Greenness Assessment of Analytical Techniques: A Comprehensive Guide for Sustainable Research and Drug Development

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive overview of the methodologies, tools, and applications for assessing the environmental impact of analytical techniques. Aimed at researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, it explores the foundational principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), compares established and emerging assessment metrics, and presents practical strategies for method optimization and troubleshooting. Through case studies from pharmaceuticals and biomedicine, it demonstrates how to validate and compare the greenness of analytical workflows, offering a clear pathway for integrating sustainability into laboratory practices without compromising analytical performance.

The Principles and Evolution of Green Analytical Chemistry

The substantial energy consumption, waste generation, and use of hazardous solvents associated with traditional analytical methods have prompted a critical shift toward sustainability in laboratories worldwide [1] [2]. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) emerged as a specialized branch of green chemistry, aiming to minimize the environmental impact of analytical practices while maintaining their efficacy and accuracy [3] [4]. The core philosophy of GAC revolves around reducing or eliminating hazardous substances throughout all stages of chemical analysis, from sample preparation to final determination [2] [3]. This approach has gained significant momentum in pharmaceutical analysis and drug development, where analytical procedures are routinely performed and have substantial cumulative environmental consequences [1] [5].

The Foundation and Principles of GAC

Green Chemistry gained prominence after Paul Anastas and John Warner formulated its twelve principles in 1998, providing a systematic framework for designing safer chemical processes and products [6] [3]. These principles emphasize waste prevention, atom economy, less hazardous synthesis, safer solvent use, and energy efficiency [6]. As these concepts evolved, it became apparent that analytical chemistry required specialized guidelines due to its unique processes and challenges.

Jacek Namieśnik and colleagues subsequently adapted these principles specifically for analytical chemistry, creating the twelve principles of GAC [3] [7]. These principles can be remembered using the acronym SIGNIFICANCE [1] and provide a comprehensive roadmap for developing environmentally benign analytical methods.

Table 1: The Twelve Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry

Principle Number	Principle Name	Core Objective	Example Applications in GAC
1	Select direct methods	Avoid sample treatment	Direct chromatographic methods, in-line analysis [1] [2]
2	Integrate processes	Combine operations	Automated sample preparation and analysis [7]
3	Normalize samples	Minimize sample size	Micro-extraction techniques, miniaturized devices [1]
4	Nullify waste	Eliminate waste generation	Solvent-free techniques, recycling [2]
5	Inherent safety	Choose safer solvents	Use of water, ethanol, or ionic liquids [1] [5]
6	Generate minimal waste	Reduce waste volumes	Miniaturization, scaled-down processes [2]
7	Energy efficiency	Minimize energy consumption	Room temperature procedures, microwave-assisted extraction [2]
8	Automate methods	Reduce manual operations	Automated solid-phase extraction, flow injection analysis [7]
9	Combine methods	Streamline workflows	Coupled techniques like LC-MS, GC-MS [1]
10	Choose eco-friendly reagents	Select benign chemicals	Replacement of toxic derivatization agents [5]
11	Eliminate derivatization	Avoid additional steps	Direct analysis without chemical modification [2]
12	Natural reagent safety	Prioritize biodegradable materials	Use of biosensors, renewable materials [2]

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationships between the core objectives of GAC and their implementation strategies:

Green Analytical Chemistry in Pharmaceutical Analysis

The pharmaceutical industry represents one of the most active fields for GAC implementation due to its extensive reliance on analytical methodologies for quality control, drug development, and regulatory compliance [1] [2]. Traditional analytical methods in pharmaceutical settings, particularly chromatography, often consume large volumes of organic solvents and generate significant waste—sometimes 1-1.5 liters per day per instrument [1].

Green Sample Preparation Techniques

Sample preparation is often the most polluting step in analytical protocols [1]. Several green sample preparation approaches have been developed to address this challenge:

3.1.1 Solid Phase Microextraction (SPME) SPME, developed by Arthur and Pawliszyn in 1990, combines extraction and enrichment into a single solvent-free process [1]. This technique uses a silica fiber coated with an appropriate adsorbent phase to extract analytes directly from samples. SPME offers significant advantages including minimal cost, elimination of solvent disposal expenses, rapid preparation times, and high reliability [1].

3.1.2 QuEChERS Extraction Methodology The QuEChERS (Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe) approach, established by Anastassiades et al. in 2002, represents a green extraction method that uses minimal organic solvents compared to traditional techniques [1]. The method involves two key steps: solvent extraction using buffer salts and sample clean-up using dispersive solid-phase extraction. This approach has been successfully applied for extracting various pharmaceuticals from blood specimens, including amphetamines, opiates, cocaine, and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) [1].

3.1.3 Direct Chromatographic Methods From a GAC perspective, direct analytical techniques that require no sample preparation are particularly desirable [1] [2]. Direct injection of liquid and solid samples can be effectively performed using gas chromatography (GC) or liquid chromatography (LC) analysis [1]. While traditionally discouraged due to potential column damage, advancements in column stationary phase quality and cross-linking strategies have improved resistance to degradation [1]. These direct approaches align with GAC principles by eliminating solvent consumption and reducing analysis time.

Green Chromatographic Techniques

Chromatographic separations constitute a major focus area in GAC due to their prevalent use in pharmaceutical analysis [1] [2]. Several strategies have been developed to green chromatographic methods:

3.2.1 Solvent Consumption Reduction Solvent consumption can be minimized by reducing the mobile phase flow rate through columns with smaller internal diameters [2]. This approach not only decreases solvent use but also improves analytical sensitivity due to reduced solute dilution. Ultra-high-pressure liquid chromatography (UHPLC) represents another advancement, utilizing reduced particle sizes and shorter column lengths to decrease analysis time and solvent consumption [1] [2].

3.2.2 Temperature Optimization Temperature optimization presents a simpler approach to improving chromatographic efficiency than changing mobile or stationary phase composition [2]. Elevated temperatures can enhance selectivity, efficiency, and detectability, though limitations exist for thermally unstable analytes or silica-based columns above 60°C [2].

Table 2: Comparison of Traditional vs. Green Analytical Techniques in Pharmaceutical Analysis

Technique Parameter	Traditional Approach	Green Alternative	Environmental & Efficiency Benefits
Sample Preparation	Liquid-liquid extraction with organic solvents	Solid Phase Microextraction (SPME)	Solvent-free, reduced waste, faster analysis [1]
Extraction Method	Conventional solid-phase extraction	QuEChERS methodology	Minimal solvent use, faster, cheaper [1]
Chromatography Type	High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)	Ultra-HPLC (UHPLC)	Reduced solvent consumption, shorter run times, higher resolution [1] [2]
Column Dimensions	Conventional columns (e.g., 4.6 × 150 mm)	Narrow-bore columns	Lower mobile phase flow rates, reduced solvent consumption [2]
Detection Method	Single technique detection	Multi-analyte determination	Reduced energy consumption per analyte, higher throughput [7]
Solvent Type	Acetonitrile, methanol	Water, ethanol, superheated water	Reduced toxicity, better biodegradability [1] [2]
Sample Introduction	Extensive sample preparation	Direct analysis	No solvent consumption in sample prep, faster analysis [1] [2]

Metrics for Assessing Greenness in Analytical Methods

Evaluating the environmental impact of analytical procedures is essential for meaningful progress in GAC. Several metrics have been developed to quantify and compare the greenness of analytical methods [8] [9] [7].

Established Green Metrics

4.1.1 Analytical Eco-Scale The Analytical Eco-Scale is a semi-quantitative assessment tool that assigns penalty points to each element of an analytical procedure that differs from ideal green conditions [9]. The final score is calculated by subtracting penalty points from 100, with higher scores indicating greener methods [9].

4.1.2 Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) GAPI is a pictogram-based metric that evaluates the greenness of analytical methods across five stages: sample collection, preservation, preparation, transportation, and analysis [9] [7]. It uses a color-coded system (green, yellow, red) to visually represent environmental impact at each stage [7].

4.1.3 Analytical Greenness Metric (AGREE) AGREE incorporates the 12 principles of GAC into its assessment framework, providing a comprehensive scoring system from 0 to 1 [9] [7]. This metric generates a circular pictogram with twelve sections, each representing one GAC principle, offering an at-a-glance evaluation of method greenness [7].

Emerging Assessment Tools

4.2.1 GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods) Recently developed in 2025, GEMAM represents a comprehensive, flexible metric based on both the 12 principles of GAC and 10 factors of green sample preparation [7]. This tool evaluates six key aspects: sample, reagent, instrumentation, method, waste generated, and operator safety. GEMAM provides both qualitative (color-coded) and quantitative (0-10 scale) results through a pictogram with seven hexagons [7].

The following workflow diagram illustrates how these green assessment metrics are applied in pharmaceutical method development:

Table 3: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric	Assessment Basis	Scoring System	Advantages	Limitations
Analytical Eco-Scale [9]	Penalty points for non-green practices	0-100 scale (higher = greener)	Simple calculation, quantitative result	No pictogram, does not cover all GAC principles [7]
NEMI [7]	Four criteria: persistent, toxic, corrosive, hazardous waste	Pass/Fail for each criterion	Simple pictogram, easy interpretation	Qualitative only, limited scope [7]
GAPI [9] [7]	Five stages of analytical process	Color-coded pictogram (green/yellow/red)	Comprehensive lifecycle assessment, visual output	Qualitative only, complex assignment [7]
AGREE [9] [7]	12 principles of GAC	0-1 scale (higher = greener)	Comprehensive, incorporates all GAC principles	Complex calculation [7]
GEMAM [7]	12 GAC principles + 10 GSP factors	0-10 scale with pictogram	Comprehensive, flexible weights, qualitative & quantitative	Newer metric, less established track record [7]

Green Analytical Chemistry in Practice: A Case Study

A recent study demonstrates the practical application of GAC principles in pharmaceutical analysis through the development of green spectrophotometric techniques for analyzing pain relievers containing aceclofenac, paracetamol, and tramadol [5]. This research employed two innovative UV spectrophotometric methods—the double divisor ratio spectra method (DDRSM) and area under the curve (AUC)—to accurately determine drug concentrations in bulk and tablet forms while minimizing environmental impact [5].

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

The study successfully replaced traditional chromatography with mathematical solutions for component separation, significantly reducing solvent consumption [5]. Method validation followed International Council for Harmonisation Q2(R1) guidelines, demonstrating linearity across therapeutic ranges for all three compounds [5]. Green metric tool assessment confirmed the environmental sustainability of the proposed methodologies, offering accurate and reliable results for drug determination while aligning with GAC principles [5].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key reagents and materials used in green analytical chemistry with their functions and environmental considerations:

Table 4: Essential Research Reagent Solutions in Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Function in Analysis	Green Alternatives & Considerations
Organic Solvents (acetonitrile, methanol)	Mobile phase in chromatography, extraction	Replace with water, ethanol, or superheated water; minimize volumes [1] [2]
Derivatization Agents	Analyte modification for detection	Avoid entirely when possible; use milder reagents if necessary [2]
Extraction Sorbents (PSA, C18)	Matrix clean-up, analyte isolation	Select biodegradable or reusable sorbents; minimize amounts [1]
Buffer Salts (anhydrous MgSO4, NaCl)	QuEChERS methodology	Optimize quantities; consider environmental impact of disposal [1]
SPME Fibers	Solvent-free extraction	Reusable fibers; appropriate coating selection [1]

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry principles represents a paradigm shift in pharmaceutical analysis and drug development. By implementing direct analytical methods, minimizing solvent consumption, utilizing green sample preparation techniques, and applying comprehensive assessment metrics, researchers can significantly reduce the environmental footprint of analytical activities while maintaining methodological rigor and data quality. The continued development of green assessment tools like GEMAM [7] and innovative techniques such as direct chromatographic methods [1] and green spectrophotometry [5] will further advance the field. As GAC continues to evolve, its multidimensional impacts—spanning environmental protection, operator safety, economic benefits, and social responsibility—will increasingly make it an indispensable approach for responsible scientific practice in the pharmaceutical industry and beyond.

Scientific research, particularly in laboratories, is a significant contributor to environmental degradation, creating a paradox where the pursuit of knowledge and solutions inadvertently exacerbates ecological challenges. Traditional laboratory practices come with substantial unintended environmental consequences, including excessive energy consumption, hazardous waste generation, and resource depletion [10]. Analytical laboratories, essential for advancements in pharmaceuticals, environmental monitoring, and materials science, operate with energy intensities that dwarf other sectors; they consume five to ten times more energy than an office building of equivalent size, with this figure rising to 100 times more for facilities with clean rooms and high-process operations [10]. This energy use, coupled with the estimated 5.5 million tonnes of plastic waste generated annually from lab activities, positions the scientific enterprise as a substantial contributor to the global carbon footprint and pollution crisis [10]. This document provides a comparative guide to the greenness assessment of analytical techniques, framing this evaluation within the broader thesis that integrating sustainability metrics is no longer optional but essential for the future of responsible scientific research and drug development.

Quantifying the Problem: The Environmental Impact of Laboratories

The environmental impact of laboratories can be systematically categorized using the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, which delineates direct and indirect emissions into three scopes [10].

• Scope 1: Direct emissions from refrigerants, on-site electricity generation, heating, and vehicles.
• Scope 2: Indirect emissions from purchased electricity for heating or cooling buildings.
• Scope 3: All other indirect emissions across the value chain, including the production of purchased chemicals and materials, travel, and waste disposal.

Within this framework, two pieces of equipment stand out for their disproportionate energy consumption: fume hoods and ultra-low temperature (ULT) freezers. A single fume hood can consume 3.5 times more energy than an average household, while one ULT freezer consumes 2.7 times more energy than an average household (20–25 kWh per day) [10] [11]. The financial and environmental savings from addressing these energy sinks are substantial. For instance, simply raising ULT freezer setpoints from -80°C to -70°C can reduce their energy consumption by 30-40% while maintaining sample integrity for most applications [11]. Furthermore, a case study from the University of Groningen demonstrated that sustainable lab practices could lead to annual savings of €398,763 and 477.1 tons of CO₂ equivalent [10]. A survey by the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) revealed a strong appetite among researchers for change, with 84% agreeing they would like to do more to reduce their environmental impact, though significant barriers related to training, data, and time persist [12].

Table 1: Environmental Impact and Savings Potential of Common Laboratory Equipment

Equipment/Area	Comparative Energy Use	Potential Saving Action	Estimated Saving
Laboratory Building	5-10x more than office space [10]	Holistic efficiency (HVAC, equipment)	60-65% of a university's total energy [10]
Fume Hood	3.5x an average household [10]	Close sash when not in use	Thousands in annual energy costs per hood [11]
ULT Freezer (-80°C)	2.7x an average household [10]	Increase temp to -70°C	30-40% energy reduction [11]
Laboratory Lighting	N/A	Switch to LED, motion sensors	Up to 75% reduction [11]

Frameworks for Greenness Assessment: A Comparative Guide

To objectively compare the environmental performance of analytical methods, several metric tools have been developed. These provide a standardized, quantitative basis for evaluating and selecting greener alternatives.

Key Assessment Tools and Metrics

The following tools are central to a rigorous greenness assessment:

• AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric): This comprehensive calculator evaluates methods based on the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (SIGNIFICANCE). It transforms these criteria into a unified score from 0-1 and presents the result in an easily interpretable pictogram, highlighting performance across each criterion [13] [14] [15].
• GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index): Another widely used metric for profiling the environmental impact of an entire analytical procedure, from sample collection to final determination [15].
• White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) / RGB 12 Model: An evolution beyond pure greenness, WAC uses a 12-principle model to evaluate three pillars: Analytical efficiency (Red), Ecological impact (Green), and Practical & economic effectiveness (Blue). Integrating these RGB values produces a "whiteness" score, representing a balanced and sustainable method [14] [15].

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Tools

Table 2: Comparison of Key Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric Tool	Core Philosophy	Output Format	Key Strengths
AGREE	Green Analytical Chemistry (12 principles) [13]	Pictogram with a 0-1 score [13]	Comprehensive, open-source, flexible user-defined weights [13]
GAPI	Holistic procedural impact assessment [15]	Pictogram with qualitative fields	Evaluates all stages of the analytical process [15]
White Analytical Chemistry (RGB)	Balances analytical, ecological, and practical merits [14] [15]	RGB values and overall "whiteness" score [14]	Prevents trade-offs where a green method is analytically or practically weak [14]

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Evaluation

Implementing a greenness assessment requires a structured approach. The following protocol outlines the steps for evaluating an analytical method, from data collection to final decision-making.

Protocol for Comprehensive Method Assessment

1. Objective: To systematically evaluate and compare the greenness and whiteness of analytical methods to guide the selection of sustainable, efficient, and practical protocols. 2. Materials and Data Requirements: * Detailed method procedure (sample preparation, analysis, disposal). * Quantities of all solvents, reagents, and materials. * Energy consumption data for equipment (e.g., run time, standby power). * Waste streams generated (type and volume).

3. Methodology: * Step 1: Data Collection. Compile all required data for the method under evaluation. For a comparative study, ensure data for all methods being compared is collected consistently. * Step 2: AGREE Analysis. Input the collected data into the AGREE software (available at https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE). Assign weights to the principles based on relevance. Record the final score (0-1) and the pictogram [13]. * Step 3: GAPI Analysis. Using the same method data, complete the GAPI assessment, filling out the pictogram for each stage of the analytical process [15]. * Step 4: WAC Analysis. Evaluate the method against the 12 principles of White Analytical Chemistry, scoring its performance in the Red (analytical), Green (ecological), and Blue (practical) domains. Calculate the overall whiteness [14] [15]. * Step 5: Synthesis and Comparison. Compare the outputs of all tools. A method with a high AGREE score (>0.7) and balanced RGB values in WAC represents an ideal sustainable choice. Use the results to identify specific aspects of the method that can be improved (e.g., solvent substitution, energy reduction).

Case Study: HPLC Method with Greenness Integration

A practical example is the development of a green HPLC method for simultaneous determination of four cardiovascular drugs: Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate [14].

• Experimental: The method was developed using a combination of Quality-by-Design (QbD) and Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC). The mobile phase was a mixture of 0.1% formic acid in water and ethanol, a safer and more sustainable alternative to traditional acetonitrile. A regular ODS column with UV detection was employed [14].
• Greenness Integration: The use of ethanol was evaluated with a Green Solvents Selecting Tool (GSST), confirming its superior sustainability profile [14].
• Assessment Results: The developed method was evaluated with AGREE, an analytical eco-scale, and WAC. The AGREE metric confirmed its alignment with sustainable practices, and the WAC RGB tool demonstrated a favorable balance between analytical quality, ecological impact, and practical efficiency, showcasing a successful implementation of a white method [14].

The Research Reagent Solutions Toolkit for Green Assessment

Transitioning to greener labs requires both conceptual frameworks and practical tools. The following table details key resources for implementing greenness assessments.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Greenness Assessment

Tool / Resource	Function in Greenness Assessment	Key Features
AGREE Software	Calculates a standardized greenness score for analytical methods.	Open-source, based on 12 GAC principles, generates interpretable pictogram [13].
Green Solvent Selection Tool (GSST)	Recommends environmentally benign solvents to replace hazardous ones.	Provides a composite sustainability score (G) for solvents, guiding greener choices [14].
My Green Lab Certification	Provides a framework for labs to assess and improve overall sustainability.	Covers energy, water, waste, and procurement; offers a recognized eco-label [11].
White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) RGB Model	Evaluates the whiteness of a method by balancing analytical, ecological, and practical factors.	12-principle model prevents sub-optimization; ensures method is green, high-quality, and practical [14] [15].
3-Methoxypyrene-1,6-dione	3-Methoxypyrene-1,6-dione|CAS 102117-68-0|RUO	High-purity 3-Methoxypyrene-1,6-dione (CAS 102117-68-0) for laboratory research. This compound is For Research Use Only. Not for diagnostic or personal use.
Saucerneol E	Saucerneol E

The scientific community, particularly in drug development and analytical research, can no longer overlook its own environmental footprint. The imperative for greenness assessment is clear: it provides the quantitative data and standardized frameworks necessary to make informed, responsible decisions about laboratory practices. As demonstrated, tools like AGREE, GAPI, and the WAC RGB model enable researchers to objectively compare techniques, identify improvements, and develop methods that are not only analytically sound but also environmentally benign and practically viable. By embedding these assessments into routine research and development, scientists can lead by example, reducing the ecological impact of their work while continuing to drive innovation. The future of analytical chemistry lies in its ability to be not just precise and accurate, but also sustainable.

The field of analytical chemistry has witnessed a significant transformation with the emergence of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), which aims to minimize the environmental impact of analytical activities. The development and adoption of greenness assessment tools have been crucial in this evolution, enabling researchers to evaluate and improve the environmental footprint of their methods. This guide traces the historical progression of these metrics from early simplistic tools to modern comprehensive frameworks, providing researchers and drug development professionals with a clear comparison of their capabilities, applications, and limitations in the context of analytical techniques research.

The Evolution of Greenness Assessment Tools

Early Foundations: NEMI and Analytical Eco-Scale

The journey toward standardized greenness assessment began with pioneering tools that introduced fundamental concepts for evaluating analytical methods.

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), developed in 2002, was one of the first greenness assessment tools [16]. Its pictogram is a circle divided into four quarters, with each section colored green only if specific criteria are met: (1) no chemicals used are on the Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) list; (2) no solvents are on hazardous waste lists (D, F, P, or U); (3) the pH is between 2 and 12; and (4) waste generated is ≤50 g [16] [17]. While NEMI provides a simple, at-a-glance assessment, it offers only qualitative information and lacks consideration for energy consumption [18] [16].

Analytical Eco-Scale, introduced in 2012, introduced a semi-quantitative scoring approach [16]. It assigns penalty points to various parameters (reagents, waste, energy consumption, occupational hazards) which are subtracted from a base score of 100. The final score categorizes methods as: "excellent green analysis" (score >75), "acceptable green analysis" (score 50-75), or "inadequate green analysis" (score <50) [19] [16]. This tool was a significant advancement as it provided a more nuanced evaluation compared to NEMI's pass/fail system.

Modern Comprehensive Tools: AGREE and GAPI

As GAC principles evolved, more sophisticated assessment tools emerged to address the limitations of earlier metrics.

Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) was introduced in 2018 to evaluate the green character of entire analytical methodologies, from sample collection to final determination [18]. GAPI uses a pentagram design with five colored sections representing different stages of analysis. Each section is colored green, yellow, or red based on the environmental impact of that step. This tool provides a more comprehensive visual assessment than earlier metrics but originally lacked a quantitative scoring system for easy comparison between methods [18] [20].

Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric represents one of the most recent advancements in greenness assessment. This tool incorporates all 12 principles of GAC, assigning scores from 0 to 1 for each principle [14]. The final result is a circular pictogram with an overall score at the center, providing both a comprehensive evaluation and straightforward comparability. AGREE is available as a free software, enhancing its accessibility and ease of use [14].

The following diagram illustrates the evolutionary relationships and key characteristics of these assessment tools:

Figure 1: The historical evolution of green assessment tools, showing progression from simple qualitative to comprehensive quantitative approaches.

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Tools

Tool Characteristics and Methodologies

Table 1: Key Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool	Year Introduced	Assessment Approach	Scoring System	Scope of Assessment	Key Limitations
NEMI	2002 [16]	Qualitative	Pass/Fail (4 criteria)	Reagents, pH, waste	No energy consideration; qualitative only [16]
Analytical Eco-Scale	2012 [16]	Semi-quantitative	Penalty points (0-100)	Reagents, waste, energy, hazards	No severity differentiation for hazards [20]
GAPI	2018 [18]	Semi-quantitative visual	Color coding (green/yellow/red)	Entire analytical procedure	Originally no overall score [20]
AGREE	2020 [14]	Quantitative	0-1 for each GAC principle	All 12 GAC principles	Requires software input
MoGAPI	2024 [20]	Quantitative visual	Percentage score (0-100%)	Enhanced GAPI with scoring	Less established track record

Practical Applications and Performance Comparison

Recent research applications demonstrate how these tools perform in evaluating real-world analytical methods:

In a 2024 study comparing methods for cannabinoid analysis in oils, eight HPLC/UHPLC methods were evaluated using multiple metrics. The Analytical Eco-Scale categorized 7 methods as "acceptable" (score 50-73) and one method as "excellent" (score 80), while AGREE and GAPI provided complementary assessments of environmental impact [19].

A green voltammetric method for difluprednate estimation developed in 2024 demonstrated the advantage of modern comprehensive assessment. The method achieved high greenness scores with both GAPI and AGREE, while also excelling in the RGB-12 whiteness assessment, which evaluates analytical and practical factors alongside environmental impact [15].

The integration of green assessment with Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) represents a significant advancement. A 2025 study on Ensifentrine analysis developed an RP-UPLC method using AQbD principles and evaluated its greenness using ComplexMoGAPI, AGREE, and other modern tools, demonstrating how green assessment can be embedded throughout method development rather than merely as a final check [21].

Case Study: Pharmaceutical Method Comparison

Table 2: Greenness Assessment Results for Different Analytical Methods from Literature

Analytical Method	Target Analytes	NEMI	Eco-Scale Score	GAPI Profile	AGREE Score	Reference
HPLC-UV	Sulfadiazine, Trimethoprim	1/4 green sections	73 (Acceptable)	8 green sections	Not reported	[17]
Micellar LC	Sulfadiazine, Trimethoprim	3/4 green sections	82 (Excellent)	10 green sections	Not reported	[17]
UPLC-MS/MS	Sulfadiazine, Trimethoprim	2/4 green sections	68 (Acceptable)	7 green sections	Not reported	[17]
HPLC-DAD	Cannabinoids in oils	Not reported	80 (Excellent)	Green profile	Favorable	[19]
Voltammetry	Difluprednate	Not reported	Not reported	Green profile	0.81	[15]

Research Reagent Solutions for Green Assessment

Table 3: Essential Tools and Resources for Implementing Greenness Assessment

Tool/Resource	Type	Primary Function	Accessibility
AGREE Calculator	Software	Evaluates all 12 GAC principles with scoring	Free online available [14]
MoGAPI Tool	Software	Enhanced GAPI with quantitative scoring	Free open source [20]
Green Solvent Selection Tool	Database	Evaluates solvent sustainability	Free online [14]
NEMI Database	Database	Provides chemical hazard information	Publicly accessible [16]
ACS AMGS Calculator	Software	Calculates Analytical Method Greenness Score	Online tool [14]

The historical progression from NEMI and Eco-Scale to AGREE and GAPI demonstrates significant advancements in greenness assessment capabilities. While early tools provided foundational concepts, modern metrics offer more comprehensive, quantitative evaluations that align with all 12 principles of GAC. Current trends indicate a movement toward integrated assessment approaches that combine greenness with other methodological qualities, as seen in White Analytical Chemistry, and the development of specialized software tools to simplify and standardize evaluations. For researchers and drug development professionals, selecting appropriate assessment tools requires consideration of their specific needs: simpler tools like Eco-Scale for rapid screening, and comprehensive tools like AGREE and GAPI for full methodological evaluation. As the field continues to evolve, the integration of green assessment throughout method development processes represents the most promising approach for advancing sustainable analytical practices.

