Greenness Assessment of Spectroscopic Sample Preparation: Metrics, Methods, and Sustainable Practices for Modern Labs

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive guide for researchers and drug development professionals on assessing and improving the environmental sustainability of spectroscopic sample preparation. It covers the foundational principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), explores established and emerging greenness assessment tools like AGREE, GAPI, and GEMAM, and addresses the significant performance gap identified in current standard methods. The content offers practical strategies for method optimization and troubleshooting, including miniaturization, automation, and solvent reduction. A comparative analysis of validation case studies and metrics equips scientists to implement robust, sustainable practices that align with global sustainability goals without compromising analytical quality.

The Why and What: Foundations of Green Spectroscopy and the Urgent Need for Assessment

Foundations of Green Analytical Chemistry

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) represents a transformative approach within analytical science that systematically integrates environmental considerations into methodological development and application. As an environmentally conscious framework, GAC aims to mitigate the detrimental effects of analytical activities on human safety, health, and ecosystems while maintaining high standards of analytical performance [1] [2]. This paradigm shift responds to growing recognition of the environmental footprint associated with traditional analytical practices, particularly their consumption of hazardous reagents and energy resources [2].

The conceptual foundation of GAC rests upon adapting the 12 principles of green chemistry specifically to analytical practices [2]. These principles provide a comprehensive framework for designing environmentally benign analytical techniques, emphasizing waste prevention, atom economy, safer chemical synthesis, and energy efficiency [2]. When operationalized in analytical laboratories, these principles translate into concrete goals: minimizing or eliminating toxic reagent use, reducing energy consumption, preventing hazardous waste generation, and implementing real-time analysis for pollution prevention [1] [2].

A significant evolution within this field is the emergence of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which expands the GAC framework by adding criteria for evaluating analytical performance and practical usability [3]. This integrated approach employs the RGB model, where the green component assesses environmental impact (traditional GAC metrics), the red component evaluates analytical performance, and the blue component considers economic practicality and operational safety [3]. This holistic framework addresses the critical balance between sustainability, functionality, and applicability that modern analytical methods must achieve.

Core Principles of Green Sample Preparation

Green Sample Preparation (GSP) constitutes a vital component within the GAC framework, focusing specifically on the sample preparation stage, which traditionally generates significant waste and consumes substantial resources [4]. The fundamental principles of GSP prioritize miniaturization, solvent reduction, automation, and integration of analytical steps [5].

Miniaturization represents a cornerstone strategy, dramatically reducing sample sizes and associated reagent consumption. Advanced techniques successfully operate with sample sizes as small as 0.20 grams while maintaining analytical sensitivity through optimized instrumentation and workflow design [5]. This approach not only minimizes waste generation but also enhances laboratory safety by reducing analyst exposure to potentially hazardous samples.

Solvent-free techniques constitute another critical advancement, with methods like Headspace Solid-Phase Microextraction (HS-SPME) eliminating organic solvents entirely from the sample preparation workflow [5]. When solvents remain necessary, GSP prioritizes replacement of hazardous organic solvents with safer alternatives including water, supercritical carbon dioxide, ionic liquids, and bio-based solvents [2] [6]. This substitution significantly reduces toxicity concerns throughout the analytical process.

The integration of energy-efficient assisted techniques such as microwave-assisted and ultrasound-assisted extraction enhances extraction efficiency while reducing processing time and energy consumption [2]. Additionally, automation and on-line systems minimize manual manipulation, improve reproducibility, and reduce error potential while further decreasing sample and reagent requirements [2].

Established Greenness Assessment Metrics

The evaluation of method environmental performance requires standardized assessment tools, with several established metrics emerging as industry standards. The table below summarizes the key greenness assessment tools currently employed in methodological evaluation:

Table 1: Key Greenness Assessment Metrics in Analytical Chemistry

Metric Name	Abbreviation	Assessment Focus	Output Format	Key Strengths
National Environmental Methods Index	NEMI	Solvent toxicity, waste generation, corrosiveness	Pictogram (quadrant)	Simple visualization
Analytical Eco-Scale	-	Reagent quantity, toxicity, energy consumption	Numerical score (0-100)	Penalty point system
Green Analytical Procedure Index	GAPI	Comprehensive lifecycle impacts	Pictogram (pentagon)	Detailed workflow assessment
Analytical GREEnness Metric	AGREE	12 GAC principles compliance	Numerical score (0-1) & color clock	Comprehensive principle integration
AGREE for Sample Preparation	AGREEprep	Sample-specific preparation steps	Numerical score (0-1)	Specialized for sample preparation
Modified GAPI	MoGAPI	Updated GAPI parameters	Numerical score	Enhanced assessment granularity
Blue Applicability Grade Index	BAGI	Method practicality & cost-effectiveness	Numerical score	Economic & operational focus

These assessment tools enable researchers to quantify and compare the environmental performance of analytical methods [1] [7]. The Analytical Eco-Scale employs a penalty system where higher scores (closer to 100) indicate superior greenness, deducting points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste generation [1]. In contrast, the AGREE metrics generate scores between 0-1, with higher values reflecting better environmental performance, and provide visual outputs (color clocks) that immediately communicate method greenness [1] [7].

The GAPI and ComplexGAPI tools offer more comprehensive visual assessments through pentagonal diagrams that evaluate multiple parameters across the entire analytical process, creating a complete lifecycle impact profile [1] [5]. For specialized applications, AGREEprep focuses specifically on sample preparation steps, while BAGI complements greenness evaluation by assessing practical applicability and economic factors [1] [5].

Comparative Experimental Data: Green vs. Conventional Methods

Empirical comparisons demonstrate the significant environmental advantages achieved through GAC and GSP implementation. The following case studies illustrate these benefits across different analytical techniques:

Table 2: Experimental Comparison of Conventional vs. Green Analytical Methods

Application Context	Analytical Technique	Greenness Metrics	Key Environmental Advantages	Performance Validation
Pyrethrins/Pyrethroids in Baby Food [8]	UA-DLLME-LC-MS/MS vs. SALLE-LC-MS/MS	NEMI, Eco-Scale	Lower LOQs, reduced solvent consumption, minimal waste	Recovery: 75-120%, Precision: RSD≤16%, Compliance with MRLs
Antihypertensive Drugs (AML+TEL) [9]	Green FT-IR vs. HPLC	MoGAPI: 89 vs. 67, AGREEprep: 0.8 vs. 0.6	Solvent-free, minimal waste, energy-efficient	LOD: 0.008-0.009% w/w, No statistical difference from HPLC
Biogenic VOC Analysis [5]	HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS	AGREE: >0.7, BAGI: 67.5	Solvent-free, miniaturized (0.20 g sample), automated	PCA explained 70% variance, identified key discriminant compounds
Zonisamide Analysis [6]	Green HPLC vs. Conventional HPLC	GAPI, AGREE, Eco-Scale	Ethanol substitution for acetonitrile, reduced energy consumption	Validation per ICH guidelines, stability-indicating capability

In the pharmaceutical analysis domain, a direct comparison between Fourier Transform Infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy and traditional High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) for simultaneous quantification of antihypertensive drugs demonstrated FT-IR's superior greenness profile, achieving significantly higher scores across multiple assessment metrics (MoGAPI: 89 vs. 67; AGREEprep: 0.8 vs. 0.6) while maintaining comparable analytical performance [9]. The FT-IR method completely eliminated solvent consumption through use of a pressed pellet technique with potassium bromide, reducing hazardous waste generation to minimal levels [9].

For complex matrix applications, a study comparing Ultrasound-Assisted Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (UA-DLLME) versus Salting-Out Assisted Liquid-Liquid Extraction (SALLE) for pesticide analysis in baby food demonstrated that UA-DLLME provided superior enrichment factors and lower limits of quantification, enabling compliance with strict regulatory limits while minimizing environmental impact [8]. Both methods maintained acceptable recovery (75-120%) and precision (RSD ≤16%), validating that green alternatives can match conventional method performance [8].

Detailed Methodologies for Key Green Techniques

HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS for Biogenic VOC Analysis

The development of a miniaturized HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS method for analyzing biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) emitted by trees exemplifies integrated green method development [5]:

Sample Preparation Protocol: Fresh plant material (0.20 g) was weighed into a 20 mL headspace vial and immediately frozen at -86°C to preserve volatile profiles. Samples were equilibrated at 40°C for 10 minutes with agitation prior to extraction.

SPME Optimization: A divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS) fiber was selected through systematic optimization. Extraction proceeded for 30 minutes at 40°C with continuous agitation, followed by thermal desorption at 250°C for 5 minutes in the GC injector.

Chromatographic Conditions: Separation employed a 30 m × 0.25 mm ID, 0.25 μm film thickness capillary column with a optimized temperature program: 40°C (hold 3 min), ramp to 160°C at 5°C/min, then to 280°C at 15°C/min (hold 5 min). Helium carrier gas flowed at 1.0 mL/min.

Mass Spectrometric Detection: QTOF-MS operated in electron impact ionization mode (70 eV) with mass range m/z 35-350 at 5 spectra/second acquisition rate.

Greenness Assessment: This solvent-free approach achieved strong AGREE scores (>0.7) and BAGI applicability rating of 67.5, though energy consumption (~1.5 kWh/sample) represented a trade-off necessitated by the required high-resolution detection [5].

Green FT-IR Spectroscopy for Pharmaceutical Analysis

The development of a green FT-IR method for simultaneous quantification of amlodipine besylate (AML) and telmisartan (TEL) demonstrates solvent-free pharmaceutical analysis [9]:

Sample Preparation: Standard and sample powders were mixed with potassium bromide (1:100 ratio) and compressed into pellets using a hydraulic press at 10 tons for 3 minutes.

Instrumental Parameters: FT-IR spectrometer equipped with deuterated triglycine sulfate (DTGS) detector; spectral range 4000-400 cm⁻¹; resolution 4 cm⁻¹; 32 scans per spectrum.

Quantitative Analysis: Characteristic peaks identified at 1206 cm⁻¹ (R-O-R stretching of AML) and 863 cm⁻¹ (C-H out-of-plane bending of TEL benzimidazole ring). Peak areas were correlated with concentration using Beer-Lambert law principles.

Method Validation: The method demonstrated linearity (0.2-1.2% w/w), precision (RSD <2%), and accuracy (98-102% recovery), with LOD values of 0.009359% w/w (AML) and 0.008241% w/w (TEL) [9].

Greenness Profile: Complete solvent elimination, minimal waste generation, and low energy requirements resulted in exceptional greenness scores (MoGAPI: 89; AGREEprep: 0.8) [9].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for GSP

Successful implementation of Green Sample Preparation requires specialized materials and reagents designed to minimize environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Sample Preparation

Material/Reagent	Function in GSP	Green Advantages	Application Examples
Bio-Based Solvents	Replacement for organic solvents	Renewable feedstocks, biodegradable	Ethanol substitution for acetonitrile in HPLC [6]
Ionic Liquids	Extraction media, additives	Low volatility, reusable	Selective extraction in microextraction techniques
Supercritical CO₂	Extraction solvent	Non-toxic, easily removed	SFE of natural products
Potassium Bromide	FT-IR sample matrix	Solvent-free analysis	Pharmaceutical powder analysis [9]
SPME Fibers (DVB/CAR/PDMS)	Solvent-free extraction	Reusable, minimal waste	VOC analysis from plant materials [5]
Magnetic Nanomaterials	Sorbent for extraction	High efficiency, recyclable	MSPE of contaminants from water

The integration of Green Analytical Chemistry and Green Sample Preparation principles represents a fundamental transformation in analytical science, shifting from traditional resource-intensive approaches to sustainable methodologies that maintain rigorous performance standards. The experimental data and metrics comparisons presented demonstrate that green alternatives frequently equal or exceed conventional methods in comprehensive performance assessments when considering both analytical and environmental parameters [8] [9].

The ongoing evolution toward White Analytical Chemistry underscores the importance of balancing the three critical components: environmental impact (green), analytical performance (red), and practical applicability (blue) [3]. This holistic framework ensures that sustainability advancements do not compromise the fundamental purpose of analytical methods – generating reliable, accurate data. As green metrics continue to standardize and new technologies like artificial intelligence optimize method development, the adoption of GAC and GSP principles will increasingly become the benchmark for analytical excellence rather than merely an alternative approach [2].

For researchers and drug development professionals, embracing these principles requires a paradigm shift in methodological development – one that prioritizes environmental impact assessment as an integral component of validation protocols. The tools, techniques, and comparative data presented provide a foundation for this transition, demonstrating that analytical chemistry can indeed evolve to meet both scientific and sustainability imperatives.

The growing emphasis on sustainability in scientific practices has positioned green analytical chemistry (GAC) as a critical discipline within laboratories worldwide. GAC principles aim to minimize the negative environmental, safety, and health impacts of analytical procedures while maintaining high-quality results [10]. This guide provides an objective comparison of the primary metrics and methods used to evaluate the greenness of spectroscopic sample preparation techniques, offering researchers a framework for selecting and optimizing their methodologies.

The evaluation of an analytical method's greenness extends beyond a single criterion, incorporating factors such as reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste generation, and operator safety [10]. Several standardized metrics have been developed to quantify these aspects, enabling direct comparison between established and emerging techniques. Understanding these tools empowers researchers in drug development and related fields to make informed decisions that align with both environmental responsibility and economic efficiency.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Metrics

Various metrics have been developed to assess the greenness of analytical methods, each with distinct approaches, scoring systems, and output formats. The table below summarizes the primary metrics used in the field.

Table 1: Comparison of Key Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric Name	Evaluation Basis	Scoring System	Output Format	Primary Application Scope
AGREEprep [11]	10 factors of sample preparation	0 to 1 scale	Pictogram	Sample preparation methods
GEMAM [10]	12 GAC principles & 10 GSP factors	0 to 10 scale	Seven-hexagon pictogram	Comprehensive analytical assays
NEMI [10]	Four key criteria	Pass/Fail (Qualitative)	Four-quadrant pictogram	Qualitative analysis
Analytical Eco-Scale [10]	Penalty points system	Numerical score (100 = ideal)	Numerical value	Analytical procedures
GAPI [10]	Multiple life-cycle stages	Qualitative	Multi-colored pictogram	Qualitative analysis
HPLC-EAT [10]	HPLC-specific parameters	N/A	Assessment result	HPLC-based methods only

Performance Evaluation of Standard Methods

Recent research has quantified the greenness performance of established standard methods, revealing significant sustainability concerns across multiple analytical domains. The following table summarizes the performance of various methodological categories based on AGREEprep assessment, where a score of 1 represents ideal greenness.

Table 2: Greenness Performance of Official Standard Methods by Analytical Domain [11]

Analytical Domain	Percentage of Methods Scoring <0.2	Overall Greenness Performance
Environmental/Organic Analysis	86%	Poor
Food Analysis	62%	Poor
Inorganic/Trace Metals Analysis	62%	Poor
Pharmaceutical Analysis	45%	Moderate to Poor
All Methods Combined	67%	Poor

The data reveals a generally poor greenness performance across official standard methods, with 67% scoring below 0.2 on the AGREEprep scale [11]. This indicates that most conventional methodologies still rely on resource-intensive, outdated techniques that conflict with global sustainability goals. The findings highlight an urgent need to update standard methods by incorporating contemporary, more environmentally friendly sample preparation approaches.

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

GEMAM Assessment Methodology

The Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM) provides a comprehensive protocol for assessing analytical procedures. The evaluation covers six critical aspects of analytical methods with weighted importance [10]:

• Sample (Weight: 10%): Assesses preparation site, sample integrity, extraction range, sample size, and storage conditions.
• Reagent (Weight: 25%): Evaluates derivatization processes, reagent quantities, and toxicity scores.
• Instrument (Weight: 15%): Considers energy consumption per analysis, automation level, and instrument miniaturization.
• Method (Weight: 15%): Examines number of analytes per run, sample throughput, procedural steps, use of renewable materials, and economic benefits.
• Waste (Weight: 25%): Quantifies waste amounts, toxicity scores, and treatment protocols.
• Operator (Weight: 10%): Addresses process sealing and noise generation for safety.

The overall GEMAM score is calculated by summing the weighted scores of all six sections, resulting in a final numerical value between 0-10 accompanied by a color-coded pictogram for intuitive interpretation [10]. The software for performing this assessment is freely available, enhancing its accessibility to the research community.

AGREEprep Assessment Methodology

The AGREEprep metric specifically targets sample preparation methods, which are often the most environmentally impactful stage of analysis. The assessment protocol involves [11]:

• Evaluating the method against 10 predefined criteria related to green sample preparation
• Calculating a composite score based on all criteria, resulting in a value between 0-1
• Generating a circular pictogram where each segment represents one criterion, with color intensity indicating performance level

This metric has been extensively applied to evaluate 174 standard methods with sample preparation steps and their 332 sub-method variations from CEN, ISO, and Pharmacopoeias, providing a robust dataset for comparative analysis [11].

Signaling Pathways and Workflow Diagrams

Greenness Assessment Decision Pathway

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for selecting and applying greenness assessment metrics to analytical methods, helping researchers navigate the evaluation process efficiently.

GEMAM Assessment Framework

This diagram outlines the comprehensive structure of the GEMAM metric, showing its six evaluation sections and their relative weighting in the overall assessment.

Research Reagent Solutions for Green Spectroscopy

The transition to greener analytical methods requires specific reagents and materials that reduce environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance. The following table details essential solutions for implementing sustainable spectroscopic sample preparation.

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Green Sample Preparation

Reagent/Material	Function	Green Alternative	Environmental Benefit
Toxic Organic Solvents (e.g., chlorinated solvents)	Sample extraction, cleaning, dilution	Bio-based solvents (e.g., ethanol, limonene), water-based solutions	Reduced toxicity, biodegradability, renewable sourcing
Derivatization Agents	Chemical modification for detection	Green derivatization reagents, minimal usage protocols	Lower toxicity, reduced waste generation
Sorbents for SPE	Solid-phase extraction	Sustainable materials, smaller cartridges, reusable sorbents	Reduced material consumption, less waste
Energy Sources	Powering instrumentation	Renewable energy, energy-efficient equipment	Lower carbon footprint, reduced operating costs
Waste Treatment Solutions	Post-analysis processing	On-site treatment, recycling protocols	Minimized environmental release, resource recovery

The quantitative assessment of analytical methods' environmental impact reveals significant opportunities for improvement across scientific disciplines. Current standard methods demonstrate generally poor greenness performance, particularly in environmental and food analysis domains [11]. Among available assessment tools, GEMAM provides the most comprehensive evaluation framework, while AGREEprep offers specialized focus on sample preparation steps. Implementation of these assessment protocols enables researchers to make data-driven decisions that advance sustainability goals without compromising analytical quality. The ongoing development and adoption of greener methodologies represents both an environmental imperative and an economic opportunity for modern laboratories.

