental impact of analytical chemistry methods, such as the Analytical Eco-Scale, GAPI, and AGREE, carry notable trade-offs between quantitative scoring, visual clarity, and user bias. The Analytical Green Star Area, or AGSA, addresses these limitations by offering a visual and comprehensive assessment framework aligned with the twelve principles of green analytical chemistry. Adapted from an established green chemistry metric, AGSA combines an intuitive graphical format with an automated, built-in scoring system and method classification to reduce subjective bias. Evaluated through multiple case studies, the tool reliably differentiates analytical procedures by their environmental footprint. Offered as open-source software, AGSA functions as an accessible, practical instrument designed to support sustainable decision-making across analytical laboratories.
Laboratories need reliable, objective ways to measure how sustainable their chemical testing procedures are. By combining straightforward visual graphics with an automated scoring system, this tool makes it easier to measure ecological footprints, reduce hazardous waste, and adopt greener testing practices without relying on complex or subjective evaluation systems.
The tool is already deployed as free open-source software, indicating an applied and ready-to-use status rather than early-stage research. Potential users include analytical, industrial quality-control, and academic testing laboratories looking to audit the environmental impact of their workflows. Its primary application lies in method selection, verification, and standardisation to support sustainability compliance across chemical testing operations.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
The field of Green Chemistry (GC) and Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has led to the development of multiple metrics designed to assess the impact of analytical methods. Among these, the Analytical Eco-Scale (AES) provides a quantitative evaluation but lacks visual representation, limiting intuitive assessment. The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) and its variant offer graphical evaluation, yet they lack a total scoring system, making direct comparisons difficult. While ModifiedGAPI (MoGAPI) and ComplexMoGAPI provide a total score for each method, their assessment is not directly structured around the principles of GAC, relying instead on 16 and 27 predefined questions, respectively. In contrast, the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) Metric is explicitly structured around the 12 principles of GAC. However, it does not classify analytical methods based on total scores, is less resistant to user bias, and lacks an analogous metric in GC. To bridge these gaps, the Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA) introduces a comprehensive, built-in scoring, and visually intuitive approach to method evaluation. AGSA integrates method classification, built-in scoring and resistance to user bias, ensuring objective assessment while maintaining alignment with the 12 Principles of GAC. Furthermore, AGSA is an extension of an analogous metric from GC, and is available as an open source at bit.ly/AGSA2025, facilitating interdisciplinary comparisons. Multiple case studies are analyzed, demonstrating its effectiveness in distinguishing analytical methods based on their environmental impact. These findings highlight AGSA as a versatile, consistent, and practical tool for promoting sustainability in analytical laboratories while overcoming the limitations of existing greenness metrics. • AGSA is a comprehensive, and visually intuitive approach to greenness evaluation. • AGSA is an extension of the green star area metric in green chemistry. • The tool is available as a free to use open source at bit.ly/AGSA2025 • AGSA was favorably compared with other greenness metrics.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1016/j.scp.2025.102051
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