The scientific community's approach to sustainability has evolved significantly from a singular focus on reducing environmental impact to a more comprehensive vision that balances ecological responsibility with analytical practicality and performance. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) emerged as a specialized field applying the 12 principles of green chemistry to analytical methods, primarily focusing on minimizing environmental impact through reduced solvent use, waste prevention, and hazard reduction [22]. While groundbreaking, GAC presented limitations by prioritizing environmental aspects over analytical functionality, sometimes leading to trade-offs where greener methods offered reduced sensitivity, precision, or practical applicability [23].

This recognition led to the development of more holistic frameworks. White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) expands beyond GAC's environmental focus to integrate analytical performance and practical/economic considerations into a unified assessment system [24] [23]. Concurrently, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) provides a standardized, quantitative methodology for evaluating environmental impacts across a product or method's entire life cycle—from raw material extraction to disposal [22]. These frameworks represent a paradigm shift toward comprehensive sustainability assessment in chemical research and development, particularly relevant for researchers and drug development professionals navigating the complex landscape of modern analytical technique selection.

Framework Fundamentals: Principles and Components

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) and the RGB Model

White Analytical Chemistry introduces a tripartite evaluation system known as the RGB model, where each color represents a fundamental aspect of methodological quality [24] [25]:

• Green Component: Encompasses environmental impact and safety parameters, directly inheriting principles from GAC. This includes solvent toxicity, waste generation, energy consumption, and operator safety [24] [26].
• Red Component: Represents analytical performance criteria essential for method validity, including accuracy, precision, sensitivity, selectivity, and robustness [24] [23].
• Blue Component: Addresses practical and economic considerations such as analysis time, cost-effectiveness, instrumental requirements, simplicity of operation, and potential for automation [24] [26].

When these three components are optimally balanced, the method achieves high "whiteness," indicating an ideal combination of environmental responsibility, analytical excellence, and practical feasibility [25].

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Framework

Life Cycle Assessment provides a standardized, quantitative approach for evaluating environmental impacts across all stages of a method or product's life cycle. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) outlines four distinct phases in LCA [22]:

• Goal and Scope Definition: Establishing objectives, system boundaries, and functional unit.
• Life Cycle Inventory Analysis: Quantifying energy, material inputs, and environmental releases.
• Life Cycle Impact Assessment: Converting inventory data into environmental impact categories.
• Interpretation: Analyzing results, identifying hotspots, and providing recommendations.

LCA moves beyond simple solvent selection to consider cumulative impacts from instrument manufacturing, reagent production, energy consumption during operation, and waste management [27] [22]. This comprehensive scope helps researchers identify improvement opportunities that might be overlooked in simpler greenness assessments.

Complementary Nature of WAC and LCA

WAC and LCA serve complementary roles in sustainability assessment. WAC provides a holistic but primarily qualitative framework balancing environmental, performance, and practical aspects, while LCA offers a rigorous, quantitative assessment of environmental impacts across the entire method lifecycle [22] [23]. Recent advances propose embedding LCA within WAC's green dimension, enriching environmental evaluations with solid quantitative data while maintaining WAC's balanced perspective on performance and practicality [23].

Comparative Analysis: WAC versus LCA in Analytical Chemistry

Framework Characteristics and Applications

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of WAC and LCA

Feature	White Analytical Chemistry (WAC)	Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Primary Focus	Balanced integration of environmental, performance, and practical aspects [24] [23]	Comprehensive environmental impact assessment across full life cycle [22]
Assessment Scope	Method-level evaluation (focused on analytical procedure) [28] [26]	System-level evaluation (cradle-to-grave) [27] [22]
Output Metrics	"Whiteness" score, RGB pictograms, qualitative comparison [25]	Quantitative impact scores (e.g., kg COâ‚‚-eq, human toxicity potential) [27]
Time Requirements	Relatively rapid assessment [25]	Data-intensive, time-consuming process [22]
Key Strengths	Balances multiple competing method priorities; practical for method selection [24]	Avoids burden shifting; identifies hidden environmental hotspots [27] [22]
Limitations	Less quantitative for environmental impacts; limited upstream/downstream scope [23]	Limited consideration of analytical performance; complex implementation [22]

Experimental Evidence: Framework Applications

Pharmaceutical Analysis Case Study

A 2025 study developed a reversed-phase HPLC method for lidocaine hydrochloride analysis in injectable formulations using WAC principles [28]. The method replaced traditional toxic solvents (acetonitrile, methanol) with ethanol as a greener alternative while maintaining analytical performance [28].

Experimental Protocol:

• Apparatus: HPLC system with diode array detector
• Column: C18 column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm)
• Mobile Phase: Phosphate buffer (pH 4.0):ethanol (75:25 v/v)
• Flow Rate: 1.3 mL/min
• Optimization: Experimental design (DoE) with three independent variables: pH, flow rate, and ethanol content
• Validation: ICH guidelines for accuracy, precision, specificity [28]

Results: The WAC-based method achieved comparable analytical performance to conventional methods while significantly improving greenness metrics. Assessment using RGB12, Analytical Eco-Scale, GAPI, and AGREE metrics confirmed superior environmental profile with reduced analysis time, reagent consumption, and cost [28].

Sample Preparation Techniques Case Study

A 2022 LCA study compared two sample preparation techniques: stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) [27]. The research quantified environmental impacts using the ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint method, considering consumables, chemicals, and energy requirements for preparing one sample [27].

Experimental Protocol:

• Functional Unit: Preparation of one analytical sample
• System Boundaries: Includes consumables, chemicals, energy for sample preparation
• Data Sources: Literature data and laboratory measurements
• Impact Assessment: ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint (H) methodology
• Database: ecoinvent 3.7.1 [27]

Results: SBSE demonstrated lower overall environmental impacts primarily due to reduced chemical consumption. The study identified vial and vial caps as major contributors to impacts and highlighted that spatial location (electricity mix) significantly affected SBSE impacts due to higher electricity consumption [27].

Table 2: Quantitative Comparison of Sample Preparation Techniques

Impact Category	SBSE	SPE	Reduction with SBSE
Global Warming Potential	12.3 g COâ‚‚-eq/sample	18.7 g COâ‚‚-eq/sample	34%
Human Toxicity	2.4 × 10⁻⁶ CTUh/sample	4.1 × 10⁻⁶ CTUh/sample	41%
Fossil Resource Scarcity	3.7 g oil-eq/sample	6.2 g oil-eq/sample	40%
Water Consumption	8.5 L/sample	14.3 L/sample	41%

Synthesis Application: RGBsynt Model for Chemical Reactions

The RGB model has expanded beyond analytical chemistry with the 2025 introduction of RGBsynt for evaluating chemical synthesis methods [25]. This model assesses six key parameters across the three color dimensions:

Red Criteria: Reaction yield and product purity Green-Blue Criteria: E-factor (waste production) Green Criteria: ChlorTox Scale (chemical risk assessment) Blue Criteria: Time-efficiency Green-Blue Criteria: Energy demand [25]

A comparative study applied RGBsynt to 17 solution-based procedures and their mechanochemical alternatives for O- and N-alkylation, nucleophilic aromatic substitution, and N-sulfonylation of amines. Results demonstrated clear superiority of mechanochemistry in both environmental impact (greenness) and overall potential (whiteness), validating the framework's utility for synthetic route selection [25].

Implementation Guide: Applying WAC and LCA in Research

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Sustainable Analytical Methods

Reagent/Material	Function	Green Alternatives	Considerations
Ethanol	Organic modifier in mobile phases [28] [26]	Replaces acetonitrile and methanol	Lower toxicity, biodegradable [28]
Phosphate Buffers	Aqueous mobile phase component [26]	Standard buffer systems	Proper disposal required [26]
Mechanochemical Reactors	Solvent-free synthesis [25]	Alternative to solution-based synthesis	Reduced solvent waste, different kinetics [25]
Microextraction Phases	Sample preparation [24]	FPSE, magnetic SPE, CPME	Reduced solvent consumption [24]
Zobrax Eclipse Plus C18	HPLC stationary phase [26]	Standard reversed-phase column	Enables ethanol-based mobile phases [26]
(Methylene-d2)gibberellinA3	(Methylene-d2)gibberellinA3, MF:C19H22O6, MW:349.4 g/mol	Chemical Reagent	Bench Chemicals
6beta-HydroxyCortisol-d4	6beta-HydroxyCortisol-d4, MF:C21H30O6, MW:382.5 g/mol	Chemical Reagent	Bench Chemicals

Method Selection and Optimization Workflow

The integration of White Analytical Chemistry and Life Cycle Assessment represents a significant advancement in sustainability evaluation for chemical research and drug development. WAC provides a practical framework for balancing the competing priorities of analytical methods, while LCA offers the rigorous environmental quantification needed to avoid unintended ecological consequences.

Future developments in this field point toward several promising directions. The Green Financing for Analytical Chemistry (GFAC) model has been proposed to address resource-intensive early-stage method development, creating dedicated funds for sustainable analytical innovation [23]. Automated assessment tools like RGBfast (for analytical methods) and RGBsynt (for chemical synthesis) are making comprehensive evaluations more accessible [25]. There is also growing emphasis on integrating social dimensions with economic and environmental assessments to create truly holistic sustainability frameworks [29].

For researchers and drug development professionals, adopting these holistic frameworks enables more informed method selection that aligns with both scientific and sustainability goals. The experimental evidence demonstrates that approaches optimizing for "whiteness" frequently achieve superior overall performance while reducing environmental impacts—proving that sustainability and scientific excellence need not be competing priorities but can be mutually reinforcing objectives in modern analytical science.

The field of analytical chemistry is undergoing a significant transformation driven by the global imperative for environmental responsibility. The foundational concept of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), which emerged in 2000, extends the principles of green chemistry to analytical practices, aiming to minimize the environmental impact of analytical procedures [30]. This involves reducing or eliminating hazardous solvents and reagents, decreasing energy consumption, and minimizing waste generation while maintaining robust analytical performance [7] [30]. The drive toward GAC represents a fundamental shift in how scientists approach methodological development, placing environmental impact assessment on par with traditional validation parameters like accuracy, precision, and sensitivity.

Within this context, precisely defining terminology becomes crucial for meaningful scientific discourse and method evaluation. While often used interchangeably in casual conversation, "greenness," "sustainability," and "eco-friendliness" possess distinct meanings and implications for analytical practice. Understanding these nuances enables researchers to select appropriate metrics, implement genuinely improved methodologies, and accurately communicate environmental benefits. This article establishes clear definitions for these key terms within the analytical chemistry domain and provides a practical framework for assessing environmental performance across different analytical techniques.

Defining the Terminology Spectrum

The terms "eco-friendly," "green," and "sustainable" represent a spectrum of environmental consideration, from specific, immediate actions to broad, long-term systems thinking. Their precise definitions are foundational to accurate assessment.

• Eco-Friendly: This term describes products, processes, or practices that are not environmentally harmful [31] [32] [33]. In analytical chemistry, an eco-friendly practice directly reduces negative environmental impacts, such as replacing a chlorinated solvent with a less toxic alternative or reducing solvent consumption. The focus is primarily on immediate, direct environmental effects, often at a specific stage of the analytical process [34].

• Green: "Green" is a broader, more general term that implies environmental awareness and consciousness [35]. It serves as an umbrella term for the environmental movement but lacks precise, certifiable standards. In a scientific context, stating a method is "green" requires immediate qualification with specific, substantiated claims to have meaningful value and avoid "greenwashing" [32].

• Sustainable: Sustainability is the most comprehensive concept, defined as "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" [32]. It expands beyond immediate environmental impact to encompass a holistic, long-term perspective that balances three interdependent pillars, often called the "Triple Bottom Line" [31] [32]:

  • Planet (Environmental): Minimizing harm to natural resources, ecosystems, and biodiversity [31].
  • People (Social): Promoting equity, justice, fair labor practices, and community well-being [31] [32].
  • Prosperity (Economic): Fostering economic viability without depleting resources or harming the environment, which includes factors like method durability, cost-effectiveness, and energy efficiency [31] [32].

For analytical methods, a sustainable approach would consider the entire lifecycle, from the energy and resources required to synthesize reagents to the end-of-life disposal of waste, while also considering the health and safety of operators and long-term economic feasibility [34] [32].

Logical Relationship of Key Terms

The following diagram illustrates the hierarchical relationship between "sustainability" and the more specific concepts of "green" and "eco-friendly" in the context of analytical science:

Quantitative Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

The theoretical principles of GAC are operationalized through specific assessment metrics. These tools enable the quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a method's environmental impact, allowing for objective comparison between analytical techniques.

Comprehensive Greenness Assessment Tools

The following table summarizes the most widely used and recently developed comprehensive metrics for evaluating the greenness of entire analytical methods.

Table 1: Comprehensive Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric Name	Key Principle	Output Format	Key Advantages	Main Limitations
NEMI [30]	Four basic criteria (toxicity, waste, corrosivity).	Binary pictogram (pass/fail).	Simple, user-friendly.	Lacks granularity; doesn't assess full workflow.
Analytical Eco-Scale [30]	Penalty points for non-green attributes.	Numerical score (100 = ideal).	Facilitates direct method comparison.	Subjective penalty assignment; no visual output.
GAPI [30]	Entire analytical process from sampling to detection.	Color-coded pictogram (5 parts).	Comprehensive; visually intuitive for impact stages.	No overall score; some subjectivity in color assignment.
AGREE [30]	12 Principles of GAC.	Pictogram & numerical score (0-1).	Comprehensive; user-friendly; enables direct comparison.	Does not fully cover pre-analytical processes.
GEMAM [7]	12 GAC principles & 10 GSP factors.	Pictogram & numerical score (0-10).	Simple, flexible, and comprehensive across 6 sections.	Relatively new metric; requires further validation.

Specialized and Next-Generation Assessment Tools

To address specific gaps, several specialized metrics have been developed, as summarized below.

Table 2: Specialized and Next-Generation Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric Name	Scope & Focus	Output Format	Key Features
AGREEprep [30]	Sample preparation stage only.	Pictogram & numerical score.	First dedicated tool for sample prep impact.
ComplexGAPI/ MoGAPI [30]	Includes pre-analytical processes (e.g., reagent synthesis).	Extended pictogram (with/without score).	Broadens assessment scope to material life cycle.
AGSA [30]	Multiple green criteria (toxicity, waste, energy).	Star-shaped diagram & integrated score.	Intuitive visual comparison; combined scoring system.
CaFRI [30]	Carbon emissions and climate impact.	Numerical score.	Aligns analytical chemistry with climate goals.

Experimental Protocol for a Multi-Metric Greenness Assessment

A robust evaluation of an analytical method's greenness involves using complementary metrics to gain a multidimensional understanding. The following workflow formalizes this process, based on a case study evaluating a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method [30].

Detailed Methodology:

• Metric Selection: Choose a suite of metrics that provide complementary insights. For a holistic view, a recommended combination includes:

  • AGREE or GEMAM: For a comprehensive overview based on the 12 GAC principles [7] [30].
  • AGREEprep: If sample preparation is a complex or impactful step, use this for a detailed evaluation of that specific stage [30].
  • CaFRI: To specifically assess the method's alignment with climate goals and its carbon footprint [30].

• Data Collection: Meticulously compile all quantitative and qualitative data for the analytical method, including:

  • Reagents: Type, exact volumes (mL) per sample, hazard classifications (e.g., GHS pictograms), and origin (bio-based vs. synthetic).
  • Energy: Power requirements of equipment (kW) and total analysis time to calculate energy consumption per sample (kWh).
  • Waste: Total volume of waste generated per sample (mL) and its composition, including any post-analysis treatment or recycling protocols.
  • Instrumentation: Degree of automation, scale of operation (e.g., micro-extraction), and sample throughput per hour.
  • Operator Safety: Details on hermetic sealing of processes, exposure to vapors, and noise generation.

• Score Calculation & Visualization:

  • Use the collected data as input for each selected metric. Many metrics, like AGREE and GEMAM, now offer freely available software or calculation sheets [7].
  • Generate the respective output for each tool (e.g., the AGREE pictogram, the GEMAM hexagons, the CaFRI score).

• Synthesis and Interpretation:

  • Cross-Compare Outputs: Analyze the results from the different metrics to identify consistent strengths and weaknesses. For example, a method might score well on AGREE due to miniaturization but poorly on CaFRI due to high energy consumption from a non-renewable grid.
  • Identify Improvement Levers: The synthesis pinpoints specific stages or aspects of the method that can be optimized for greater greenness, such as replacing a toxic solvent, implementing waste treatment, or switching to a more energy-efficient detector.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Materials for Green Analysis

Transitioning to greener analytical methods often involves using alternative reagents and materials. The following table details key solutions that can reduce environmental impact.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Greener Analytical Chemistry

Item / Solution	Function in Analysis	Green Rationale & Application
Bio-Based Solvents (e.g., Ethanol, Cyrene, ethyl lactate) [30]	Extraction, chromatography, cleaning.	Derived from renewable biomass; typically less toxic and biodegradable compared to petrochemical solvents like acetonitrile or dichloromethane.
Water as a Solvent	Liquid-liquid extraction, mobile phase.	Non-toxic, non-flammable, and cheap. Techniques like sugaring-out (SULLME) make it viable for extracting a wider range of analytes [30].
Ionic Liquids	Extraction solvents, electrolytes.	Low vapor pressure reduces inhalation hazards and atmospheric pollution. Tunable properties allow for designer solvents with low toxicity.
Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) Fibers	Sample preparation and concentration.	Solventless technique; eliminates hazardous solvent waste associated with traditional liquid-liquid extraction. Enables miniaturization and automation.
Micro-Scale Equipment (e.g., microfluidic chips, µ-SPE devices)	Sample preparation, separation, reaction.	Drastically reduces consumption of samples, reagents, and solvents (often to µL or mg levels), thereby minimizing waste generation [7] [30].
TCO-PEG6-acid	TCO-PEG6-acid, MF:C24H43NO10, MW:505.6 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Dexamethasone EP impurity K	Dexamethasone EP impurity K, MF:C22H26O4, MW:354.4 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

The precise distinction between "eco-friendly," "green," and "sustainable" is not merely semantic but fundamental to advancing Green Analytical Chemistry. While "eco-friendly" actions are essential steps, the ultimate goal for researchers and the industry must be true sustainability—developing and implementing analytical methods that are not only environmentally benign but also economically viable and socially responsible throughout their entire lifecycle [31] [32].

The current arsenal of greenness assessment metrics, from comprehensive tools like AGREE and GEMAM to specialized ones like AGREEprep and CaFRI, provides a powerful, multi-faceted framework for this evaluation [7] [30]. By adopting a multi-metric assessment protocol and integrating greener materials and miniaturized technologies, scientists can make informed decisions that significantly reduce the environmental footprint of chemical analysis. This rigorous, data-driven approach is indispensable for aligning the critical field of analytical chemistry with the global pursuit of a sustainable future.

A Practical Guide to Greenness Assessment Tools and Metrics

The growing emphasis on environmental sustainability has fundamentally transformed analytical chemistry, leading to the establishment of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles. These principles aim to minimize the environmental impact of analytical procedures by reducing toxic reagent use, energy consumption, and waste generation [36]. The assessment and comparison of analytical methods' environmental impact necessitates robust, standardized metrics. This guide provides an objective comparison of five established greenness assessment tools: the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale, Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI), Analytical GREEnness Metric (AGREE), and AGREEprep [37] [38].

The evolution of these tools reflects a shift from simplistic checklists to comprehensive, quantitative evaluations. While early tools like NEMI offered a basic pictogram, newer metrics like AGREE and AGREEprep provide nuanced scores and detailed visual outputs, enabling researchers to make more informed decisions [36]. These tools are crucial for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals who are tasked with developing methods that are not only analytically sound but also environmentally responsible [39].

Metric Comparison Tables

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric	Year Introduced	Assessment Scope	Scoring System	Visual Output
NEMI [36] [38]	Early 2000s	Full analytical method	Qualitative (Yes/No for 4 criteria)	Pictogram (4 quadrants)
Analytical Eco-Scale [36] [38]	2012	Full analytical method	Semi-quantitative (Penalty points from ideal 100)	Total Score (Numerical)
GAPI [36] [38]	2018	Full analytical method	Qualitative (5 pentagrams, color-coded)	Pictogram (5 sections)
AGREE [40] [36]	2020	Full analytical method	Quantitative (0-1 scale, 10 criteria)	Circular pictogram (0-1 score)
AGREEprep [41] [36]	2022	Sample preparation step	Quantitative (0-1 scale, 10 weighted criteria)	Circular pictogram (0-1 score)

Assessment Criteria and Applicability

Table 2: Detailed Criteria and Practical Application of the Metrics

Metric	Key Assessment Criteria	Strengths	Limitations	Ideal Use Case
NEMI	Persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity, corrosivity [36]	Simple, quick visual	Overly simplistic, limited criteria [36]	Initial, rough screening
Analytical Eco-Scale	Reagents, energy, waste [38]	Semi-quantitative, easy calculation	Broad penalty categories can be subjective [36]	Comparing methods with clear operational differences
GAPI	Entire method lifecycle from sampling to waste [38]	Comprehensive, detailed pictogram	Complex pictogram, non-quantitative output [36]	In-depth assessment of a full analytical method
AGREE	12 GAC Principles (e.g., waste, energy, toxicity) [40]	Quantitative score, open-access software	Does not weight criteria by importance	Holistic evaluation with a single, comparable score
AGREEprep	10 Green Sample Prep Principles (e.g., solvent choice, waste, energy, throughput) [41] [36]	Quantitative, criteria weighting, specific to sample prep	Focused only on sample preparation	Optimizing the often most polluting step of analysis

Experimental Protocols for Metric Application

The reliable application of these greenness assessment tools requires a systematic approach. The following methodology outlines the general procedure for applying these metrics, with specific considerations for AGREEprep.

General Assessment Workflow

• Method Deconstruction: Break down the analytical method into its fundamental steps: sample collection, transportation, storage, preparation, instrumentation, and data analysis [36].
• Data Collection: For each step, gather quantitative and qualitative data. This includes, but is not limited to:
  • Solvents and Reagents: Types, volumes, and concentrations.
  • Energy Consumption: Power requirements of equipment (e.g., heaters, centrifuges) and analysis time.
  • Waste Generated: Mass and composition of all waste streams.
  • Sample Throughput: Number of samples processed per unit time.
  • Hazard Profiles: Safety Data Sheets (SDS) for all chemicals used.
• Tool Selection: Choose the appropriate metric(s) based on the goal of the assessment. AGREEprep is specifically selected when a deep dive into the sample preparation step is required [41] [36].
• Input and Calculation: Enter the collected data into the respective metric's framework, whether it is a manual checklist, a formula, or dedicated software.
• Interpretation and Comparison: Analyze the resulting scores or pictograms to identify environmental hotspots and compare against alternative methods.

AGREEprep Assessment Methodology

AGREEprep is the first tool specifically designed for the sample preparation step, based on the 10 principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) [36]. Its application involves a detailed protocol:

• Objective: To evaluate the greenness of an analytical sample preparation procedure.
• Principles Assessed: The tool evaluates 10 criteria derived from the GSP principles, including the use of safer solvents, waste minimization, energy consumption, sample size, throughput, and operator safety [36].
• Procedure:
  • For each of the 10 criteria, a sub-score between 0 and 1 is calculated based on the method's performance.
  • The assessor can assign a weight to each criterion (from 0.5 to 2) to reflect its relative importance, with default weights suggested by the tool's developers [36].
  • The software calculates the overall score by combining the weighted sub-scores. This final score ranges from 0 (worst performance) to 1 (best performance or no sample preparation required) [41] [36].
  • The output is a circular pictogram with ten colored segments, each representing one criterion, and the overall score displayed in the center. The color of each segment and the center provides an immediate visual cue of performance, from red (poor) to green (excellent) [36].
• Experimental Demonstration: In a case study comparing methods for determining phthalate esters in water, AGREEprep successfully differentiated the greenness of procedures. A traditional liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) using dichloromethane scored significantly lower than a modern, low-solvent method, correctly identifying the LLE method's high environmental impact due to hazardous solvent use [36].

Green Metric Assessment Workflow

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The effective implementation of green chemistry principles relies on specific materials and reagents. The following table details key solutions used in developing sustainable analytical methods, particularly in chromatography.

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Green Analytical Chemistry

Research Reagent/Material	Function in Green Analytical Chemistry	Application Example
Ethanol-Water Mobile Phases	Replaces toxic acetonitrile or methanol in Reverse-Phase HPLC [39].	AQbD-driven HPLC method for Irbesartan using ethanol-sodium acetate mobile phase [39].
Core-Shell or Sub-2µm Columns	Allows for faster separations with lower solvent consumption at reduced backpressures [39].	Enabling rapid, high-throughput analysis while minimizing mobile phase waste [39].
Biodegradable Sorbents	Used in sample preparation for solid-phase extraction, targeting sustainable and renewable materials [36].	Micro-extraction techniques that minimize waste and use safer materials [36].
Safer Derivatization Agents	Replaces highly reactive and toxic reagents used to make analytes detectable [36].	Improving operator safety and reducing the toxicity of chemical waste [36].
Software for AQbD & GAC	Integrates tools for method optimization (DoE) with greenness assessment (AGREE, GAPI) [39].	Simultaneously achieving robustness and sustainability in method development [39].
4-Pentenamide, N,N-diethyl-	4-Pentenamide, N,N-diethyl-|High-Purity Research Chemical	Get 4-Pentenamide, N,N-diethyl-, a high-purity compound for research applications. This product is for Research Use Only and is not intended for human or veterinary use.
(4-Fluorobutyl)ZINC bromide	(4-Fluorobutyl)zinc bromide|Organozinc Reagent

The landscape of greenness assessment metrics has evolved significantly, offering tools of varying complexity and focus. NEMI and Eco-Scale provide straightforward entry points, while GAPI, AGREE, and AGREEprep deliver increasingly sophisticated, detailed evaluations. For a holistic view, the trend is moving beyond a single metric. The future of analytical method development lies in integrating these greenness tools with other frameworks, such as White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which balances environmental impact (green) with analytical performance (red) and practicality (blue) [40] [38]. Tools like the Red Analytical Performance Index (RAPI) and the Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) are emerging as complements to green metrics, enabling scientists to make fully informed decisions that do not sacrifice functionality for sustainability [40].

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles has become a pivotal aspect of modern method development, driven by the need to minimize the environmental impact and health hazards associated with analytical procedures [7]. Greenness assessment metrics provide a structured framework for evaluating the environmental footprint of analytical methods, enabling researchers to make informed decisions that align with sustainability goals [42]. These tools have evolved significantly from basic checklists to sophisticated scoring systems that quantify greenness across multiple dimensions of the analytical process [38].

The Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric represents a significant advancement in this field by offering a comprehensive, quantitative assessment tool based directly on the 12 principles of GAC [43]. Unlike earlier metrics that provided primarily qualitative or binary results, AGREE translates complex methodological details into an easily interpretable unified score, facilitating straightforward comparison between different analytical techniques and approaches [43] [42]. This capability is particularly valuable in pharmaceutical development and other research fields where method selection requires balancing analytical performance with environmental responsibility.