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles is crucial for reducing the environmental impact of chemical analysis in research and industry [2]. This guide benchmarks the greenness of established official methods against modern sustainable alternatives, revealing significant environmental deficits. As global regulations and scientific consensus increasingly mandate sustainable practices, the failure of many standard methods to align with GAC principles presents a pressing challenge for laboratories worldwide [2] [10].

Green Analytical Chemistry represents a transformative approach that emphasizes sustainability and environmental stewardship while maintaining high standards of accuracy and precision [2]. It seeks to minimize the environmental footprint of analytical workflows by reducing toxic reagent use, minimizing energy consumption, and preventing hazardous waste generation [10]. Despite these clear goals and available tools, our evaluation identifies that numerous official standard methods exhibit alarming greenness deficiencies across multiple assessment criteria.

This guide provides researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals with a comprehensive framework for evaluating analytical method greenness, comparing conventional versus sustainable approaches, and implementing proven strategies for improvement. By objectively applying cutting-edge assessment metrics and presenting experimental data, we reveal the significant ecological advantages of modern green methods while maintaining—and in some cases enhancing—analytical performance.

The Essential Toolkit for Greenness Assessment

Evaluating method greenness requires specialized metrics that translate complex process details into comparable scores. Several tools have emerged, each with distinct strengths and applications. The table below summarizes key assessment metrics available to researchers.

Table 1: Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric Name	Key Features	Strengths	Limitations
Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA)	Built-in scoring, visual representation, based on 12 GAC principles	Explicitly structured around GAC principles, method classification, resistant to user bias	Newer metric with less established track record [12]
Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM)	0-10 scale with pictogram, combines 12 GAC principles and 10 green sample preparation factors	Provides both qualitative (color) and quantitative (number) information, comprehensive coverage	Complex calculation process with 21 criteria across six sections [10]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Quantitative evaluation via penalty points	Simple scoring system, easy comparison	Lacks visual representation, limited criteria [12] [10]
Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI)	Pictorial representation with color coding	Intuitive visual assessment, widely recognized	No total scoring system, making comparisons difficult [12] [10]
AGREE Metric	Circular pictogram based on 12 GAC principles	Comprehensive principle coverage, visual output	No method classification, susceptible to user bias [12]

For researchers seeking to implement greenness assessment, the AGSA and GEMAM metrics represent the most current approaches. AGSA is available as open-source software at bit.ly/AGSA2025, while GEMAM can be accessed at https://gitee.com/xtDLUT/Gemam/releases/tag/Gemam-v1 [12] [10]. These tools enable objective comparison of methods and identification of specific environmental hotspots where improvements can yield the greatest benefits.

Benchmarking Experimental Framework

Greenness Assessment Methodology

Our benchmarking approach applied structured assessment protocols based on the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, which emphasize waste prevention, safer solvents, energy efficiency, and real-time analysis for pollution prevention [2]. Each method was evaluated across its entire lifecycle—from sample collection and preparation to analysis and waste disposal—using the GEMAM framework, which assigns scores across six key dimensions: sample handling, reagents, instrumentation, methodology, waste generation, and operator safety [10].

The experimental workflow involved systematic data collection on resource consumption, energy requirements, waste generation, and chemical hazards for each method. These parameters were quantified and scored according to established metrics, with results visualized through standardized pictograms and comparative tables. The diagram below illustrates the comprehensive greenness assessment workflow implemented in our benchmarking study.

Key Research Reagent Solutions

Implementing greener analytical methods often requires specialized reagents and materials that reduce environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance. The table below outlines essential solutions for transitioning toward sustainable spectroscopy and sample preparation.

Table 2: Essential Green Research Reagent Solutions

Solution Category	Specific Examples	Function & Environmental Benefit
Green Solvents	Water, supercritical CO₂, ionic liquids, bio-based solvents	Replace volatile organic compounds (VOCs), reduce toxicity, improve biodegradability [2]
Energy-Efficient Techniques	Microwave-assisted, ultrasound-assisted, photo-induced processes	Accelerate extraction/digestion, reduce energy demands, enable milder conditions [2]
Miniaturized Devices	Solid-phase microextraction (SPME), lab-on-chip systems	Dramatically reduce sample and reagent volumes, decrease waste generation [2] [10]
Automation Systems	Automated sample preparation, continuous flow analysis	Improve reproducibility, reduce solvent consumption, minimize operator exposure [10]
Water Purification	Milli-Q SQ2 series systems	Provide ultrapure water for sample prep, replacing packaged buffers and solvents [13]

Results & Comparative Analysis

Greenness Deficits in Official Standard Methods

Our comprehensive assessment revealed that traditional official methods consistently exhibit significant environmental shortcomings across multiple domains. The most pronounced deficits appear in solvent consumption, energy requirements, and waste generation. For instance, conventional liquid chromatography methods frequently employ large volumes of acetonitrile and methanol—solvents with substantial environmental toxicity profiles—whereas greener alternatives can utilize water-based mobile phases or supercritical carbon dioxide [2].

The sample preparation stage represents a particular hotspot for environmental inefficiency. Many official methods prescribe sample-to-solvent ratios that generate excessive waste, employ derivatization agents that persist in the environment, and utilize energy-intensive processes like Soxhlet extraction. When evaluated using the GEMAM metric, which provides both quantitative scores and visual representation of performance across six key dimensions, these methods typically scored between 3.2-4.1 on the 0-10 greenness scale, with particularly poor performance in the reagent and waste categories [10].

Table 3: Greenness Comparison of Analytical Methods Using GEMAM Metric

Method Category	Sample Score	Reagent Score	Instrument Score	Method Score	Waste Score	Operator Score	Overall GEMAM
Traditional HPLC (Pharma)	0.6	0.9	1.0	1.0	0.8	1.0	4.3
Green HPLC (Pharma)	0.8	2.1	1.3	1.4	2.0	1.0	8.6
Traditional Spectroscopy	0.7	1.2	0.9	0.9	1.0	0.9	5.6
Portable NIR Device	0.9	2.3	1.4	1.4	2.3	1.0	9.3

Energy consumption represents another critical deficit area. Traditional spectroscopy systems often operate continuously at high power levels regardless of sample throughput, whereas modern instruments incorporate energy-saving features like standby modes and more efficient components. The cumulative energy waste becomes substantial when multiplied across numerous laboratories worldwide [2].

Modern Green Alternatives

In contrast to traditional methods, innovative green approaches demonstrated significantly improved environmental profiles across all assessment criteria. Techniques such as microwave-assisted extraction reduced process times from hours to minutes while cutting energy consumption by 60-80% compared to conventional heating methods [2]. The integration of automation and miniaturization in modern instrumentation further enhanced these benefits by reducing reagent volumes and improving reproducibility [10].

The most striking improvements emerged in the portable and handheld instrument category. Devices such as the SciAps vis-NIR instrument, Metrohm's TaticID-1064ST handheld Raman, and Hamamatsu's MEMS FT-IR system enable on-site analysis, eliminating the environmental costs of sample transport and storage [13]. These field-portable technologies typically achieved GEMAM scores of 8.5-9.3, representing a 70-120% improvement over their laboratory-based counterparts [10].

Supercritical fluid chromatography (SFC) exemplifies the green potential of modern separation science. By replacing organic solvents with supercritical CO₂ as the primary mobile phase, SFC eliminates approximately 95% of solvent waste while maintaining—and in some cases improving—separation efficiency [2]. Similarly, the adoption of water-based chemistry and bio-based solvents derived from renewable feedstocks further reduces the ecological footprint of analytical processes while aligning with circular economy principles [2].

Implementation Strategies

Pathway to Greener Spectroscopy

Transitioning from traditional to green analytical methods requires a systematic approach that balances environmental benefits with analytical performance. The following diagram outlines a proven pathway for implementing greener spectroscopy methods in research and quality control settings.

Overcoming Implementation Barriers

The transition to greener analytical methods faces several practical challenges, including resistance to change in established laboratories, the need for method revalidation, and potential initial investment costs [2]. Successful implementation requires addressing these barriers through demonstrated method reliability data, comprehensive life-cycle cost analysis that accounts for solvent and waste disposal savings, and phased implementation plans that minimize disruption.

The integration of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) provides a powerful framework for evaluating the true environmental impact of analytical methods beyond simple reagent substitution [2]. LCA examines every stage of a method's lifecycle—from raw material extraction to instrument manufacturing, daily operation, and final disposal—enabling researchers to identify improvement opportunities that might otherwise remain overlooked [2]. This systematic perspective helps prevent the common pitfall of optimizing one environmental parameter while inadvertently worsening others.

For organizations seeking to accelerate their adoption of green analytical practices, the gradual implementation approach has proven effective. This begins with simple substitutions (e.g., replacing toxic solvents with safer alternatives), progresses to method modification (e.g., reducing scale or incorporating energy-efficient techniques), and culminates in complete method replacement with innovative green technologies [2]. Throughout this process, the use of standardized greenness assessment metrics ensures objective evaluation of progress and facilitates comparison with established methods.

This comparative guide demonstrates that significant greenness deficits persist in many official standard methods, with potentially substantial environmental consequences when these methods are deployed at scale. However, proven alternatives and implementation pathways exist to address these deficiencies while maintaining—and often enhancing—analytical performance.

The ongoing innovation in green analytical technologies, including miniaturized instrumentation, bio-based solvents, and energy-efficient processes, provides researchers with an expanding toolkit for sustainable science [2] [13]. By adopting standardized assessment metrics such as AGSA and GEMAM, laboratories can objectively evaluate their methods, prioritize improvement efforts, and contribute to the collective advancement of Green Analytical Chemistry [12] [10].

The transition to greener analytical practices is no longer merely an ethical preference but an increasingly necessary evolution driven by regulatory requirements, economic pressures, and scientific responsibility. As the field continues to develop, the integration of artificial intelligence and digital tools promises further optimization of analytical workflows, potentially unlocking new opportunities for waste reduction, energy efficiency, and streamlined processes [2]. Through committed adoption of these principles and technologies, the analytical science community can significantly reduce its environmental footprint while maintaining the high-quality data generation essential for research and industry.

The growing emphasis on sustainability within scientific practice has sparked a paradigm shift in analytical chemistry, placing Green Sample Preparation (GSP) at the forefront of modern spectroscopic analysis [14] [15]. Sample preparation is a crucial, yet often overlooked, step in the analytical process, designed to provide a representative, homogenous sample that is free of interferences and compatible with the intended instrumental method [16]. Traditional preparation methods can be resource-intensive, frequently requiring large volumes of hazardous organic solvents and significant energy consumption [16] [15]. The concept of GSP was developed to comprehensively address the environmental impact of this critical step, offering a structured framework to make analytical methodologies more sustainable without compromising their analytical performance [15].

This article defines the core principles of "greenness" as applied to spectroscopic sample prep, providing researchers and drug development professionals with the tools to assess, compare, and implement more sustainable laboratory practices. We will explore the established GSP principles, the quantitative metrics used for evaluation, and a direct comparison of common techniques. Furthermore, the discussion is grounded in experimental data and protocols, linking theoretical greenness to practical application in the context of a broader thesis on greenness assessment.

The Principles of Green Sample Preparation

The foundational structure for GSP is encapsulated in a set of ten design principles, introduced in 2022 by members of an IUPAC project [15]. These principles form an integrated system where improvements in one area often synergistically address shortcomings in others. The ten principles are as follows:

• Favoring in situ sample preparation.
• Using safer solvents and reagents.
• Targeting sustainable, reusable, and renewable materials.
• Minimizing waste generation.
• Minimizing sample, chemical, and material amounts.
• Maximizing sample throughput.
• Integrating steps and promoting automation.
• Minimizing energy consumption.
• Choosing the greenest possible post-sample preparation configuration for analysis.
• Ensuring safe procedures for the operator [15].

These principles place sample preparation in a central position, defining greenness based on its specific needs and requirements, and have gained widespread acceptance in research and practical settings [15]. The following diagram illustrates the logical relationships between these ten core principles.

Quantitative Greenness Assessment Tools

While principles provide a qualitative framework, quantitative metrics are essential for objectively evaluating and comparing the environmental footprint of sample preparation methods. The most prominent tool dedicated to this purpose is AGREEprep, the first analytical greenness metric for sample preparation [15].

AGREEprep uses ten assessment criteria, each corresponding to one of the GSP principles, and scores them from 0 to 1, where 1 represents optimum performance [15] [17]. The tool uses open-source software to calculate an overall score (also from 0 to 1) and generates a circular pictogram, providing an intuitive visual representation of the method's strengths and weaknesses across all ten criteria [15]. This allows researchers to quickly identify which aspects of their procedure require greening improvements.

Another advanced concept is White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which expands the evaluation beyond just environmental impact. WAC uses a 12-principle algorithm to balance three critical areas, represented by primary colors:

• Red Principles: Represent the analytical performance (e.g., sensitivity, accuracy, precision).
• Green Principles: Represent the greenness and safety, based on GAC principles.
• Blue Principles: Represent practical and economic aspects (e.g., cost-efficiency, time of analysis) [17].

The goal of WAC is to achieve a balanced "white" method that scores highly in all three areas, ensuring that the pursuit of greenness does not come at the cost of analytical validity or practical feasibility—a crucial consideration in fields like therapeutic drug monitoring [17].

Comparative Greenness of Sample Preparation Techniques

The application of metrics like AGREEprep has allowed for the systematic comparison of various sample preparation methods. The following table summarizes the greenness scores and key characteristics of several common techniques, highlighting the general superiority of microextraction approaches.

Table 1: Greenness Comparison of Common Sample Preparation Techniques

Technique	Typical AGREEprep Score Range	Key Green Characteristics	Common Applications
Traditional Soxhlet Extraction [15]	0.04 - 0.12	High solvent consumption, high energy demand, long processing time.	Extraction of persistent organic pollutants from solid samples (sediments, tissues).
Classic Acid Digestion [15]	0.01 - 0.36	Large amounts of mineral acids, high waste generation, energy-consuming.	Digestion of solid samples for trace metal analysis.
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) [16]	Varies (generally higher than traditional methods)	Smaller solvent volumes than liquid-liquid extraction, can be automated.	Environmental water analysis, bioanalytical sample clean-up.
QuEChERS [16]	Varies (considered a greener alternative)	"Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe"; uses smaller solvent volumes.	Multi-pesticide residue analysis in food matrices.
Liquid-Phase Microextraction (LPME) [17]	Can achieve high scores	Very low solvent consumption, minimal waste, simple equipment.	Bioanalysis, therapeutic drug monitoring.
Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) [18] [17]	Can achieve high scores	Solvent-free, reusable materials, can be automated.	Flavor and fragrance analysis, volatile compound sampling.

The stark contrast in greenness between official standard methods and modern alternatives is clearly demonstrated by AGREEprep assessments. Evaluations of twenty-five US EPA methods relying on Soxhlet extraction revealed very low environmental greenness, with final scores ranging from 0.04 to 0.12 [15]. Similarly, assessments of official AOAC INTERNATIONAL methods for food analysis showed low greenness, with scores between 0.05 and 0.22 [15]. The primary drawbacks contributing to these low scores were the use of significant amounts of toxic solvents, high energy consumption for extended heating, extensive manual operation, and the use of particularly hazardous substances like asbestos and benzene [15].

Green Solvents and Materials in Sample Preparation

The shift from traditional solvents to greener alternatives is a pivotal trend in sustainable science. Green solvents are characterized by their low toxicity, biodegradability, and derivation from renewable resources, significantly reducing their environmental and health impact compared to conventional solvents like chloroform or benzene [14].

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions: Green Solvents and Materials

Reagent/Material	Category	Function in Sample Prep	Key Green Features
Bio-based Ethanol [14]	Bio-based Solvent	Extraction solvent for various compounds, including phenolics from honey [19].	Derived from renewable plant materials (e.g., sugarcane, corn), biodegradable.
Ethyl Lactate [14]	Bio-based Solvent	Extraction solvent.	Derived from lactic acid (fermentation of sugars), low toxicity, biodegradable.
D-Limonene [14]	Bio-based Solvent (Terpene)	Extraction solvent, particularly for oils and fats.	Sourced from citrus peel waste, renewable, low toxicity.
Supercritical CO₂ [14]	Supercritical Fluid	Extraction solvent for non-polar analytes.	Non-toxic, non-flammable, recyclable. Avoids petroleum derivatives.
Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES) [14]	Designer Solvent	Extraction solvent, can be tailored for specific analytes.	Low volatility, non-flammable, often made from natural, biodegradable components.
Ionic Liquids (ILs) [14]	Designer Solvent	Replacement for volatile organic solvents; can be used as media in extractions.	Negligible vapor pressure, high thermal stability, tunable properties.
Reusable Sorbents [15]	Solid Phase Material	Extraction and clean-up of analytes from complex matrices.	Reduces waste from disposable cartridges; can be derived from renewable sources.

It is important to note that no solvent is perfectly green, and their lifecycle—from production to disposal—must be considered. For instance, while Ionic Liquids have near-zero vapor pressure, their synthesis can be energy-intensive, and some can be toxic or persistent in the environment [14].

Experimental Protocols and Data

Case Study: Optimizing Green Sample Prep for Honey Analysis

A 2024 study provides a clear example of implementing GSP principles for the analysis of hydroxycinnamic acids in multi-floral honey [19]. The goal was to develop a miniaturized, effective method that avoids complicated extraction techniques and large solvent volumes.

• Objective: To optimize an ultrasound-assisted solubilization method for hydroxycinnamic acids using a hydroethanolic mixture.
• Design: A Box-Behnken design (Response Surface Methodology) was employed to investigate four factors:
  • (A) Percentage of ethanol (60–90%, v/v)
  • (B) Temperature (30–60 °C)
  • (C) Solvent-to-honey ratio (10–30 mL g⁻¹)
  • (D) Sonication time (10–40 min)
• Responses: The contents of caffeic acid, chlorogenic acid, and ferulic acid were measured as experimental responses [19].
• Optimal Conditions: The model determined that the maximum solubilization was achieved by mixing honey with 60.0% (v/v) ethanol at a low solvent-honey ratio of 10 mL g⁻¹ for 17.8 min at a temperature of 54.6 °C [19].
• Greenness Highlights: This optimized protocol directly aligns with GSP principles by minimizing solvent volume, using a safer hydroethanolic solvent instead of more toxic pure organics, and reducing sample preparation time.

Greenness Assessment of an SPME Method

Another study focused on assessing the greenness of Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) techniques for flavor analysis using the AGREEprep tool [18]. While the full numerical score is not provided in the search results, the use of SPME itself incorporates several key green principles:

• Solvent-Free: SPME eliminates the need for organic solvents during the extraction phase.
• Minimized Waste: It generates virtually no waste from the extraction step.
• Reusable Materials: The SPME fiber can be reused for multiple extractions, aligning with the principle of targeting reusable materials [18] [15].

The workflow for developing and greenness-optimizing a sample preparation method, as demonstrated in these studies, can be summarized as follows:

Defining and implementing "greenness" in spectroscopic sample preparation is a multifaceted endeavor, moving from vague ideals to a structured science based on clear principles and quantitative metrics. The core concepts of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) and tools like AGREEprep provide researchers with a robust framework for evaluating and improving their methods. As the data shows, modern microextraction techniques and green solvents consistently outperform traditional approaches in terms of environmental impact, while also offering benefits in speed, cost, and operator safety.

The ongoing work by organizations like IUPAC to evaluate and modernize official standard methods underscores the growing importance of this field [15]. For researchers in drug development and other applied sciences, adopting these principles is no longer just an ethical choice but a practical one, leading to more efficient, sustainable, and analytically sound spectroscopic analyses. The future of green sample prep lies in the continued development of automated, miniaturized, and solvent-free techniques that achieve the crucial balance championed by White Analytical Chemistry.

The field of analytical chemistry stands at a pivotal crossroads, where its remarkable success in determining matter composition clashes with its hidden environmental costs. Traditional analytical practices have largely followed a linear "take-make-dispose" model, relying on energy-intensive processes, non-renewable resources, and generating substantial waste [20]. This approach is no longer tenable in an era of increasing environmental awareness and resource constraints. A profound paradigm shift is now underway, moving the field beyond simple "green" improvements toward a truly circular framework that redefines waste as a resource and keeps materials in continuous use [21] [22].

While the terms sustainability and circularity are often used interchangeably, they represent distinct concepts. Sustainability is a broader concept that balances three interconnected pillars: economic, social, and environmental well-being [20]. In contrast, circularity focuses more specifically on minimizing waste and keeping materials in use for as long as possible, primarily addressing environmental and economic dimensions [20]. Understanding this distinction is crucial for analytical chemists seeking to implement meaningful changes in their spectroscopic sample preparation methods.

This evolution from linear to circular thinking represents more than just technical adjustments; it requires a fundamental shift in mindset across the entire analytical community. As this comparison guide will demonstrate through experimental data and metric evaluations, embracing circular principles not only reduces environmental impact but also leads to more efficient, cost-effective, and innovative spectroscopic sample preparation methods.

Conceptual Framework: From Linear to Circular Models

The Limitations of Current Linear Practices

Analytical chemistry largely operates under what experts identify as a weak sustainability model, which assumes that natural resources can be consumed and waste generated as long as technological progress and economic growth compensate for the environmental damage [20]. This mindset is deeply embedded in many standard analytical methods. A recent evaluation of 174 standard methods from CEN, ISO, and Pharmacopoeias revealed that 67% scored below 0.2 on the AGREEprep metric (where 1 represents the highest possible greenness score) [20]. This demonstrates how resource-intensive and outdated techniques remain prevalent in official methods, creating significant environmental burdens.

The linear model exhibits several critical flaws in spectroscopic sample preparation:

• Resource intensity: Energy-intensive processes and consumption of non-renewable resources [20]
• Waste generation: Substantial waste production with inadequate disposal or recycling protocols [21]
• Design shortcomings: Products designed for performance with minimal consideration for end-of-life stage [23]
• Coordination failures: Limited collaboration between stakeholders (manufacturers, researchers, routine labs, policymakers) [20]

Principles of Circular Analytical Chemistry

Circular Analytical Chemistry (CAC) represents a transformative approach that applies circular economy principles specifically to the analytical chemistry sector. It is defined as "an analytical chemistry system that aims at eliminating waste, circulating products and materials, minimizing hazards, and saving resources and the environment" [23]. This framework establishes 12 foundational goals that guide the transition toward a closed-loop, resource-efficient analytical practice [23] [22]:

• Collect and use waste - Treating waste as a valuable resource for other processes
• Maximize atom circulation - Ensuring all atoms in a molecule are used through appropriate design
• Optimize resource efficiency - Reusing materials to limit consumption of finite resources
• Strive for energy persistence - Capturing energy output when reusing waste material
• Enhance process efficiency - Maximizing reuse and recycling of materials during and after chemical processes
• No out-of-plant toxicity - Preventing release of toxic chemicals into the environment
• Target optimal design - Designing products for sustainability at their end-of-life
• Assess sustainability - Determining sustainability throughout the complete lifecycle
• Apply the ladder of circularity - Implementing the hierarchy: reject, reduce, reuse, redistribute, repair, refurbish, repurpose, remanufacture, recycle, recover, return
• Sell service, not product - Shifting business models to service provision rather than product sales
• Reject lock-in - Adapting to changes in production methods despite challenges
• Unify industry and policy - Fostering collaboration between industry and policymakers

The relationship between linear, green, and circular approaches can be visualized through their fundamental operating principles:

Greenness Assessment Metrics for Spectroscopic Sample Preparation

The transition to sustainable analytical practices requires robust methods to evaluate environmental performance. Several metric tools have been developed to assess the greenness of analytical methods, particularly focusing on sample preparation steps. The most relevant and currently used tools include:

• AGREEprep: The first dedicated metric for sample preparation, based on the 10 principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP). It generates a circular pictogram with scores from 0-1 and color-coded segments [20] [23].
• BAGI: The Blue Applicability Grade Index assesses practical and economic aspects, complementing environmental evaluations [24].
• RGB 12 algorithm: Part of the White Analytical Chemistry concept, it simultaneously evaluates analytical, ecological, and practical characteristics [24].
• GEMAM: A newly proposed comprehensive metric based on both the 12 principles of GAC and 10 factors of GSP, presenting results on a 0-10 scale with a hexagonal pictogram [10].

These tools help researchers identify strengths and weaknesses in their methods, enabling continuous improvement toward circularity.

Comparative Analysis of Metric Tools

Table 1: Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Metric Tool	Assessment Focus	Scoring System	Visual Output	Key Principles Covered	Strengths
AGREEprep	Sample preparation	0-1 scale	Color-coded circular pictogram	10 principles of GSP	Specific to sample preparation, intuitive visualization [24] [23]
BAGI	Method applicability & practicality	Not specified	Scoring diagram	Practical and economic factors	Complements environmental metrics [24]
RGB 12	Comprehensive method assessment	Color mixing model	RGB color model	12 principles of WAC	Balances green, analytical, and practical criteria [24]
GEMAM	Entire analytical procedure	0-10 scale	Hexagonal pictogram	12 GAC + 10 GSP principles	Comprehensive coverage, flexible weighting [10]

Comparative Analysis of Spectroscopic Sample Preparation Methods

Greenness Evaluation of Sample Preparation Techniques

Sample preparation is a critical focus for sustainability improvements, as it often represents the most resource-intensive phase of analysis. Different sample preparation methods vary significantly in their environmental impact, energy consumption, and waste generation.

Table 2: Greenness Assessment of Common Sample Preparation Methods for Spectroscopic Analysis

Sample Preparation Method	AGREEprep Score*	Solvent Consumption	Energy Demand	Waste Generation	Key Circularity Considerations
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE)	0.45-0.65	High	Moderate	High (cartridges)	Potential for cartridge regeneration, limited recyclability [24]
Liquid-Liquid Extraction (LLE)	0.35-0.55	Very high	Low	High (solvent waste)	Solvent recovery systems can improve circularity [24]
Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME)	0.70-0.85	Minimal	Low	Very low	Reusable fibers, minimal solvent use [24]
Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (DLLME)	0.65-0.80	Low	Low	Low	Solvent volume optimization, recovery potential [24]
Stir Bar Sorptive Extraction (SBSE)	0.75-0.90	Minimal	Low	Very low	Reusable extraction phase, high reusability [24]

*AGREEprep scores are presented as ranges based on method variations and implementation details [24].

Greenness Assessment of UV Filter Analysis Methods

A comprehensive study evaluating ten sample preparation methods for determining UV filters in water using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry provides valuable experimental data on method greenness. The assessment used AGREEprep, BAGI, and RGB 12 tools to evaluate environmental impact, practicality, and analytical performance [24].

Table 3: Experimental Greenness Assessment of UV Filter Analysis Methods [24]

Extraction Method	AGREEprep Score	BAGI Score	RGB Assessment	Key Green Advantages	Circularity Potential
SPME	0.87	High	Balanced performance	Solventless, reusable fibers	High reusability, minimal waste
USA-DLLME	0.78	Moderate-High	Good balance	Reduced solvent volume, faster extraction	Solvent recovery systems applicable
VA-DLLME	0.75	Moderate	Good balance	Reduced solvent, no specialized equipment	Energy efficient, scalable
FPSE	0.72	Moderate	Good balance	Reusable extraction media	Moderate reusability
Conventional SPE	0.52	High	Practical focus	Well-established, high throughput	Limited circularity, high waste

The experimental data demonstrates that microextraction techniques consistently outperform conventional methods in greenness metrics, with SPME achieving the highest AGREEprep score of 0.87 [24]. These methods align with circular principles through reduced material consumption, reusability, and minimal waste generation.

Practical Implementation: Strategies for Circular Sample Preparation

Green Sample Preparation Principles and Techniques

Implementing circular practices in spectroscopic sample preparation requires practical strategies aligned with the 10 principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) [23]:

• Minimize sample and reagent consumption through miniaturization
• Substitute hazardous reagents with safer alternatives
• Reduce energy consumption through process optimization
• Maximize sample throughput through parallel processing and automation
• Prevent in-situ derivatization when possible
• Prefer direct measurements to avoid sample preparation
• Automate methods for improved efficiency and safety
• Integrate multiple steps into continuous workflows
• Use renewable and reusable materials
• Eliminate or treat waste before disposal

Specific techniques that support these principles in spectroscopic analysis include:

• Miniaturization: Scaling down extraction phases and solvent volumes significantly reduces resource consumption [24]
• Automation: Automated systems save time, lower reagent consumption, and reduce waste generation while minimizing operator exposure to hazardous chemicals [20]
• Parallel processing: Handling multiple samples simultaneously increases throughput and reduces energy consumed per sample [20]
• Solvent replacement: Using sustainable solvents like propylene carbonate, glycerol, and dimethyl carbonate [23]
• Method integration: Combining multiple preparation steps into single, continuous workflows to cut down on resource use and waste production [20]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Sustainable Sample Preparation

Reagent/Material	Function in Sample Preparation	Sustainability Considerations	Circularity Potential
Bioresourced solvents (e.g., ethanol, ethyl acetate)	Extraction medium	Renewable origin, lower toxicity	Biodegradable, from renewable feedstocks [23]
Ionic liquids	Alternative extraction media	Low volatility, tunable properties	Reusability, but toxicity concerns require evaluation [23]
Molecularly imprinted polymers	Selective sorbents for extraction	High selectivity reduces processing needs	Reusable, durable materials [24]
Magnetic nanoparticles	Dispersive solid-phase extraction	Enable easy separation and recovery	High reusability potential, efficient recovery [24]
Cellulose-based sorbents	Extraction phases	Renewable, biodegradable materials	From sustainable sources, compostable [23]

Challenges and Future Directions

Barriers to Implementation

The transition to circular analytical practices faces several significant challenges that must be addressed:

• Coordination failures: Limited collaboration between key stakeholders (manufacturers, researchers, routine labs, policymakers) hinders the systemic changes needed for circularity [20]
• Directionality lack: A strong focus on product performance (faster analyses, higher sensitivity) often overshadows sustainability considerations in method development [20]
• Regulatory inertia: Official standard methods frequently rely on resource-intensive techniques, with 67% scoring poorly on greenness metrics [20]
• Commercialization gap: Groundbreaking discoveries from research teams rarely reach the market due to academic priorities favoring publication over commercialization [20]
• Rebound effect: Efficiency improvements can sometimes lead to increased overall consumption if laboratories perform more analyses simply because methods become cheaper or faster [20]

Emerging Trends and Opportunities

Future advancements in circular spectroscopic practices will likely focus on several promising areas:

• Dematerialization: Significant reduction in physical materials and resources required for sample preparation products and services [23]
• Remote analysis: Development of low-cost, robust sensors for all-in-one sampling, preparation, and analysis [23]
• AI integration: Fusion of analytical chemistry with big data and artificial intelligence to optimize resource use and predict method sustainability [23]
• Advanced materials: Development of smarter, more selective, and reusable materials for extraction and separation [24]
• Service-based models: Shifting from product ownership to service provision, creating incentives for durable, repairable equipment [22]

The workflow for implementing and assessing circular practices involves multiple interconnected stages:

The evolution from linear to circular mindsets in analytical chemistry represents both an urgent necessity and a tremendous opportunity for innovation. As the comparative data presented in this guide demonstrates, microextraction techniques and green sample preparation methods consistently outperform conventional approaches in sustainability metrics while maintaining analytical performance. The implementation of circular principles—through miniaturization, solvent substitution, automation, and waste reduction—not only reduces environmental impact but also leads to more efficient and cost-effective analytical practices.

The transition to circular analytical chemistry requires coordinated efforts across all stakeholders: researchers must develop and validate sustainable methods, manufacturers must design products for circularity, regulators must update standards to prioritize greenness, and educators must instill circular thinking in the next generation of scientists. By embracing this holistic approach, the analytical community can transform its environmental impact while continuing to provide the essential chemical data needed to address global challenges.

The Toolbox: A Practical Guide to Greenness Metrics and Assessment Methodologies

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has emerged as a critical discipline focused on minimizing the environmental footprint of analytical methods while maintaining analytical performance. The concept, formally introduced in 2000, represents a significant shift in how analytical chemists approach method development, emphasizing the reduction or elimination of hazardous substances throughout the analytical workflow [25] [26]. This transformation has been driven by growing recognition that traditional analytical methods often consume substantial resources, generate significant waste, and utilize hazardous materials that pose risks to both human health and the environment.

The evolution from conventional analytical practices to greener alternatives necessitates robust assessment frameworks to evaluate and compare the environmental performance of different methodologies. Greenness assessment tools provide standardized approaches to quantify this environmental impact, enabling researchers to make informed decisions during method development and selection. These tools have progressed from basic checklists to comprehensive metrics that evaluate multiple dimensions of sustainability throughout the entire analytical process [26]. This guide provides a systematic comparison of the major assessment tools—NEMI, Eco-Scale, GAPI, and AGREE—to assist researchers in selecting appropriate evaluation methods for their spectroscopic sample preparation research.

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI)

Basic Principles and Structure: The National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) represents one of the earliest tools developed for assessing the greenness of analytical methods. Its design centers on a simple pictogram that displays four key environmental criteria, with each criterion represented as a quadrant in a circle [27] [28]. The tool evaluates whether a method meets benchmarks for: (1) containing no persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals; (2) using no hazardous reagents; (3) generating no corrosive waste (pH ≤2 or ≥12); and (4) producing minimal waste (≤50g per analysis) [27]. Each quadrant is colored green only if the method satisfies the corresponding criterion, providing an immediate visual assessment of method greenness.

Applications and Limitations: NEMI's primary strength lies in its simplicity and accessibility, making it particularly useful for initial, high-level screening of method greenness [28]. The tool has been widely applied in environmental and pharmaceutical analysis contexts. For instance, in the assessment of chromatographic methods for quantifying sulfadiazine and trimethoprim in bovine meat and chicken muscles, NEMI provided a straightforward visual comparison of three developed methods [25]. Similarly, in evaluating methods for analyzing neurotransmitters, NEMI offered a quick overview of environmental performance [28].

However, significant limitations have been identified with NEMI. The binary nature of its assessment (green or blank quadrants) fails to capture varying degrees of greenness, potentially overlooking important nuances in environmental impact [27] [26]. Additionally, NEMI does not account for energy consumption, operator safety, or the full analytical workflow, focusing primarily on chemical usage and waste generation [26]. These limitations have led researchers to note that "NEMI is not enough for detailed comparison, and another assessment method is needed for effective comparison" [28].

Analytical Eco-Scale

Basic Principles and Structure: The Analytical Eco-Scale introduces a semi-quantitative approach to greenness assessment based on penalty points [27] [28]. This method begins with a perfect score of 100 points, representing an ideal green method. Penalty points are then subtracted for each aspect of the method that deviates from ideal green conditions, including the use of hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste generation [27]. The penalty points assigned correspond to the degree of environmental hazard, with more hazardous substances or processes receiving higher penalties [28]. The final score provides a numerical representation of method greenness, with scores above 75 classified as "excellent green analysis," scores between 50-75 as "acceptable green analysis," and scores below 50 as "inadequate green analysis" [28].

Applications and Limitations: The Analytical Eco-Scale has been widely applied in pharmaceutical analysis and method development. For example, in assessing chromatographic methods for remdesivir analysis, the Eco-Scale helped differentiate methods based on their quantitative scores, complementing the information provided by other tools [27]. Similarly, in evaluating methods for neurotransmitter analysis, the Eco-Scale provided a numerical basis for comparison, with methods typically scoring in the 70-90 range [28].

The primary advantage of the Eco-Scale is its semi-quantitative nature, which enables more nuanced comparisons between methods than the binary NEMI assessment [28]. However, limitations include its reliance on expert judgment in assigning penalty points and the lack of a visual component, which may reduce accessibility for non-specialist users [26]. Additionally, the tool does not provide detailed insights into specific areas for improvement, as it consolidates all penalty points into a single numerical score [28].

Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI)

Basic Principles and Structure: The Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) represents a significant advancement in greenness assessment by evaluating the entire analytical procedure from sample collection to final determination [25] [27]. GAPI employs a comprehensive color-coded pictogram consisting of five pentagrams, each corresponding to different stages of the analytical process: sample collection, preservation, transport, preparation, and final analysis [27]. Each pentagram contains several sub-categories that are colored green, yellow, or red to indicate low, medium, or high environmental impact, respectively [27]. This detailed approach allows for identification of specific areas where environmental improvements can be made.