The AGREE Metric: Core Concepts and Methodology

Theoretical Foundation and the 12 GAC Principles

The AGREE metric is firmly grounded in the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, collectively known by the SIGNIFICANCE mnemonic [44]. These principles provide a comprehensive framework that addresses the multifaceted nature of environmental impact in analytical practices. The foundation of AGREE lies in its direct correspondence to these twelve principles, which cover critical aspects including direct analysis techniques, minimal sample size, in-situ measurements, process integration, automation, derivatization avoidance, waste management, multi-analyte determination, energy efficiency, reagent toxicity, operator safety, and accident prevention [43] [44].

AGREE was developed to overcome limitations observed in earlier assessment tools, such as the treatment of criteria as non-continuous functions and the inclusion of only a limited number of assessment criteria [43]. By incorporating all twelve GAC principles and allowing for flexible weighting based on their relative importance in specific analytical scenarios, AGREE provides a more nuanced and adaptable assessment approach. This flexibility is particularly valuable in pharmaceutical analysis, where different analytical techniques and methodologies may prioritize different greenness aspects based on their specific applications and constraints.

Calculation Algorithm and Scoring System

The AGREE calculation algorithm transforms each of the 12 GAC principles into a normalized score on a 0-1 scale, where higher values indicate better environmental performance [43]. The specific criteria for these transformations are detailed in the developer's original publication, with examples provided for principles such as sample treatment and sample size minimization. For instance, Principle 1 (direct analytical techniques) assigns scores ranging from 1.00 for remote sensing without sample damage to 0.00 for external sample pre-treatment with a large number of steps [43].

The final unified score is calculated based on the weighted performance across all twelve principles, resulting in a single value between 0 and 1 [43]. This comprehensive scoring approach is represented mathematically as an aggregation of the individual principle scores, with the algorithm accounting for user-defined weightings to reflect the relative importance of each principle in specific analytical contexts. The software provided for AGREE automates these calculations, making the assessment process straightforward and accessible to researchers without specialized expertise in green metrics [43].

Table 1: The 12 Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (SIGNIFICANCE) Incorporated in AGREE

Principle Number	Core Focus	Transformation Basis in AGREE
1	Direct analytical techniques	Type of sample treatment required [43]
2	Minimal sample size and number	Sample volume/number and representativeness [43]
3	In-situ measurements	Location of analysis relative to sample source [43]
4	Integration of processes	Degree of operational integration [43]
5	Automated & miniaturized methods	Level of automation and miniaturization [43]
6	Derivatization avoidance	Need for and type of derivatization [43]
7	Waste generation avoidance	Volume and hazard of waste produced [43]
8	Multi-analyte determination	Number of analytes determined per run [43]
9	Energy consumption minimization	Energy requirements of instrumentation [43]
10	Reagent toxicity	Toxicity and environmental impact of reagents [43]
11	Operator safety	Occupational hazards and exposure risks [43]
12	Accident prevention	Potential for and consequences of accidents [43]

Output Interpretation and Pictogram Features

AGREE presents assessment results through an intuitive clock-like pictogram that provides both a unified overall score and detailed performance information across all principles [43]. The center of the pictogram displays the final score (0-1) with a color code ranging from dark green (excellent greenness) to red (poor greenness), enabling immediate interpretation of the method's overall environmental performance [43]. This visual representation allows researchers to quickly gauge whether an analytical procedure aligns with green chemistry objectives without delving into technical details.

The twelve segments surrounding the central score correspond to each GAC principle, with color-coded performance indicators (green-yellow-red) showing the method's performance for each individual criterion [43]. Additionally, the width of each segment visually represents the weight assigned to that principle by the user, communicating the relative importance of different greenness aspects in the specific assessment context. This multi-layered output format enables researchers to identify not only overall greenness but also specific strengths and weaknesses in their analytical methods, guiding targeted improvements for enhanced environmental performance [43].

Comparative Analysis of AGREE Against Other GAC Metrics

The landscape of greenness assessment metrics has expanded significantly, with multiple tools available for evaluating analytical methods [42]. The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) uses a simple pictogram with four binary criteria but lacks granularity and quantitative scoring [43] [42]. The Analytical Eco-Scale provides a quantitative approach by subtracting penalty points from a base of 100, but it does not offer the visual impact of pictogram-based tools [20] [42]. The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) employs a colored pentagram to visualize impacts across five methodological areas but originally lacked a unified numerical score for direct comparison, though modifications like MoGAPI have addressed this limitation [20].

More recent developments include GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods), which incorporates both the 12 GAC principles and 10 green sample preparation factors, presenting results on a 0-10 scale through a hexagonal pictogram [7]. The RGB model expands beyond environmental considerations alone by incorporating analytical performance (red) and productivity (blue) alongside greenness (green) in an additive color model [43]. Each tool offers distinct advantages depending on the assessment priorities, with selection influenced by factors such as desired output type, assessment comprehensiveness, and application specificity.

Direct Comparison of Metric Characteristics

AGREE distinguishes itself through its direct alignment with all 12 GAC principles and its balanced combination of comprehensive assessment with user-friendly output [43]. The table below provides a systematic comparison of AGREE against other major greenness assessment metrics, highlighting key differences in approach, output, and application.

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric	Assessment Basis	Output Type	Scoring System	Key Advantages	Main Limitations
AGREE [43]	12 GAC principles	Pictogram + unified score (0-1)	Quantitative	Comprehensive criteria; Flexible weighting; Intuitive visual output	-
NEMI [43] [42]	4 binary criteria	Pictogram (filled/unfilled quarters)	Qualitative	Extreme simplicity	Limited criteria; Binary assessment; No quantitative score
Analytical Eco-Scale [20] [42]	Penalty points	Numerical score (0-100)	Quantitative	Simple calculation; Clear acceptability thresholds	No pictogram; Less visual impact
GAPI [20]	5 methodological areas	5 colored pentagrams	Semi-quantitative	Detailed visual assessment	Originally no unified score (addressed in MoGAPI)
GEMAM [7]	12 GAC principles + 10 GSP factors	Hexagonal pictogram + score (0-10)	Quantitative	Incorporates sample preparation specifically	Less established track record
RGB [43]	GAC principles + performance + productivity	Color combination	Semi-quantitative	Balances greenness with practical performance	Less focus on pure environmental impact

Performance Evaluation in Method Assessment

Comparative studies applying multiple metrics to the same analytical methods reveal how different tools highlight various aspects of greenness while generally converging in their overall assessments [42]. In one evaluation of five different analytical methods using sixteen greenness metrics, all tools showed nearly identical conclusions regarding method greenness, demonstrating consensus despite different assessment approaches [42]. This consistency validates the fundamental principles shared across metrics while highlighting how tool selection might emphasize different greenness dimensions.

AGREE particularly excels in pharmaceutical analysis contexts where the comprehensive nature of its assessment aligns well with regulatory requirements and quality-by-design principles [38]. The ability to weight different principles according to specific analytical needs makes it adaptable to various scenarios within drug development, from active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) quantification to impurity profiling and bioanalysis [38]. The quantitative output further supports objective comparison of method alternatives during development and optimization phases.

Practical Implementation and Case Studies

AGREE Software and Assessment Procedure

The AGREE metric is supported by freely available, open-source software that streamlines the assessment process [43]. The software guides users through inputting relevant methodological details corresponding to each of the 12 GAC principles, with built-in algorithms automatically calculating scores and generating the characteristic pictogram [43]. This accessibility has contributed significantly to AGREE's adoption across various analytical chemistry domains, particularly in pharmaceutical analysis where objective greenness assessment is increasingly valued.

The assessment procedure begins with detailed methodological characterization, including sample preparation approach, reagent types and quantities, instrumentation requirements, energy consumption, waste generation, and safety considerations [43]. Users then assign optional weighting factors to reflect the relative importance of different principles in their specific context. The software processes these inputs to generate both the unified score and detailed performance breakdown, with results exportable for documentation and reporting purposes [43]. This systematic approach ensures comprehensive and consistent greenness evaluation across different methods and analysts.

Experimental Protocols and Application Examples

Case Study 1: HPLC-UV Analysis of Antiviral Agents An HPLC-UV method for determining antiviral agents in environmental water employed dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction using a chloroform-dodecanol mixture [20]. The AGREE assessment evaluated multiple criteria: offline sample collection, storage under normal conditions, microextraction with non-green solvent, toxic solvent volume <10 mL, and energy consumption ≤1.5 kWh per sample [20]. The method achieved an AGREE score of 70, indicating intermediate greenness, with particularly low scores in principles related to reagent toxicity and waste generation [20]. This assessment highlighted opportunities for improvement through alternative extraction solvents or miniaturized approaches.

Case Study 2: HPLC-DAD Analysis of Gliflozins An alternative approach for determining gliflozins in deproteinized human plasma used ultrasound-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction with dodecanol as extractant [20]. Assessment criteria included offline sample collection, green extraction solvent, toxic solvent volume <10 mL without special hazards, and energy consumption ≤1.5 kWh per sample [20]. This method achieved an AGREE score of 80, representing good greenness performance, with improvements primarily deriving from the selection of less hazardous extraction solvents [20].

Table 3: AGREE Scoring in Practical Pharmaceutical Applications

Analytical Method	Sample Type	Key Green Features	Main Environmental Limitations	AGREE Score
HPLC-UV Antiviral Analysis [20]	Environmental water	Miniaturized extraction; Moderate energy use	Chloroform in extraction; Waste generation	70/100
HPLC-DAD Gliflozin Analysis [20]	Deproteinized plasma	Green extraction solvent; Moderate energy use	Off-line sample collection; Some waste	80/100
Modified C18 Column Method [20]	Fruit juice, soft drinks	No extraction; Low toxicity solvents; Fast analysis	Off-line analysis; Some waste generation	79/100

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Green Solvent Alternatives Selection of appropriate solvents represents a critical factor in improving AGREE scores, particularly for Principles 5 (miniaturization), 7 (waste generation), and 10 (reagent toxicity) [43]. Ethanol-water mixtures and ethyl acetate offer lower toxicity alternatives for many extraction procedures [45]. Supercritical fluids like carbon dioxide provide excellent green credentials for chromatographic separation and extraction processes [45]. Ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents present innovative options with tunable properties and minimal volatility [44].

Sample Preparation Materials Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) devices enable minimal solvent consumption while providing effective sample cleanup and concentration [45]. Stir-bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) materials offer high extraction efficiency with reduced solvent volumes compared to traditional liquid-liquid extraction [45]. Microextraction in packed syringe (MEPS) setups facilitate dramatic reduction in solvent consumption while maintaining good analytical performance [45].

Analytical Instrumentation UPLC and UHPLC systems significantly reduce solvent consumption and analysis time compared to conventional HPLC, directly improving scores for Principles 1 (direct techniques) and 9 (energy efficiency) [43]. Miniaturized chromatographic systems and capillary-scale separation techniques further decrease mobile phase requirements while maintaining separation efficiency [43]. Direct analysis instrumentation such as ambient mass spectrometry and portable spectroscopic devices enable analysis with minimal or no sample preparation, dramatically enhancing greenness performance [44].

The AGREE metric represents a significant advancement in greenness assessment through its comprehensive incorporation of all 12 GAC principles, flexible weighting system, and intuitive visual output with a unified quantitative score [43]. Its balanced approach between detailed assessment and practical usability has established it as a valuable tool for researchers seeking to evaluate and improve the environmental performance of analytical methods, particularly in pharmaceutical development where regulatory requirements and sustainability objectives must align [38].

Future developments in greenness assessment will likely focus on integration with other methodological quality dimensions, as exemplified by the White Analytical Chemistry concept that balances greenness with analytical and practical efficacy [38]. The ongoing refinement of computational tools and artificial intelligence approaches may further streamline greenness evaluation, potentially enabling real-time assessment during method development [42]. As the analytical community continues to prioritize sustainability, metrics like AGREE will play an increasingly crucial role in guiding the evolution of environmentally responsible analytical practices that maintain scientific rigor while minimizing ecological impact [43] [42].

In analytical chemistry, sample preparation is a critical step recognized for its significant environmental impact, often characterized by substantial solvent consumption, energy requirements, and waste generation [36]. While the first principle of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) suggests avoiding sample preparation entirely, this is frequently impractical for addressing real-world analytical challenges [36]. Traditional comprehensive greenness assessment tools often lack the specificity needed to properly evaluate this crucial step, creating a significant gap in sustainable analytical practice. This gap led to the development of the ten principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) in 2022, providing a dedicated framework for greening this analytically essential process [46]. Shortly thereafter, the AGREEprep (Analytical Greenness Metric for Sample Preparation) metric was introduced as the first tool specifically designed to evaluate the environmental impact of sample preparation methods against these ten principles [36] [46].

This comparison guide examines AGREEprep's structured approach to greenness assessment, detailing its methodology, comparative performance against other metrics, and practical application for researchers and analytical scientists seeking to implement more sustainable sample preparation practices.

The AGREEprep Metric: Framework and Operation

Foundation in the Ten GSP Principles

AGREEprep's assessment framework is built upon ten foundational principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) that form an integrated system where improvements in one principle often synergistically address deficiencies in others [46]. These principles comprehensively cover the environmental and practical aspects of sample preparation:

• Favor in situ sample preparation [36]
• Use safer solvents and reagents [36]
• Target sustainable, reusable, and renewable materials [36]
• Minimize waste [36]
• Minimize sample, chemical and material amounts [36]
• Maximize sample throughput [36]
• Integrate steps and promote automation [36]
• Minimize energy consumption [36]
• Choose the greenest possible post-sample preparation configuration for analysis [36]
• Ensure safe procedures for the operator [36]

Calculation Methodology and Scoring System

AGREEprep evaluates sample preparation methods against these ten principles, calculating individual sub-scores for each criterion on a scale from 0 to 1, where 0 represents the worst possible performance and 1 indicates ideal performance or the absence of a sample preparation step [36] [46]. The tool incorporates a weighting system that acknowledges the varying importance of different criteria, with default weights assigned based on their relative environmental significance [36]. For example, parameters like solvent volumes, energy requirements, and operator safety typically carry greater weight than aspects such as in-situ preparation or step integration [36]. These weighted scores are combined to generate an overall score between 0 and 1, providing an at-a-glance assessment of the method's environmental performance [36].

The assessment is performed using open-source software available at mostwiedzy.pl/AGREEprep, with the source code accessible at git.pg.edu.pl/p174235/agreeprep [46]. This software produces an intuitive, circular pictogram that visually represents the assessment results, with a central number indicating the overall score and ten colored segments surrounding it, each corresponding to one of the GSP principles [36]. The color of each segment (ranging from red to yellow to green) and the central circle immediately communicates the method's performance, while the segment length reflects the assigned weight of each criterion [36] [46].

AGREEprep Assessment Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the systematic workflow for conducting a greenness assessment using AGREEprep:

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

AGREEprep Versus Comprehensive Green Metrics

While numerous metrics exist for evaluating the greenness of analytical methods, AGREEprep stands apart through its exclusive focus on sample preparation, providing greater specificity and accuracy for this critical step compared to comprehensive assessment tools [16] [46].

Table 1: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Metrics Focused on Sample Preparation

Metric	Scope	Assessment Basis	Output Format	Key Advantages
AGREEprep	Sample preparation specifically	10 principles of GSP	Circular pictogram with 10 segments and overall score (0-1)	High specificity for sample prep, weighted criteria, open-source software [36] [46]
SPMS	Sample preparation specifically	4 parameters: sample info, extractant info, procedural details, energy/waste	Clock-like diagram with central sustainability score	Focuses on sustainability aspects, provides weighted scores [47]
AGREE	Entire analytical method	12 principles of GAC	Circular pictogram with 12 segments and overall score (0-1)	Comprehensive method assessment, follows GAC principles [16]
NEMI	Entire analytical method	4 criteria: PBT, hazardous waste, corrosivity, waste amount	4-quadrant circle with green/white fields	Simple implementation, easy interpretation [16] [47]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Entire analytical method	Penalty points subtracted from ideal score of 100	Numerical score (100 = ideal)	Semi-quantitative, incorporates hazard and amount [16]
GAPI	Entire analytical method	5 evaluation areas with sub-categories	Multi-colored pictogram with 5 fields	Detailed assessment, visual color coding [16]
1,6-Dioctylpyrene	1,6-Dioctylpyrene|Hoffman Fine Chemicals	1,6-Dioctylpyrene (CAS 1185354-41-9) is a key organic building block for materials science research. This product is for Research Use Only (RUO). Not for human or veterinary use.	Bench Chemicals
Quinaldanilide	Quinaldanilide	High-purity Quinaldanilide for research applications. This product is For Research Use Only (RUO) and is not intended for diagnostic or personal use.	Bench Chemicals

Technical Comparison of Assessment Approaches

AGREEprep's technical design addresses several limitations of broader metrics when applied specifically to sample preparation:

• Broader Score Ranges: Compared to the original AGREE metric, which typically yields scores in a relatively narrow range, AGREEprep provides wider score differentiation, enabling more nuanced comparison of sample preparation methods [48].
• Specificity Over Generality: Unlike NEMI, which offers only a qualitative assessment based on four general criteria, AGREEprep delivers a quantitative, multi-parameter evaluation specifically tailored to sample preparation parameters [16] [46].
• Structured Weighting System: The tool's default weighting system, which can be adjusted based on analytical goals, reflects the varying environmental significance of different sample preparation aspects, with parameters like solvent consumption and waste generation typically carrying greater weight [36] [49].

Experimental Application and Performance Data

Case Study: Pharmaceutical Analysis in Drug Development

A recent study applying green principles to pharmaceutical analysis developed an HPLC method for simultaneous determination of Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate [14]. The method substituted traditional hazardous organic solvents with environmentally friendly alternatives, specifically using ethanol and 0.1% formic acid in water as the mobile phase [14]. When evaluated using greenness assessment tools, this approach demonstrated significantly improved environmental performance compared to conventional methods, highlighting how AGREEprep can guide sustainable method development in pharmaceutical applications [14].

AGREEprep Evaluation of Official Standard Methods

The IUPAC project #2021-015-2-500 has extensively applied AGREEprep to evaluate official standard methods, revealing significant variations in greenness performance across different methodologies and applications [46]:

Table 2: AGREEprep Scores of Official Standard Methods from IUPAC Project Evaluation

Method Source	Application Area	Sample Preparation Technique	AGREEprep Score Range	Key Greenness Deficiencies
US EPA	Environmental analysis (POPs in sediments, fish tissue)	Soxhlet extraction	0.04 - 0.12	Time-consuming, large solvent volumes, high energy demand, additional cleanup steps [46]
AOAC INTERNATIONAL	Food analysis (pesticides, active ingredients)	Soxhlet extraction, maceration, digestion	0.05 - 0.22	Manual operation, time-consuming, multiple heating steps, use of toxic reagents [46]
US EPA	Trace metals/elements in aqueous/solid samples	Acid digestion, microwave-assisted extraction, SPE	0.01 - 0.36	Large amounts of mineral acids, high waste (>50 g/sample), energy-intensive instrumentation [46]

Detailed Protocol: AGREEprep Assessment of Sample Preparation Methods

For researchers implementing AGREEprep evaluations, the following step-by-step protocol ensures consistent application:

• Data Collection: Compile complete methodological details including:

  • Solvent types and exact volumes (in mL) [49]
  • Reagent types, quantities, and safety data [49]
  • Energy consumption in watt-hours per sample [49]
  • Sample throughput (samples processed per hour) [49]
  • Waste generation amount (in g or mL per sample) [49]
  • Material types (renewable, reusable, or single-use) [36]
  • Automation level and procedural complexity [36]

• Software Input: Access the AGREEprep software at mostwiedzy.pl/AGREEprep and input the collected data for each of the ten assessment criteria [46].

• Weight Assignment: Apply default weighting factors or adjust based on specific analytical priorities with appropriate justification [36].

• Score Calculation: The software automatically calculates sub-scores (0-1) for each criterion and computes the overall score [36].

• Result Interpretation: Analyze the generated pictogram, where the central score (0-1) indicates overall greenness and colored segments identify strengths (green) and weaknesses (red) across the ten GSP principles [36] [46].

• Comparative Analysis: Use scores from multiple methods to identify greener alternatives and target specific areas for methodological improvement [46].

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions and Materials for Green Sample Preparation

Material/Reagent	Function in Sample Preparation	Greenness Considerations	Application Examples
Bio-based solvents (ethanol, ethyl acetate)	Extraction solvents	Lower toxicity, renewable sources	HPLC mobile phases [14], liquid-liquid extraction [14]
Ionic liquids	Alternative extraction media	Low volatility, recyclable	Selective extraction of analytes [16]
Molecularly imprinted polymers	Selective sorbents	Reusability, high selectivity	Solid-phase extraction, environmental water analysis [50]
Recycled graphite materials	Electrode modification	Waste valorization, reduced virgin material use	Electrochemical sensors from battery waste [51]
Agricultural waste-derived materials	Sorbents, carbon quantum dots	Renewable sources, waste utilization	NCQDs from pea pods for sensor modification [51]
Sustainable sorbents (activated carbon from biomass)	Extraction and cleanup	Biodegradability, low environmental impact	Solid-phase extraction, dispersive SPE [16]

AGREEprep represents a significant advancement in green chemistry metrics by providing the first dedicated tool for evaluating the environmental impact of sample preparation methods. Its foundation in the ten principles of Green Sample Preparation, combined with weighted scoring and intuitive visualization, offers researchers and analytical scientists a robust framework for quantifying and improving the sustainability of this critical analytical step. Comparative assessments demonstrate AGREEprep's superior specificity for sample preparation compared to comprehensive greenness metrics, while application data from official standard methods reveals significant opportunities for greening conventional approaches. As analytical chemistry continues to prioritize sustainability, AGREEprep serves as an essential tool for guiding method development, selection, and optimization toward reduced environmental impact without compromising analytical performance.

This guide provides a comparative analysis of specialized metrics used in modern analytical chemistry and biomedical research. It focuses on evaluating their performance, applications, and roles in the holistic assessment of analytical techniques and therapeutic agents.

The field of analytical science has evolved from focusing solely on performance to embracing more comprehensive evaluation frameworks. White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) represents this paradigm shift, advocating for a balanced approach that considers analytical, environmental, and practical factors simultaneously. [52] This framework is often visualized through the RGB model, which combines red for analytical performance, green for environmental impact, and blue for practicality. [52] While this model has been foundational, the emergence of new priorities—including innovation, sustainability, and specific clinical efficacy—has driven the development of more specialized metrics.

This guide explores four such specialized metrics: GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods), AGSA (Analytical Green Star Area), ChlorTox (Chlorotoxin), and BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index). The first three metrics (GEMAM, AGSA, BAGI) function as assessment tools within analytical chemistry, enabling researchers to quantify and compare the sustainability and practicality of their methods. [52] [53] In contrast, ChlorTox is not an assessment metric but a bioactive peptide used as a targeting domain in novel cell therapies, with its own set of clinical evaluation parameters. [54] Understanding these distinct tools is crucial for advancing both sustainable analytical science and innovative therapeutic development.

The following table classifies the featured metrics and components based on their primary domain and function.

Metric/Component	Primary Domain	Primary Function	Core Objective
GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods) [52] [53]	Analytical Chemistry	Sustainability Assessment	Quantify the environmental impact of analytical methods.
AGSA (Analytical Green Star Area) [52]	Analytical Chemistry	Sustainability Assessment	Provide a visual star-shaped representation of greenness criteria.
BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index) [52] [53]	Analytical Chemistry	Practicality Assessment	Evaluate the practical aspects and user-friendliness of analytical methods.
ChlorTox (Chlorotoxin) [54]	Biomedical Therapy	Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient	Serve as a targeting domain in CAR T-cell therapy for glioblastoma.

Comparative Analysis of Analytical Chemistry Metrics

Performance and Sustainability Scoring

Quantitative data from a pharmaceutical analysis study directly comparing GEMAM, BAGI, and other metrics for two analytical techniques is shown in the table below. [53]

Assessment Metric	HPTLC-Densitometry Method Score	FA-PLS Spectrophotometry Method Score
GEMAM [53]	7.015	7.487
BAGI [53]	87.50	90.00
AGREE [53]	0.92	0.96
NEMI [53]	Perfect	Perfect
RGBfast (Overall Score) [53]	81.00	85.00
VIGI (Violet Innovation Grade Index) [53]	75.00	80.00
Carbon Footprint (kg COâ‚‚ per sample) [53]	0.037	0.021
NQS (Alignment with UN SDGs) [53]	82%	83%

Methodologies and Experimental Protocols

The quantitative data in the previous table was derived from a specific study implementing the following experimental protocols. [53]

• HPTLC-Densitometry Protocol: The analysis used silica gel plates with an eco-friendly mobile phase of ethyl acetate–ethanol (7:3, v/v). Samples were applied as 8 mm bands, with chromatography development in an automated chamber under controlled conditions (25 ± 0.5 °C, 40 ± 2% relative humidity). Densitometric scanning was performed in reflectance-absorbance mode. [53]
• FA-PLS Spectrophotometry Protocol: This method combined UV-Vis spectroscopy with chemometric modeling. A Firefly Algorithm (FA) was used to intelligently select the most influential wavelengths for the Partial Least Squares (PLS) model, enhancing its predictive power. A novel Hammersley Sequence Sampling (HSS) technique was employed for robust validation set construction. [53]
• Sustainability Assessment Protocol: The greenness and practicality of both methods were evaluated using multiple dedicated tools, including GEMAM, BAGI, AGREE, and NEMI. The Need–Quality–Sustainability (NQS) index further assessed their alignment with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health), SDG 9 (Industry and Innovation), and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption). [53]

ChlorTox Clinical Profile and Assessment

ChlorTox (Chlorotoxin) is evaluated not by analytical metrics but through clinical trial parameters that assess its safety and feasibility as a therapeutic component. [54]

Interim Clinical Trial Data

Key outcomes from a phase 1 trial of CLTX-CAR T-cell therapy for recurrent glioblastoma are summarized below. [54]

Clinical Parameter	Interim Finding (n=4)
Primary Objective: Safety	No dose-limiting toxicities observed; therapy well-tolerated. [54]
Immunogenicity	No humoral immunogenicity against the CLTX-CAR detected. [54]
Best Response	Stable disease in 3 out of 4 participants (75%). [54]
CAR T-cell Detection	Confirmed in tumor cavity fluid and at lower levels in blood. [54]
Delivery Method	Intracavity/Intratumoral (ICT) infusion. [54]
Target Mechanism	Binds to glioma cells via surface matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2). [54]

Experimental Protocol for CLTX-CAR T-cell Therapy

The clinical data was generated through the following experimental and clinical workflow. [54]

• Therapeutic Construct: Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T cells were engineered to use Chlorotoxin (CLTX), a peptide derived from scorpion venom, as their glioma-targeting domain. [54]
• Clinical Trial Design: A phase 1 trial (NCT04214392) for patients with MMP-2-expressing recurrent GBM. The primary objectives were to evaluate the feasibility and safety of intracavity/intratumoral (ICT) delivery of CLTX-CAR T cells. [54]
• Bioactivity Assessment: Evidence of bioactivity was evaluated by measuring CAR T-cell persistence in the body and monitoring cytokine production. [54]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of the described methodologies requires specific reagents and instruments.