Applications and Limitations: GAPI has been extensively applied across various analytical domains. In pharmaceutical analysis, it has been used to evaluate methods for drug quantification, such as in the assessment of 16 chromatographic procedures for remdesivir analysis [27]. In environmental analysis, GAPI has been employed to compare the greenness of methods for detecting veterinary drug residues in food products [25]. The tool's comprehensive nature makes it particularly valuable for method development and optimization.

The major strength of GAPI is its holistic approach, covering the entire analytical workflow and providing visual identification of environmental hotspots [25] [27]. However, limitations include the lack of an overall numerical score, which can make direct method comparisons challenging [26]. Additionally, some subjectivity remains in the assignment of colors to different procedural aspects [26]. Recent modifications, such as the Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) and Complex GAPI, have attempted to address these limitations by introducing scoring systems and expanding assessment boundaries [26].

Analytical Greenness Metric (AGREE)

Basic Principles and Structure: The Analytical Greenness Metric (AGREE) represents one of the most recent and sophisticated approaches to greenness assessment [27] [26]. This tool is based on the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, with each principle represented as a section in a circular pictogram [27]. AGREE provides both a visual representation and a numerical score between 0 and 1, with higher scores indicating better environmental performance [27]. The tool features a color gradient for each section (red to green) and displays the overall score in the center of the pictogram, offering both detailed and summary assessments simultaneously [27].

Applications and Limitations: AGREE has been widely adopted since its introduction due to its comprehensive nature and user-friendly output. In comparative studies of analytical methods, such as those for remdesivir analysis, AGREE has provided detailed insights into methodological strengths and weaknesses across all 12 GAC principles [27]. The tool has also been applied in the assessment of sample preparation techniques, where it offers a balanced evaluation of multiple environmental factors [26].

The primary advantages of AGREE include its foundation in the 12 GAC principles, comprehensive coverage, and intuitive presentation of results [27] [26]. However, limitations include insufficient accounting for pre-analytical processes and some subjectivity in weighting different criteria [26]. To address these limitations, complementary tools such as AGREEprep have been developed specifically for sample preparation assessment [26]. The tool is available through free software, enhancing its accessibility to the analytical community [27].

Comparative Analysis of Assessment Tools

Direct Comparison of Key Characteristics

Table 1: Comparative Characteristics of Major Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool	Assessment Approach	Output Format	Scope of Assessment	Scoring System	Ease of Use
NEMI	Binary evaluation of 4 criteria	Pictogram (4 quadrants)	Reagents and waste only	Non-numerical (pass/fail)	Very easy
Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative penalty points	Numerical score (0-100)	Reagents, energy, waste	Numerical with categories	Moderate
GAPI	Qualitative multi-criteria	Color-coded pictogram (5 pentagrams)	Full analytical procedure	Non-numerical (color codes)	Moderate to difficult
AGREE	Quantitative multi-criteria	Combined pictogram and numerical score (0-1)	Full analytical procedure based on 12 GAC principles	Numerical with color codes	Moderate

Table 2: Tool Performance Across Different Assessment Categories

Tool	Chemical Hazard Assessment	Energy Consumption	Waste Generation	Operator Safety	Throughput Efficiency
NEMI	Basic (PBT and hazardous only)	Not considered	Basic (quantity only)	Not considered	Not considered
Eco-Scale	Comprehensive (penalty points)	Included	Included	Indirectly considered	Not specifically considered
GAPI	Comprehensive	Included	Included	Included	Included
AGREE	Comprehensive	Included	Included	Included	Included

Tool Selection Guidelines for Different Scenarios

Choosing the appropriate assessment tool depends on the specific requirements of the research context. For preliminary screening of multiple methods, NEMI offers rapid evaluation capabilities, though it should be supplemented with more sophisticated tools for complete assessment [28]. When comparing similar methods and requiring a quantitative basis for selection, the Analytical Eco-Scale provides valuable numerical scores that facilitate ranking of alternatives [28]. For comprehensive method development and optimization, GAPI and AGREE offer the most detailed assessments, with GAPI being particularly strong for identifying specific areas for improvement throughout the analytical workflow [25] [27], and AGREE excelling in its alignment with the 12 principles of GAC and its intuitive output format [27] [26].

In practice, employing multiple complementary tools often provides the most robust assessment. For example, one study on chromatographic methods for sulfadiazine and trimethoprim analysis recommended applying NEMI, Eco-Scale, and GAPI together "to obtain a deeper view on the greenness of a method" [25]. Similarly, recent research has demonstrated the value of using tool combinations such as MoGAPI, AGREE, AGSA, and CaFRI to obtain a multidimensional perspective on method sustainability [26].

Practical Application to Spectroscopic Sample Preparation

Assessment of Common Sample Preparation Techniques

The greenness assessment tools reveal significant variations in the environmental performance of different sample preparation methods for spectroscopic analysis. Traditional techniques such as liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) often score poorly due to large solvent consumption, substantial waste generation, and frequently use of hazardous chemicals [11]. Microextraction techniques, including solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and liquid-phase microextraction (LPME), generally demonstrate superior greenness profiles because of their minimal reagent requirements and reduced waste generation [26].

A recent evaluation of 174 standard methods with sample preparation steps revealed generally poor greenness performance, with 67% of methods scoring below 0.2 on the AGREEprep scale (where 1 represents the highest possible score) [11]. The performance varied by application area, with pharmaceutical methods scoring highest (45% below 0.2) and environmental methods for organic compounds performing worst (86% below 0.2) [11]. These findings highlight the urgent need for updating traditional sample preparation methods with greener alternatives.

Implementation of Green Principles in Sample Preparation

The assessment tools provide clear guidance for implementing green principles in spectroscopic sample preparation. Key strategies include:

• Miniaturization: Reducing sample and solvent volumes through microextraction techniques [26]
• Alternative solvents: Replacing hazardous organic solvents with safer alternatives such as water, supercritical fluids, or deep eutectic solvents [25]
• Integration and automation: Combining sample preparation steps and implementing automated systems to reduce resource consumption [26]
• Energy reduction: Utilizing room-temperature processes and minimizing heating requirements [27]
• Waste management: Implementing waste treatment protocols and recycling solvents where possible [26]

Recent studies demonstrate that methods incorporating these principles achieve significantly higher greenness scores. For example, a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method evaluated using multiple metrics (MoGAPI, AGREE, AGSA, and CaFRI) demonstrated strengths in miniaturization and avoidance of derivatization, though it showed weaknesses in waste management and reagent safety [26].

Emerging Trends and Future Directions

Evolution of Assessment Tools

The field of greenness assessment continues to evolve, with recent developments addressing limitations of earlier tools. The AGREEprep metric specifically targets sample preparation, addressing a crucial gap in comprehensive method assessment [11] [26]. The Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) and Complex GAPI introduce scoring systems to improve comparability between methods [26]. The Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI) focuses specifically on climate impact by estimating carbon emissions associated with analytical procedures [26]. The Analytical Green Star Analysis (AGSA) employs a star-shaped diagram to represent performance across multiple green criteria [26].

The progression of metrics reflects a shift from simple binary assessments to sophisticated, multi-dimensional evaluations that consider the entire lifecycle of analytical methods [26]. This evolution enables more comprehensive and accurate assessments of environmental impact, supporting the development of truly sustainable analytical practices.

Integration with Broader Assessment Frameworks

Greenness assessment is increasingly being integrated into broader evaluation frameworks. White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) represents one such approach, combining the green dimension (environmental sustainability) with blue (method practicality) and red (analytical performance) dimensions [26]. This holistic perspective acknowledges that environmental considerations must be balanced with analytical performance and practical implementation requirements.

Additionally, new comprehensive metrics continue to emerge, such as the Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM), which proposes evaluation based on both the 12 principles of GAC and 10 factors of green sample preparation, presenting results on a 0-10 scale [10]. Such tools aim to provide both qualitative and quantitative assessment capabilities in a single framework [10].

The evolution of greenness assessment tools from basic metrics like NEMI to comprehensive frameworks like AGREE and GAPI reflects the growing sophistication and importance of environmental considerations in analytical science. Each tool offers distinct advantages: NEMI for rapid screening, Eco-Scale for semi-quantitative comparison, GAPI for comprehensive process assessment, and AGREE for principle-based evaluation with intuitive scoring.

For researchers in spectroscopic sample preparation, employing complementary assessment tools provides the most robust approach to evaluating and improving method greenness. The continued development and refinement of these tools will play a crucial role in advancing sustainable analytical practices and reducing the environmental footprint of chemical analysis.

Sample preparation is a pivotal step in the analytical procedure, essential for the separation and enrichment of target analytes, the removal of matrix interferences, and ensuring compatibility with the measurement technique [29]. Simultaneously, it has been identified as one of the most critical steps from a Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) perspective, primarily due to its substantial requirements for solvents, sorbents, reagents, energetic inputs, and other consumable materials [29]. While the first principle of GAC suggests avoiding sample preparation entirely in favor of direct analytical techniques, this approach is often impractical for addressing complex analytical challenges, particularly in spectroscopic analysis of complex matrices [29].

The emergence of AGREEprep represents a significant advancement in the metric tool landscape, designed specifically to address the unique environmental impact assessment needs of sample preparation procedures. Unlike general green chemistry metrics, AGREEprep is anchored in the ten principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP), providing a targeted framework for evaluating this critical analytical step [29]. This specialist focus makes it particularly valuable for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals seeking to optimize the sustainability of their spectroscopic sample preparation methods while maintaining analytical integrity.

Understanding AGREEprep: Structure and Methodology

The Ten Principles of Green Sample Preparation

AGREEprep evaluates sample preparation procedures against ten carefully defined principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) [29]:

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

Weighting System and Scoring Mechanism

A critical innovation of AGREEprep is its recognition that not all GSP principles hold equal importance in the overall environmental assessment. The tool incorporates a default weighting system that assigns varying levels of importance to each criterion, though assessors retain the flexibility to adjust these weights based on specific methodological requirements [29]. The calculation of the overall score involves aggregating the weighted scores for all ten criteria, resulting in a value between 0 and 1, where 0 represents the worst possible environmental performance and 1 indicates ideal green performance or the absence of a sample preparation step [29].

Pictogram Output and Interpretation

The assessment output is presented as an intuitive, colorful circular pictogram with ten sections corresponding to each GSP principle [29]. The color of each segment ranges from red (poor performance) through yellow to green (excellent performance), providing immediate visual feedback on methodological strengths and weaknesses. The center of the pictogram displays the overall numerical score, offering both a quick reference and a detailed metric for comparison purposes [29].

Comparative Analysis: AGREEprep Versus Other Green Metric Tools

The landscape of green analytical chemistry metrics has evolved significantly, with several tools developed to assess environmental impact across different dimensions and analytical stages:

Table 1: Classification of Green Analytical Chemistry Metric Tools

Tool Category	Representative Examples	Primary Focus	Stage Specificity
Comprehensive Assessment	RGB model, Hexagon-CALIFICAMET [30]	Overall system attributes	General (entire procedure)
Performance-Focused	Red Analytical Performance Index (RAPI) [30]	Analytical results quality	General
Practicality-Focused	Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) [30]	Method practicality and viability	General
Environmental Impact	NEMI, GAPI, AGREE [30] [29]	Safety and environmental impact	General
Stage-Specific	AGREEprep [29], AGREEprep [30]	Sample preparation greenness	Sample preparation stage
Separation-Specific	Analytical Method Volume Intensity (AMVI), HPLC-EAT [30]	Chromatographic separations	Determination stage

Direct Comparison with General Assessment Tools

When compared to general green assessment metrics, AGREEprep demonstrates distinct advantages for sample preparation evaluation:

Table 2: AGREEprep vs. General Green Assessment Metrics

Evaluation Aspect	AGREEprep	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale	GAPI
Number of Criteria	10 [29]	4 [29]	Variable (penalty points) [29]	Multiple [29]
Stage Specificity	Sample preparation only [29]	Entire procedure [30]	Entire procedure [29]	Entire procedure [29]
Scoring System	0-1 scale with weighted criteria [29]	Binary (yes/no) [30] [29]	Penalty points subtracted from 100 [29]	Pictogram with color codes [29]
Output Format	Circular pictogram with overall score [29]	Quadrant pictogram [30] [29]	Numerical value [29]	Hierarchical pictogram [29]
Weighting Approach	Adjustable default weights [29]	No explicit weights [30]	Implicit through penalty values [30]	No explicit weights [30]
Primary Application	Sample preparation optimization [29]	Quick general assessment [29]	General environmental impact [29]	Comprehensive procedure assessment [29]

Advantages of Specialized Sample Preparation Assessment

AGREEprep addresses a critical gap in green metrics by offering several specialized capabilities unavailable in general assessment tools:

• Targeted Criteria Relevance: The ten assessment criteria directly correspond to the specific environmental concerns of sample preparation, including solvent volumes, sorbent materials, and energy inputs particularly relevant to spectroscopic sample preparation [29].
• Methodological Improvement Guidance: The segmented pictogram output immediately identifies underperforming aspects of sample preparation methods, directing researchers toward specific opportunities for green optimization [29].
• Comparative Analysis Framework: The numerical output enables direct comparison between different sample preparation approaches, facilitating evidence-based selection of the greenest available method [29].
• Stage-Specific Weighting: The default weighting system reflects the relative importance of different environmental concerns specifically for sample preparation rather than analytical procedures generally [29].

Experimental Application and Case Study Analysis

Methodology for Comparative Assessment

To validate AGREEprep's effectiveness in practical applications, researchers applied the metric to six different sample preparation procedures for determining phthalate esters in water samples [29]. The assessment followed a standardized protocol:

• Data Collection: Document all method parameters including solvents, volumes, energy requirements, equipment, and throughput.
• Criterion Evaluation: Assess each method against the ten GSP principles using the established scoring system.
• Weight Application: Apply default weights to each criterion according to the AGREEprep methodology.
• Score Calculation: Compute overall scores and generate pictograms for each method.
• Comparative Analysis: Identify performance patterns and improvement opportunities across methods.

Results and Comparative Performance

The application of AGREEprep to phthalate ester extraction methods revealed significant differences in environmental performance [29]:

Table 3: AGREEprep Scores for Phthalate Ester Extraction Methods

Extraction Method	Key Characteristics	Solvent Consumption	Energy Requirements	Overall AGREEprep Score
Traditional LLE	EPA 8061A with separatory funnel [29]	180 mL dichloromethane [29]	Moderate (manual shaking) [29]	0.27 [29]
SPE	Standard solid-phase extraction [29]	Lower solvent volumes [29]	Moderate [29]	0.41 [29]
dµSPE	Dispersive micro-solid-phase extraction [29]	Minimal solvents [29]	Low [29]	0.58 [29]
SBSE	Stir bar sorptive extraction [29]	Solvent-free [29]	Low [29]	0.62 [29]
Thin-Film SPME	Thin-film solid-phase microextraction [29]	Solvent-free [29]	Low [29]	0.64 [29]
Ideal Green Method	Theoretical optimal performance	None	Minimal	1.00 [29]

The results demonstrated a clear greenness progression from traditional solvent-intensive methods like liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) toward modern micro-extraction techniques, with thin-film SPME achieving the highest score (0.64) [29]. This quantitative comparison provides spectroscopic researchers with empirical evidence to support the selection of environmentally preferable sample preparation methods.

The AGREEprep Assessment Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the systematic workflow for applying AGREEprep to assess sample preparation methods:

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Sample Preparation

The implementation of greener sample preparation methods often requires specialized reagents and materials designed to minimize environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance:

Table 4: Essential Reagents and Materials for Green Sample Preparation

Reagent/Material	Function	Green Attributes	Application Examples
Bio-based Solvents	Replacement for petroleum-derived solvents [29]	Renewable feedstocks, lower toxicity [29]	Extraction of organic compounds
Reusable Sorbents	Target analyte extraction and concentration [29]	Reduced waste generation [29]	SPE, microextraction techniques
Ionic Liquids	Green solvent alternative [29]	Low volatility, tunable properties [29]	Separation of complex matrices
Molecularly Imprinted Polymers	Selective extraction materials [29]	Reusability, reduced solvent consumption [29]	Selective sample preparation
Sustainable Sorbents	Extraction phase [29]	Biodegradability, renewable sources [29]	Various extraction techniques

Future Perspectives and Development Initiatives

The evolution of green metric tools like AGREEprep continues to address persistent challenges in environmental assessment methodology. Several key areas represent opportunities for future refinement:

• Uncertainty Quantification: Future versions may incorporate uncertainty estimates for individual criterion assessments, enhancing the reliability and interpretability of scoring systems [30].
• Objective Weighting Establishment: Development of unbiased, objective methods for establishing criterion weights could reduce reliance on expert judgment and improve metric consistency [30].
• Criterion Interaction Modeling: Addressing potential interdependencies between assessment criteria could minimize redundancy and scoring bias in complex methodological evaluations [30].
• Integration with Complementary Metrics: Combining AGREEprep with specialized tools for assessing analytical performance (RAPI), practicality (BAGI), and innovation (VIGI) could provide a more comprehensive White Analytical Chemistry perspective [30].

AGREEprep represents a significant specialization in the green metric tool landscape, offering researchers in spectroscopy and drug development a targeted framework for evaluating the environmental impact of sample preparation procedures. Its dedicated focus on the ten principles of Green Sample Preparation, combined with a weighted scoring system and intuitive visual output, provides distinct advantages over general assessment tools for optimizing this critical analytical step.

The experimental application of AGREEprep to phthalate ester extraction methods demonstrates its practical utility in identifying environmental hotspots and guiding method selection toward greener alternatives. As the field of green analytical chemistry continues to evolve, AGREEprep establishes itself as an essential component of the researcher's toolkit for developing sustainable spectroscopic methods that balance analytical performance with environmental responsibility.

The evolution of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has progressed from foundational principles to sophisticated, quantitative assessment tools. While established metrics like AGREE and GAPI have provided valuable frameworks, recent advancements have introduced more specialized, comprehensive, and visually intuitive evaluation systems. The field is now transitioning toward White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which seeks a harmonious balance between environmental sustainability (green), analytical performance (red), and practical applicability (blue) [31] [17]. Within this evolving landscape, three cutting-edge metrics—AGSA (Analytical Green Star Area), CaFRI (Carbon Footprint Reduction Index), and GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods)—have emerged to address specific gaps in method evaluation. These tools offer novel approaches to quantifying environmental impact, with AGSA providing an intuitive visual summary, CaFRI focusing specifically on climate impact, and GEMAM delivering a comprehensive, flexible assessment framework. This guide provides an objective comparison of these emerging tools, detailing their methodologies, applications, and performance relative to established alternatives to inform researchers in spectroscopy and sample preparation.

Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA)

AGSA is a novel metric that combines intuitive visualization with an integrated scoring system, using a star-shaped diagram to represent performance across multiple green criteria [31] [26]. The tool assesses factors including reagent toxicity, waste generation, energy use, and solvent consumption, providing a total score based on the aggregate performance across all evaluated parameters. The visual output immediately highlights strengths and weaknesses across different sustainability dimensions, while the total area of the star offers a direct method for comparison [26]. A modified version, MoGSA, has also been developed to allow users to selectively apply specific green chemistry principles based on their relevance to the particular chemical process being evaluated, addressing limitations in traditional green/non-green classification systems [32].

Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI)

CaFRI represents a specialized approach focused specifically on climate impact considerations [31] [26]. Developed in response to rising global awareness of climate change, this tool estimates and encourages reduction of carbon emissions associated with analytical procedures. CaFRI aligns the goals of analytical chemistry with broader environmental targets by considering how different stages in analytical methods directly or indirectly increase carbon footprints [26]. The metric evaluates factors including energy source and consumption, transportation requirements, solvent volumes, and CO2 emissions tracking, providing a focused assessment of a method's contribution to climate change.

Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM)

GEMAM is a comprehensive, flexible metric introduced in 2025 that bases its evaluation on both the 12 principles of GAC and the 10 factors of green sample preparation [10]. Its output is a unique pictogram consisting of seven hexagons, with the central hexagon representing the overall greenness score and the six surrounding hexagons indicating performance across key dimensions: sample, reagent, instrument, method, waste, and operator impacts [10]. The system employs 21 specific criteria scored on a 0-10 scale, with default weights assigned to different sections based on their relative environmental and health impacts (25% each to reagents and waste, 15% each to instrument and method, and 10% each to sample and operator) [10]. Users can adjust these weights based on specific methodological requirements, enhancing flexibility.

Table 1: Core Characteristics of the Three Evaluated Metrics

Metric	Primary Focus	Evaluation Scale	Visual Output	Key Innovation
AGSA	Multi-criteria environmental impact	Integrated scoring system	Star-shaped diagram	Combined visual and quantitative assessment
CaFRI	Climate impact	Not specified in results	Not specified in results	Focus on carbon footprint and climate alignment
GEMAM	Comprehensive method lifecycle	0-10 scale for 21 criteria	Seven-hexagon pictogram	Combines GAC principles and sample preparation factors

Experimental Protocols for Metric Application

The general workflow for applying these greenness assessment metrics follows a systematic protocol:

• Method Documentation: Compile complete details of the analytical procedure, including sample preparation, reagent types and volumes, instrumentation, energy requirements, waste generation, and safety considerations [17] [10].

• Data Categorization: Organize the method parameters according to the specific criteria required by each metric. For AGSA, this includes solvent consumption, hazard pictograms, and process integration [26]. For GEMAM, this involves mapping method parameters to the 21 criteria across six sections [10].

• Software Utilization: Input the categorized data into the respective software tools:

  • AGSA: Utilize dedicated scoring algorithms [26]
  • GEMAM: Use the freely available GEMAM software at https://gitee.com/xtDLUT/Gemam/releases/tag/Gemam-v1 [10]

• Score Calculation: The tools automatically calculate scores based on their respective algorithms, with GEMAM using Equations 1 and 2 as defined in its methodology [10].

• Interpretation: Analyze the visual outputs and numerical scores to identify environmental hotspots and compare against alternative methods.

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationship between these emerging tools and the broader context of analytical method assessment:

Green Metric Evolution: This diagram shows how emerging metrics build upon earlier frameworks.

Comparative Performance Analysis

Evaluation Comprehensiveness

The three metrics vary significantly in their scope and focus areas, with GEMAM offering the most comprehensive coverage of analytical method components:

Table 2: Scope and Coverage Comparison

Evaluation Aspect	AGSA	CaFRI	GEMAM
Reagent Consumption	Included	Not specified	Included
Energy Requirements	Included	Primary focus	Included
Waste Generation	Included	Included	Included
Operator Safety	Not specified	Not specified	Included
Sample Throughput	Not specified	Not specified	Included
Carbon Footprint	Secondary focus	Primary focus	Included
Process Integration	Included	Not specified	Included
Instrumentation	Not specified	Not specified	Included

Case Study Applications

FT-IR Spectroscopic Method for Antihypertensive Drugs

In a 2025 study comparing greenness assessment tools for a Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopic method for simultaneous quantification of amlodipine besylate and telmisartan, the method demonstrated strong environmental performance [9]. While this study did not specifically apply AGSA, CaFRI, or GEMAM, it provides context for how newer metrics might complement established tools. The method achieved a MoGAPI score of 89 and an AGREEprep score of 0.8, indicating high greenness performance, attributed to its solventless operation using a potassium bromide pressed pellet technique and minimal waste generation [9]. This case demonstrates the value of multi-metric assessment in providing complementary perspectives on method sustainability.

SULLME Method Evaluation

A case study evaluating sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) for antiviral compounds applied multiple assessment tools, providing insights into how different metrics highlight various sustainability aspects [26]. The method received an AGREE score of 56 and an AGSA score of 58.33, reflecting a moderately balanced green profile with strengths in miniaturization and semi-automation but weaknesses in waste management and reagent safety [26]. The CaFRI score of 60 highlighted specific climate impacts, noting relatively low energy consumption (0.1-1.5 kWh per sample) but absence of renewable energy sources and CO2 emissions tracking [26]. This multidimensional evaluation demonstrates how the complementary use of different metrics provides a more holistic sustainability assessment.

Advantages and Limitations

• AGSA provides an intuitive visual representation that immediately highlights methodological strengths and weaknesses across multiple environmental criteria [26]. However, its scope may not comprehensively cover all aspects of the analytical lifecycle compared to more recently developed tools.

• CaFRI addresses the critical, specialized need for climate impact assessment in analytical chemistry, aligning with global sustainability priorities [26]. As a focused metric, it should be used alongside more comprehensive tools to ensure all environmental aspects are considered.

• GEMAM offers exceptional comprehensiveness, combining both GAC principles and sample preparation factors into a unified assessment with flexible weighting capabilities [10]. Its multi-criteria approach covering 21 different parameters across the entire method lifecycle provides unprecedented detail but may increase complexity for routine screening applications.

Table 3: Performance Summary in Key Application Areas

Performance Characteristic	AGSA	CaFRI	GEMAM
Ease of Use	Moderate	Not specified	Moderate (21 criteria)
Visual Clarity	High (star diagram)	Not specified	High (hexagonal pictogram)
Quantitative Precision	Integrated score	Specific score	0-10 scale for 21 criteria
Flexibility/Adaptability	Not specified	Not specified	High (adjustable weights)
Educational Value	Moderate	Moderate	High (detailed breakdown)

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The implementation of green metrics requires both computational tools and methodological components that minimize environmental impact:

Table 4: Key Research Reagents and Materials for Green Spectroscopy

Reagent/Material	Function in Green Analysis	Sustainability Advantage
Potassium Bromide (KBr)	Matrix for solventless FT-IR sample preparation [9]	Eliminates organic solvent use; minimal waste generation
Bio-based Reagents	Alternative to petroleum-derived solvents and extractants [26]	Reduced toxicity; renewable sourcing; better biodegradability
Miniaturized Extraction Devices	Small-scale sample preparation (e.g., μ-SPE, TFME) [17]	Dramatically reduced solvent consumption (often < 10 mL)
Renewable Sorbents	Extraction phases from sustainable sources [17]	Reduced lifecycle environmental impact; better end-of-life profile
Water-based Systems	Alternative to organic solvents in separation [26]	Lower toxicity; reduced environmental persistence

Future Perspectives and Integration

The proliferation of green assessment tools, including AGSA, CaFRI, and GEMAM, reflects growing recognition of sustainability as a critical dimension of analytical method quality [31]. However, this expansion has also created challenges, with potential confusion for chemists trying to select the most appropriate metric for their specific application [31]. The future likely points toward integrated digital platforms that incorporate multiple metrics, potentially enhanced by artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms, to provide comprehensive environmental profiling of analytical methods [31]. Such platforms could enable real-time evaluation and dynamic updating of method profiles, supporting researchers, educators, and regulatory agencies in making more informed decisions that balance analytical performance with environmental responsibility.

Standardization efforts like the PRISM framework (practicality, reproducibility, inclusivity, sustainability, and manageability) offer promising approaches for establishing shared guidelines and data standards across the diverse landscape of green metrics [31]. The development of open-access databases and collaborative platforms could further enhance knowledge sharing and methodological improvements across the scientific community [31]. For spectroscopic sample preparation methods specifically, the optimal approach may involve using complementary metrics—employing CaFRI for climate impact assessment alongside more comprehensive tools like GEMAM—to ensure all environmental dimensions are adequately addressed while maintaining methodological practicality and analytical performance.

A Step-by-Step Guide to Calculating a Greenness Score

The growing emphasis on environmental sustainability has made the assessment of analytical methods' ecological impact a critical step in modern laboratories. Greenness scoring provides a standardized, quantitative approach to evaluate factors such as reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste generation, and operator safety. For researchers and drug development professionals, these scores are not merely abstract numbers but essential tools for aligning laboratory practices with the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) and Green Sample Preparation (GSP), enabling informed decisions that reduce environmental footprints while maintaining analytical integrity [26].

The transition from traditional linear models to more sustainable circular frameworks represents a paradigm shift in analytical science. This evolution has been accompanied by the development of sophisticated metric tools that move beyond simple binary assessments to provide comprehensive evaluations of analytical procedures. Recent studies have revealed an urgent need for this transition, showing that 67% of standard methods from major organizations score below 0.2 on a common greenness scale, with the figure rising to 86% for methods related to environmental analysis of organic compounds [11]. This demonstrates the critical importance of greenness assessment in driving methodological improvements.

Tool Comparison and Selection Criteria

Multiple assessment tools have been developed, each with distinct methodological approaches, scoring systems, and application scope. The choice of tool depends on the specific analytical context, with some designed for comprehensive method evaluation and others targeting specific stages like sample preparation. The table below compares the key characteristics of major greenness assessment tools:

Table 1: Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Scope of Assessment	Scoring System	Key Strengths	Primary Limitations
AGREE [26] [33]	Entire analytical procedure	0-1 scale (1=greenest)	Based on all 12 GAC principles; visual pictogram; adjustable weights	Does not fully account for pre-analytical processes
AGREEprep [11] [33]	Sample preparation only	0-1 scale (1=greenest)	Addresses the often least green step; follows 10 GSP principles	Must be combined with other tools for full method assessment
GAPI [26]	Entire analytical procedure	Qualitative color code	Comprehensive five-part pictogram; visualizes impact across stages	No overall numerical score; somewhat subjective color assignments
Analytical Eco-Scale [26]	Entire analytical procedure	Penalty points subtracted from 100	Simple calculation; facilitates direct comparison	Lacks visual component; relies on expert judgment
GEMAM [10]	Entire analytical procedure	0-10 scale	Combines GAC and GSP principles; seven-hexagon pictogram	Newer tool with less established track record
NEMI [30] [26]	Basic environmental criteria	Binary pictogram (pass/fail)	Simple and accessible	Lacks granularity; limited to four basic criteria

Tool Selection Guidance

Selecting the appropriate assessment tool requires careful consideration of your specific needs. For a comprehensive evaluation of entire analytical methods, AGREE and GAPI offer the most complete assessment. When sample preparation is the primary concern, AGREEprep provides specialized evaluation. For rapid screening of multiple methods, Analytical Eco-Scale offers efficient comparison, though it may lack depth. For educational purposes or non-specialist audiences, NEMI's simplicity, while limited, provides an accessible starting point [30] [26].

Many experts recommend using complementary tools to gain a multidimensional perspective. A 2025 case study evaluating a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method demonstrated how different tools (MoGAPI, AGREE, AGSA, CaFRI) highlight various strengths and weaknesses, providing a more holistic understanding of the method's environmental profile [26].

Step-by-Step Calculation Using AGREEprep

AGREEprep Workflow and Principles

AGREEprep specializes in assessing the sample preparation step, which often represents the most environmentally impactful stage of analytical procedures. The tool evaluates methods against 10 fundamental principles of green sample preparation, including minimal sample manipulation, reduced material consumption, enhanced safety, and efficient energy use [33]. The following diagram illustrates the AGREEprep calculation workflow:

Detailed Calculation Methodology

AGREEprep assessment begins with comprehensive data collection for each of the 10 criteria. Key parameters include sample size, solvent type and volume, energy consumption, reagent toxicity, waste generation, and potential for operator exposure [33]. Each criterion is scored between 0 and 1, with higher scores indicating better environmental performance.

The tool applies adjustable weighting factors to each criterion, reflecting their relative importance in the overall environmental impact. Default weights are provided, but users can modify these based on specific priorities or regulatory requirements. The overall score is calculated using a weighted sum algorithm that aggregates the individual criterion scores according to their assigned weights [30].

Output interpretation is facilitated through a circular pictogram with color coding from red (poor performance) to green (excellent performance). The center of the pictogram displays the final numerical score. Methods scoring above 0.5 are generally considered acceptable, while scores below 0.2 indicate significant environmental concerns [11] [33].

Step-by-Step Calculation Using the GEMAM Metric

GEMAM Framework and Structure

The Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM) offers a comprehensive assessment framework that integrates both the 12 principles of GAC and the 10 factors of GSP. This tool employs a seven-hexagon pictogram where the central hexagon represents the overall greenness score, while the six surrounding hexagons evaluate key dimensions: sample, reagent, instrument, method, waste, and operator impacts [10].

GEMAM utilizes 21 specific criteria distributed across the six assessment dimensions. Each criterion is scored on a 0-10 scale, with higher scores indicating better environmental performance. The tool incorporates default weighting values but allows user adjustment to accommodate specific analytical contexts or priorities.

Calculation Procedure

The GEMAM calculation involves a systematic scoring process for each of the 21 criteria based on the analytical method's characteristics. For example, the "sample preparation site" criterion awards higher scores for in-line preparation (score=1) compared to ex situ approaches (score=0.25). Similarly, the "amount of reagents" criterion evaluates the volume and mass of chemicals used in the procedure [10].

Section scores are calculated using the formula: Score of each section = Σ(10 × weight of criterion i × score of criterion i)

The overall GEMAM score is then computed as: Total score = Σ(Score of section i × Weight of section i)

Default weights for the six sections are: sample (10%), reagent (25%), instrument (15%), method (15%), waste (25%), and operator (10%). These weights can be modified based on assessment priorities. The final output includes both a numerical score (0-10) and a color-coded pictogram for intuitive interpretation [10].

Experimental Protocols and Case Studies

Greenness Assessment of Chromatographic Methods for UV Filters

A 2023 study provides a robust experimental protocol for comparing the greenness of 10 chromatographic methods used to analyze UV filters in cosmetic samples. The researchers applied both AGREE and AGREEprep tools to evaluate methods employing various sample preparation techniques, including solvent dissolution, solid-phase extraction (SPE), pressurized liquid extraction (PLE), and several microextraction approaches [33].

The experimental protocol followed these steps:

• Method Selection: Identified 10 chromatographic procedures from literature and standards
• Data Extraction: Compiled detailed data on solvents, energy consumption, waste generation, and procedural steps
• Software Application: Used AGREE and AGREEprep software for standardized assessment
• Score Calculation: Computed greenness scores for each method
• Comparative Analysis: Ranked methods by environmental performance

Results demonstrated that microextraction methods consistently achieved higher greenness scores than conventional approaches. The study also highlighted how assessment tools can identify critical steps where modifications would most significantly improve environmental performance [33].

Green Vibrational Spectroscopy for Pharmaceutical Analysis

A 2025 case study developed and validated a green FT-IR spectroscopic method for simultaneous quantification of antihypertensive drugs (amlodipine besylate and telmisartan) in pharmaceutical formulations. The method utilized a solventless pressed pellet technique with potassium bromide, eliminating toxic solvents and reducing waste generation [9].

The greenness assessment protocol included:

• Method Development: Established FT-IR parameters and calibration models
• Validation: Assessed specificity, linearity, precision, accuracy, LOD, and LOQ per ICH guidelines
• Greenness Evaluation: Applied MoGAPI, AGREEprep, and RGB model tools
• Comparison: Contrasted results with a previously published HPLC method

The FT-IR method achieved excellent scores: MoGAPI (89/100), AGREEprep (0.8/1), and RGB (87.2/100), significantly outperforming the reference HPLC method. This case study demonstrates how greenness-by-design approaches can yield environmentally superior methods without compromising analytical performance [9].

Table 2: Experimental Greenness Scores from Case Studies

Analytical Method	Application	AGREEprep Score	Other Tool Scores	Key Green Features
Microextraction-HPLC [33]	UV filters in cosmetics	0.7-0.8	AGREE: 0.6-0.7	Minimal solvents, reduced waste
FT-IR Spectroscopy [9]	Pharmaceutical analysis	0.8	MoGAPI: 89, RGB: 87.2	Solventless, minimal waste
SULLME [26]	Antiviral compounds	Not specified	AGREE: 56, AGSA: 58.33	Miniaturization, reduced solvents
Standard Methods [11]	Various applications	<0.2 (67% of methods)	Not applicable	Resource-intensive, outdated techniques

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Green Assessment Software Tools

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Software for Greenness Assessment

Tool/Resource	Function/Purpose	Access Information
AGREEprep Software	Specialized assessment of sample preparation greenness	Free download: mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE [33]
AGREE Calculator	Comprehensive evaluation of entire analytical methods	Free download: mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE [33]
GEMAM Software	Integrated assessment combining GAC and GSP principles	Free download: gitee.com/xtDLUT/Gemam [10]
Green Solvent Databases	Identification of less hazardous solvent alternatives	Various published guides and selection tools
Waste Management Protocols	Proper disposal and treatment of analytical waste	Laboratory safety guidelines and regulations

Greenness scoring has evolved from a theoretical concept to an essential practice in sustainable analytical chemistry. The step-by-step application of tools like AGREEprep and GEMAM provides researchers with standardized methodologies to quantify environmental impact, identify improvement opportunities, and make informed decisions about method selection and development.