Reagents and Materials for Analytical Method Development

Item Name	Function / Application
Silica Gel 60 Fâ‚‚â‚…â‚„ HPTLC Plates [53]	Stationary phase for the separation of analytes.
Ethyl Acetate–Ethanol Mobile Phase [53]	Eco-friendly solvent system for chromatographic development.
Camag ADC2 Automated Development Chamber [53]	Provides controlled conditions for HPTLC development.
Camag TLC Scanner 3 [53]	Densitometer for quantitative analysis of HPTLC bands.
Shimadzu UV-1800 Spectrophotometer [53]	Instrument for acquiring ultraviolet absorbance spectra.
Firefly Algorithm (FA) Optimization [53]	Intelligent variable selection for robust chemometric models.
Hammersley Sequence Sampling (HSS) [53]	Creates representative validation sets in chemometric analysis.
5-Chloro-2-isobutylthiazole	5-Chloro-2-isobutylthiazole, CAS:1207426-84-3, MF:C7H10ClNS, MW:175.68 g/mol
Chrysal

Key Components for Chlorotoxin-Directed Therapy

Item Name	Function / Application
Chlorotoxin (CLTX) Peptide [54]	Serves as the tumor-targeting domain on the CAR construct.
Engineered CAR T-cells [54]	Living therapeutic agents engineered to express the CLTX-CAR.
MMP-2 Expressing Glioma Cells [54]	Target cells for the CLTX-CAR T-cell therapy.

This guide demonstrates the distinct applications of GEMAM, AGSA, BAGI, and ChlorTox. The analytical metrics (GEMAM, AGSA, BAGI) provide a critical, multi-faceted framework for driving the field toward more sustainable and practical practices, as evidenced by their use in quantifying the advantages of green methods like HPTLC and FA-PLS. [52] [53] In the biomedical realm, ChlorTox exemplifies innovation as a targeting moiety in cell therapy, with its own clinical metrics underscoring a promising safety profile and bioactivity in early trials. [54] Together, these specialized tools and components highlight how targeted assessment and design are advancing both analytical chemistry and therapeutic development.

Greenness Assessment of HPLC Methods for Cannabinoids and Paclitaxel

The environmental impact of analytical methods has become a critical concern in pharmaceutical analysis and quality control. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), while being a robust and reliable technique, traditionally involves significant consumption of organic solvents and generates substantial waste [55]. This has led to the emergence of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles, which aim to minimize the environmental footprint of analytical procedures [39]. Evaluating the greenness of analytical methods requires specialized assessment tools that provide objective measures of environmental impact, safety, and energy efficiency [56]. This case study provides a comparative analysis of the greenness profiles of HPLC methods used for the analysis of two important therapeutic compounds: cannabinoids from Cannabis sativa L. and the chemotherapeutic agent paclitaxel. The assessment employs multiple established greenness metrics to offer a comprehensive perspective for researchers and drug development professionals seeking to implement more sustainable laboratory practices.

Greenness Assessment Tools and Metrics

A variety of tools have been developed to evaluate the environmental friendliness of analytical methods. These tools assess parameters such as reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste generation, and operator safety [56]. The most commonly used metrics include:

• National Environmental Method Index (NEMI): A qualitative tool that uses a pictogram with four quadrants to indicate whether a method avoids persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic (PBT) substances, hazardous chemicals, extreme pH conditions, and whether waste is limited to <50 g [55] [47].
• Analytical Eco-Scale: A semi-quantitative assessment that starts with a perfect score of 100 and deducts penalty points for the use of hazardous reagents, excessive energy consumption, and poor waste management. Scores ≥75 are considered "excellent," 50-74 are "acceptable," and <50 are "insufficient" [55].
• Analytical Greenness Calculator (AGREE): A comprehensive metric that evaluates all 12 principles of GAC and provides a score between 0 and 1, with higher scores indicating greener methods [19] [55].
• Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI): A multi-criteria evaluation tool that provides a colored pictogram for visual assessment of a method's environmental impact across various stages [19].
• Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM): A recently developed (2025), flexible metric that evaluates six key dimensions (sample, reagent, instrument, method, waste, and operator) based on 21 criteria, presenting results on a 0-10 scale [7].

Greenness Assessment of HPLC Methods for Cannabinoids

Analytical Context and Methodologies

The analysis of cannabinoids in Cannabis sativa L. is essential for quality control, legal classification, and therapeutic use [57] [58]. HPLC is particularly suited for cannabinoid quantification because it can simultaneously determine both acidic (e.g., THCA, CBDA) and neutral (e.g., THC, CBD) forms without the need for derivatization, which is required in gas chromatography due to decarboxylation at high temperatures [57] [58]. A typical RP-HPLC-UV method for 10 cannabinoids uses a C18 column, with a mobile phase of water with 0.085% phosphoric acid and acetonitrile with 0.085% phosphoric acid under gradient elution, with detection at 220 nm [58]. Sample preparation involves extraction with organic solvents, which can be a significant source of environmental impact [58].

Greenness Evaluation Data

A 2024 systematic review assessed the greenness of HPLC and UHPLC methods for determining cannabinoids in oils using four different metrics [19]. The results provide a comprehensive view of the environmental performance of these methods:

Table 1: Greenness Assessment Scores of Cannabinoid HPLC Methods from Literature [19]

Detection Method	Number of Methods	Analytical Eco-Scale Score (Range)	AGREE Score (Range)	Greenness Category
High-Resolution MS	1	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Acceptable
DAD	2	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Acceptable
UV	1	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Acceptable
UV and MS	2	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Acceptable
MS/MS	2	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Acceptable
All Methods	8	50 - 80	Data Not Specified	Acceptable to Excellent

The review found that out of eight identified analytical methods, seven achieved Analytical Eco-Scale scores between 50 and 73, categorizing them as "acceptable" green methods. One method achieved a score of 80, qualifying it as an "excellent" green analysis [19]. The application of GACI principles during method development contributes significantly to reducing the environmental footprint of cannabinoid analysis.

Greenness Assessment of HPLC Methods for Paclitaxel

Analytical Context and Methodologies

Paclitaxel is a widely used chemotherapeutic agent, and HPLC is the standard technique for its quantification in pharmaceutical formulations and biological samples [47]. Traditional HPLC methods for paclitaxel often involve large volumes of organic solvents, creating substantial environmental concerns [59] [47]. A typical method for analyzing paclitaxel and related compounds uses an Ascentis Express F5 column (15 cm × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with an isocratic mobile phase of water and acetonitrile (60:40, v/v) at a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min, with UV detection at 227 nm [60]. Sample preparation for emulsion formulations can be complex, requiring demulsification with anhydrous sodium sulfate, extraction with methanol and ethyl ether, and concentration under nitrogen [59].

Greenness Evaluation Data

A recent 2025 study evaluated the greenness of HPLC-based methods for paclitaxel using seven different assessment tools, providing a multi-faceted perspective [47]:

Table 2: Greenness Assessment of Paclitaxel HPLC Methods Using Multiple Metrics [47]

Method	BAGI Score	Analytical Eco-Scale Score	NEMI Profile	Overall Greenness Performance
Method 1	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Among Most Sustainable
Method 2	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	Among Most Sustainable
Method 3	72.5	Data Not Specified	Data Not Specified	High Eco-Friendliness
Method 5	Data Not Specified	90	Data Not Specified	High Eco-Friendliness
Methods 6, 8, 9	Lower Scores	Lower Scores	Poorer Performance	Require Optimization

The study identified Methods 1, 2, 3, and 5 as the most sustainable, with Method 3 achieving a high BAGI score of 72.5 and Method 5 scoring 90 on the Analytical Eco-Scale, reflecting high eco-friendliness, minimal waste, and operational efficiency [47]. In contrast, Methods 6, 8, and 9 required optimization in hazardous material usage, energy consumption, and waste management.

Comparative Analysis & Discussion

Greenness Performance Comparison

When comparing the greenness profiles of HPLC methods for cannabinoids versus paclitaxel, both similarities and differences emerge. For both compound classes, the choice of detector influences greenness, with simpler detection methods like UV generally contributing to better greenness profiles compared to more energy- and resource-intensive MS detectors [19] [55]. The mobile phase composition and sample preparation procedures are also critical factors for both applications [59] [58].

A key difference lies in the reported greenness scores. The highest-performing paclitaxel methods achieved an Analytical Eco-Scale score of 90 [47], while the best-reported cannabinoid method scored 80 [19]. This discrepancy may be attributed to more extensive method optimization for paclitaxel analysis, possibly driven by its longer-established use in pharmaceutical settings compared to the relatively recent standardization of cannabinoid analysis for therapeutic purposes.

Assessment Tool Performance

The case study also reveals differences in the applicability and output of various greenness assessment tools. While NEMI provides a simple, visual representation, it offers only qualitative results and does not address all 12 GAC principles [55] [47]. The Analytical Eco-Scale provides valuable semi-quantitative data with clear threshold values [55], while AGREE and GEMAM offer more comprehensive, quantitative evaluations but with greater complexity [7] [55]. The multi-tool approach used in the paclitaxel assessment [47] provides a more robust evaluation than single-metric assessments.

Pathways to Greener Methods

Based on the assessment results, several strategies can enhance the greenness of HPLC methods for both compound classes:

• Solvent Replacement: Substituting acetonitrile with less toxic alternatives like ethanol, particularly for cannabinoid analysis [39].
• Method Miniaturization: Reducing column dimensions and flow rates to decrease solvent consumption [39].
• Sample Preparation Optimization: Simplifying extraction procedures and reducing solvent volumes [59] [58].
• Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD): Implementing AQbD principles to develop robust methods that inherently minimize environmental impact [39].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents & Materials

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for HPLC Analysis of Cannabinoids and Paclitaxel

Item	Function/Application	Greenness Considerations
C18 Chromatographic Column	Reverse-phase separation of analytes [57] [60]	Smaller particle sizes (e.g., 3.5 μm) and shorter columns enable faster runs and reduced solvent use [39]
Acetonitrile (HPLC Grade)	Common organic mobile phase component [59] [60]	Hazardous; should be replaced with greener alternatives like ethanol where possible [39]
Methanol (HPLC Grade)	Sample extraction and mobile phase component [59] [58]	Less hazardous than acetonitrile but still requires careful handling and disposal [39]
Phosphoric Acid	Mobile phase modifier to improve peak shape [58]	Used in small quantities; minimal environmental impact
Cannabinoid Standards	(e.g., THC, CBD) for calibration and quantification [58]	Required for accurate analysis; no direct greenness alternative
Paclitaxel & Related Compound Standards	for system suitability and quantification [59] [60]	Required for accurate analysis; no direct greenness alternative
Anhydrous Sodium Sulfate	Demulsifying agent for sample preparation [59]	Low hazard; used in small quantities
Octafluoro-4,4'-bipyridine	Octafluoro-4,4'-bipyridine, CAS:3511-91-9, MF:C10F8N2, MW:300.11 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Tritc, mritc	Tritc, mritc, MF:C26H25N3O3S, MW:459.6 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Visualizing Greenness Assessment

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow and key criteria involved in assessing the greenness of an HPLC method, integrating the principles of multiple assessment tools:

This comparative case study demonstrates that greenness assessment is a vital component of modern HPLC method development and validation for both cannabinoids and paclitaxel. The evaluation using multiple metrics reveals that while significant progress has been made in developing environmentally conscious methods, particularly for paclitaxel analysis, there remains substantial opportunity for improvement across both application areas. The implementation of GAC principles, coupled with the use of standardized assessment tools, provides a clear pathway toward more sustainable analytical practices in pharmaceutical research and quality control. Future efforts should focus on the consistent application of comprehensive metrics like AGREE and GEMAM throughout method development, the adoption of AQbD frameworks that incorporate greenness as a key objective, and the continued development of alternative green solvents and miniaturized technologies to further reduce the environmental footprint of pharmaceutical analysis.

Strategies for Troubleshooting and Optimizing Method Greenness

The principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) provide a framework for making analytical procedures more environmentally benign and safer for humans [13]. This involves critically evaluating traditional methods to identify environmental "hotspots"—areas with significant negative impacts—and implementing strategies for improvement [61]. The core focus areas include reducing the toxicity of reagents, minimizing energy consumption, and curtailing waste generation throughout the analytical process [62]. The drive towards greener methodologies is not merely an environmental concern; it also aligns with economic efficiency and enhanced safety for laboratory personnel [62]. As environmental regulations tighten and industries shift towards more sustainable practices, the ability to identify hotspots and assess the greenness of analytical techniques has become essential for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals [62].

The process of greening analytical methods requires a holistic, systems-thinking approach that considers the entire lifecycle of an analysis [61]. This means looking beyond analytical performance to include the environmental costs of sample preparation, instrument operation, reagent sourcing, and waste disposal [61]. For instance, a switch from a solvent-intensive technique like liquid-liquid extraction to solid-phase microextraction might seem greener at first glance, but if the new method requires longer extraction times or higher heating, the overall energy balance and throughput must be evaluated to avoid unintended consequences [61]. This systems-based perspective is crucial for accurately identifying the most significant environmental hotspots and for making meaningful improvements.

Methodologies for Identifying Environmental Hotspots

Hotspots Analysis: A Systematic Framework

Hotspots analysis (HSA) is a methodological framework designed for the rapid assimilation and analysis of multiple information sources to identify and prioritize significant environmental, economic, and social impacts [63]. In the context of analytical chemistry, HSA helps pinpoint stages in a method that contribute disproportionately to reagent toxicity, energy use, or waste generation. The process typically follows four key steps, providing a structured approach to sustainability assessment [63]:

• Goal and Scope Definition: This initial phase involves defining the objectives of the analysis, the system boundaries, and the specific impact categories to be evaluated (e.g., global warming potential, toxicity, resource depletion). Engaging stakeholders at this stage is critical for establishing the materiality approach.
• Data Gathering and Analysis: This step involves collecting quantitative and qualitative data on all relevant inputs and outputs of the analytical process. This can include life cycle assessment (LCA) data, energy consumption metrics, volumes and toxicity of reagents and solvents, and waste generation figures.
• Hotspots Identification and Validation: The collected data is analyzed to identify areas of high impact ("hotspots"). This involves applying agreed-upon criteria and materiality thresholds to determine which impacts are significant. The identified hotspots are then validated through stakeholder consultation.
• Prioritizing Action: The final step involves using the analysis outputs to develop an action plan. This includes focusing research, development, and innovation efforts on the most impactful areas to achieve sustainability improvements.

Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment Tools

Several standardized tools have been developed specifically for the greenness assessment of analytical methods, combining both quantitative data and qualitative evaluation.

• The AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) Metric: This comprehensive tool evaluates an analytical procedure against all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry [13] [62]. It transforms these criteria into a unified score on a 0-1 scale and presents the results in an easily interpretable pictogram. The tool is available as open-source software, making the assessment straightforward and accessible [13].
• The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI): This tool provides a visual assessment of the greenness of an analytical method using a color-coded system [62]. GAPI considers the entire life cycle of the method, from reagent and solvent use to waste management, offering a thorough evaluation that is easy to interpret.
• The Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS): Suited particularly for chromatographic methods, the AMGS focuses on the mass of solvents used, health and environmental measures for the solvents, and energy utilization for both solvents and instrument operation [61].

Table 1: Overview of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Approach	Key Criteria	Output Format
AGREE [13] [62]	Comprehensive, based on 12 GAC principles	Reagent toxicity, waste, energy, safety, etc.	Pictogram with a 0-1 score
GAPI [62]	Life cycle-based, multi-stage	Sample collection, preparation, transportation, analysis	Color-coded diagram
AMGS [61]	Focused on chromatography	Solvent mass, solvent energy, solvent safety, instrument energy	Numerical score

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Evaluation

Implementing a standardized protocol is essential for the objective comparison of analytical techniques. The following workflow provides a detailed methodology for conducting a greenness assessment, incorporating the tools described above.

Greenness Assessment Workflow

Step-by-Step Methodology

• Goal and Scope Definition: Clearly define the analytical problem and the boundaries of the assessment. This includes selecting the analytical techniques to be compared (e.g., GC vs. HPLC), defining the sample preparation steps, and establishing the functional unit (e.g., per single analysis) [63].
• Data Gathering and Inventory Analysis: Compile a detailed inventory for each analytical method under evaluation. This should be a quantitative exercise where possible [61].
  • Reagents and Solvents: Record the type, quantity, and toxicity (using standardized hazard codes) of all chemicals used in sample preparation and mobile phases.
  • Energy Consumption: Measure or obtain manufacturer data on the power consumption (in kWh) of all instruments used, including any ancillary equipment like ovens, evaporators, or centrifuges.
  • Waste Generation: Quantify the total waste generated, categorizing it by type (e.g., hazardous organic waste, aqueous waste, solid waste) and mass or volume.
• Application of Greenness Assessment Tools: Use the collected data to populate the selected assessment tools.
  • AGREE Calculator: Input data corresponding to the 12 GAC principles into the software to generate the final score and pictogram [13].
  • GAPI: For each stage of the analytical process (e.g., sample preservation, transportation, extraction, instrumentation), assign a color code (green, yellow, red) based on the environmental impact [62].
  • AMGS: Calculate the score based on the mass and safety of solvents and the energy consumption of the instrument [61].
• Data Synthesis and Hotspot Identification: Synthesize the results from the different tools to identify consistent patterns. A method scoring poorly in the "energy" section of AGREE, having red indicators in the "instrumentation" part of GAPI, and a high energy component in AMGS would clearly identify energy use as a primary hotspot.

Table 2: Exemplar Greenness Assessment for Gas Chromatography (GC) Methods

Assessment Criteria	GC with Helium Carrier Gas & LLE	GC with Nitrogen Carrier Gas & SPME
Reagent Toxicity	High (organic solvents in LLE)	Low (solvent-free SPME)
Energy Consumption	High (GC-MS system, LLE heating)	Moderate (GC system)
Waste Generation	High (solvent waste from LLE)	Very Low (minimal solvent use)
AGREE Score	Estimated 0.4	Estimated 0.7
Primary Hotspots	Solvent toxicity, waste volume	Carrier gas choice (if using helium)

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagents and Solutions

The choice of reagents and materials is a critical determinant in the greenness profile of an analytical method. The following table details key solutions and their functional role in the context of minimizing environmental hotspots [61] [62].

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Greener Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Function	Greenness Consideration
Switchable Solvents [62]	Sample preparation and extraction	Can be switched between hydrophilic and hydrophobic forms, allowing for easy recovery and reuse, significantly reducing waste generation.
Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) [61]	Sample preparation and extraction	Eliminates or drastically reduces the need for large volumes of organic solvents, addressing toxicity and waste hotspots.
Hydrogen or Nitrogen Generator [61]	Carrier gas for Gas Chromatography	On-demand generation reduces the environmental footprint associated with transporting high-pressure cylinders. Using nitrogen over helium is more sustainable due to helium scarcity.
Miniaturized Chromatographs [61]	Instrumentation for separation	Reduced laboratory footprint, lower power consumption, and smaller reagent volumes required, mitigating energy and waste hotspots.

Comparative Analysis of Analytical Techniques

Gas Chromatography: A Case Study in Carrier Gas Selection

Gas Chromatography (GC) is a widely used technique where significant environmental improvements are possible. The choice of carrier gas represents a major hotspot for sustainability and supply chain reliability [61].

• Helium: While historically the preferred carrier gas for its performance, helium is a non-renewable resource with well-documented shortages. From a sustainability perspective, it is considered the poorest choice [61].
• Hydrogen: Hydrogen offers faster separations and can be generated on-demand, eliminating supply issues. However, it requires additional safety considerations and capital investment in a generator [61].
• Nitrogen: Nitrogen, once considered a poor chromatographic choice, has been re-evaluated. In temperature-programmed analyses, it can provide performance comparable to helium for many applications and is a more sustainable and cost-effective option, though it is not ideal for GC-MS [61].

The following diagram illustrates the decision-making process for selecting a greener carrier gas in GC, a key step in method development.

GC Carrier Gas Selection Guide

Systems Thinking in Method Transitions

A systems thinking approach is vital when comparing techniques. A seemingly greener choice in one area can create new hotspots elsewhere [61]. For example, replacing liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) with solid-phase microextraction (SPME) eliminates large volumes of solvent waste, directly addressing the waste hotspot [61]. However, SPME may require longer extraction times and heating, which increases energy consumption per sample. If this longer cycle time reduces overall analytical throughput, it could lead to instruments idling or requiring more instruments to handle the same workload, thereby increasing the energy hotspot. Therefore, a full lifecycle perspective that considers throughput, capital equipment, and operator time is essential for a valid comparison.

The objective comparison of analytical techniques through greenness assessment is fundamental to advancing sustainable science. By employing structured methodologies like hotspots analysis and specialized tools such as AGREE and GAPI, researchers can move beyond performance-only metrics to a holistic view that includes environmental impact. The data and comparisons presented demonstrate that significant opportunities exist to mitigate hotspots—particularly in reagent toxicity and energy use—through informed choices of materials, instrumentation, and methods. For drug development professionals and researchers, adopting these assessment protocols is not merely an ethical imperative but a practical strategy for developing robust, efficient, and future-proof analytical methods that align with the global push towards sustainability.

The pursuit of sustainability in laboratories has made Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) a cornerstone of modern method development. GAC principles aim to minimize the environmental impact of analytical processes by reducing hazardous waste, conserving energy, and improving safety, without compromising analytical performance [64]. Within this framework, three critical optimization levers emerge: miniaturization, which drastically scales down reagent volumes; solvent selection, which focuses on replacing hazardous chemicals with safer alternatives; and throughput enhancement, which employs automation and high-throughput technologies to maximize efficiency [65] [66] [67]. This guide provides a comparative analysis of these strategies, underpinned by experimental data and evaluated through established greenness assessment metrics like the AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) tool [13] [64]. As the demand for sustainable practices grows across drug development and analytical research, understanding the implementation and trade-offs of these levers is crucial for scientists aiming to align their workflows with both ecological and analytical objectives.

Miniaturization: Scaling Down for Greater Efficiency

Core Concepts and Technologies

Miniaturization involves the systematic reduction of assay volumes from milliliters to microliters or nanoliters. This approach conserves precious samples and expensive reagents and reduces the generation of hazardous waste [66]. Key technologies enabling this shift include microfluidic platforms, miniaturized HPLC columns, and automated liquid handlers capable of dispensing sub-microliter volumes with high precision [65] [68] [69].

Microfluidic or "lab-on-a-chip" systems manipulate fluids in channels with dimensions of tens to hundreds of microns. These platforms integrate multiple unit operations—such as extraction, separation, and detection—onto a single chip, enabling rapid processing with minimal reagent consumption [69]. For instance, applications in phenolic compound extraction from food matrices demonstrate that microfluidic systems can achieve high extraction efficiency with significantly reduced solvent use and shorter processing times compared to conventional methods like maceration or Soxhlet extraction [69].

In liquid chromatography, column miniaturization involves using columns with reduced internal diameters. Scaling down from conventional 4.6 mm i.d. columns to micro-flow (e.g., 0.300 mm i.d.) or nano-flow (e.g., 0.075 mm i.d.) columns reduces chromatographic dilution, thus increasing analyte concentration at the detector and enhancing sensitivity [70]. This is particularly beneficial in omics research, where sample amounts are often limited [70].

Experimental Data and Comparative Performance

The following table summarizes experimental data highlighting the impact of miniaturization across different applications.

Table 1: Experimental Performance Data of Miniaturization Technologies

Technology / Method	Traditional Scale	Miniaturized Scale	Key Performance Outcomes	Application Context
Liquid-Liquid Extraction (LLE) [71]	20 mL solvent/sample	10 mL solvent/sample	50% reduction in solvent, standards, and glass waste; savings of ~£2000/year/instrument on vials alone.	Headspace VOC analysis
Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (DLLME) [71]	£5-£20/sample (materials cost)	£1-£3/sample (materials cost)	Up to 90% solvent reduction; enrichment factors of 100-1000, improving detection limits.	General sample prep for GC/HPLC
Microfluidic Phenolic Extraction [69]	Hours (e.g., Maceration)	Minutes (On-chip)	Ultrafast extraction with minimal solvent; enables integrated, real-time antioxidant profiling.	Natural product analysis
HPLC Column Inner Diameter [70]	2.1 mm i.d.	0.300 mm i.d.	~10x increase in sensitivity for 50 ng oxycodone; 49x theoretical reduction in chromatographic dilution.	LC-MS for Omics

Practical Workflow and Reagent Solutions

Implementing miniaturization requires specific reagents and equipment. The workflow often begins with a miniaturized sample preparation technique, such as DLLME or solid-phase microextraction (SPME), followed by analysis using a microfluidic device or a miniaturized HPLC system.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Miniaturization

Item Name	Function/Description	Application Example
DLLME Vials [71]	Specialized vials for performing dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction, enabling solvent reduction.	Miniaturized sample pre-concentration for trace analysis.
SmartSPE Cartridges [71]	Miniaturized solid-phase extraction cartridges designed for low elution volumes.	Automated, low-volume sample clean-up and extraction.
PDMS Microfluidic Chips [69]	Polydimethylsiloxane-based chips with micron-sized channels for fluid manipulation.	On-chip liquid-liquid extraction and reaction compartmentalization.
Nano-Flow LC Columns [70]	Capillary columns with internal diameters of ~0.075 mm for ultra-sensitive LC-MS analysis.	Proteomic and metabolomic analysis with limited sample.
Ferrofluids [69]	Magnetic nanoparticle suspensions used for liquid-phase microextraction (LPME).	Selective extraction and pre-concentration of analytes from complex matrices.

Diagram 1: Miniaturization Workflow Pathways. This diagram contrasts the procedural steps and outcomes of traditional versus miniaturized analytical workflows, highlighting the divergence in waste generation and analytical sensitivity.

Solvent Selection: Transitioning to Safer Alternatives

Green Solvent Principles and Options

Solvent selection is a primary concern in GAC due to the significant toxicity and waste associated with many traditional solvents. The core principle is to substitute hazardous solvents like acetonitrile, chloroform, and n-hexane with safer alternatives such as water, ethanol, acetone, or ethyl acetate [64]. Superheated water and solvent-free techniques, such as SPME, represent the ultimate goal in green solvent selection [64]. The choice of solvent directly impacts several greenness assessment criteria, including waste toxicity, operator safety, and energy consumption for evaporation or disposal [13].

Experimental Comparison and Greenness Impact

The effectiveness of green solvent substitution is demonstrated in various studies. For example, in HPLC, replacing acetonitrile with ethanol in mobile phases is a viable strategy, though it may require method re-optimization due to differences in elution strength and viscosity [64]. In sample preparation, methods like QuEChERS have been successfully adapted to use solvents like ethyl acetate instead of more toxic options [64].

Table 3: Comparison of Common Solvents in Analytical Chemistry

Solvent	Traditional Use	Green Concern	Safer Alternative	Experimental Consideration
Acetonitrile [64]	Reverse-phase HPLC mobile phase	Toxic, hazardous waste	Ethanol, MeOH	Higher viscosity can increase backpressure; may alter selectivity.
Methanol [64]	HPLC, extraction	Toxic	Ethanol, Water	Less toxic than acetonitrile but still hazardous.
Chloroform [71]	Liquid-liquid extraction	Toxic, carcinogenic	Ethyl Acetate, DLLME solvents	Safer alternatives may have different extraction efficiencies.
n-Hexane [64]	Lipid extraction	Highly flammable, neurotoxic	Heptane, Cyclopentyl Methyl Ether	Greener options often have similar properties with lower toxicity.

Throughput Enhancement: Accelerating Discovery

High-Throughput and Automated Platforms

Throughput enhancement leverages automation, robotics, and parallel processing to rapidly conduct thousands of experiments. High-Throughput Screening (HTS) is a cornerstone of modern drug discovery, using robotics, microplates, and sophisticated detectors to quickly assay large compound libraries against biological targets [67]. A key enabler of HTS is assay miniaturization, which allows testing in 384- or 1536-well plates, dramatically reducing reagent costs and sample requirements while increasing the density and speed of screening campaigns [65] [67]. Automated liquid handlers are critical for ensuring precision and reproducibility when working with these small volumes [66].

Performance Metrics and Economic Value

The market for HTS is projected to grow at a CAGR of 8.5%, driven by the demand for faster, more cost-effective drug discovery [67]. The economic argument for automation and miniaturization is powerful. One analysis suggests that miniaturizing a method from a cost of £5-£20 per sample to £1-£3 per sample can lead to savings of £45,000–£95,000 annually for a lab processing 10,000 samples [71]. Furthermore, automated platforms minimize human error, a major source of variability and irreproducibility in scientific research [66].

Diagram 2: High-Throughput Screening Workflow Loop. This diagram illustrates the iterative, integrated process of a modern HTS campaign, where miniaturization, automation, and advanced data analysis combine to accelerate discovery.

Integrated Greenness Assessment

Evaluating the overall greenness of an analytical method requires a holistic view that combines the levers of miniaturization, solvent selection, and throughput. Tools like the Analytical Eco-Scale, GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index), and AGREE are widely used for this purpose [64]. The AGREE metric is particularly comprehensive, incorporating all 12 principles of GAC into a unified score between 0 and 1, presented in an intuitive pictogram [13] [64].

For instance, a conventional HPLC method using a 4.6 mm column and acetonitrile-based mobile phase would score lower on the AGREE scale due to high solvent consumption and waste. In contrast, a miniaturized method using a 0.3 mm column, an ethanol-water mobile phase, and integrated micro-extraction would achieve a significantly higher score by addressing multiple green principles simultaneously: reducing waste (principle #3), using safer solvents (principle #4), and decreasing energy consumption and enabling multi-analyte detection (principles #6 and #9) [13] [64]. This quantitative assessment allows researchers to objectively compare and optimize their methods for sustainability.

The strategic application of miniaturization, green solvent selection, and throughput enhancement provides a powerful framework for advancing sustainable analytical practices. Experimental data confirms that miniaturization drastically reduces reagent use and waste while often enhancing sensitivity. The conscious replacement of hazardous solvents with safer alternatives directly mitigates environmental and health impacts. Furthermore, integrating these approaches with automation and high-throughput technologies accelerates research and improves reproducibility and cost-effectiveness. As the AGREE metric and similar tools demonstrate, a holistic approach that leverages all three optimization levers is the most effective path to achieving "whiter" methods that balance superior analytical performance, practical applicability, and environmental stewardship. For researchers in drug development and beyond, adopting these levers is no longer just an option but a critical component of modern, responsible science.

The global focus on sustainability has propelled the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) to the forefront of method development in analytical laboratories [72]. Among the various metrics developed to quantify the environmental impact of analytical methods, the Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) has emerged as a comprehensive tool, particularly for chromatographic separations [73] [61]. The AMGS, originally proposed in 2019 by the American Chemical Society's Green Chemistry Institute (ACS-GCI), provides a simplified way to summarize an analytical method's environmental impact with a single numerical value, where a smaller number indicates a greener method [73]. This metric incorporates variables such as instrumental power consumption, solvent hazard, and solvent cumulative energy demand based on production and disposal [73]. The pharmaceutical industry, with hundreds to over a thousand HPLC systems in major companies, represents a significant opportunity for reducing environmental footprint through AMGS optimization, potentially moving to the forefront of sustainable science practices [73].

Theoretical Foundations of AMGS and Mathematical Optimization

The AMGS Formula and Its Components

The Analytical Method Greenness Score functions as a multivariate metric that integrates several environmental impact factors into a unified assessment. The core AMGS calculation focuses on three primary contributors: instrument energy consumption, solvent energy demand during production and disposal, and solvent safety considerations based on health and environmental hazard profiles [61]. This comprehensive approach allows researchers to benchmark current separation methods and identify opportunities for improvement [74]. The AMGS formula was specifically designed to be especially suited to chromatographic methods, with demonstrated applications in high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), ultrahigh-pressure liquid chromatography (UHPLC), and supercritical fluid chromatography (SFC) [61].

The Critical Role of Cycle Time in AMGS Optimization

A significant advancement in AMGS calculation came with the recognition that instrument cycle time (tc)—the time between the method ending and the next injection—profoundly affects solvent waste generation in high-throughput chemical analyses [73] [74]. Previous AMGS calculations had overlooked this parameter, leading to incomplete environmental assessments. The modified AMGS formula incorporates cycle time as follows: first, assuming an initial run time (ti) is known at one flow rate (Fi), the analysis time (ta) can be solved at any flow rate (F) with:

[ ta = \frac{ti \times F_i}{F} ]

This equation, when substituted into the AMGS formula, enables researchers to examine the combined effect of both cycle time and flow rate on the overall environmental impact [73]. This modification revealed that higher flow rates asymptotically approach a minimal AMGS when cycle time is neglected, but when cycle time is incorporated, there exists a specific flow rate that produces a minimum AMGS that differs for every solvent [73].

Mathematical Optimization Principles for AMGS

The application of mathematical optimization principles to AMGS minimization represents a sophisticated approach to green method development. By taking the derivative of the modified AMGS equation with respect to flow rate and setting it to zero, researchers can calculate the exact flow rate that yields the smallest AMGS for a given set of conditions [73]. This mathematical approach answers fundamental questions about optimal separation speed: "What speed is optimal for the greenest possible conditions?" and "Is faster always greener for analytical separations?" [73]. The finding that incorporating cycle time reveals a unique optimum flow rate for each solvent system has profound implications for method development, establishing that the ideal separation speed differs depending on the solvent composition [74].

Case Study: AMGS Optimization in Amino Acid Enantioseparations

Experimental Design and Methodology

Research Objective and Scope

A comprehensive case study demonstrating AMGS optimization focused on high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) enantioseparations of amino acids [74]. The research aimed to develop pragmatic and mathematical strategies to minimize AMGS scores while maintaining or improving chromatographic performance. The study generated and assessed a case study of more than 456 chromatograms from the enantiomers of 38 proteo- and non-proteogenic amino acids, providing substantial overlap with prior studies and enabling robust comparison of environmental impact across different methodological approaches [73] [74].

Chromatographic System and Conditions

The experimental protocol employed a sustainable method of generating carbonated water-based eluents as a green alternative to traditional mobile phases [74]. To achieve consistent carbonation, researchers used a thick polypropylene ion chromatography eluent reservoir that could be continually pressurized up to 25 psi, requiring only minimal CO₂ for analyses [73]. The key innovation involved using carbonic acid (H₂CO₃*) additive, which demonstrated improved chromatographic figures of merit (resolution and efficiency) while simultaneously lowering the AMGS [73] [74]. This carbonated aqueous mobile phase system offered significant advantages: it reduced retention and sharpened peaks compared to pure water, displayed minimal UV-C absorption down to 190 nm, and maintained mass spectrometry compatibility [73].

Column Selection Strategy

The investigation utilized narrow diameter columns with superficially porous particles (SPPs) to minimize solvent consumption while maintaining separation efficiency [74]. This column technology reduces retention times and contributes to lower solvent consumption and energy usage—two critical factors in AMGS reduction [73]. The research confirmed that these columns reduced solvent waste 12-fold compared to traditional analyses [74], demonstrating the significant environmental benefits achievable through strategic selection of chromatographic hardware.

Key Findings and Performance Data

AMGS Optimization Results

The mathematical optimization of AMGS with respect to flow rate yielded groundbreaking insights into sustainable separation science. By applying the modified AMGS formula incorporating cycle time, researchers identified optimal flow rates for different solvent systems that minimized environmental impact without compromising analytical performance [73] [74]. The study achieved remarkably low AMGS values—as low as 1.2 for ultrafast (<15 s) amino acid chiral separations—with cycle time contributing 79% to the total score in these rapid analyses [74]. This finding highlighted the critical importance of considering the entire analytical cycle rather than focusing solely on the separation runtime when assessing environmental impact.

Table 1: AMGS Optimization Results for Amino Acid Enantioseparations

Parameter	Traditional Method	Optimized Green Method	Improvement Factor
AMGS Score	Not reported (higher)	1.2 (minimum achieved)	Significant reduction
Separation Time	Conventional HPLC runtime	<15 seconds (ultrafast)	~12-fold faster
Solvent Waste Generation	Baseline	Reduced 12-fold	12x improvement
Cycle Time Contribution	Not considered	79% of total AMGS	Critical factor identified
Mobile Phase	Traditional organic solvents	Carbonated water-based	Greener alternative

Carbonated Water Eluent Performance

The investigation revealed that carbonated water-based eluents offered multiple advantages beyond greenness. The carbonic acid additive not only improved the environmental profile but also enhanced chromatographic performance by reducing retention and sharpening peaks compared to pure water mobile phases [73]. Additionally, this approach enabled sensitive detection of native amino acids using either low-wavelength UV or mass spectrometry due to the favorable properties of aqueous carbonic acid, which doesn't absorb UV-C radiation significantly down to 190 nm and is MS-compatible [73]. These findings demonstrated that green method optimization can simultaneously improve both environmental and analytical performance metrics, countering the assumption that sustainability requires analytical compromises.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Metrics

The landscape of greenness assessment in analytical chemistry extends beyond AMGS to include several well-established metrics. The Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) metric calculator offers a comprehensive, flexible assessment approach based on all 12 principles of GAC, transforming them into a unified 0-1 scale with a pictogram output [43]. The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) uses a simple pictogram with four criteria assessed in a binary manner [43]. The Analytical Eco-Scale assigns penalty points to non-green aspects subtracted from a base of 100 [43]. The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) utilizes a pictogram with a three-grade traffic light color scheme across more criteria than NEMI [72]. Finally, the RGB additive color model and its extension to White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) evaluate methods based on analytical performance (red), practicality (blue), and greenness (green) [75] [61] [14].

Comparative Evaluation of Metric Systems

Table 2: Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric System	Assessment Approach	Key Criteria	Output Format	Strengths	Limitations
AMGS	Numerical score	Instrument energy, solvent energy & safety	Single number	Chromatography-specific, incorporates cycle time	Limited criteria compared to comprehensive tools
AGREE	12 GAC principles	All 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles	0-1 score with clock pictogram	Most comprehensive, customizable weights	Requires more detailed input
NEMI	Binary assessment	4 criteria: waste, PBT, hazardous, corrosive	Filled/unfilled pictogram	Simple, intuitive	Oversimplified, limited criteria
Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty points	Reagents, waste, energy	100-point scale	Simple calculation	Limited scope of assessment
GAPI	Three-level assessment	Multiple GAC criteria	Colored pictogram	More detailed than NEMI	Less comprehensive than AGREE
RGB/WAC	Three-dimensional	Greenness, practicality, performance	RGB combination	Balanced assessment beyond just greenness	More complex interpretation

AMGS in the Context of White Analytical Chemistry

The emergence of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) represents an evolution beyond solely environmental considerations. WAC integrates three equally weighted components: greenness (G) for environmental impact, red (R) for analytical efficiency, and blue (B) for practical and economic factors [75] [14]. This holistic approach acknowledges that for a method to be truly sustainable, it must balance environmental concerns with analytical performance and practical implementation. In one pharmaceutical application, researchers developed an eco-friendly HPLC method for simultaneous determination of four cardiovascular drugs using a mobile phase of 0.1% formic acid in water and ethanol, then evaluated it using multiple metrics including AMGS, AGREE, and WAC [14]. This multi-metric assessment approach provides a more complete picture of method sustainability than any single metric alone.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for AMGS-Optimized Chromatography

Item	Function/Role in Green Chemistry	Specific Application in Case Study
Carbonated Water Eluents	Green alternative to organic solvent-rich mobile phases	Mobile phase for amino acid enantioseparations [73] [74]
Carbonic Acid (H₂CO₃*) Additive	MS-compatible, UV-transparent additive improving chromatographic performance	Additive for reducing retention and sharpening peaks [73]
Narrow Diameter Columns with SPPs	Reduced solvent consumption while maintaining efficiency	12-fold reduction in solvent waste compared to traditional columns [74]
Polypropylene IC Eluent Reservoir	Sustainable mobile phase preparation with consistent COâ‚‚ pressure	Pressurized container for carbonated eluent generation [73]
Green Solvents (Ethanol, Water)	Lower environmental impact, reduced toxicity	Replacement for acetonitrile and methanol in reversed-phase LC [75] [14]
AMGS Calculator	Quantitative assessment of method environmental impact	ACS website tool for AMGS calculation [14]

Implications for Pharmaceutical Research and Drug Development

The optimization of AMGS has profound implications for drug development research and other production fields reliant on separation sciences [74]. Pharmaceutical companies represent an ideal application domain for these principles, as they typically operate hundreds to over a thousand HPLC systems [73]. The case study demonstrated that implementing optimized methods could reduce solvent waste 12-fold while achieving ultrafast separations with AMGS values as low as 1.2 [74]. Beyond environmental benefits, these optimized methods offer economic advantages through reduced solvent consumption and disposal costs, alongside improved throughput from faster analysis times [73] [74]. The transfer of classical liquid chromatographic methods to more sustainable ones aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for 2030 and represents an increasingly important consideration in analytical chemistry [75]. As regulatory bodies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) promote transitioning to green analytical chemistry, AMGS optimization provides a mathematically rigorous framework for achieving these sustainability targets [75].

Visualizing AMGS Optimization Workflow and Relationships

AMGS Optimization Pathway

Greenness Metric Ecosystem Relationships

The mathematical optimization of the Analytical Method Greenness Score represents a sophisticated approach to reducing the environmental impact of analytical separations while maintaining or even enhancing analytical performance. The case study on amino acid enantioseparations demonstrates that through strategic modifications—including the incorporation of cycle time, use of carbonated water-based eluents, implementation of narrow-diameter columns with superficially porous particles, and application of derivative-based flow rate optimization—significant reductions in AMGS can be achieved. The achievement of AMGS values as low as 1.2 for ultrafast separations, coupled with 12-fold reductions in solvent waste, provides a compelling template for sustainable method development across analytical chemistry. As the field continues to evolve toward more comprehensive assessment frameworks like White Analytical Chemistry, the principles of AMGS optimization will play an increasingly important role in balancing environmental responsibility with analytical excellence, particularly in high-throughput environments like pharmaceutical research and quality control.

The movement toward sustainable laboratory practices is fundamentally reshaping analytical chemistry. Driven by the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), this transition focuses on minimizing the environmental impact of analytical methods by reducing hazardous reagent consumption, energy requirements, and generated waste. The evaluation of method greenness has become increasingly sophisticated, moving beyond simple observation to standardized metric-based assessment [76]. Tools like the AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) metric provide a comprehensive, quantitative evaluation based on all 12 principles of GAC, offering an easily interpretable score that helps researchers objectively compare and improve their methodologies [13]. This framework is essential for objectively comparing the environmental performance of conventional techniques against emerging green alternatives in microextraction, solvent selection, and energy utilization.

This guide provides a comparative analysis of these green alternatives, focusing on performance data, standardized greenness assessment, and practical implementation protocols to enable researchers and drug development professionals to make informed, sustainable choices in their analytical workflows.

Greenness Assessment Metrics: A Standardized Framework

The push for standardized evaluation is critical, as the increasing popularity of greenness metrics has sometimes created confusion rather than clarity. A proposed Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) aims to remedy this situation by establishing general rules to improve transparency, research quality, and information exchange [76]. For analytical chemistry, several specific tools have been developed:

• AGREE Metric: This open-source software calculator uses the 12 SIGNIFICANCE principles of GAC, transforming them into a unified score from 0-1. The output includes a pictogram showing the final score and performance in each criterion, providing an easily interpretable and comprehensive assessment [13].
• Analytical Eco-Scale: This semi-quantitative tool penalizes methods for hazardous reagents, waste, and energy consumption, with a higher score indicating a greener method [77].
• GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index): A graphical tool that provides a color-coded assessment of the greenness of each step in an analytical procedure [77].

The consistent application of these tools is vital for making valid, comparable assessments of the greenness of analytical techniques, as will be demonstrated in the following comparisons.

Microextraction Techniques: A Comparative Analysis

Microextraction techniques represent a paradigm shift from conventional sample preparation by dramatically reducing solvent consumption and waste generation. The table below compares the key performance characteristics of major microextraction techniques.

Table 1: Performance Comparison of Common Microextraction Techniques

Technique	Principle	Solvent Volume	Enrichment Factor	Key Advantages	Primary Limitations
DLLME [78]	Dispersion of fine extraction solvent droplets in aqueous sample	Microliters (μL)	Very High	Simplicity, high enrichment, low cost	Use of dispersive solvent, solvent density dependency
SDME [78]	Extraction into a single suspended solvent drop	1-3 μL	Moderate	Extremely low solvent use, simple setup	Drop instability, limited extraction time, low precision
HS-SDME [78]	Extraction from sample headspace into a suspended drop	1-3 μL	Moderate	Clean extracts, suitable for volatiles	Limited to volatile compounds, drop stability issues
MEPS [78]	Miniaturized solid-phase extraction in syringe barrel	~10 μL (eluent)	High	Low solvent use, reusable device, online coupling	Potential for carryover, sorbent limited capacity

Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (DLLME): Protocol and Optimization

DLLME has gained prominence due to its simplicity, speed, and exceptional efficiency. The basic protocol involves the rapid injection of a mixture containing a water-immiscible extraction solvent and a water-miscible dispersive solvent into an aqueous sample. This creates a cloudy solution with fine droplets of the extraction solvent, providing a vast surface area for rapid analyte transfer. The mixture is then centrifuged, and the sedimented extraction phase is collected for analysis [78].

Optimizing a DLLME procedure is complex, with multiple interacting variables. The use of Experimental Design (DoE) is strongly recommended over the traditional one-factor-at-a-time approach. Effective designs for DLLME optimization include:

• Screening Designs: Plackett-Burman or fractional factorial designs to identify significant factors from a large set of variables (e.g., solvent types and volumes, salt addition, pH, extraction time) [79].
• Optimization Designs: Response Surface Methodology (RSM) using Central Composite Design (CCD) or Box-Behnken Design (BBD) to model interactions and find the optimal conditions for significant factors [79].

The following diagram illustrates the standard DLLME workflow and key optimization parameters identified through DoE.

Bio-Based Solvents: Performance and Applications

Bio-based solvents, derived from renewable biomass (e.g., corn, sugarcane, cellulose), offer a sustainable alternative to petroleum-derived solvents. They are characterized by low toxicity, biodegradability, and reduced VOC emissions [80]. The global market for these solvents is projected to grow from 1.3 million tons in 2024 to over 2.5 million tons by 2034, reflecting rising demand across industries [80].

Table 2: Performance and Applications of Prominent Bio-Based Solvents

Solvent	Feedstock Source	Key Performance Attributes	Application Examples in Analysis
D-Limonene [77]	Citrus peels	Low density, high extraction efficiency for hydrophobic compounds, low volatility	LD-DLLME for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) from water
Cyrene (Dihydrolevoglucosenone) [81]	Plant cellulose	High boiling point, good dispersing ability, non-toxic	Solvent for graphene inks in printed electronics; potential replacement for DMF and NMP
2-MeTHF (2-Methyltetrahydrofuran) [81]	Corn cobs, bagasse	Good hydrophobicity, suitable for liquid-liquid extraction	Replacement for hexane and dichloromethane in extraction of bioactive compounds
Bio-Alcohols (e.g., Bioethanol) [80]	Sugarcane, corn	Versatile, low toxicity, biodegradable	Widely used in coatings, adhesives, and as a base for other solvent formulations
Lactate Esters (e.g., Ethyl Lactate) [80]	Corn, sugarcane	Excellent dissolving power, low toxicity, high boiling point	Used in paint strippers, cleaning agents, and food industry extractions

Experimental Protocol: DLLME of NSAIDs using D-Limonene

The following protocol is adapted from a study that successfully applied the bio-based solvent D-limonene for the extraction of acidic drugs [77], demonstrating a direct green alternative to halogenated solvents.

1. Materials and Reagents:

• Extraction Solvent: D-Limonene (bio-based, low density).
• Dispersive Solvent: A water-miscible solvent like acetone or methanol.
• Standard Solutions: Analytical standards of target NSAIDs (e.g., ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac).
• Real Samples: Environmental water samples (river, tap, wastewater) filtered to remove particulates.
• Equipment: Glass conical test tubes (10-15 mL), microsyringes (100-250 μL), centrifuge, analytical instrument (e.g., HPLC-UV).

2. Optimization and Procedure: A one-factor-at-a-time (OFAT) approach followed by a Central Composite Face-centered (CCF) design was used to optimize the method [77]. The general steps are:

• Step 1: Prepare a 5-10 mL aqueous sample spiked with analytes in a conical tube. Adjust the pH to optimize the extraction efficiency of the acidic drugs (e.g., pH ~2-3).
• Step 2: Rapidly inject a predetermined volume (e.g., 100-500 μL) of a homogeneous mixture containing D-limonene (extraction solvent) and acetone (dispersive solvent) using a syringe.
• Step 3: Gently shake or vortex the mixture to form a fine, cloudy emulsion. The large surface area between the dispersed D-limonene droplets and the aqueous phase allows for rapid analyte transfer.
• Step 4: Centrifuge the mixture at 3500-5000 rpm for 5 minutes to break the emulsion and separate the phases. Due to its low density, D-limonene will form a supernatant layer at the top of the tube.
• Step 5: Carefully collect the upper D-limonene layer (typically 20-50 μL) using a microsyringe. The extract can be directly injected or diluted as needed for chromatographic analysis.

3. Performance Data: Under optimal conditions, the method using D-limonene demonstrated high %recovery for hydrophobic NSAIDs, outperforming both other bio-based monoterpenes and conventional halogenated solvents [77]. The method exhibited good linearity (r ≥ 0.9950), with low Limits of Detection (LOD) ranging from 0.11 to 0.81 ng/mL, confirming its high sensitivity [77].

Energy-Efficient Computing in Scientific Research

The energy consumption of computational workflows, including data processing and simulation in drug development, is a significant but often overlooked aspect of a laboratory's environmental footprint. Energy efficiency in High-Performance Computing (HPC) is a critical concern, with system developers and operators implementing various strategies [82].

Key strategies for improving energy efficiency in HPC and data processing include:

• Hardware Innovations: Adoption of energy-efficient processors, specialized accelerators (GPUs), and direct liquid cooling (DLC) systems that transfer waste heat from components more effectively than air cooling [82].
• Power Management and Scheduling: Advanced system software that employs dynamic voltage and frequency scaling (DVFS) and intelligent job scheduling policies to maximize resource utilization and reduce idle power consumption [82].
• Application-Level Optimization: The responsibility of scientists and application developers to write efficient code. Optimizing algorithms and parallelization can significantly reduce the energy consumption of individual computational jobs, leading to a higher scientific output per Watt [82].

The relationship between user application optimization and system-level energy management is synergistic, as visualized below.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

The transition to greener laboratories requires specific reagents and materials. The following table details key solutions for implementing the green alternatives discussed in this guide.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Techniques

Reagent/Material	Function/Description	Green Advantage
D-Limonene	A bio-based, low-density solvent used as the extraction phase in LD-DLLME [77].	Renewable (citrus waste), biodegradable, low toxicity compared to chlorinated solvents.
Cyrene	A dipolar aprotic solvent derived from cellulose, used for dispersing nanomaterials [81].	Non-toxic, bio-based alternative to reprotoxic solvents like DMF and NMP.
2-MeTHF	A renewable solvent for liquid-liquid extraction and reaction media [81].	Derived from biomass (e.g., corn cobs), not from petrochemicals; lower environmental impact.
Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES)	Mixtures forming a eutectic with a melting point lower than its components; used for extraction [81].	Tunable properties, can be made from low-cost, non-toxic, and biodegradable components.
Octanol	A viscous, water-immiscible solvent used in Single-Drop Microextraction (SDME) [78].	Enables extreme solvent reduction (single drop); higher viscosity improves drop stability.
MEPS Sorbent (C8, C18, etc.)	Miniaturized solid-phase packed in a syringe barrel for repeated micro-extractions [78].	Drastically reduces solvent consumption (~10 μL per extraction) and enables automated, online analysis.

To conclude, the following table provides a consolidated qualitative comparison of the greenness of conventional techniques versus their green alternatives across several criteria, providing a holistic view of their environmental benefits.

Table 4: Holistic Greenness Comparison of Conventional vs. Green Alternative Techniques

Technique Category	Solvent Consumption	Waste Generation	Energy Demand	Toxicity & Hazards	Overall Greenness Potential
Conventional LLE	High (mL to L)	High	Low-Moderate	High (often uses hazardous solvents)	Low
Microextraction (DLLME/SDME)	Very Low (μL)	Very Low	Low	Moderate (can be improved with bio-solvents)	High
Petroleum-Based Solvents	Varies	Varies	Varies	High (toxic, volatile, flammable)	Low
Bio-Based Solvents	Varies	Varies	Varies	Low-Moderate (biodegradable, less toxic)	High
Standard Data Processing	N/A	N/A	High (inefficient code on standard hardware)	N/A	Low
Energy-Optimized HPC	N/A	N/A	Lower (efficient code on optimized systems)	N/A	High

The integration of microextraction techniques, bio-based solvents, and energy-efficient computing practices represents a powerful and multi-faceted strategy for advancing the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry. Experimental data confirms that these alternatives are not merely theoretical but are practical, high-performing options available to researchers today. For instance, D-limonene in DLLME provides equal or superior recovery for certain analytes compared to halogenated solvents [77], while solvents like Cyrene enable new pathways in sustainable materials science [81].

The adoption of standardized metrics like AGREE [13] and a commitment to Good Evaluation Practice [76] are essential for moving beyond anecdotal evidence and making genuine, quantifiable progress in reducing the environmental footprint of scientific research. For researchers and drug development professionals, the implementation of these green alternatives is no longer just an environmental imperative but a marker of scientific rigor and innovation.

The pharmaceutical industry is increasingly mandated to adopt sustainable practices, propelling Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) to the forefront of method development. GAC principles aim to minimize the environmental impact of analytical techniques by reducing hazardous waste, energy consumption, and the use of toxic reagents [14]. Consequently, several metric-based tools have been developed to quantitatively evaluate the "greenness" of analytical methods. However, these tools often operate on different underlying criteria and scoring systems. When these assessment tools provide different conclusions, researchers and drug development professionals are faced with a significant challenge: determining the true environmental footprint of their process and making informed decisions. This guide objectively compares the performance of predominant greenness assessment tools, providing a structured approach to navigating conflicting outcomes, a critical competency for ensuring genuine sustainability in pharmaceutical analysis.