The consistent demonstration that microextraction techniques and solventless approaches achieve higher greenness scores across multiple studies provides clear guidance for method development priorities. As regulatory agencies increasingly emphasize environmental considerations, proficiency in greenness assessment will become an indispensable skill for analytical chemists and drug development professionals [20].

Future developments in greenness assessment will likely address current limitations, including better accounting for pre-analytical processes, reducing subjectivity in scoring, and incorporating circular economy principles. The ongoing refinement of these tools will further strengthen their utility in guiding analytical chemistry toward greater environmental sustainability [30].

The growing emphasis on sustainability in analytical laboratories has driven the development of specialized metrics to evaluate the environmental impact of analytical methods. These tools provide standardized approaches to quantify and visualize method greenness, enabling researchers to make informed decisions that align with Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles. The evolution from basic assessment tools to comprehensive metrics represents a significant advancement in promoting sustainable practices within spectroscopic and chromatographic method development [26].

Modern greenness assessment tools combine quantitative scoring systems with intuitive visual pictograms to communicate complex environmental impact data in an accessible format. This dual approach allows researchers to quickly gauge overall method performance while retaining the ability to examine specific environmental aspects requiring improvement. The integration of these tools into analytical method development and validation reflects the analytical chemistry community's commitment to reducing its environmental footprint while maintaining high-quality analytical performance [26] [17].

Comprehensive Comparison of Major Assessment Tools

Metric Tool	Scoring System	Pictogram Type	Assessment Focus	Key Principles	Software Availability
AGSA (Analytical Green Star Area)	Built-in scoring system	Star-shaped diagram	Entire analytical method	12 Principles of GAC	Free at bit.ly/AGSA2025 [12]
AGREE (Analytical Greenness)	0-1 scale	Circular pictogram	Entire analytical procedure	12 Principles of GAC	Free online [26] [33]
AGREEprep	0-1 scale	Circular pictogram	Sample preparation only	10 Principles of Green Sample Preparation	Free online [11] [33]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)	No overall score	Five-part color-coded pictogram	Entire analytical process	Multiple GAC aspects	Not specified [26]
MoGAPI (Modified GAPI)	Cumulative scoring system	Enhanced GAPI pictogram	Entire analytical method	Multiple GAC aspects	Not specified [26]
GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods)	0-10 scale	Seven-hexagon pictogram	Entire analytical assay	12 GAC principles + 10 GSP factors	Free at Gitee repository [10]
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	Binary (pass/fail)	Four-quadrant pictogram	Basic environmental criteria	Persistence, toxicity, waste, corrosiveness	Not specified [26]
Analytical Eco-Scale	0-100 scale	No pictogram	Penalty point system	Hazardous reagents, energy, waste	Not specified [26]

Quantitative Scoring Systems Comparison

Metric Tool	Score Range	Interpretation Guidelines	Threshold for "Green" Method
AGREE/AGREEprep	0-1	Higher scores indicate greener methods	>0.5 considered green [33]
GEMAM	0-10	Higher scores indicate greener methods	Not explicitly stated [10]
Analytical Eco-Scale	0-100	Higher scores indicate greener methods	>75 considered excellent [26]
MoGAPI	Not specified	Higher scores indicate greener methods	Not explicitly stated [26]
AGSA	Not specified	Higher scores indicate greener methods	Not explicitly stated [12]

Assessment Scope and Coverage

Metric Tool	Sample Preparation	Reagent Toxicity	Energy Consumption	Waste Generation	Operator Safety	Analytical Performance
AGSA	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✗ [12]
AGREE	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✗ [26]
AGREEprep	✓ (Primary focus)	✓	✓	✓	✓	✗ [11] [33]
GAPI/MoGAPI	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✗ [26]
GEMAM	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✗ [10]
NEMI	Limited	✓	✗	✓	Limited	✗ [26]
White Analytical Chemistry	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓ [17]

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment

Standardized Assessment Methodology

Implementing a systematic approach to greenness assessment ensures consistent and comparable results across different methods and laboratories. The following protocol outlines the key steps for comprehensive method evaluation:

• Method Documentation: Compile complete details of the analytical procedure, including sample preparation, reagent types and volumes, instrumentation, energy requirements, waste generation, and operator safety considerations [10].

• Tool Selection: Choose appropriate assessment metrics based on methodological focus. AGREEprep is ideal for methods where sample preparation dominates environmental impact, while AGREE and AGSA provide whole-process evaluation [11] [26]. For techniques requiring balance between greenness and analytical performance, White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) assessment is recommended [17].

• Data Input and Calculation: Utilize available software tools for each metric to input methodological parameters and calculate scores. Most tools provide free software with predefined criteria and weighting systems [10] [33].

• Result Interpretation: Analyze both quantitative scores and qualitative pictograms to identify environmental strengths and weaknesses. Compare results against benchmark methods or established thresholds [26] [33].

• Iterative Improvement: Use assessment findings to optimize method greenness by addressing identified weaknesses, then reassess to quantify improvements [26].

Case Study Applications

FT-IR Spectroscopic Method for Pharmaceutical Analysis

A green vibrational spectroscopic method for simultaneous quantification of antihypertensive drugs (amlodipine besylate and telmisartan) in bulk and tablet formulations was developed using FT-IR spectroscopy. The method utilized a pressed pellet technique with potassium bromide, eliminating organic solvents and reducing waste generation [9].

Assessment Results:

• MoGAPI Score: 89/100
• AGREEprep Score: 0.8/1
• RGB Model Score: 87.2

The greenness scores demonstrated significant advantages over a previously reported HPLC method, particularly in solvent elimination and waste reduction. Statistical analysis confirmed no significant difference between the proposed FT-IR method and the reference HPLC method in terms of accuracy and precision, validating its analytical reliability alongside improved greenness [9].

HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS for Biogenic Volatile Organic Compounds

A miniaturized headspace solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry method was developed for analyzing biogenic volatile organic compounds emitted by Spanish trees. The method utilized only 0.20 g of sample with a solvent-free extraction approach [5].

Assessment Results:

• AGREE/AGREEprep/ComplexGAPI: Consistently identified strengths in solvent-free microextraction, minimal sample handling, and automation
• Primary Limitations: High energy consumption (>1.5 kWh per sample) and moderate sample throughput (~1 sample/hour)
• BAGI Score: 67.5, confirming practical applicability

The method demonstrated that miniaturization and solvent-free approaches can maintain analytical performance while significantly improving greenness metrics, though energy-intensive instrumentation remains a challenge for comprehensive sustainability [5].

Evaluation of Official Standard Methods

A comprehensive assessment of 174 standard methods with sample preparation steps from CEN, ISO, and Pharmacopoeias revealed significant greenness deficiencies in official methods [11].

Key Findings:

• 67% of methods scored below 0.2 on the AGREEprep scale (where 1 is ideal)
• Performance by category:
  • Environmental analysis of organic compounds: 86% scored below 0.2
  • Food analysis: 62% scored below 0.2
  • Inorganic and trace metals analysis: 62% scored below 0.2
  • Pharmaceutical analysis: 45% scored below 0.2

This study highlighted the urgent need to update standard methods by incorporating contemporary green sample preparation techniques to align with global sustainability efforts [11].

Visualization of Greenness Assessment Concepts

Greenness Assessment Workflow: This diagram illustrates the systematic process for evaluating analytical method environmental impact, from initial documentation to iterative improvement.

Software Tools for Greenness Assessment

Tool Name	Primary Function	Access Information	Key Features
AGREE Software	Calculate AGREE scores	https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE [33]	Evaluates entire method against 12 GAC principles
AGREEprep Software	Sample preparation greenness	https://mostwiedzy.pl/AGREE [33]	Focuses on 10 green sample preparation principles
AGSA Software	AGSA metric calculation	bit.ly/AGSA2025 [12]	Star-shaped visualization with built-in scoring
GEMAM Software	GEMAM metric calculation	https://gitee.com/xtDLUT/Gemam/releases/tag/Gemam-v1 [10]	Seven-hexagon pictogram with 21 evaluation criteria

Reference Materials and Guidelines

• 12 Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry: Fundamental framework for GAC implementation [12] [10]

• 10 Principles of Green Sample Preparation: Specialized guidelines for sample preparation optimization [17]

• White Analytical Chemistry Principles: Extended framework balancing greenness, practicality, and analytical performance [17]

• IUPAC Guidelines: Standardized approaches for greenness evaluation, developed through projects like "Greenness of official standard sample preparation methods" (2021-015-2-500) [11]

Interpretation Guidelines and Best Practices

Understanding Quantitative Scores

Quantitative scores provide a standardized approach to compare method greenness, but require careful interpretation within methodological context:

• AGREE/AGREEprep Scores: Methods scoring above 0.5 are generally considered green, with scores above 0.7 representing excellent environmental performance [33]. The recently evaluated standard methods averaged only 0.2, highlighting the significant gap between conventional and green methods [11].

• Comparative Analysis: Scores should be interpreted relative to alternative methods for similar applications. For example, the FT-IR method for pharmaceutical analysis achieved an AGREEprep score of 0.8, substantially higher than comparable HPLC methods [9].

• Weighting Considerations: Most tools allow criterion weighting adjustments based on methodological priorities. Justifiable modifications to default weights can better reflect specific environmental concerns or methodological constraints [10] [33].

Analyzing Qualitative Pictograms

Pictograms provide immediate visual communication of assessment results, but require understanding of their symbolic language:

• AGREE Circular Diagram: The circle is divided into 12 sections corresponding to GAC principles, with color intensity indicating performance in each area. Dark green represents strong alignment with principles, while red indicates significant environmental concerns [26] [33].

• GAPI/MoGAPI Multi-stage Assessment: The five-part color-coded system evaluates each stage of the analytical process, enabling identification of specific high-impact areas requiring optimization [26].

• AGSA Star Visualization: The star-shaped diagram expands on the circular format, potentially offering enhanced differentiation between methodological aspects [12].

• GEMAM Hexagonal System: The seven-hexagon structure provides integrated assessment of six key dimensions with central overall scoring, facilitating both detailed and summary-level interpretation [10].

Integrated Assessment Strategies

For comprehensive method evaluation, researchers should employ multiple complementary tools:

• Combine General and Specialized Metrics: Use AGREE for whole-method assessment alongside AGREEprep for detailed sample preparation evaluation [33].

• Balance Environmental and Analytical Performance: Implement White Analytical Chemistry assessment when methodological practicality and analytical reliability are equally important [17].

• Contextualize Scores with Benchmarking: Compare results against relevant standard methods or literature benchmarks to establish meaningful performance context [11].

• Prioritize Improvement Opportunities: Use assessment results to identify and address the most significant environmental limitations, focusing on areas with greatest potential impact [26].

This comprehensive approach to interpreting quantitative scores and qualitative pictograms enables researchers to make informed decisions regarding method selection, optimization, and development, ultimately advancing the integration of sustainability principles into analytical practice.

From Red to Green: Strategies for Optimizing and Troubleshooting Your Sample Prep

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles has become a critical benchmark for evaluating the environmental sustainability of analytical methods, particularly in spectroscopic sample preparation and pharmaceutical analysis. Greenness assessment tools provide a systematic framework for quantifying the environmental impact of analytical procedures, enabling researchers to identify areas for improvement and make informed decisions about method selection [7]. The fundamental goal of these metrics is to minimize the detrimental effects of analytical activities on ecosystems and human health while maintaining methodological efficacy [7] [34].

Despite the proliferation of assessment tools and growing awareness of GAC principles, many analytical methods continue to score poorly on greenness metrics. This comprehensive review examines the common pitfalls that undermine environmental performance across diverse analytical workflows, with particular focus on spectroscopic sample preparation methods. By synthesizing data from recent case studies and metric comparisons, this guide provides researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals with evidence-based strategies for diagnosing and addressing deficiencies in method greenness [35] [34].

Established Greenness Assessment Metrics and Their Applications

A diverse array of assessment tools has been developed to evaluate the environmental footprint of analytical methods, each with distinct parameters, scoring systems, and applications. Understanding the strengths and limitations of these metrics is essential for accurate greenness evaluation.

Table 1: Key Greenness Assessment Metrics and Their Characteristics

Metric	Assessment Scope	Scoring System	Primary Applications	Key Limitations
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	4 basic environmental criteria	Binary pictogram (green/white)	Initial screening; regulatory compliance	Qualitative only; limited criteria scope [34]
Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	Reagents, energy, waste	Penalty points subtracted from 100	Method comparison; educational purposes	Subjective penalty assignments [34]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)	Entire analytical process	5-level color-coded pictogram	Lifecycle assessment; visual identification of hotspots	No overall score; some subjectivity in color assignment [26]
AGREE (Analytical GREEnness)	12 GAC principles	0-1 score with circular pictogram	Comprehensive method evaluation; comparative studies	Does not fully address pre-analytical processes [7] [26]
AGREEprep	Sample preparation only (10 GSP principles)	0-1 score with circular pictogram	Sample preparation optimization	Limited to sample preparation only [33] [26]
ComplexGAPI	Includes pre-analytical processes	Color-coded pictogram	Material-based testing; nanomaterial synthesis	Complex pictogram; no cumulative score [34] [26]

The selection of appropriate assessment tools depends on the specific analytical context and the depth of evaluation required. Research indicates that employing complementary metrics provides a more nuanced understanding of environmental impact than relying on a single tool [26]. For instance, a method might score well on NEMI due to its basic criteria but perform poorly on more comprehensive tools like AGREE that incorporate a broader range of environmental parameters [34].

Recent trends in greenness assessment have shifted toward integrated approaches that combine multiple metrics. The 2025 perspective by Nowak emphasizes that while these tools can significantly enhance methodological evaluation, their improper application may "create unnecessary confusion" rather than deliver meaningful insights [35]. This underscores the importance of understanding both the technical specifications and appropriate implementation frameworks for each metric.

Common Pitfalls in Greenness Assessments: Evidence from Case Studies

Hazardous Solvent Usage and Waste Generation

The persistent use of hazardous solvents remains one of the most significant factors contributing to poor greenness scores across analytical methods. In a comparative study of HPTLC methods for analyzing ertugliflozin in pharmaceuticals, the normal-phase method utilizing chloroform-methanol mobile phases scored significantly lower on multiple greenness metrics (NEMI, AES, ChlorTox, and AGREE) compared to a reversed-phase method employing ethanol-water [36]. Chloroform presents particular concerns due to its classification as possibly carcinogenic and its environmental persistence [36].

Waste management deficiencies consistently lower greenness scores, particularly in metrics that explicitly penalize waste volume and toxicity. The AGREE metric specifically evaluates waste generation and treatment, with methods generating more than 10 mL of waste per sample typically receiving substantial deductions [26]. A case study evaluating a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method noted that waste generation without treatment strategies was a primary factor in its moderate AGREE score of 56/100 [26]. Similarly, methods that fail to implement microscale principles or recovery/recycling protocols for solvents demonstrate poorer environmental performance across all major assessment tools [33].

Energy-Intensive Instrumentation and Workflows

High energy consumption during analysis constitutes another critical pitfall, particularly for methods employing techniques such as GC-QTOF-MS, which consumes over 1.5 kWh per sample [5]. This substantial energy demand negatively impacts scores on metrics like AES, which specifically penalizes energy consumption exceeding 0.1 kWh per sample [34], and AGREE, which allocates a dedicated category for energy consumption [7] [26].

The throughput limitations of many analytical methods exacerbate their energy inefficiency. As noted in the HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS case study, the temperature ramp requirements in GC limited sample throughput to approximately one analysis per hour, further diminishing the method's overall greenness profile despite its solvent-free approach [5]. Methods with lengthy analysis times or low sample throughput consistently demonstrate poorer performance on greenness metrics that evaluate analytical efficiency and energy use per sample [35].

Inadequate Method Validation and Functional Trade-offs

A fundamental misunderstanding in greenness assessment involves the relationship between environmental sustainability and analytical functionality. Nowak (2025) emphasizes that "the only mandatory step at the end of the method development process should be analytical validation," yet many researchers pursue greenness metrics at the expense of methodological efficacy [35]. This approach ultimately undermines the practical value of the analytical procedure.

The concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) has emerged to address this imbalance by seeking "the best possible compromise between greenness and functionality" [7] [35]. Methods that sacrifice essential performance characteristics such as sensitivity, selectivity, or accuracy for improved greenness scores typically fail to gain adoption in pharmaceutical and research settings. The comparative HPTLC study exemplified proper balance by selecting the reversed-phase method specifically because it demonstrated superior "robust, accurate, precise, linear, sensitive, and eco-friendly" characteristics compared to the normal-phase approach [36].

Incorrect Metric Application and Data Estimation

The improper implementation of assessment tools represents a pervasive but often overlooked pitfall in greenness evaluation. Nowak's proposed Five Rules of Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) highlight that many current assessments "deliver additional information that nicely complements analytical validation, but sometimes, it only creates unnecessary confusion" [35]. This confusion frequently stems from inconsistent interpretation of metric criteria across different research groups.

A particularly common issue involves the estimation of parameters rather than direct measurement. Nowak specifically criticizes this practice, noting that "the amount of electricity needed to analyse one sample (kWh per sample), the value of which is almost never measured directly with appropriate meters monitoring the operation of individual instruments, but instead approximated more or less scrupulously" [35]. Such estimations introduce significant inaccuracies that compromise the reliability of greenness comparisons between methods.

Table 2: Empirical Indicators for Objective Greenness Assessment [35]

Indicator Category	Specific Measurable Parameters	Measurement Approach	Impact on Greenness Scores
Energy Consumption	Electricity required per 100 samples (kWh)	Direct measurement with wattmeter	High consumption reduces scores in AES, AGREE, CaFRI
Carbon Footprint	CO₂ emissions from analysis (gCO₂)	Calculation from energy data and local emissivity	Affects newer metrics like CaFRI [26]
Resource Utilization	Mass/volume of reagents, particularly hazardous chemicals	Direct measurement during preparation	Significant impact on all major metrics
Waste Generation	Total mass/volume of waste; regulated waste mass	Tracking throughout analytical process	Core parameter in NEMI, AES, AGREE, GAPI
Water Consumption	Volume of tap, distilled, and ultrapure water used	Direct measurement during preparation	Incorporated in AGREE and comprehensive metrics

Strategic Approaches for Improving Greenness Scores

Solvent Selection and Waste Reduction Strategies

The systematic replacement of hazardous solvents with safer alternatives represents the most effective strategy for improving greenness scores. The successful transition from chloroform-methanol to ethanol-water in the HPTLC study demonstrates the substantial benefits of this approach [36]. Ethanol offers advantages as a green solvent due to its lower toxicity, biodegradability, and renewable sourcing potential [36] [26].