A multifaceted approach to greenness assessment is essential for a holistic understanding. The following tools represent some of the most current and widely used metrics in the field.

Analytical GREEnness Calculator (AGREE)

AGREE is a comprehensive software-based tool that evaluates an analytical method against all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry. It transforms these criteria into a unified score from 0 to 1, providing an easily interpretable pictogram that reflects the method's performance across each principle [13]. Its significance lies in its comprehensive nature and the transparency of its output, making it a popular choice for a full-scope assessment.

Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS)

The Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) calculator is accessible through the American Chemical Society (ACS) website. It requires inputting method-specific data such as flow rate, analysis run time, mobile phase composition, and the quantity of solvents used in sample preparation to generate a sustainability score [14]. It serves as a practical tool for a direct, data-driven evaluation.

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC)

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) is designed as a supplement and extension to GAC. It integrates three critical aspects of an analytical method into a single RGB (Red-Green-Blue) model [14]:

• Red (R): Represents Analytical efficiency, encompassing scope, accuracy, and precision.
• Green (G): Represents Ecological impact, considering waste and energy consumption.
• Blue (B): Represents Practical economic efficiency, including cost-effectiveness. The combination of these three color scores illustrates the "whiteness" or overall balance and practicality of the method, acknowledging that ecological impact is only one pillar of a sustainable method.

Green Solvent Selection Tool (GSST)

The Green Solvent Selection Tool (GSST) is a free online application that evaluates the sustainability of individual solvents. It generates a composite sustainability score (G value) on a scale from 1 to 10, where a higher score indicates a more environmentally friendly solvent [14]. This tool is critical for the foundational step of solvent selection in method development.

Analytical Eco-Scale

The Analytical Eco-Scale is a semi-quantitative tool that penalizes an analytical method based on the amount of hazardous chemicals, energy consumed, and waste generated. The final score is calculated by subtracting penalty points from a baseline of 100, with a higher score indicating a greener analysis [13].

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Tool Data

The following tables summarize the quantitative data and outputs of the key assessment tools, allowing for direct comparison of their approaches and results.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Basis	Output Scale	Key Parameters Evaluated
AGREE	12 Principles of GAC	0-1 (1=Greenest)	Reagent toxicity, waste amount, energy, operator safety, miniaturization [13]
AMGS	Solvent and energy consumption	Not Specified	Flow rate, run time, mobile phase composition, solvent type/quantity [14]
WAC	RGB Model (3 Pillars)	RGB Scores & Combined Whiteness	Red: Analytical Performance; Green: Ecology; Blue: Practicality [14]
GSST	Solvent Properties	1-10 (10=Greenest)	Health risk, safety, environmental impact [14]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty Points	100-0 (100=Greenest)	Reagent quantity/toxicity, energy, waste [13]

Table 2: Hypothetical Tool Outputs for a Model HPLC Method [14]

Assessment Tool	Method Using Ethanol/Water	Method Using Acetonitrile/Buffer	Conclusion from This Tool
AGREE Score	0.85	0.65	Ethanol/Water method is greener
AMGS Score	Higher	Lower	Ethanol/Water method is greener
WAC (G Score)	High	Moderate	Ethanol/Water method has lower ecological impact
GSST (G Value for Solvent)	Ethanol: 8	Acetonitrile: 4	Ethanol is a greener solvent
Analytical Eco-Scale	85	70	Ethanol/Water method is greener

Experimental Protocols for Tool Application

To ensure reproducibility and accurate comparison, the application of these tools must follow a standardized protocol. The following workflow, based on a published study, details the steps for a comparative greenness assessment [14].

Detailed Methodology from a Case Study

A referenced study developed an eco-friendly HPLC method for the simultaneous determination of four cardiovascular drugs—Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate—and evaluated its greenness using multiple tools [14].

• 1. Chromatographic Method: The separation was achieved using a mobile phase of 0.1% formic acid in water (pH 2.5) and ethanol on a conventional ODS column with UV detection at 220 nm [14].
• 2. Method Validation: The method was rigorously validated per ICH guidelines, demonstrating linearity (25–75 μg/mL for TEL; 150–450 μg/mL for NEB, VAL, AML), accuracy (mean recovery 98.86–99.89%), and precision (RSD < 2%) [14].
• 3. Greenness Assessment Protocol: The validated method was then subjected to a multi-tool assessment:
  • AGREE: The software was used to calculate a score based on the 12 GAC principles.
  • AMGS: Data on flow rate, run time, and solvent composition were input into the ACS calculator.
  • WAC: The method was scored on the RGB model for analytical, ecological, and practical performance.
  • GSST: The sustainability of ethanol was verified using this online tool, confirming its high 'G' value [14].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents & Solutions

The execution of eco-friendly analytical methods relies on specific materials and reagents. The following table details key items used in the featured experimental protocol [14].

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Materials for Green Chromatography

Item Name	Function/Description	Greenness Consideration
Ethanol (Absolute, 99.8%)	Environmentally friendly organic solvent used in the mobile phase [14].	Renewable resource; lower toxicity and environmental impact compared to traditional solvents like acetonitrile [14].
Formic Acid	Additive in the aqueous mobile phase to modulate pH and improve chromatography [14].	Used in low concentrations (0.1%) to minimize hazardous reagent consumption [14].
Octadecyl Silica (ODS) Column	Standard reverse-phase HPLC column for compound separation.	Method developed using a "regular" column, avoiding specialized, energy-intensive equipment [14].
Water (HPLC Grade)	Primary solvent in the mobile phase.	Nontoxic and safe, serving as the ideal green solvent base [14].
Design of Experiments (DoE) Software	Statistical tool for optimizing method parameters with minimal experimental runs [14].	Significantly reduces solvent and material waste during method development, aligning with green chemistry principles [14].

Discrepancies between tools are not failures but opportunities for a deeper, more nuanced understanding. The following decision framework provides a logical pathway for resolving these conflicts.

Actionable Steps for Resolution

• 1. Interrogate the Scopes and Weightings: The first step is a granular comparison of what each tool measures. A method might score highly on the GSST and AMGS because it uses a green solvent, but score poorly on the AGREE metric due to high energy consumption or poor operator safety. Conflicting conclusions often arise because one tool prioritizes solvent choice, while another penalizes waste generation or overlooks a key principle like sample preparation [13] [14]. Understanding these inherent biases is crucial.
• 2. Check System Boundaries and Data Inputs: Ensure that the assessment for all tools encompasses the entire analytical process, from sample preparation to final analysis. A common source of conflict is inconsistent system boundaries; one tool might only assess the chromatographic run, while another includes sample derivation and cleaning procedures. Verify that the data (e.g., solvent volumes, energy figures) input into each tool are identical and accurate [14].
• 3. Weight Findings According to Strategic Goals: The "correct" interpretation often depends on the context of the research or development project. Use the White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) framework to guide this. If the primary goal is regulatory submission, the Red (Analytical Efficiency) pillar is paramount, and a method with a slightly lower green score but superior accuracy and precision may be preferable. If the goal is cost reduction and waste minimization, the Blue (Practicality) and Green (Ecological) scores should carry more weight [14]. The final decision should be a weighted synthesis based on strategic priorities.
• 4. Synthesize a Unified, Defensible Conclusion: Do not simply average the scores. Instead, create a narrative that explains the conflicting results. For example: "While our method uses the green solvent ethanol (validated by GSST), its overall AGREE score is moderated by higher-than-ideal energy consumption. However, given its excellent analytical performance (WAC-Red) and its alignment with our corporate solvent replacement initiative, it represents the most balanced and sustainable choice for implementation." This demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of both the method and the assessment landscape.

In the evolving landscape of sustainable science, the emergence of multiple greenness assessment tools is a sign of maturity, not a problem. For researchers and drug development professionals, the goal is not to find a single "perfect" tool but to become adept at wielding a suite of them. By understanding each tool's architecture, applying them through standardized protocols, and interpreting their outputs via a structured decision framework, scientists can confidently navigate conflicting conclusions. This advanced competency transforms a potential source of confusion into a powerful mechanism for making truly informed, ethical, and sustainable choices in analytical chemistry and pharmaceutical development.

Validation Protocols and Comparative Analysis of Analytical Techniques

The selection of an appropriate chromatographic technique is a critical decision in analytical chemistry, influencing the success of drug development, environmental monitoring, and material science applications. As the field moves toward more sustainable practices, this decision now extends beyond traditional performance metrics to include environmental impact—a concept known as "greenness assessment." This comparative guide objectively evaluates three fundamental chromatographic techniques—High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), Gas Chromatography (GC), and Supercritical Fluid Chromatography (SFC)—across multiple technical, economic, and environmental dimensions.

Chromatography functions on the principle of separating mixture components between a stationary phase and a mobile phase. HPLC utilizes liquid solvents under high pressure (50–1400 bar) to separate compounds dissolved in a liquid matrix [83]. GC employs inert carrier gases to volatilize and separate components through a column under elevated temperatures [84] [85]. SFC, considered a hybrid technique, uses supercritical fluids—typically carbon dioxide above its critical point (72 atm and 31°C)—as the primary mobile phase, combining advantageous properties of both gases and liquids [84].

Framed within the broader context of green analytical chemistry research, this guide provides researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals with a structured framework for technique selection that balances analytical performance with environmental sustainability. The following sections present detailed comparative tables, experimental protocols, and visualization tools to support informed decision-making in analytical method development.

Evaluating chromatographic techniques requires a multidimensional approach that considers both traditional performance criteria and emerging sustainability metrics. The framework presented in this guide systematically compares HPLC, GC, and SFC across four primary domains: fundamental principles and applicability, performance characteristics, economic and operational factors, and environmental impact.

Fundamental differences in mobile phase selection directly govern each technique's application scope. HPLC employs liquid solvents (typically water-acetonitrile or water-methanol mixtures) suitable for soluble, thermally labile, and high molecular weight compounds, including pharmaceuticals, biomolecules, and polymers [83] [85]. GC requires analyte volatility or derivatization to volatility and applies primarily to thermally stable, low molecular weight compounds such as hydrocarbons, fragrances, and residual solvents [84] [85]. SFC utilizes supercritical carbon dioxide, often with polar modifiers like methanol, enabling analysis of both non-polar and polar compounds without derivatization, particularly effective for chiral separations, natural products, and compounds with intermediate properties [84].

Performance evaluation encompasses efficiency (theoretical plates), resolution, speed, and detection capabilities. Economic assessment includes instrument costs, maintenance, and consumable expenses. Environmental impact is quantified using established green metrics such as AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric), GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index), and Analytical Eco-Scale, which evaluate solvent usage, energy consumption, waste generation, and operator safety [39].

Technical Comparison

The core technical differences between HPLC, GC, and SFC stem from their distinct mobile phases, which directly influence their applicability, performance characteristics, and operational requirements.

Fundamental Operating Principles and Applications

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics and Application Scope

Parameter	HPLC	GC	SFC
Mobile Phase	Liquid solvents (water, acetonitrile, methanol)	Inert gas (helium, hydrogen, nitrogen)	Supercritical fluid (primarily COâ‚‚ with modifiers)
Separation Mechanism	Partitioning/adsorption between liquid mobile phase and solid stationary phase	Volatility and partitioning between gas mobile phase and liquid/solid stationary phase	Solvation in supercritical fluid and interaction with stationary phase
Molecular Weight Range	High molecular weight compounds (including proteins, polymers)	Low molecular weight, volatile compounds (<3000 Da)	Medium to high molecular weight compounds (n-alkanes C5-C30, pharmaceuticals)
Compound Applicability	Thermally labile, polar, ionic, and non-volatile compounds	Thermally stable and volatile compounds	Thermally labile, non-volatile, and both polar/non-polar compounds (with modifier)
Primary Industries/Applications	Pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, food safety, environmental monitoring	Petrochemical, environmental (air analysis), fragrance, forensics	Natural products, chiral separations, preparative chromatography, lipidomics

Performance and Efficiency Metrics

Table 2: Performance Characteristics and Operational Parameters

Parameter	HPLC	GC	SFC
Diffusion Coefficient	Low (10⁻¹⁰ m²/s)	High (10⁻¹ m²/s)	Intermediate (between gas and liquid)
Viscosity	High	Low	Low (similar to gases)
Analysis Speed	Moderate to Slow (10-60 minutes)	Fast (minutes to seconds for volatile compounds)	Fast (high diffusion enables faster separations)
Column Dimensions	Short, wide columns (30-250 mm length, 2.1-4.6 mm diameter)	Long, thin capillary columns (10-60 m length, 0.1-0.53 mm diameter)	Both packed and capillary columns available
Separation Efficiency	High resolving power for complex mixtures	High efficiency for volatile compounds, improved resolution with capillary columns	High resolving power (5-10× greater than HPLC in some applications)
Detection Compatibility	UV-Vis, PDA, MS, RID, ELSD	FID, TCD, ECD, MS	Compatible with both HPLC and GC detectors (FID, UV, MS)
Gradient Programming	Mobile phase composition only	Temperature programming only	Temperature, mobile phase, and pressure programming

The diffusion coefficient and viscosity differences highlighted in Table 2 significantly impact mass transfer and efficiency. Gases have the highest diffusion coefficients and lowest viscosities, enabling rapid equilibration and fast separations in GC [84]. Liquids in HPLC have the lowest diffusion coefficients and highest viscosities, resulting in slower mass transfer and requiring high pressure to maintain flow [83]. Supercritical fluids in SFC exhibit gaseous properties of high diffusion coefficients and low viscosity, enabling faster analyses than HPLC while maintaining liquid-like solvating power [84].

The separation mechanism in GC is primarily based on compound volatility, where similar molecular weights can result in comparable retention times and potential peak overlap [84]. In contrast, SFC separation depends on both stationary phase selection and mobile phase composition, with polarity and specific interactions playing significant roles. The resolving power of SFC is reportedly 5-10 times greater than conventional HPLC separations [84].

Figure 1: Technique Selection Logic Based on Mobile Phase Properties and Application Scope

Economic and Operational Factors

Beyond technical capabilities, economic considerations significantly influence technique selection in both research and industrial settings. The total cost of ownership encompasses initial instrument investment, ongoing maintenance, and consumable expenses.

Cost Analysis and Operational Requirements

Table 3: Economic and Operational Comparison

Factor	HPLC	GC	SFC
Instrument Cost	High (complex pressurized system)	Moderate	Moderate to High
Maintenance Cost	High (due to high pressures and solvent corrosion)	Low	Low
Solvent/Carrier Cost	High (expensive high-purity solvents required)	Low (inexpensive carrier gases)	Low (COâ‚‚ is inexpensive and readily available)
Solvent Consumption	High (mL-min flow rates)	None (gas is not consumed)	Low (mainly COâ‚‚ with small modifier amounts)
Solvent Disposal Cost	High (hazardous waste)	None	Low (easy recovery in preparative applications)
Column Cost	Moderate to High	Moderate (capillary columns)	Moderate
Energy Consumption	Moderate	High (oven and high temperatures)	Moderate
Operational Pressure	High (50-1400 bar)	Low	Moderate to High
Temperature Requirements	Ambient (typically)	High (above analyte boiling points)	Moderate (near ambient to supercritical conditions)

Instrument costs for HPLC systems are generally higher due to the need for pressure-resistant components and sophisticated pumping systems capable of handling high backpressures [84]. GC instruments are typically less complex and more cost-effective, though they require precise temperature control systems [85]. SFC systems fall in the moderate to high range, requiring specialized pumps and back-pressure regulators to maintain the supercritical state [84].

A significant differentiator is the ongoing operational cost. HPLC requires high-purity solvents that represent a substantial recurring expense, coupled with costly disposal of hazardous organic waste [84] [39]. In contrast, GC utilizes inexpensive carrier gases, and SFC predominantly uses carbon dioxide, which is inexpensive, readily available as a byproduct of other industrial processes, and easily removed through depressurization, particularly beneficial in preparative-scale applications where compound recovery is essential [84].

Environmental Impact Assessment

The paradigm shift toward sustainable analytical chemistry has made environmental impact assessment a critical factor in technique selection. Greenness evaluation metrics provide standardized approaches to quantify and compare the environmental footprint of analytical methods.

Green Metric Evaluation Frameworks

Several established metrics systems enable objective assessment of method greenness:

• AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric): Provides a comprehensive score (0-1) based on all 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, evaluating factors including energy consumption, waste generation, and operator safety [39].
• GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index): A pictogram-based tool that assesses environmental impact across multiple stages of the analytical process [39].
• Analytical Eco-Scale: A semi-quantitative tool that penalizes methods for hazardous reagent use, energy consumption, and waste generation [39].
• NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index): Uses a simple pictogram to indicate whether a method meets basic green chemistry criteria [39].

Greenness Comparison of HPLC, GC, and SFC

Table 4: Environmental Impact Assessment Using Green Metrics

Assessment Criteria	HPLC	GC	SFC
Solvent Toxicity	High (acetonitrile, methanol)	Low (carrier gas only)	Low to Moderate (mainly COâ‚‚ with methanol modifiers)
Waste Generation	High (hundreds of mL/day of solvent waste)	None (gas expands to atmosphere)	Low (modifier waste only)
Energy Consumption	Moderate (pumps, detectors)	High (oven requires significant energy)	Moderate (pumps, pressure control)
Renewable Resources	Low (petroleum-derived solvents)	Low (carrier gases)	High (COâ‚‚ can be captured from industrial waste)
Sample Preparation	Often extensive	Variable	Typically minimal
Hazard Potential	High (toxic solvent exposure)	Moderate (high temperature, gas cylinders)	Moderate (high pressure)
Overall Greenness Score	Low to Moderate	Moderate	High

SFC demonstrates superior environmental performance in multiple categories. The primary mobile phase component—carbon dioxide—is non-toxic, non-flammable, and can be sourced as a byproduct from other industrial processes, creating a circular economy model [84] [86]. SFC typically generates less waste than HPLC, with easier analyte recovery in preparative applications [84]. Recent studies implementing eco-friendly AQbD-driven HPLC methods have achieved improved AGREE scores (up to 0.75) by replacing acetonitrile with ethanol-water mobile phases, demonstrating that greenness optimization is possible within each technique [39].

The concept of "circular analytical chemistry" extends beyond simple waste reduction to encompass a comprehensive framework where all stakeholders (manufacturers, researchers, routine labs) collaborate to minimize environmental impact through shared practices and resource recovery [86]. Within this framework, SFC aligns more closely with circular principles than traditional HPLC methods.

Experimental Protocols and Method Development

Robust method development requires systematic approaches that simultaneously optimize analytical performance and sustainability. The integration of Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) principles with Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) provides a structured framework for achieving this dual objective.

AQbD-Driven Method Development Workflow

The AQbD framework incorporates systematic method development through defined stages:

• Define Analytical Target Profile (ATP): Establish method requirements including precision, accuracy, linearity, robustness, and sustainability targets [39].

• Identify Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) and Critical Method Parameters (CMPs): CQAs include resolution, retention time, and peak symmetry, while CMPs encompass flow rate, mobile phase composition, column temperature, and gradient profile [39].

• Risk Assessment: Utilize tools such as Ishikawa (fishbone) diagrams and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to prioritize variables significantly affecting method quality [39].

• Design of Experiments (DoE): Implement factorial, Box-Behnken, or central composite designs to efficiently explore factor interactions and identify optimal conditions with minimal experimental runs [39].

• Establish Method Operable Design Region (MODR): Define the multidimensional parameter space where the method delivers acceptable performance, allowing operational flexibility without revalidation [39].

Figure 2: AQbD-GAC Integrated Method Development Workflow

Technique-Specific Optimization Approaches

HPLC Method Optimization: For reversed-phase HPLC (the most common mode), key parameters include column chemistry (C8, C18, phenyl, etc.), mobile phase composition (water with acetonitrile or methanol), pH adjustment (formic acid, phosphoric acid, ammonium acetate), and gradient profile [83]. Green optimization strategies include replacing acetonitrile with ethanol, reducing column internal diameter, and using elevated temperatures to reduce solvent viscosity [39].

GC Method Optimization: Primary parameters include column selection (stationary phase chemistry and dimensions), oven temperature program (ramp rates, hold times), injector temperature, and carrier gas flow rate [85]. Green optimization focuses on reducing temperature hold times, implementing faster temperature ramps, and using hydrogen as carrier gas (when safe) due to its superior efficiency allowing lower temperatures [84].

SFC Method Optimization: Key parameters include column chemistry, system pressure, temperature, and modifier composition (type and percentage of organic solvent in CO₂) [84]. The unique advantage of SFC is pressure programming, where increasing pressure enhances solvating power—a parameter unavailable in HPLC or GC [84]. Green optimization emphasizes minimizing modifier percentage and selecting less hazardous modifiers (ethanol vs. methanol).

Research Reagent Solutions and Essential Materials

Table 5: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Chromatographic Method Development

Category	Specific Examples	Function/Purpose
HPLC Solvents	Acetonitrile, Methanol, Ethanol, Water (HPLC-grade)	Mobile phase components for compound elution
HPLC Buffers/Additives	Formic acid, Trifluoroacetic acid, Ammonium acetate, Ammonium formate	Modify mobile phase pH and ionic strength to control retention and selectivity
HPLC Columns	C18, C8, Phenyl, Cyano, Amino, HILIC	Stationary phases with different selectivity for various compound classes
GC Carrier Gases	Helium, Hydrogen, Nitrogen	Mobile phase transporting volatilized analytes through the system
GC Columns	DB-5, DB-35, DB-Wax, HP-1, HP-5	Stationary phases with different polarity for separation of volatile compounds
GC Liners	Single taper, double taper, baffled	Vaporization chamber for liquid samples in injection port
SFC Solvents	Carbon dioxide (SFC-grade), Methanol, Ethanol, Isopropanol	Primary mobile phase (COâ‚‚) and polar modifiers for polarity adjustment
SFC Columns	Silica, Cyano, Diol, Amino, 2-EP, OJ-H, AD-H	Stationary phases for normal-phase and chiral separations
Universal Detectors	UV/Vis, PDA, MS, FID (SFC/GC), ELSD	Compound detection and quantification after separation

Future Trends and Research Directions

Chromatographic technique development continues to evolve, with several emerging trends shaping future applications and sustainability profiles:

Sustainability-Driven Innovation: The transition from "weak sustainability" (where technological progress compensates for environmental damage) to "strong sustainability" (which acknowledges ecological limits and prioritizes nature conservation) is reshaping analytical chemistry [86]. This shift will accelerate adoption of SFC and stimulate development of greener HPLC solvents and GC energy reduction technologies.

Advanced Modeling and Optimization: Surrogate modeling and machine learning approaches are emerging as powerful tools for chromatographic method development, enabling more efficient experimentation and predictive optimization [87]. These approaches reduce method development time and solvent consumption while identifying optimal separation conditions that might be overlooked with traditional one-factor-at-a-time approaches.

Hybrid and Hyphenated Techniques: Coupling of chromatographic separation with advanced detection techniques (LC-MS, GC×GC, SFC-MS) provides enhanced analytical capabilities. The convergence of AQbD with Green Analytical Chemistry represents a significant trend, ensuring methods are both robust and environmentally responsible [39].

Circular Economy Integration: The concept of Circular Analytical Chemistry (CAC) is gaining traction, focusing on minimizing waste and keeping materials in use through coordinated stakeholder collaboration [86]. Future developments may include standardized solvent recovery systems, carbon dioxide capture and reuse for SFC, and manufacturer take-back programs for consumables.

This comprehensive evaluation demonstrates that HPLC, GC, and SFC each occupy distinct niches within the analytical technique landscape, with selective advantages and limitations across technical, economic, and environmental dimensions.

HPLC remains the most versatile technique for soluble, thermally labile, and high molecular weight compounds, particularly in pharmaceutical and biological applications. Its main disadvantages include high solvent consumption and waste generation, though green chemistry approaches are mitigating these impacts.

GC provides unparalleled efficiency and speed for volatile, thermally stable compounds, with lower operational costs and minimal waste. Its limitation to volatile analytes or those amenable to derivatization restricts its application scope.

SFC emerges as a compelling hybrid technique, combining advantages of both HPLC and GC while offering superior environmental performance through its primary use of carbon dioxide mobile phase. Its applications in chiral separations, natural products, and preparative chromatography continue to expand.

Technique selection should follow a systematic decision framework that begins with analyte characteristics (volatility, polarity, molecular weight, thermal stability), considers required performance (resolution, speed, sensitivity), and incorporates environmental impact assessment using standardized green metrics. For research and drug development professionals operating within sustainability frameworks, SFC deserves strong consideration where applicable, while green HPLC principles should be applied when liquid-phase separation is required. The continued integration of AQbD with Green Analytical Chemistry provides a pathway for developing robust, reproducible methods that minimize environmental impact without compromising analytical performance.

Systematic Comparison of 16 Chromatographic Methods for an Antispasmodic Drug

The development and quality control of pharmaceutical compounds, including antispasmodic drugs, rely heavily on robust and precise analytical methods. Chromatographic techniques are the cornerstone of this analytical process, enabling the separation, identification, and quantification of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), their impurities, and metabolites in complex matrices [88]. The choice of chromatographic method significantly impacts the accuracy, efficiency, and environmental footprint of pharmaceutical analysis.

This guide provides a systematic comparison of 16 chromatographic methods reported for the analysis of antispasmodic drugs, with a particular emphasis on Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles. GAC aims to minimize the environmental impact of analytical procedures by reducing the use of hazardous chemicals, energy, and waste generation [76] [89]. The assessment of method "greenness" is now an integral part of method development and validation, complementing traditional performance metrics such as sensitivity, precision, and accuracy. This comparison is framed within the broader thesis that integrating greenness assessment from the initial stages of method development is crucial for advancing sustainable pharmaceutical analysis. The objective is to offer researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals a clear, objective overview to aid in selecting the most appropriate, sustainable, and effective chromatographic method for their specific needs related to antispasmodic compounds.

The analysis of antispasmodic drugs spans a wide array of chromatographic techniques, from traditional methods to more advanced hyphenated systems. The table below summarizes the key characteristics of 16 methods, including their separation basis, typical applications, and a qualitative greenness profile based on common assessment criteria.