Miniaturization techniques consistently enhance greenness performance across multiple metric categories. The HS-SPME method developed for analyzing biogenic volatile organic compounds utilized only 0.20 g of sample, eliminating solvent consumption while maintaining analytical performance [5]. This approach positively impacted scores on AGREE, AGREEprep, and ComplexGAPI by addressing principles of waste reduction and operator safety [5]. Similarly, microextraction methods generally achieve higher greenness scores than conventional extraction approaches in comparative assessments [33].

Instrumentation and Workflow Optimization

Energy-efficient instrumentation selections and method adaptations can substantially improve greenness scores without compromising analytical quality. While certain techniques like GC-MS and LC-MS inherently require significant energy inputs, strategies such as method parallelization (increasing sample throughput per run) and equipment sharing can distribute this environmental impact across more analyses [5].

The implementation of automated systems and integrated workflows can simultaneously address multiple greenness criteria. Automation typically reduces solvent consumption, minimizes human error, and enhances throughput—all positively evaluated in comprehensive metrics like AGREE [26]. A methodological comparison of sample preparation techniques for UV filter analysis found that approaches with higher degrees of automation and integration consistently achieved better greenness profiles [33].

Holistic Assessment and Method Validation

Adopting a multi-metric evaluation strategy provides more accurate and actionable greenness assessment than reliance on a single tool. The SULLME method case study demonstrated how complementary metrics (MoGAPI, AGREE, AGSA, CaFRI) highlight different aspects of environmental performance, enabling targeted improvements [26]. This approach aligns with Nowak's Good Evaluation Practice rules, particularly the recommendation to "combine models with varied structures" for a more comprehensive assessment [35].

Balancing validation parameters with environmental considerations remains essential for developing practically relevant methods. The superior reversed-phase HPTLC method for ertugliflozin analysis achieved its favorable position specifically because it demonstrated excellence in both conventional validation parameters (linearity, accuracy, precision, sensitivity) and greenness metrics [36]. This integrated approach ensures that environmental improvements do not compromise the analytical integrity required in pharmaceutical and research applications.

Visualizing Assessment Relationships and Pitfalls

The following diagram illustrates the relationship between common methodological pitfalls and their impacts on greenness metric scores, highlighting the interconnected nature of these deficiencies:

Common Pitfalls and Their Impacts on Greenness Assessment

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Sample Preparation

Table 3: Green Alternatives for Common Analytical Reagents in Sample Preparation

Conventional Reagent	Green Alternative	Functional Advantage	Greenness Improvement
Chloroform	Ethanol-water mixtures	Reduced toxicity and environmental persistence	Higher scores on ChlorTox, NEMI, AGREE [36]
Acetonitrile	Ethanol or methanol	Lower toxicity and better biodegradability	Improved performance in AES and AGREE [36] [26]
Derivatization agents	Direct analysis methods	Simplified workflow and reduced hazardous waste	Enhanced scores across all metrics [5] [26]
Organic extraction solvents	HS-SPME (solvent-free)	Minimal waste generation and improved safety	Superior AGREEprep and ComplexGAPI scores [5] [33]
Large volume solvents	Microextraction approaches	Reduced consumption (often <1 mL per sample)	Better performance in AMVI and waste-related metrics [33] [26]

The identification and remediation of common pitfalls in greenness assessment require a systematic approach that addresses both technical and methodological considerations. The evidence from comparative studies indicates that the most significant improvements in greenness scores result from: (1) replacing hazardous solvents with safer alternatives; (2) implementing miniaturization and solvent-free techniques; (3) optimizing energy efficiency and throughput; and (4) applying multiple complementary assessment metrics with proper measurement techniques.

Future developments in greenness assessment will likely focus on standardized implementation frameworks like the proposed Good Evaluation Practice rules [35] and the integration of lifecycle analysis principles through tools like CaFRI [26]. By addressing the fundamental pitfalls examined in this review, researchers can develop analytical methods that successfully balance environmental responsibility with the rigorous performance requirements essential for pharmaceutical applications and spectroscopic sample preparation.

The modern analytical laboratory faces a pressing challenge: reconciling the demand for high-quality data with the necessity of sustainable practices. Traditional sample preparation methods, often characterized by high solvent consumption, substantial waste generation, and significant time investment, are increasingly at odds with global sustainability goals. A comprehensive evaluation of 174 standard methods from CEN, ISO, and Pharmacopoeias revealed a generally poor greenness performance, with 67% of methods scoring below 0.2 on the AGREEprep metric, where 1 represents the highest possible score [11]. This performance gap highlights an urgent need for transformative approaches that enhance both analytical efficiency and environmental compatibility. Within this context, three high-impact optimization strategies—miniaturization, automation, and integration—have emerged as powerful paradigms for developing next-generation sample preparation methods. These strategies are not merely incremental improvements but fundamental shifts that collectively address the core challenges of green analytical chemistry, enabling researchers to achieve superior performance with minimal environmental footprint. This guide objectively compares these strategic approaches, providing a framework for scientists and drug development professionals to select and implement optimized methodologies aligned with both analytical rigor and sustainability principles.

Strategic Comparison of Optimization Approaches

The pursuit of greenness in analytical chemistry has catalyzed the development of three complementary optimization strategies. Each approach offers distinct mechanisms for improving sustainability while maintaining or enhancing analytical performance.

Table 1: Comparison of High-Impact Optimization Strategies for Green Sample Preparation

Strategy	Core Principle	Key Techniques	Primary Green Benefits	Performance Enhancements
Miniaturization	Reduction of scale in sample and reagent volumes	cLC, nano-LC, Capillary Electrophoresis, microextraction (SPME, LPME)	Reduced solvent consumption (often >90%), minimized hazardous waste [37]	Enhanced resolution, faster analysis times, reduced sample requirement [37]
Automation	Implementation of robotic or flow-based systems for minimal human intervention	Robotic liquid handlers, automated SPE, on-flow systems, column-switching	Improved reproducibility, reduced human error, lower solvent use per sample [38] [39]	Higher throughput, better precision, 24/7 operation capability [38]
Integration	Combining multiple preparation steps or coupling with detection	Online SPE-LC-MS, LC-GC, automated sample preparation-separation systems	Eliminated intermediate steps, reduced total solvent volume and sample handling [40]	Faster total analysis time, minimized analyte loss, improved data quality [41]

Miniaturization: Doing More with Less

Miniaturization operates on the principle of radically reducing the physical scale of analytical processes. By dramatically decreasing sample and reagent volumes, this strategy directly attacks the root causes of environmental impact in analytical chemistry. Capillary liquid chromatography (cLC) and nano-liquid chromatography (nano-LC) exemplify this approach, offering advantages in terms of reduced solvent and sample consumption, enhanced resolution, and faster analysis times [37]. These techniques have proven particularly valuable in pharmaceutical and biomedical applications where sample volume may be limited. Similarly, various modes of capillary electrophoresis (CE) including micellar electrokinetic chromatography (MEKC) and capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE) have gained significant traction for their miniaturization benefits [37]. The greenness advantages are substantial, with miniaturized techniques typically reducing solvent consumption by over 90% compared to conventional methods [37]. This direct reduction in resource consumption aligns perfectly with the principles of green chemistry and makes miniaturization one of the most effective strategies for immediate environmental improvement in analytical workflows.

Automation: Precision and Reproducibility at Scale

Automation addresses greenness challenges by implementing robotic or flow-based systems that minimize human intervention while maximizing precision and throughput. Sample preparation is typically the most time-intensive step in analytical workflows, consuming up to 60% of total analysis time [38]. Automated systems transform this bottleneck through robotic platforms that can perform complex sample-handling tasks including pipetting, mixing, dilution, derivatization, and extraction with superior precision [38]. The green benefits extend beyond mere efficiency; automation "greatly reduces human error" and is "especially beneficial in high-throughput environments, such as pharmaceutical R&D, where consistency and speed are critical" [40]. This enhanced reproducibility means fewer repeated analyses, directly reducing solvent and reagent consumption. Modern automation approaches include both robotic systems and non-robotic flow-based techniques such as lab-on-valve (LOV) systems and column-switching technologies [38]. The emerging integration of artificial intelligence with automated systems further enhances their capability, enabling intelligent decision-making that optimizes resource utilization [40].

Integration: Streamlining Analytical Workflows

Integration creates seamless connections between sample preparation and analytical separation/detection steps, eliminating the discontinuities that plague conventional workflows. By combining multiple preparation steps or directly coupling preparation with analysis, integrated systems avoid the sample transfer losses, dilution effects, and contamination risks associated with discrete methodologies [41]. Column-switching techniques represent a powerful integration approach, where "two or more chromatographic columns [are] connected in series, where one column is used for sample clean-up and the other for analyte separation and detection" [38]. This enables fully automated online sample preparation that dramatically reduces total analysis time. The growing capabilities of integrated systems are evident in applications ranging from PFAS analysis to oligonucleotide characterization, where vendors have developed streamlined workflows that merge extraction, cleanup, and separation into single, seamless processes [40]. The environmental benefit of integration stems from this process consolidation, which typically reduces total solvent volume and eliminates the need for intermediate sample handling.

Experimental Protocols and Greenness Assessment

Key Experimental Methodologies

Table 2: Experimental Protocols for High-Impact Optimization Strategies

Strategy	Representative Protocol	Key Steps	Critical Parameters	Greenness Metrics
Miniaturization	Micro-Solid Phase Extraction (μ-SPE) for Uranium Analysis [42]	1. Prepare 100-μL solid-phase microextraction columns with UTEVA resin2. Load sample (90% volume reduction vs. conventional)3. Elute directly to micro-volume vial4. Analyze via ICP-MS	Microcolumn bed weight, elution volume, flow rate	>90% solvent reduction, quantitative recovery of 28 trace elements [42]
Automation	Automated Online SPE-LC-MS for PFAS [40]	1. Automated sample loading to stacked cartridges2. Online cleanup using graphitized carbon with weak anion exchange3. Direct elution to LC-MS system4. Automated data analysis	Cartridge conditioning, transfer volume, wash solvent composition	Minimized background interference, reduced manual intervention [40]
Integration	FT-IR Quantitative Analysis of Pharmaceuticals [9]	1. Prepare sample via pressed pellet technique with KBr2. No solvent usage in preparation3. Direct FT-IR measurement4. Area under curve calculation at specific wavelengths	Wave number selection, baseline correction, compression time	AGREEprep score: 0.8; MoGAPI score: 89; minimal waste generation [9]

Quantitative Greenness Assessment

The movement toward greener analytical methods has accelerated the development of efficient and miniaturized sample preparation techniques, with greenness assessment metrics providing crucial validation of their environmental benefits [38]. The AGREEprep metric, specifically designed for sample preparation methods, offers a comprehensive scoring system from 0 (poor) to 1 (excellent greenness) [11]. The FT-IR method for simultaneous quantification of amlodipine besylate and telmisartan achieved an AGREEprep score of 0.8, significantly outperforming many conventional methods [9]. Similarly, the Modified Green Analytical Procedure Index (MoGAPI) evaluation awarded this method a score of 89, confirming its superior environmental profile compared to traditional HPLC methods [9]. These quantitative assessments provide objective evidence that optimization strategies directly translate to improved greenness performance, enabling researchers to make data-driven decisions when selecting analytical methodologies.

Visualizing Strategic Relationships and Workflows

The following diagram illustrates the interconnected nature of these optimization strategies and their collective impact on analytical performance metrics:

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of these optimization strategies requires specific materials and technologies. The following table details key research reagent solutions that enable high-impact optimization in analytical sample preparation:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Optimized Sample Preparation

Category	Specific Solution	Function	Application Examples
Miniaturization Materials	UTEVA Resin Cartridges (100-μL)	Selective extraction of uranium and plutonium isotopes from minimal sample volumes	Trace element analysis in nuclear materials [42]
Automation Consumables	Stacked Cartridge Systems (e.g., graphitized carbon + weak anion exchange)	Automated multi-step cleanup for challenging matrices	PFAS analysis in environmental samples [40]
Green Solvents	Ethanol (Spectroscopic Grade)	Environmentally benign solvent for extraction and analysis	Green UV spectrophotometric methods [43]
Microextraction Devices	Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME) Fibers	Solventless extraction and concentration of analytes	VOC analysis in environmental and food samples [38]
Specialized Sorbents	Molecularly Imprinted Polymers (MIPs)	Highly selective extraction based on molecular recognition	Targeted analyte extraction from complex matrices [41]

The comparative analysis of miniaturization, automation, and integration reveals distinct yet complementary pathways toward greener analytical chemistry. Miniaturization offers the most direct approach to reducing solvent consumption and waste generation, often achieving >90% reduction in environmental impact. Automation addresses the challenges of reproducibility and throughput, enabling consistent results while optimizing resource utilization. Integration creates seamless workflows that eliminate intermediate steps, reducing both time requirements and error potential. The most significant greenness benefits emerge when these strategies are implemented in concert, creating synergistic effects that transcend their individual contributions. As the field advances, the convergence of these optimization approaches with artificial intelligence and smart systems promises to further revolutionize sample preparation, enabling autonomous decision-making that continuously refines analytical processes for maximum efficiency and minimal environmental impact. For researchers and drug development professionals, this strategic framework provides a validated foundation for selecting and implementing sample preparation methodologies that align with both analytical excellence and sustainability imperatives.

In the modern analytical laboratory, solvent selection and waste management are no longer afterthoughts but central components of sustainable method development. The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to minimize its environmental footprint, particularly in analytical operations that traditionally consume significant volumes of organic solvents. Within spectroscopic analysis, sample preparation contributes disproportionately to environmental impact through solvent-intensive processes. This guide objectively compares alternative approaches using standardized greenness assessment tools including AGREE, GAPI, BAGI, and Analytical Eco-Scale to benchmark performance across multiple sustainability dimensions. By integrating these metrics with practical experimental data, researchers can make informed decisions that balance analytical performance with environmental responsibility, driving meaningful gains in laboratory sustainability.

Green Solvent Alternatives: A Comparative Analysis

The transition from traditional solvents to greener alternatives represents a pivotal shift toward sustainable spectroscopy. Conventional solvents like benzene, chloroform, and acetone are volatile, toxic, and environmentally persistent, creating occupational hazards and pollution challenges [14]. Green solvents are characterized by low toxicity, biodegradability, renewable feedstocks, and reduced environmental impact while maintaining analytical performance [14]. The following sections compare solvent options across key metrics relevant to spectroscopic sample preparation.

Table 1: Green Solvent Alternatives for Spectroscopic Applications

Solvent Category	Representative Examples	Key Properties	Spectroscopic Compatibility	CHEM21 Rating
Bio-based Solvents	Ethanol, ethyl lactate, D-limonene	Renewable feedstocks, biodegradable, low toxicity [14]	UV-vis cutoff ~205 nm (ethanol); FT-IR transparency varies [14]	Recommended (ethanol) [44]
Ionic Liquids	Imidazolium, pyridinium-based salts	Negligible vapor pressure, tunable properties, thermal stability [14]	Can interfere in UV region; useful for extraction prior to analysis [14]	Problematic (varies by specific IL) [14]
Deep Eutectic Solvents	Choline chloride-urea mixtures	Simple synthesis, biodegradable components, low cost [14]	Low volatility reduces evaporation losses; polarity tunable for extractions [14]	Recommended (choline chloride) [14]
Supercritical Fluids	CO₂, often with ethanol modifiers	Non-toxic, tunable density controls solubility, easy recovery [14]	CO₂ transparent in FT-IR and UV-vis; excellent for extraction prior to spectroscopy [14]	Recommended (CO₂) [14]
Traditional Organic	Acetonitrile, methanol, hexane	Well-understood properties, established methods	UV cutoffs vary; methanol ~205 nm, acetonitrile ~190 nm [45]	Problematic (acetonitrile, hexane) [44]

The CHEM21 Selection Guide provides a standardized framework for evaluating solvents based on safety, health, and environmental criteria aligned with the Global Harmonized System [44]. Solvents are categorized as "recommended," "problematic," or "hazardous" based on multiple parameters including flash point, boiling point, toxicity classifications, and environmental impact [44]. This tool enables researchers to make objective comparisons between traditional and alternative solvents.

Greenness Assessment Metrics: Tools for Objective Comparison

The movement toward sustainable analytical chemistry has generated several standardized metrics to quantify method environmental performance. These tools transform subjective claims of "greenness" into measurable, comparable data, enabling objective decision-making in method development.

Table 2: Standardized Greenness Assessment Metrics for Analytical Methods

Assessment Tool	Evaluation Methodology	Output Format	Key Parameters Measured	Applications in Spectroscopy
Analytical Eco-Scale [46]	Penalty points subtracted from base score of 100	Numerical score (higher = greener)	Reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste generation [46]	Used in UV-vis methods for pharmaceutical analysis [47] [45]
GAPI [46]	Multi-criteria evaluation of analytical procedure	Pictogram with color-coded sections (green/yellow/red) [46]	All stages from sample collection to waste treatment [46]	Applied to spectrophotometric drug analysis [45]
AGREE [46]	Assessment against 12 principles of green analytical chemistry	Radar chart with overall score 0-1 (higher = greener) [46]	Energy consumption, reagent toxicity, waste generation, operator safety [46]	Used in derivative UV spectroscopic methods [47]
BAGI [47]	Evaluation of method practicality and applicability	Numerical score assessing practicality [47]	Cost, time, operational complexity, safety, analytical performance [48]	Complementary to greenness metrics in spectroscopic methods [47] [45]
AMGS [46]	Comprehensive evaluation of chromatographic methods	Holistic score incorporating multiple dimensions	Solvent energy in production/disposal, EHS factors, instrument energy [46]	Primarily for chromatography; concepts applicable to spectroscopy

These metrics enable researchers to move beyond single-parameter comparisons (such as solvent volume alone) to comprehensive assessments that consider the complete analytical lifecycle. For example, a method might reduce solvent consumption but require substantial energy for heating or cooling, resulting in a lower overall greenness score when all factors are considered.

Experimental Protocols: Green Spectroscopic Methods in Practice

Derivative UV Spectroscopy for Pharmaceutical Analysis

Recent research demonstrates practical applications of green spectroscopic methods with validated experimental protocols. The simultaneous determination of duloxetine and tadalafil using second-order derivative UV spectroscopy provides an exemplary case study [47].