Table 1: Summary of Chromatographic Methods for Antispasmodic Drug Analysis

Method Name	Separation Principle	Common Antispasmodic Applications	Greenness Profile (Qualitative)
HPLC-UV/VIS	Polarity (Liquid-Liquid Partition)	Bulk drug, dosage forms, stability studies [90] [91]	Medium (Moderate solvent use)
UHPLC-UV/VIS	Polarity (Enhanced Efficiency)	High-throughput analysis, impurity profiling	Improved (Reduced solvent consumption vs. HPLC)
GC-FID	Volatility & Polarity	Volatile APIs, essential oil components [92]	High (Uses gases, high temperature)
GC-MS	Volatility & Mass	Identification of volatile compounds, metabolite profiling [88]	High (Uses gases, high temperature)
HPTLC-Densitometry	Polarity (Adsorption)	Binary/ternary mixtures, impurity screening [89]	Medium-High (Low solvent volume in chamber)
LC-MS (Single Quad)	Polarity & Mass	Drug metabolism (ADME), pharmacokinetics [88]	Medium (Solvent use, but high specificity)
LC-MS/MS (Triple Quad)	Polarity & Mass/Tandem MS	Ultra-trace quantification in biomatrices, toxicology [88]	Medium (Solvent use, but high specificity)
LC-HRMS (Orbitrap/TOF)	Polarity & High-Res Mass	Metabolite identification, degradant structure elucidation [88]	Medium (Solvent use, but high information depth)
SFC	Solubility in Supercritical COâ‚‚	Chiral separations, purification	Very High (COâ‚‚ as main mobile phase)
IEC	Ionic Charge	Separation of ionic species	Medium (Aqueous buffers, but may contain salts)
SEC	Molecular Size	Polymer analysis, protein therapeutics	Medium (Aqueous or organic solvents)
MPC	Multiple (Polarity, Size, etc.)	Complex sample purification	Varies
2D-LC	Two Orthogonal Mechanisms	Extremely complex mixtures (e.g., biologic digests) [88]	Lower (Increased solvent and time)
CE	Charge-to-Size Ratio	Ionic species, biomolecules	Very High (Aqueous buffers, minimal volume)
CEC	Polarity & Electrophoresis	High-efficiency separations	High (Low solvent consumption)
GPC	Molecular Size (Organic Solvents)	Analysis of polymers	Medium (Organic solvent use)

Detailed Experimental Protocols and Performance Data

To ensure the practical utility of this guide, this section details the experimental protocols and performance metrics for three key methods applied to antispasmodic drugs: a green HPLC-DAD method, an HPTLC-densitometry method, and a GC-MS method.

Green HPLC-DAD for Spasmolytic Mixture and Toxic Impurity

This method was developed for the simultaneous estimation of phloroglucinol (PGD) and trimethylphloroglucinol (TMP), along with the toxic impurity 3,5-dichloroaniline [89].

• Chromatographic Conditions:
  • Column: XTerra RP-C18 (250 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 µm)
  • Mobile Phase: Methanol: 10.0 mM phosphate buffer, pH 3.7 ± 0.1 (75:25, v/v)
  • Flow Rate: 1.0 mL/min
  • Detection: DAD at 220 nm
  • Injection Volume: 20 µL
• Sample Preparation: Standard stock solutions (100 µg/mL) of PGD and TMP were prepared in methanol. Working standards were prepared by appropriate dilution with the mobile phase. For pharmaceutical dosage forms, tablets were powdered, extracted with methanol, sonicated, and filtered.
• Validation Data:
  • Linearity: PGD and TMP showed correlation coefficients (r) > 0.999 over their respective ranges.
  • Accuracy: Recovery rates were between 98-102% for both drugs.
  • Precision: Both intra-day and inter-day precision expressed as %RSD were found to be less than 2%.
  • Sensitivity: LOD and LOQ were in the low ng/mL range on-column.

HPTLC-Densitometry for Spasmolytic Drugs

A green HPTLC method was also reported for the same spasmolytic mixture, offering an alternative with different solvent usage [89].

• Chromatographic Conditions:
  • Stationary Phase: HPTLC silica gel 60 Fâ‚‚â‚…â‚„ plates
  • Mobile Phase: Ethyl acetate-Butanol-Ammonia (8.0:2.0:0.2, by volume)
  • Development: Ascending development in a twin-trough chamber saturated with mobile phase vapor.
  • Detection: Densitometric scanning at 210 nm.
• Sample Preparation: Similar to the HPLC method, standard and sample solutions were prepared in methanol and spotted on the HPTLC plates.
• Validation Data:
  • Linearity: Calibration curves were linear with r > 0.998 for both drugs.
  • Specificity: Well-resolved bands for PGD, TMP, and 3,5-dichloroaniline were obtained.
  • Accuracy and Precision: Met ICH guidelines with recoveries of 98-102% and %RSD < 2%.

GC-MS for Essential Oil Constituents with Antispasmodic Activity

While not applied to a synthetic drug directly, GC-MS is a primary technique for analyzing essential oils, such as peppermint oil, which have documented clinical antispasmodic effects [92] [93].

• Chromatographic Conditions:
  • Column: Capillary column (e.g., 5% phenyl polysiloxane), 30m x 0.25mm i.d., 0.25µm film thickness.
  • Carrier Gas: Helium at a constant flow rate of 1.0 mL/min.
  • Oven Program: Typically starts at 60°C (hold 1-2 min), ramped to 280°C at 5-10°C/min.
  • Injection: Split or splitless mode at 250°C.
  • Ionization: Electron Impact (EI) at 70 eV.
• Sample Preparation: Essential oil is obtained by hydrodistillation of plant material and diluted 1:100 or 1:1000 in hexane or ethyl acetate before injection.
• Identification: Compounds are identified by comparing their mass spectra and retention indices with those in commercial libraries (e.g., NIST, Wiley).
• Performance: The technique provides high-resolution separation of volatile monoterpenes (e.g., menthol, carvone) and sesquiterpenes responsible for the antispasmodic activity.

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Data of Featured Methods

Method Parameter	HPLC-DAD [89]	HPTLC-Densitometry [89]	GC-MS [92] [88]
Analytes	PGD, TMP, 3,5-Dichloroaniline	PGD, TMP, 3,5-Dichloroaniline	Menthol, Carvone, other terpenes
Linearity Range (µg/mL)	1-50 (for both drugs)	0.1-2.0 µg/band	Varies by compound (wide dynamic range)
Correlation Coefficient (r)	> 0.999	> 0.998	> 0.995 (typical)
Limit of Detection (LOD)	Low ng/mL	Sub-nanogram per band	Low picogram to nanogram
Limit of Quantification (LOQ)	Low ng/mL	Nanogram per band	Nanogram
Accuracy (% Recovery)	98 - 102%	98 - 102%	85 - 115% (in complex matrices)
Precision (% RSD)	< 2%	< 2%	< 5% (typical)

Greenness Assessment of Analytical Techniques

The paradigm of method evaluation in analytical chemistry is shifting to include a formal assessment of environmental impact, known as "greenness" assessment [76]. Several tools are available to perform this evaluation systematically.

• Greenness Assessment Tools:

  • Analytical Eco-Scale: This semi-quantitative tool assigns penalty points to an analytical method for parameters that are not environmentally ideal (e.g., hazardous reagents, high energy consumption, large waste generation). A higher final score indicates a greener method. An ideal green method has a score of 100 [89].
  • Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI): GAPI is a pictogram that provides a visual profile of the environmental impact of a method across its entire lifecycle, from sample collection to final determination. It uses a color-coded system (green, yellow, red) to indicate the greenness of each aspect [89].
  • Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) Tool: A more recent software-based tool that uses a multi-criteria calculation to output a score between 0 and 1, providing a comprehensive and quantitative greenness metric [89].

• Application to Chromatographic Methods:

  • HPLC vs. UHPLC: While both use liquid mobile phases, UHPLC is generally greener due to its reduced solvent consumption, shorter run times, and lower energy usage per analysis [88].
  • HPLC vs. HPTLC: HPTLC often has a superior greenness profile because it consumes significantly less solvent per sample. The volume of mobile phase in an HPTLC chamber is used for multiple samples simultaneously, whereas HPLC continuously flows solvent during analysis [89].
  • GC vs. HPLC: GC methods, utilizing gaseous mobile phases, can be considered green in terms of solvent avoidance. However, their high energy consumption due to elevated oven temperatures must be factored into the assessment [94] [95].
  • SFC and CE: These are among the greenest techniques. SFC uses supercritical COâ‚‚ (non-toxic and recyclable) as the primary mobile phase, while CE operates with aqueous buffers at very low volumes [88].

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for selecting and evaluating a chromatographic method, integrating greenness assessment as a core decision criterion.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The execution of reliable chromatographic methods depends on the consistent quality and appropriate selection of research reagents and materials. The following table details key items used in the featured experiments.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Antispasmodic Drug Analysis

Item Name	Function/Application	Example from Methods
C18 Reverse-Phase Column	The workhorse stationary phase for HPLC; separates molecules based on hydrophobicity.	XTerra RP-C18, 250 mm x 4.6 mm, 5 µm [89]
HPTLC Silica Gel Plates	The stationary phase for planar chromatography; enables parallel analysis of multiple samples.	HPTLC silica gel 60 Fâ‚‚â‚…â‚„ [89]
Methanol & Acetonitrile (HPLC Grade)	Common organic modifiers in reversed-phase HPLC mobile phases; dissolve analytes and control retention.	Methanol used in mobile phase [89] [96]
Buffer Salts (e.g., Phosphate)	Added to aqueous mobile phase to control pH, which improves peak shape and reproducibility.	10 mM Phosphate buffer, pH 3.7 [89]
High Purity Gases (He, Nâ‚‚, Hâ‚‚)	Serves as the mobile phase (He, Nâ‚‚) or fuel for detectors (FID, Hâ‚‚) in Gas Chromatography.	Helium carrier gas for GC-MS [95] [88]
Ethyl Acetate	A common, relatively low-toxicity organic solvent used in extraction and HPTLC mobile phases.	Component of HPTLC mobile phase (Ethyl acetate:Butanol:Ammonia) [89]

This systematic comparison of 16 chromatographic methods for antispasmodic drug analysis highlights a clear trend: the field of pharmaceutical analysis is moving towards techniques that are not only highly precise and accurate but also environmentally sustainable. The data demonstrates that for any given analytical problem, multiple valid chromatographic solutions exist, each with its own performance and greenness profile.

Techniques like UHPLC, HPTLC, and SFC offer compelling advantages by significantly reducing solvent consumption, while advanced hyphenated techniques like LC-MS/MS provide unparalleled specificity that can streamline analysis and reduce false positives. The consistent application of greenness assessment tools like AGREE and GAPI is crucial for making informed, objective decisions that align with the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry.

For researchers and drug development professionals, the path forward involves a balanced consideration of analytical performance, practical constraints, and environmental impact. By adopting the greenest viable method for each application, the pharmaceutical industry can maintain its high standards of quality and safety while progressing towards a more sustainable future.

In the modern pharmaceutical and analytical laboratory, the validation of an analytical method has traditionally been anchored in performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, specificity, and linearity. However, a transformative shift is occurring, expanding this paradigm to include environmental sustainability as a core validation component. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles now complement established validation guidelines, pushing researchers to minimize environmental impact without compromising analytical quality [39] [14]. This evolution responds to growing recognition that the ecological footprint of analytical methods—through solvent consumption, energy use, and waste generation—represents a critical aspect of method quality and responsibility.

The concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) further advances this integration by demanding a balanced compromise between the traditional analytical performance (red), ecological sustainability (green), and practical/economic feasibility (blue) [97] [98] [99]. This holistic framework ensures that methods are not only environmentally friendly but also practically viable and analytically sound. As the field progresses, the question is no longer merely "Does this method work?" but rather "How does this method perform across analytical, ecological, and practical dimensions?" This guide provides a comprehensive comparison of the tools and methodologies enabling this multidimensional validation approach.

Established Greenness Assessment Tools: A Comparative Analysis

Multiple standardized tools have been developed to quantify and visualize the environmental performance of analytical methods. These tools vary in their approach, scoring systems, and specific areas of emphasis, allowing researchers to select the most appropriate assessment for their specific context.

Table 1: Comparison of Major Greenness and Whiteness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Approach	Scoring System	Key Criteria Assessed	Primary Output	Strengths	Limitations
AGREE [43]	Comprehensive, quantitative	0-1 scale (closer to 1 = greener)	All 12 GAC principles	Circular pictogram with colored segments	Most comprehensive; incorporates all GAC principles; user-assignable weights	Requires detailed method data; more complex calculation
Analytical Eco-Scale [98] [47]	Semi-quantitative penalty system	100-point base (≥75 = excellent greenness)	Reagents, waste, energy, toxicity	Numerical score	Simple calculation; easy interpretation	Less comprehensive than AGREE; penalty assignment can be subjective
GAPI [98] [99]	Qualitative, multi-stage	Traffic light system (green-yellow-red)	15 aspects across all analytical steps	Pentagram pictogram with colored segments	Evaluates entire method lifecycle; visual output	Qualitative rather than quantitative; less granular
NEMI [47]	Qualitative, binary	Pass/fail for 4 criteria	PBT chemicals, hazardous waste, corrosivity, waste amount	4-quadrant pictogram	Extreme simplicity; quick assessment	Overly simplistic; binary approach lacks nuance
BAGI [98] [47]	Quantitative practicality	Numerical score (higher = more practical)	Throughput, cost, safety, operational complexity	Numerical score with asteroid pictogram	Assesses practical/economic factors (blueness)	Does not address environmental impact alone
RGB Model [97] [14]	Holistic whiteness	0-1 scale for red, green, blue	Analytical, ecological, and practical criteria	Combined color output	Balanced assessment of all WAC aspects	Complex interpretation; requires multiple assessments
GEMAM [7]	Comprehensive, quantitative	0-10 scale	21 criteria from GAC and Green Sample Preparation	Hexagonal pictogram with colored segments	Very comprehensive; includes sample preparation	Newer tool with less established track record

Selecting and Implementing Assessment Tools

The selection of appropriate assessment tools depends on the method's context and the desired depth of evaluation. For routine screening, simpler tools like NEMI or Analytical Eco-Scale provide rapid assessment. For comprehensive method development or comparative studies, more sophisticated tools like AGREE or GAPI offer greater insights. For holistic validation addressing all WAC principles, the RGB model or tool combinations (AGREE + BAGI) are most appropriate [98] [99].

Recent research emphasizes the importance of tool complementarity. As Nowak (2025) notes in the seminal perspective introducing Good Evaluation Practice (GEP), "to ensure a more comprehensive picture, combine [metrics] with models with varied structures" [97]. This multi-tool approach mitigates the limitations of individual metrics and provides a more robust environmental validation. Furthermore, the GEP framework establishes five general rules for proper evaluation, emphasizing quantitative indicators based on empirical data, appropriate weighting of criteria, and transparent reporting [97].

Good Evaluation Practice Framework for Greenness Validation

The integration of greenness into validation protocols requires more than simply applying assessment tools—it demands a systematic framework ensuring consistent, meaningful implementation. The proposed Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) rules provide this essential structure [97]:

• Utilize Quantitative, Empirical Data: Preference should be given to measurable indicators such as actual energy consumption (measured with a wattmeter), precise waste volumes, carbon footprint calculations, and exact reagent quantities rather than estimations or categorical approximations [97].

• Employ Complementary Assessment Models: No single metric perfectly captures all environmental aspects. Combining tools with different structures and assumptions—such as AGREE's comprehensive approach with GAPI's lifecycle perspective—provides a more reliable, multi-faceted assessment [97] [43].

• Context-Dependent Weighting: Different analytical contexts may prioritize different environmental factors. GEP allows for appropriate weighting of criteria based on methodological requirements and environmental priorities [43].

• Transparent Reporting and Documentation: All assumptions, data sources, calculation parameters, and weighting decisions must be explicitly documented to ensure assessment reproducibility and credibility [97].

• Balanced Interpretation with Analytical Merit: Greenness assessment should complement, not replace, analytical validation. The primary method value may still reside in its analytical capabilities, with environmental assessment providing additional rather than sole justification [97].

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

AGREE Metric Implementation Protocol

The AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric) calculator provides one of the most comprehensive assessments, evaluating all 12 principles of GAC [43].

Experimental Workflow:

• Data Collection: Gather empirical data for each GAC principle, including:
  • Sample preparation steps and locations (in-line, on-line, at-line, off-line)
  • Exact sample size and number of samples required
  • Reagent types, quantities, and hazard classifications (GHS)
  • Waste types, volumes, and disposal methods
  • Energy consumption per analysis (preferably measured)
  • Operator safety measures and exposure risks

• Software Input: Access the freely available AGREE software (https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE) and input collected data for all 12 criteria.

• Weight Assignment: Assign appropriate weights (1-10) to each principle based on methodological context and environmental priorities.

• Interpretation: Analyze the output pictogram, where:

  • The central score (0-1) indicates overall greenness (closer to 1 = greener)
  • Colored segments show performance for each principle (green = good, yellow = moderate, red = poor)
  • Segment width reflects assigned weights for each principle

Case Study Example: In a recent HPLC method for antihypertensive drugs, AGREE assessment guided optimization toward a score of 0.75 by replacing acetonitrile with ethanol and reducing analysis time, demonstrating the tool's utility in method improvement [14].

Analytical Eco-Scale Assessment Protocol

The Analytical Eco-Scale provides a straightforward, points-based assessment suitable for rapid evaluation [98] [47].

Experimental Procedure:

• Establish Baseline: Begin with a perfect score of 100 points.

• Apply Penalties: Deduct points for each deviation from ideal green conditions:

  • Reagents: Penalize based on quantity and hazard level (1-20 points)
  • Occupational hazards: Deduct for risks to operator (1-20 points)
  • Energy consumption: Penalize high energy use (>0.1 kWh/sample = 1 point, >1.5 kWh/sample = 3 points)
  • Waste: Deduct points based on volume and hazardousness (1-6 points)

• Classification:

  • >75 points: Excellent green method
  • 50-75 points: Acceptably green method
  • <50 points: Insufficient greenness

Application Example: A spectrophotometric method for dexamethasone and chloramphenicol achieved an Eco-Scale score of 85, confirming its excellent green credentials by minimizing hazardous reagents and waste [98].

White Analytical Chemistry (RGB Model) Protocol

The RGB model evaluates the whiteness of a method by balancing analytical, ecological, and practical dimensions [97] [99].

Experimental Implementation:

• Red (Analytical) Assessment: Evaluate method performance against four criteria:
  • Scope and analytical capabilities
  • Accuracy and precision
  • Sensitivity (LOD, LOQ)
  • Method reliability and robustness

• Green (Ecological) Assessment: Utilize AGREE or similar comprehensive tool for environmental impact.

• Blue (Practical) Assessment: Apply BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index) to evaluate:

  • Throughput and analysis time
  • Cost-effectiveness and operational complexity
  • Safety and training requirements
  • Equipment needs and availability

• Whiteness Calculation: Combine RGB scores to determine overall whiteness, with ideal methods showing balanced, high scores across all three dimensions.

Validation Example: A recent RP-HPLC method for Cinnarizine demonstrated high whiteness through balanced RGB scores, outperforming three reported methods in both sustainability and practicality [99].

Successful implementation of greenness validation requires specific reagents, tools, and software resources.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Method Development

Category	Specific Items	Function in Green Validation	Green Alternatives
Solvents	Acetonitrile, Methanol	Traditional HPLC mobile phases	Ethanol, water, bio-based solvents [39] [14]
Columns	C18 columns (conventional)	Stationary phase for separation	Core-shell, sub-2µm columns (reduce solvent use) [39]
Software	AGREE, GEMAM, AMGS calculators	Greenness assessment	Freely available online tools [43] [7]
Assessment Tools	GAPI, NEMI, BAGI pictograms	Visual greenness communication	Complementary assessment models [97]
Green Solvent Selector	GSST (Green Solvent Selection Tool)	Solvent sustainability evaluation	Online tool: http://green-solvent-tool.herokuapp.com/ [14]
Design Tools	DoE software (Modde, JMP)	AQbD implementation for waste reduction	Statistical optimization packages [39] [14]

Case Studies: Greenness Validation in Pharmaceutical Analysis

Green UHPLC Method for Cleaning Validation

A recent development of a UHPLC method for tiopronin residue analysis in cleaning validation demonstrates comprehensive greenness integration. The method employed an AQbD approach to optimize chromatographic conditions, minimizing solvent consumption while maintaining robustness [100]. Greenness assessment using AGREE (0.67), BAGI (85.0), and RGB 12 (82.1) provided multidimensional validation, confirming the method as environmentally friendly and practically applicable for routine quality control [100].

Sustainable HPLC for Cardiovascular Drugs

A green HPLC method simultaneously determining four cardiovascular drugs (Nebivolol, Telmisartan, Valsartan, Amlodipine) showcased the successful integration of Quality by Design (QbD) and GAC principles [14]. The method replaced traditional solvents with ethanol and water, optimized separation through DoE, and validated greenness using AGREE, Analytical Eco-Scale, AMGS, and the RGB model. This approach demonstrated that green alternatives could maintain analytical performance while significantly reducing environmental impact [14].

Greenness Assessment of Paclitaxel HPLC Methods

A comparative study evaluating nine different HPLC methods for paclitaxel quantification applied seven assessment tools (NEMI, Complex NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, SPMS, ChlorTox, RGBfast, and BAGI) [47]. The results identified specific methods (1, 2, 3, and 5) as most sustainable, with method 3 achieving 72.5 BAGI and method 5 scoring 90 on the Analytical Eco-Scale. This systematic comparison provided a framework for selecting and optimizing analytical methods based on environmental impact, highlighting how greenness assessment can guide method selection in pharmaceutical analysis [47].

The integration of greenness assessment into analytical method validation represents both an ethical imperative and a practical enhancement to pharmaceutical and analytical sciences. The tools and frameworks discussed—from AGREE and GAPI to the comprehensive WAC approach—provide researchers with standardized methodologies to quantify and improve environmental performance while maintaining analytical excellence.

As the field evolves, several trends are emerging: the development of more sophisticated assessment tools like GEMAM [7], the integration of Artificial Intelligence for optimization, the expansion into complex matrices, and the harmonization of greenness protocols across regulatory frameworks. What remains clear is that comprehensive method validation must now extend beyond traditional performance metrics to include environmental impact, creating methods that are not only scientifically valid but also environmentally responsible. Through the continued development and application of these green validation protocols, the analytical community can significantly contribute to more sustainable scientific practices.

The principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) are reshaping modern laboratories, driving a shift toward analytical methods that minimize environmental impact while maintaining high standards of accuracy, precision, and practicality [101]. This paradigm, extended by the concepts of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) and White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), demands robust, multi-faceted assessment tools to evaluate the ecological and practical merits of analytical procedures [101] [102]. This case study provides a comparative analysis of two distinct applications: the determination of UV filters in environmental and cosmetic samples and the analysis of Cilnidipine (CLN), an antihypertensive drug, in pharmaceuticals. We objectively evaluate the greenness of various chromatographic methods using multiple metric tools, presenting experimental data and workflows to guide researchers in selecting and developing sustainable analytical methods.

Greenness Assessment Tools and Metrics

The move toward sustainable analytics is supported by several specialized metric tools that quantify environmental impact, practicality, and analytical efficiency. Key tools used in the studies under review include:

• AGREE (Analytical Greenness Metric): This tool evaluates the entire analytical procedure against the 12 principles of GAC. It generates a circular pictogram with a score from 0 to 1 (where 1 is ideal), providing a visual summary of the method's environmental performance [102] [103].
• AGREEprep (Analytical Greenness Metric for Sample Preparation): Focusing specifically on the sample preparation step, AGREEprep assesses 10 criteria aligned with GSP principles. Its output is also a pictogram with a 0-1 score, highlighting the greenness of sample preparation [101] [102].
• BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index): This tool evaluates the practical and economic aspects of a method, such as its cost, time-efficiency, and operational simplicity [101] [103].
• RGB 12 Algorithm: Based on the White Analytical Chemistry concept, this tool simultaneously scores a method's analytical, ecological, and practical performance. The ideal "white" method balances all three pillars [101] [103].
• Other Tools: The Analytical Eco-Scale and GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index) are also used, providing penalty-based or pictogram-based assessments [103].

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationship between the main assessment methodologies and their underlying principles.

Case Study 1: Analysis of UV Filters in Water and Cosmetics

Background and Experimental Protocols

UV filters, commonly used in sunscreens and other personal care products, are emerging environmental contaminants due to their release into aquatic systems. Their lipophilic nature leads to bioaccumulation in fauna and flora, necessitating sensitive and selective monitoring methods [101] [104]. Sample preparation is a critical step, often involving techniques ranging from traditional solid-phase extraction (SPE) to modern microextraction methods like Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) and Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (DLLME) [101]. Analysis is typically performed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) [101] [102].

A 2024 study comprehensively assessed ten sample preparation methods for determining UV filters in water samples prior to GC-MS analysis [101]. The workflow involved preparing water samples spiked with UV filters using different techniques, followed by GC-MS analysis. Each method was then evaluated using the AGREEprep, BAGI, and RGB 12 tools. In a separate 2023 study, ten chromatographic methods for determining UV filters in cosmetic samples were assessed using the AGREE and AGREEprep tools [102]. These methods included a European standard (EN 17156:2018) based on dissolution in solvent, as well as techniques like Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE) and microextractions such as Microextraction by Packed Sorbent (MEPS) and Dynamic HF-LPME [102].

Results and Comparative Analysis

The assessment demonstrated that microextraction techniques consistently outperformed conventional methods in greenness and practicality [101] [102].

Table 1: Greenness Scores of Selected Methods for UV Filter Analysis

Sample Matrix	Analytical Method	Sample Preparation Technique	AGREEprep Score	AGREE Score	Key Findings
Water [101]	GC-MS	DLLME & Variants	0.64 - 0.76 (Estimated from study)	Not Reported	High greenness, effectiveness, and practicality
Water [101]	GC-MS	SPME	~0.74 (Estimated from study)	Not Reported	High greenness, effectiveness, and practicality
Cosmetics [102]	LC-UV	European Standard (Method 1: Solvent Dissolution)	0.29	0.41	Low scores due to high solvent consumption
Cosmetics [102]	GC-MS	Method 10: Dynamic HF-LPME	0.64	0.61	Superior greenness due to miniaturization

The following workflow generalizes the steps involved in the greenness assessment of methods for analyzing UV filters.

Case Study 2: Analysis of Cilnidipine in Pharmaceuticals

Background and Experimental Protocols

Cilnidipine (CLN) is a newer generation calcium channel blocker used to treat hypertension. Quality control and pharmacokinetic studies of CLN require reliable analytical methods, primarily based on UV spectrophotometry and High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) [105] [103]. A significant challenge in its analysis, especially in combination with other drugs like Chlorthalidone (CLD), is the overlapping of UV spectra, which necessitates the use of advanced spectrophotometric techniques for accurate determination [106].

A 2024 study conducted a comparative greenness assessment of twelve published chromatographic methods for analyzing CLN and its combinations [103]. The assessment employed six different tools: GAPI, AGREE, Analytical Eco-Scale, ChlorTox Scale, BAGI, and RGB 12. In a parallel 2022 study, researchers developed and validated four eco-friendly UV spectrophotometric methods (Ratio Difference, First- and Second-order Ratio Derivative, and Area Under Curve) for the simultaneous determination of CLN and CLD in bulk and tablet dosage forms [106]. A key innovation was replacing toxic organic solvents with propylene carbonate, a biodegradable and safe solvent with a perfect safety score (10/10) on the GSK guide [106].

Results and Comparative Analysis

The multi-tool assessment of CLN methods revealed that the choice of solvent and sample preparation approach critically impacts greenness.

Table 2: Greenness Assessment Results for Cilnidipine (CLN) Analytical Methods

Analytical Technique	Key Method Details	AGREE Score	Other Tool Scores	Inferred Greenness Conclusion
UV Spectrophotometry [106]	Use of Propylene Carbonate solvent	Not Reported	High Analytical Eco-Scale Score	A significant step towards greenness
RP-HPLC [103]	Mobile Phase: Acetonitrile/Methanol	0.35 - 0.49 (from study data)	Lower scores on ChlorTox, BAGI, RGB 12	Less green due to hazardous solvents
RP-HPLC [103]	Mobile Phase: Ethanol/Water	0.58 - 0.68 (from study data)	Higher scores on other tools	Greener alternative for chromatography

The results indicated that methods using ethanol-water mobile phases were greener than those using acetonitrile or methanol [103]. The UV methods employing propylene carbonate were also highlighted as a move towards sustainable analysis [106]. The multi-tool approach proved essential, as it provided a balanced view from ecological, practical, and analytical perspectives, preventing a one-sided assessment [103].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Tools for Green Analysis

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent / Tool	Function / Description	Relevance to Greenness
Propylene Carbonate [106]	A cyclic carbonate ester used as an eco-friendly solvent.	Non-volatile, biodegradable, and safe for analysts and the environment (GSK score: 10/10).
Ethanol [103]	A common organic solvent, often used in mobile phases.	Considered a safer and greener alternative to acetonitrile and methanol.
AGREE & AGREEprep Software [101] [102]	Free, open-source software for greenness assessment.	Quantifies environmental impact, helping researchers select and improve methods.
BAGI Tool [101] [103]	A metric tool for evaluating practical and economic aspects.	Ensures that green methods are also practical, cost-effective, and easy to implement.
Microextraction Devices (e.g., SPME, DLLME) [101] [102]	Miniaturized equipment for sample preparation.	Drastically reduces solvent consumption and waste generation, aligning with GSP principles.

This case study demonstrates that a multi-tool assessment strategy is indispensable for objectively evaluating the sustainability of analytical methods. For both UV filters and Cilnidipine analysis, the evidence consistently shows that microextraction techniques and the replacement of hazardous solvents with safer alternatives like propylene carbonate or ethanol are the most effective pathways to greener analytical protocols. The AGREE and AGREEprep tools effectively highlight the environmental advantages of these methods, while BAGI and the RGB 12 algorithm ensure that practicality and analytical efficacy are not compromised. This holistic approach provides researchers and pharmaceutical professionals with a clear, data-driven framework for making informed decisions that align with the principles of Green and White Analytical Chemistry, ultimately fostering more sustainable laboratory practices.

The modern analytical laboratory operates under increasing pressure to not only deliver precise and accurate results but also to minimize its environmental impact. The concept of "greenness" in this context refers to the implementation of procedures that reduce hazardous waste, lower energy consumption, and promote the use of safer chemicals. Green analytical chemistry focuses on making analytical procedures more environmentally benign and safer to humans [13]. As regulatory frameworks tighten and sustainability becomes a core component of corporate responsibility, laboratories require robust, standardized methods to evaluate and compare the environmental performance of their analytical techniques.

Establishing internal greenness standards provides laboratories with a consistent framework to measure progress, make informed decisions about method selection, and demonstrate commitment to sustainable practices. This comparison guide objectively evaluates current greenness assessment tools, providing experimental methodologies and data to help researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals implement effective benchmarking within their organizations. The approach aligns with broader sustainability assessment paradigms, which aim to guide decision-making toward more sustainable outcomes through systematic evaluation [107].

Current Greenness Assessment Methodologies

Several metric-based approaches have been developed to quantify the environmental performance of analytical methods. These methodologies transform multiple environmental impact criteria into standardized scores, allowing for objective comparison between different analytical procedures.

The AGREE Metric System

The AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) calculator represents a comprehensive, flexible, and straightforward assessment approach that provides an easily interpretable and informative result [13]. This tool incorporates all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry (SIGNIFICANCE) as assessment criteria, transformed into a unified 0-1 scale. The software generates a pictogram that indicates both the overall score and performance across each criterion, with user-defined weights accommodating different laboratory priorities.

Other Assessment Tools

While AGREE offers a comprehensive approach, other assessment frameworks include:

• Analytical Eco-Scale: A semi-quantitative tool that penalizes methods based on hazardous reagents, waste generation, and energy consumption
• Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI): A graphical approach that evaluates methods across multiple stages of the analytical process
• NEMI Labeling: Uses a simple pictogram to indicate whether a method meets basic green chemistry criteria

These assessment methodologies function as specialized sustainability indicators tailored to the analytical chemistry context, similar to how Sustainability Indicators (SIs) are used more broadly to measure progress toward sustainable development goals [108].

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Metrics

The following table summarizes the key characteristics of major greenness assessment tools used in analytical chemistry:

Table 1: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Techniques

Metric Tool	Assessment Basis	Scoring System	Visual Output	Key Strengths	Reported Limitations
AGREE	12 principles of GAC	0-1 scale (continuous)	Circular pictogram with sections	Comprehensive, flexible weighting, open-source software	Requires subjective weighting decisions
Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty points system	100-point scale (higher=better)	Single numerical score	Simple calculation, intuitive interpretation	Limited scope of assessment criteria
GAPI	Multiple methodological steps	Qualitative assessment	Pictogram with color coding	Covers entire method lifecycle	Less granular differentiation between methods
NEMI	Four basic criteria	Binary (pass/fail)	Simple pictogram	Extremely simple application	Lacks granularity for method optimization

Quantitative data gathered using these assessment tools reveals significant variations in the greenness performance of common analytical techniques. For instance, studies applying the AGREE metric have demonstrated that techniques like capillary electrophoresis often achieve scores above 0.75, while traditional high-performance liquid chromatography with hazardous mobile phases typically scores below 0.5, primarily due to high solvent consumption and waste generation [13]. The environmental impact difference becomes more pronounced when comparing miniaturized systems to conventional bench-scale apparatus, with microfluidic approaches showing 40-60% reduction in solvent waste and 30-50% lower energy consumption in controlled experiments.

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

Standardized Methodology for AGREE Evaluation

Objective: To quantitatively assess and compare the greenness of analytical methods using the AGREE metric system.

Materials and Equipment:

• Computer with AGREE software installed (available at: https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE)
• Complete documentation of the analytical method to be assessed
• Safety Data Sheets for all reagents
• Instrument specifications including energy consumption data

Procedure:

• Compile Method Inventory: Document all chemicals, consumables, and equipment used throughout the analytical procedure, including sample preparation, separation, detection, and data analysis stages.
• Quantity Inputs and Outputs: Measure or calculate exact amounts of reagents, solvents, and energy consumed per analysis. Calculate waste generation including hazardous categories.
• Input Data into AGREE Software: Enter the collected data into the AGREE calculator, specifying values for each of the 12 principles:
  • Principle 1: Direct toxicity measurements of reagents
  • Principle 2: Waste quantity and treatment requirements
  • Principle 3: Energy consumption per analysis
  • Principle 4: Safety conditions for operator
  • Principle 5: Scale of operation and miniaturization potential
  • Principle 6: Integration and automation of analytical steps
  • Principle 7: Derivatization requirements and associated waste
  • Principle 8: Analytical throughput and batch capabilities
  • Principle 9: Direct analysis capabilities without sample preparation
  • Principle 10: Selectivity and specificity of method
  • Principle 11: Renewable resource utilization
  • Principle 12: Waste biodegradability and treatment requirements
• Assign Weighting Factors: Based on laboratory priorities, assign relative weights (1-10) to each principle according to organizational sustainability goals.
• Generate Assessment Output: Use the software to calculate the overall score and create the greenness pictogram.
• Comparative Analysis: Repeat the process for alternative methods and compare scores across different methodological approaches.

Validation: Perform triplicate assessments with different operators to ensure consistency in data interpretation and weighting decisions. Establish a standard operating procedure for greenness assessment to maintain consistency across evaluations.

Experimental Design for Method Comparison

Objective: To empirically compare the environmental performance of two alternative analytical methods for the same application.

Experimental Setup:

• Select a common analytical problem (e.g., determination of active pharmaceutical ingredient)
• Identify two or more established methods for this application (e.g., HPLC-UV vs. UPLC-MS)
• Run each method in triplicate using standardized samples
• Collect all waste streams separately for quantification
• Monitor energy consumption using calibrated power meters
• Record analysis time and throughput

Data Collection:

• Precisely measure all solvent and reagent consumption
• Quantify waste by volume and hazardous classification
• Document energy consumption for both operational and standby modes
• Record analysis time from sample preparation to result generation
• Note any special safety requirements or personal protective equipment

Analysis:

• Calculate resource consumption and waste generation per sample
• Input data into multiple assessment tools (AGREE, Eco-Scale, GAPI)
• Compare scores across different assessment methodologies
• Perform statistical analysis on triplicate measurements
• Identify the primary contributors to environmental impact for each method

Workflow Visualization for Greenness Assessment

The following diagram illustrates the comprehensive workflow for establishing internal greenness standards in analytical laboratories:

Graph 1: Greenness Standard Implementation Workflow

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions

Implementation of greenness assessment requires specific materials and tools to collect accurate data and perform consistent evaluations. The following table details essential items for establishing internal greenness standards:

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Greenness Assessment

Item	Function in Greenness Assessment	Application Example	Sustainability Considerations
AGREE Software	Calculates comprehensive greenness score based on 12 GAC principles	Quantitative comparison of HPLC vs. GC methods	Open-source, freely available tool
Digital Power Meters	Measure energy consumption of analytical instruments	Tracking standby vs. operational power usage	Reusable, reduces estimation errors
Waste Segregation Containers	Separate and quantify different waste streams	Measuring organic solvent waste volumes	Enable proper disposal and recycling
Solvent Recovery Systems	Reduces hazardous waste generation	Recycling and reusing extraction solvents	Lowers procurement and disposal impacts
Miniaturized Apparatus	Reduces reagent consumption through scale reduction	Micro-volume spectroscopy cells	50-90% reduction in solvent use
Alternative Solvent Guides	Identifies greener replacements for hazardous solvents	Replacing acetonitrile with ethanol	Reduces toxicity and disposal costs
Analytical Method Databases	Provides benchmark data for method comparison	Identifying established green methods	Prevents redundant method development

These tools enable laboratories to gather the precise consumption and waste data required for meaningful greenness assessments. The transition toward greener analytical practices often begins with proper measurement of current performance, similar to how sustainability assessment more broadly serves to "identify, predict and evaluate potential environment, social and economic impacts" [107].

The establishment of internal greenness standards through systematic benchmarking provides analytical laboratories with a powerful approach to reduce environmental impacts while maintaining analytical quality. The AGREE metric system, complemented by other assessment tools, offers a comprehensive framework for comparing analytical techniques and guiding method selection toward more sustainable options. As the field evolves, standardized assessment protocols will enable more consistent comparisons across laboratories and industrial sectors, driving the adoption of greener analytical practices industry-wide. Through the implementation of these benchmarking approaches, laboratories can make meaningful contributions to broader sustainability goals while potentially realizing significant cost savings through reduced resource consumption and waste disposal.

Conclusion

The systematic greenness assessment of analytical techniques is no longer optional but a fundamental component of sustainable scientific practice, particularly in drug development. This synthesis of foundational principles, methodological tools, optimization strategies, and comparative validation provides a clear roadmap for researchers. The key takeaway is that no single metric is sufficient; a multi-tool approach is essential for a holistic understanding. Future directions point toward the increased integration of White Analytical Chemistry to balance environmental, practical, and performance criteria, the adoption of AI for method optimization, and the implementation of lifecycle assessments to account for the full environmental footprint. Embracing these practices will empower biomedical and clinical research labs to significantly reduce their ecological impact while maintaining high analytical standards, ultimately contributing to a more sustainable future for the pharmaceutical industry and beyond.

References

• 1. Recent application of green analytical chemistry: eco-friendly approaches for pharmaceutical analysis | Future Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences | Full Text [https://fjps.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43094-024-00658-6]
• 2. Green chemistry and its implementation in pharmaceutical analysis [https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/revac-2023-0069/html?lang=en]
• 3. Evolution of green chemistry and its multidimensional impacts: A review - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6323129/]
• 4. Green chemical analysis: main principles and current efforts towards greener analytical methodologies - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38047714/]
• 5. Green analytical chemistry-based spectrophotometric techniques for ternary component analysis of pain relievers | Future Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences | Full Text [https://fjps.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43094-024-00648-8]
• 6. - American 12 Society Principles of Green Chemistry Chemical [https://www.acs.org/green-chemistry-sustainability/principles/12-principles-of-green-chemistry.html]
• 7. Greenness evaluation metric for analytical methods and software - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12318332/]
• 8. Green Chemistry Metrics with Special Reference to Green Analytical Chemistry - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6272361/]
• 9. Green analytical chemistry metrics: A review - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34801903/]
• 10. The relevance of sustainable laboratory practices - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11078267/]
• 11. Sustainable Energy Solutions for Laboratories [https://mygreenlab.org/resources/energy/]
• 12. Sustainable laboratories - practices to reduce the environmental effects of research [https://www.rsc.org/policy-evidence-campaigns/environmental-sustainability/sustainability-reports-surveys-and-campaigns/sustainable-laboratories/]
• 13. AGREE- Analytical Metric Approach and Software GREEnness [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32538619/]
• 14. Evaluation of analytical greenness metric for an eco-friendly method developed through the integration of green chemistry and quality-by-design for the simultaneous determination of Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11365310/]
• 15. Greenness and whiteness assessment of a sustainable voltammetric method for difluprednate estimation in the presence of its alkaline degradation product | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-61712-0]
• 16. analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the Green of... greenness [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11697060/]
• 17. Application of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale and GAPI tools for greenness assessment of three developed chromatographic methods for quantification of sulfadiazine and trimethoprim in bovine meat and chicken muscles: Comparison to greenness profile of reported HPLC methods - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0026265X19333454]
• 18. A new tool for the evaluation of the analytical procedure: Green Analytical Procedure Index - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0039914018300195]
• 19. Greenness assessment of analytical methods for determination of... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39161240/]
• 20. Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) Tool and Software for the Assessment of Method Greenness: Case Studies and Applications | MDPI [https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4532/5/3/30]
• 21. Integrating green analytical chemistry and analytical quality by design: an innovative approach for RP-UPLC method development of ensifentrine in bulk and inhalation formulations - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11909822/]
• 22. Evaluating the environmental impacts of analytical chemistry methods: From a critical review towards a proposal using a life cycle approach - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993622000085]
• 23. Green and white analytical chemistry: Advances, comparisons, future perspectives, and a proposal for green financing model for analytical chemistry - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022354925004599]
• 24. : Balancing White , Sustainability... Analytical Chemistry Performance [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/white-analytical-chemistry-balancing-performance-sustainability-and-practicality-in-modern-methods]
• 25. of greenness and Comparison of selected... whiteness [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc05097e]
• 26. of Assessment , blueness, and whiteness profiles of... greenness [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11743032/]
• 27. Life cycle assessment of sample preparation in analytical chemistry: a case study on SBSE and SPE techniques - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772582022000067]
• 28. Development of an RP-HPLC Method for the Determination... | AVESÄ°S [https://avesis.yildiz.edu.tr/yayin/687e821e-5321-4012-9831-f81ee5df888b/development-of-an-rp-hplc-method-for-the-determination-of-lidocaine-hydrochloride-in-injectable-formulation-combining-white-analytical-chemistry-and-experimental-design-with-an-eco-friendly-and-cost-effective-method]
• 29. Frontiers | Integrating life into cycle infrastructure... assessment green [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-cities/articles/10.3389/frsc.2025.1601091/full]
• 30. The Green Component: Assessing the Environmental Impact of Analytical Methods | LCGC International [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/the-green-component-assessing-the-environmental-impact-of-analytical-methods]
• 31. vs. Sustainability - Eco ? A Guide to Friendly Lingo Green [https://ecocart.io/sustainability-vs-eco-friendly/]
• 32. - Eco vs Friendly : What's the Difference? Sustainable [https://theroundup.org/eco-friendly-vs-sustainable/]
• 33. VS. Sustainability (What Is The...) - Thinking Sustainably Eco Friendly [https://www.thinkingsustainably.com/sustainability-vs-eco-friendly-what-is-the-difference/]
• 34. - Eco vs. Friendly : Key Differences Explained – 4ocean Sustainable [https://www.4ocean.com/blogs/sustainable-gifts/what-is-the-difference-between-eco-friendly-and-sustainable]
• 35. Difference between Green , Sustainable , Eco - friendly , etc. [https://haikudesigns.com/blogs/living-mindfully-blog/difference-between-green-sustainable-eco-friendly-etc]
• 36. AGREEprep – Analytical greenness metric for sample preparation - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016599362200036X]
• 37. Green metrics and green analytical applications... | CoLab [https://colab.ws/articles/10.1016%2Fj.greeac.2024.100159]
• 38. Tools to Evaluate the Eco -efficiency of Analytical Methods in the... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37877508/]
• 39. -Friendly AQbD-Driven HPLC: A Sustainable Approach to Method... Eco [https://jyoungpharm.org/10.5530/jyp.20250087]
• 40. Red analytical index (RAPI) and software: the missing... performance [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc05298f]
• 41. Agreeprep – Analytical Greenness Metric for Sample Preparation by Wojciech Wojnowski, Marek Tobiszewski, Francisco Pena-Pereira, Elefteria Psillakis :: SSRN [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3985477]
• 42. Overview of sixteen green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluation of the greenness of analytical methods - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993623002984]
• 43. —Analytical GREEnness Metric Approach and Software - PMC AGREE [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7588019/]
• 44. The 12 principles of green analytical chemistry and the SIGNIFICANCE mnemonic of green analytical practices - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993613001234]
• 45. Experimental and chemometric strategies for the development of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) spectroscopic methods for the determination of organic pollutants in natural waters - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352554116300110]
• 46. of official sample preparation standard methods Greenness [https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ci-2024-0117/html]
• 47. Sustainability in pharmaceutical analysis: greenness assessment of HPLC methods for paclitaxel | Discover Chemistry [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44371-025-00166-3]
• 48. (PDF) AGREEprep e Analytical greenness metric for sample preparation [https://www.academia.edu/84760829/AGREEprep_e_Analytical_greenness_metric_for_sample_preparation]
• 49. (PDF) A Tutorial on AGREEprep an Analytical Metric for... Greenness [https://www.academia.edu/84760830/A_Tutorial_on_AGREEprep_an_Analytical_Greenness_Metric_for_Sample_Preparation]
• 50. (Open Access) A Tutorial on AGREEprep an Analytical ... Greenness [https://scispace.com/papers/a-tutorial-on-agreeprep-an-analytical-greenness-metric-for-1tvqakw5]
• 51. Analytical green star area (AGSA) as a new assessment tool for the electrochemical determination of cyclobenzaprine hydrochloride in wastewater sample ... - RSC Advances (RSC Publishing) DOI:10.1039/D5RA04880J [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/ra/d5ra04880j]
• 52. Emerging Tools for Holistic Evaluation of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/emerging-tools-for-holistic-evaluation-of-analytical-methods]
• 53. Dual-platform integration of HPTLC and firefly algorithm-optimized... [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-025-01598-9]
• 54. Chlorotoxin-directed CAR T cell therapy for recurrent glioblastoma: Interim clinical experience demonstrating feasibility and safety - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666379125003751]
• 55. Greenness Assessment of HPLC Analytical Methods with Common Detectors for Assay of Paracetamol and Related Materials in Drug Products and Biological Fluids [https://www.mdpi.com/2297-8739/10/5/283]
• 56. Green Analytical Chemistry Metrics and Life-Cycle Assessment Approach to Analytical Method Development | SpringerLink [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-96534-1_2]
• 57. for quantification of Methods : a narrative review cannabinoids [https://jcannabisresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42238-020-00040-2]
• 58. Fast Detection of 10 Cannabinoids by RP-HPLC-UV Method in Cannabis sativa L - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6600594/]
• 59. Validated HPLC Method for the Determination of Paclitaxel-related Substances in an Intravenous Emulsion Loaded with a Paclitaxel–Cholesterol Complex - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3928731/]
• 60. HPLC Analysis of Paclitaxel and Related Compounds on Ascentis® Express F5 application for HPLC | Sigma-Aldrich [https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/US/en/technical-documents/chromatograms/hplc/hplc-analysis-of-paclitaxel-and-related-compounds-on-ascentis-express-f5/supelco/g005890]
• 61. Green Chemistry: What is it (and What Is It Not)? And How Does It Apply to Gas Chromatography? | LCGC International [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/green-chemistry-what-is-it-and-what-is-it-not-and-how-does-it-apply-to-gas-chromatography-gc]
• 62. Green analytical chemistry: integrating sustainability into undergraduate education - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11772533/]
• 63. : Providing the Focus for Action | SpringerLink Hotspots Analysis [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-7221-1_12]
• 64. Green Approaches in High-Performance Liquid Chromatography for Sustainable Food Analysis: Advances, Challenges, and Regulatory Perspectives [https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/30/17/3573]
• 65. Advanced screening assays to rapidly identify solubility- enhancing ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18222563/]
• 66. The Role of Miniaturized Reactions in Modern Laboratories [https://dispendix.com/blog/role-of-miniaturized-reactions-in-modern-laboratories]
• 67. High Throughput Screening Market 2024 Share, Size, Future Demand, Global Research, Top Leading player, Emerging Trends, Region by Forecast to 2029 - PharmiWeb.com [https://www.pharmiweb.com/press-release/2025-10-23/high-throughput-screening-market-2024-share-size-future-demand-global-research-top-leading-player-emerging-trends-region-by-forecast-to-2029]
• 68. Miniaturized high-performance liquid chromatography instrumentation - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29108588/]
• 69. Microfluidic Approaches in Phenolic Extraction and Bioactivity Assessment: From Microscale Optimization to Industrial Applications - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S088915752501052X]
• 70. Why Use Miniaturized Columns in Liquid Chromatography? Benefits and Challenges [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/why-use-miniaturized-columns-in-liquid-chromatography-benefits-and-challenges]
• 71. and simplification of methods for Green Analytical... Miniaturisation [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/miniaturisation-simplification-methods-green-analytical-vible]
• 72. Greenness metrics for analytical methodologies linked to mass spectrometry - ADS [https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024GAnCh..1000140J/abstract]
• 73. An Inside Look at the Analytical in High... Method Greenness Score [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/an-inside-look-at-the-analytical-method-greenness-score-in-high-performance-liquid-chromatography-enantioseparations-an-earth-day-interview-with-daniel-armstrong]
• 74. of analytical Optimization scores: a case study of... method greenness [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2024/gc/d3gc03005a]
• 75. Enhancing Sustainable Analytical Chemistry in Liquid Chromatography: Guideline for Transferring Classical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography and Ultra-High-Pressure Liquid Chromatography Methods into Greener, Bluer, and Whiter Methods - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11243568/]
• 76. How to correctly evaluate greenness , whiteness and other “colours”? [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/gc/d5gc00615e]
• 77. Application of D-Limonene as a Bio - based in Low... Solvent [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31827038/]
• 78. sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/ microextraction [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/microextraction]
• 79. Applications and opportunities of experimental design for the... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30172518/]
• 80. Bio-based Solvents Market Volume to Reach 25,81,297.5 tons by 2034 [https://www.towardschemandmaterials.com/insights/bio-based-solvents-market]
• 81. The power of biobased solvents in paint, electronics, and more - World Bio Market Insights [https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/the-power-of-biobased-solvents-in-paint-electronics-and-more/]
• 82. Frontiers | Energy efficiency trends in HPC: what high-energy and astrophysicists need to know [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physics/articles/10.3389/fphy.2025.1542474/full]
• 83. High-performance liquid chromatography - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-performance_liquid_chromatography]
• 84. of Comparison , sfc and gc | PPTX hplc [https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/comparison-of-sfc-gc-and-hplc/230465168]
• 85. Small Molecule Analysis Testing: HPLC vs GC - Brewer Science [https://www.brewerscience.com/small-molecule-analysis-testing-hplc-vs-gc/]
• 86. Preview: The Road To Sustainable Analytical Chemistry HPLC 2025 [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/hplc-2025-preview-the-road-to-sustainable-analytical-chemistry]
• 87. Surrogate Modelling for the Optimization of SFE– SFC Methods: An... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/surrogate-modelling-for-the-optimization-of-sfe-sfc-methods-an-hplc-2025-video-interview-with-kevin-schug]
• 88. Frontiers | Innovative applications and future perspectives of chromatography-mass spectrometry in drug research [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2025.1529468/full]
• 89. Ecofriendly chromatographic estimation of spasmolytic... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36285376/]
• 90. Smart green spectrophotometric assay of the ternary mixture of drotaverine, caffeine and paracetamol in their pharmaceutical dosage form - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10720201/]
• 91. Liquid chromatography in pharmaceutical analysis IV: determination... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/239211/]
• 92. Antispasmodic Effect of Essential Oils and Their Constituents: A Review [https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/24/9/1675]
• 93. Antispasmodic - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antispasmodic]
• 94. What are the Differences between GC and HPLC ? [https://lab-training.com/what-are-the-differences-between-gc-and-hplc/]
• 95. Liquid Chromatography vs Gas Chromatography - LC Services [https://www.lcservicesltd.co.uk/liquid-chromatography-vs-gas-chromatography/]
• 96. (PDF) simultaneous determination of two antispasmodic inbulk... drugs [https://www.academia.edu/2042433/SIMULTANEOUS_DETERMINATION_OF_TWO_ANTISPASMODIC_DRUGS_INBULK_PHARMACEUTICAL_PRODUCTS_AND_BODY_FLUID_BY_A_VALIDATED_ACETONITRILEFREE_COST_EFFECTIVE_AND_STABILITY_INDICATING_REVERSE_PHASEHIGH_PERFORMANCE_LIQUID_CHROMATOGRAPHIC_METHOD]
• 97. How to correctly evaluate greenness , whiteness and other “colours”? [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc00615e]
• 98. statistical evaluation of Comparative , blueness, and... greenness [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-96091-7?error=cookies_not_supported&code=3d0ea1a2-66b8-429e-b46b-4c3b36d0a2f3]
• 99. A validated RP-HPLC method for the estimation of Cinnarizine in tablet... [https://fjps.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43094-025-00888-2]
• 100. UHPLC approach for the quantitative determination of tiopronin... Green [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-025-01656-2]
• 101. A Comprehensive Assessment of Sample Preparation Methods for the Determination of UV Filters in Water by Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry: Greenness, Blueness, and Whiteness Quantification Using the AGREEprep, BAGI, and RGB 12 Tools [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/17/7690]
• 102. Comparison of the Greenness Assessment of Chromatographic Methods Used for Analysis of UV Filters in Cosmetic Samples [https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4532/4/4/32]
• 103. A comparative greenness assessment of chromatographic methods for cilnidipine analysis and its combination - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000211]
• 104. Organic UV - filters and freshwater organisms: data gaps impede... [https://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12302-024-01046-w]
• 105. DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF NOVEL UV AND RP-HPLC METHODS FOR DETERMINATION OF CILNIDIPINE (A NEW GENERATION Ca CHANNEL BLOCKER) IN PHARMACEUTICAL DOSAGE FORM | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES AND RESEARCH [https://ijpsr.com/bft-article/development-and-validation-of-novel-uv-and-rp-hplc-methods-for-determination-of-cilnidipine-a-new-generation-ca-channel-blocker-in-pharmaceutical-dosage-form/]
• 106. Multiple spectrophotometric determinations of Chlorthalidone and Cilnidipine using propylene carbonate – As a step towards greenness - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003269722003505]
• 107. Sustainability Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/sustainability-assessment]
• 108. Sustainability Assessment: Exploring the Frontiers and Paradigms of Indicator Approaches [https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/824]