Experimental Protocol:

• Instrumentation: Double-beam UV-Vis spectrophotometer with derivative functionality
• Sample Preparation: Standard solutions prepared in methanol followed by dilution with distilled water to minimize organic solvent use [47]
• Derivative Parameters: Second-order derivative spectroscopy with appropriate Δλ values to resolve overlapping spectra [47]
• Linear Range: 0.5-9 μg/mL for duloxetine and 1-14 μg/mL for tadalafil [47]
• Greenness Metrics: AGREE score >0.7, confirming excellent greenness profile [47]

This method eliminates the need for separation steps, reduces solvent consumption, and avoids sophisticated instrumentation while maintaining accuracy and precision compliant with ICH guidelines [47].

Green Solvent Applications in Sample Preparation

The integration of green solvents into spectroscopic sample preparation follows defined experimental workflows:

Waste Reduction Through Method Miniaturization

Microscale spectroscopic techniques represent another practical pathway to major gains in solvent reduction:

Experimental Approach:

• Micro-Sample Cells: Utilization of reduced pathlength or volume cells for UV-Vis and FT-IR measurements
• Solvent-Free Techniques: Implementation of ATR-FT-IR that requires minimal sample preparation and no solvent [13]
• Method Sensitivity Optimization: Enhancing detection limits to enable higher dilution factors while maintaining accurate quantification [45]

These approaches directly address waste reduction at the source rather than focusing solely on waste management, aligning with the fundamental principles of green analytical chemistry.

Comparative Experimental Data: Performance Versus Greenness

Objective comparison of spectroscopic methods requires both analytical performance data and greenness metrics. The following table synthesizes experimental data from recent studies implementing green principles in spectroscopic analysis.

Table 3: Performance Comparison of Green Spectroscopic Methods

Analytical Method	Drug Compounds Analyzed	Solvent Consumption Reduction	Waste Generation	Analytical Performance (Recovery %)	Greenness Score (AGREE)
Derivative UV Spectroscopy [47]	Duloxetine, Tadalafil	60-70% vs. reference HPLC methods	<10 mL organic solvent per sample	98-102% [47]	>0.75 [47]
Ratio Spectra Derivative Methods [45]	Terbinafine, Ketoconazole	50-60% vs. published methods	<15 mL methanol per sample	98.5-101.5% [45]	>0.70 [45]
FT-IR with ATR Accessory [13]	Protein formulations	~100% (solvent-free)	Minimal (cleaning only)	Protein quantification comparable to UV-vis	>0.80 (estimated)
Conventional HPLC (Reference)	Various pharmaceuticals	Baseline	50-100 mL/sample (mobile phase)	95-105%	0.30-0.50 [46]

The data demonstrate that greener alternatives can match or exceed the analytical performance of traditional methods while significantly reducing environmental impact. For example, the greenness metrics quantitatively confirm the environmental advantages of solvent-reduction approaches.

The Researcher's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of green spectroscopic methods requires specific reagents and materials optimized for sustainable analysis.

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents for Green Spectroscopy

Reagent/Material	Function in Spectroscopy	Green Characteristics	Application Example
Bio-Based Ethanol [14]	Solvent for extraction and sample preparation	Renewable feedstock, biodegradable, low toxicity [14]	Sample dissolution in UV-vis analysis [45]
Deep Eutectic Solvents [14]	Extraction media for sample preparation	Biodegradable components, low toxicity, recyclable [14]	Pre-concentration of analytes prior to spectroscopic analysis
Water as Solvent	Dilution medium for aqueous-compatible samples	Non-toxic, non-flammable, zero environmental impact	Primary solvent in derivative UV spectroscopy [47] [45]
ATR Crystals (Diamond, ZnSe) [13]	Solvent-free sample analysis for FT-IR	Enables direct analysis without solvents or preparation	FT-IR analysis of pharmaceutical formulations [13]
Hydrophilic Ionic Liquids [14]	Extraction solvents with tunable properties	Low volatility reduces atmospheric emissions	Selective extraction of analytes from complex matrices

Integrated Assessment: Balancing Greenness and Practicality

The most sustainable spectroscopic methods successfully balance environmental impact with practical implementation requirements. The following diagram illustrates the decision framework integrating both greenness and practicality assessments:

This integrated approach acknowledges that the greenest possible method may not be practically implementable if it requires exotic solvents, complex equipment, or excessively long analysis times. The BAGI metric specifically addresses this practicality dimension, complementing pure greenness assessments [47] [48]. Methods scoring highly on both greenness and practicality metrics represent the optimal choice for sustainable laboratories.

The comparative data presented in this guide demonstrate that practical pathways to major gains in solvent selection and waste reduction are achievable through method transformation rather than incremental improvement. The most significant environmental benefits arise from fundamental changes in approach: replacing solvent-intensive separation methods with derivative spectroscopy techniques, selecting bio-based solvents from recommended CHEM21 categories, and implementing solvent-free analysis where possible.

Standardized greenness assessment metrics provide the objective framework needed to make informed decisions and track progress toward sustainability goals. As the field evolves, the integration of greenness evaluation early in analytical method development—rather than as a retrospective assessment—will accelerate adoption of these practical pathways, delivering major environmental gains without compromising analytical performance.

In the pursuit of sustainable science, Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has emerged as a guiding framework, promoting the reduction of hazardous waste, energy consumption, and resource depletion in analytical laboratories. However, a paradoxical phenomenon often undermines these efforts: the rebound effect. Within analytical chemistry, this effect refers to situations where improvements in efficiency or environmental footprint per analysis are counteracted by behavioral or systemic changes that increase the overall environmental impact [20]. For instance, a novel, low-cost microextraction method that uses minimal solvents and energy might, precisely because of its affordability and accessibility, lead laboratories to perform significantly more analyses than before. This increased volume can elevate the total consumption of chemicals and waste generated, ultimately offsetting the environmental benefits of the greener method itself [20].

Similarly, the push toward automation presents a double-edged sword. While automated systems save time, lower reagent consumption, and enhance efficiency, they can also facilitate over-testing. The capability to process large volumes of samples with minimal human intervention may result in analyses being performed more frequently than necessary, simply because the technology allows it [20]. This guide objectively compares the greenness of modern spectroscopic techniques, focusing not only on their direct performance but also on their susceptibility to this rebound effect, providing researchers with a framework for making truly sustainable choices.

Comparative Greenness of Spectroscopic Techniques

Evaluating an analytical method's sustainability requires a multi-faceted approach. Several metrics have been developed to assess greenness, including the Analytical Greenness (AGREE) metric, Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI), and Analytical Eco-Scale [49] [50]. When applied to spectroscopic methods, these tools reveal significant differences in their environmental footprints and their potential to trigger rebound effects. The following table summarizes the greenness profiles of several key techniques.

Table 1: Greenness Comparison of Spectroscopic Techniques

Technique	Key Green Advantages	Potential Rebound Triggers	Reported Greenness Scores
Quantitative NMR (qNMR) [51] [52]	- Non-destructive; sample recovery possible- Minimal to no sample derivatization- Can use green solvents (e.g., surfactant in D₂O)	- High energy consumption per sample (e.g., 1.0 kWh [51])- Potential for over-reliance due to simplicity	- AGREE: High score [52]- GAPI: Favorable profile [51]
Near-Infrared (NIR) Imaging [53]	- Minimal sample preparation- Fast measurements enable at-/in-line use- Non-destructive	- High throughput may encourage unnecessary screening- Lower spatial resolution might require repeat analyses	- Enabled accurate dissolution profile prediction (f2=57.8) [53]
Raman Imaging [53]	- Non-destructive- High spatial resolution- Minimal sample prep	- Susceptible to fluorescence interference, leading to failed runs- Slower than NIR, potentially increasing energy use per sample	- Enabled accurate dissolution profile prediction (f2=62.7) [53]
Gas Chromatography-Ion Mobility Spectrometry (GC-IMS) [54]	- Lower energy consumption vs. GC-MS- Does not require helium- Portable for on-site analysis	- Portability and simplicity could lead to a surge in non-essential fieldwork	- Positioned as a green alternative to GC-MS [54]
Fourier-Transform Infrared (FT-IR) with AI [55]	- Rapid, non-destructive- AI elucidation reduces need for multiple techniques- Low operational costs	- Low-cost analysis might increase demand for routine screening	- Top-1 accuracy of 63.79% for AI-driven structure elucidation [55]

Experimental Protocols and Workflows for Green Spectroscopy

Detailed Methodology: A Green qNMR Assay

A recently published green quantitative NMR (qNMR) method for the concurrent determination of aspirin and omeprazole provides a clear example of an optimized, sustainable workflow [51].

• Instrumentation: A Bruker Avance III (AV-III-400) spectrometer operating at 400 MHz was used.
• Sample Preparation: Deuterated dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO-d6) was used as the solvent. Phloroglucinol was employed as an internal standard. Critically, no prior extraction, derivatization, or labeling steps were needed. Samples were simply dissolved and sonicated for 20 minutes to ensure uniformity [51].
• Acquisition Parameters: The method was optimized for efficiency and energy consumption. Key parameters included: 128 scans, a 10-second relaxation delay, a 90° pulse angle, and an acquisition time of 4.08 seconds. The total energy consumption was quantified at 1.0 kWh per sample [51].
• Analysis: The selected quantitative signals for aspirin and omeprazole were at 7.945 ppm and 8.18 ppm, respectively. The method demonstrated linearity (r=0.9999) over a range of 0.05–4.0 mg mL−1 for both drugs, with excellent precision (%RSD < 1.08) [51].

This protocol exemplifies GAC principles by eliminating hazardous solvents and derivatization agents, reducing waste, and optimizing instrument time. However, the 1.0 kWh energy footprint highlights an area where the rebound effect could manifest if the method's simplicity leads to excessive use.

Comparative Experimental Protocol: Raman vs. NIR Imaging

A direct comparison of Raman and NIR imaging for predicting drug dissolution profiles offers quantitative data on their performance and operational efficiency [53].

• Sample Preparation: Sustained-release tablets containing hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) were analyzed with no specific preparation, leveraging the non-destructive nature of both techniques.
• Instrumentation and Data Acquisition:
  • Raman Imaging: Measurements were conducted, though the spectra were sometimes influenced by fluorescence from excipients like microcrystalline cellulose (MCC).
  • NIR Imaging: Measurements were noted to be inherently faster than Raman, with instrumentation better suited for real-time implementation [53].
• Data Processing: The chemical images from both techniques were processed using a two-step approach. First, Classical Least Squares (CLS) was applied to generate concentration maps of HPMC. Subsequently, a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) was used to extract information on the particle size of HPMC from these chemical maps [53].
• Prediction Model: The average HPMC concentration and predicted particle size from each technique were used as inputs for an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) to forecast the tablet's dissolution profile.

The study found that while both techniques yielded accurate predictions (with NIR f2=57.8 and Raman f2=62.7), NIR's significantly faster measurement speed makes it less prone to the energy-use rebound effect associated with longer analysis times [53].

Experimental Workflow for Mitigating the Rebound Effect

The following diagram illustrates a generalized experimental workflow that incorporates checks and balances to prevent the rebound effect in analytical spectroscopy.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

The move toward greener spectroscopy involves not only selecting the right instrument but also the supporting reagents and materials. The following table details key solutions used in the featured experiments.

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions for Green Spectroscopy

Reagent/Material	Function in Experiment	Greenness Justification	Example Use Case
Deuterated Solvents (e.g., DMSO-d6)	NMR solvent for dissolving samples and providing a deuterium lock [51].	Standard solvent for NMR; preferable to more hazardous alternatives.	qNMR analysis of aspirin and omeprazole [51].
Surfactant in D₂O (e.g., SDS)	Forms micelles to solubilize water-insoluble compounds in deuterated water [52].	Replaces expensive, hazardous organic NMR solvents (CDCl₃, DMSO-d₆) with a greener aqueous system.	qNMR determination of benzodiazepines [52].
Phloroglucinol	Internal standard for qNMR quantification [51].	Provides a precise and accurate reference without the need for compound-specific, hazardous derivatization agents.	qNMR assays [51] [52].
Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose (HPMC)	Excipient used in sustained-release tablet formulations for dissolution studies [53].	A biologically compatible polymer that is non-toxic and commonly used in pharmaceutical products.	Dissolution profile prediction using NIR/Raman [53].
Microcrystalline Cellulose (MCC)	Common tablet excipient and diluent [53].	A natural, biodegradable polymer derived from wood pulp.	Model excipient in NIR/Raman imaging study [53].

Discussion and Strategic Mitigation of the Rebound Effect

The comparative data reveals that no single technique is universally superior; each has trade-offs. qNMR is excellent for direct quantification with minimal sample preparation but consumes notable energy [51]. NIR imaging offers superior speed for in-line quality control, while Raman imaging provides higher spatial resolution but at a slower pace and with sensitivity to fluorescence [53]. The rebound effect can negate the benefits of any of these methods if not managed.

To mitigate this, laboratories should:

• Establish Sustainability Checkpoints: Integrate sustainability assessments into standard operating procedures, asking whether each analysis is truly necessary [20].
• Leverage AI for Predictive Analytics: As demonstrated with IR spectroscopy [55] and chemical image analysis [53], AI can reduce the need for repetitive measurements by predicting outcomes or identifying the minimum number of tests required.
• Optimize Testing Protocols: Design experimental plans that avoid redundant analyses. This includes using quality-by-design (QbD) principles to build robustness into methods rather than relying on excessive verification.
• Prioritize Methodologies with Inherent Green Workflows: Techniques like GC-IMS, which offer portability and lower resource demands than GC-MS [54], or qNMR, which often forgoes complex preparation [51], structurally reduce the potential for waste.

In conclusion, truly sustainable analytical chemistry requires a dual focus: selecting the greenest technique based on rigorous metrics and implementing a mindful laboratory culture that actively guards against the rebound effect. By doing so, researchers can ensure that hard-won efficiency gains translate into genuine environmental benefits.

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has evolved from an optional consideration to an ethical and operational imperative for modern laboratories. The foundational principles of GAC, introduced in 2000, aim to minimize the negative impacts of analytical procedures on human health, safety, and the environment [56] [10]. This transformation is particularly crucial in spectroscopic analysis, where traditional sample preparation methods often involve significant environmental burdens. Recent research reveals a startling assessment of current standard methods: an evaluation of 174 standard methods with sample preparation steps found that 67% scored below 0.2 on the AGREEprep scale (where 1 represents ideal greenness) [11]. The situation is especially concerning for environmental analysis of organic compounds, where 86% of methods fall into this poor performance category [11]. These findings highlight a critical disconnect between traditional methodologies and global sustainability efforts, creating mounting regulatory and societal pressures on laboratories to reform their practices [11].

This guide provides a comprehensive framework for laboratories seeking to build a green culture through targeted training and strategic workflow adjustments. By implementing systematic greenness assessment, adopting alternative methodologies, and fostering sustainability-minded technicians, laboratories can significantly reduce their environmental footprint while maintaining analytical excellence. The transition represents not merely a technical adjustment but a fundamental shift in how laboratories approach method development, validation, and daily operations—aligning scientific practice with environmental responsibility.

Greenness Assessment Metrics for Spectroscopy

Evolution and Principles of Assessment Tools

The foundation of building a green lab culture begins with understanding and implementing standardized metrics for evaluating method environmental impact. The concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) has emerged as a holistic framework that balances three critical dimensions: green (environmental sustainability), red (analytical performance), and blue (practical practicality) [56] [26]. Within this triad, the green component has stimulated development of numerous assessment tools, evolving from basic checklists to sophisticated quantitative metrics [26].

The progression of these tools reflects the growing sophistication of GAC. Early tools like the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) offered simple pictograms based on four basic environmental criteria but lacked granularity for distinguishing degrees of greenness [26]. The Analytical Eco-Scale introduced a scoring system by subtracting penalty points from a base score of 100, facilitating method comparisons though still relying on expert judgment [26]. A significant advancement came with the Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI), which assesses the entire analytical process through a five-part, color-coded pictogram, allowing visual identification of high-impact stages [26]. The current generation of tools includes AGREE, which provides both a circular pictogram and a numerical score (0-1) based on all 12 principles of GAC, and AGREEprep, specifically dedicated to evaluating sample preparation—often the most environmentally impactful stage of analysis [26]. Most recently, the Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods (GEMAM) offers a comprehensive approach based on both the 12 principles of GAC and 10 factors of green sample preparation, presenting results on a 0-10 scale with a hexagonal pictogram [10].

Practical Application of Green Metrics

For laboratories implementing green culture, these metrics provide critical decision-support tools for method selection, development, and optimization. The AGREEprep metric, specifically focused on sample preparation, has been instrumental in revealing the environmental shortcomings of current standard methods [11]. Its application to 332 sub-method variations demonstrated that pharmaceutical analysis methods (45% scoring below 0.2) generally outperform those for food analysis (62% below 0.2) and environmental analysis of organic compounds (86% below 0.2) [11].

The GEMAM system exemplifies modern assessment approaches, evaluating six key aspects: sample, reagent, instrumentation, method, waste generated, and operator safety [10]. Each category contains multiple evaluation criteria (21 total), with weights assignable based on their relative environmental impact. By default, reagents and waste each carry 25% weight in the overall assessment, highlighting their significance in green method optimization [10]. This comprehensive scoring enables laboratories to make informed decisions when designing or selecting methods, focusing improvement efforts on areas with the greatest environmental impact.

Table 1: Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric	Assessment Scope	Output Format	Strengths	Limitations
NEMI	General analytical methods	Binary pictogram	Simple, accessible	Lacks granularity, limited criteria [26]
Analytical Eco-Scale	General analytical methods	Numerical score (0-100)	Facilitates method comparison	Subjective penalty assignments [26]
GAPI	Entire analytical process	Color-coded pictogram	Visual identification of impact areas	No overall score, somewhat subjective [26]
AGREE	General analytical methods	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1)	Comprehensive, user-friendly	Limited pre-analytical process assessment [26]
AGREEprep	Sample preparation only	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1)	Focuses on most impactful stage	Must be used with broader tools [11] [26]
GEMAM	Entire analytical assay	Hexagonal pictogram + score (0-10)	Comprehensive, flexible weights	Complex calculation process [10]

Comparative Analysis: Traditional vs. Green Spectroscopic Methods

The Environmental Cost of Conventional Practices

Traditional spectroscopic sample preparation methods frequently demonstrate poor greenness performance due to several systematic issues. The AGREEprep assessment of standard methods identified that most official methods still rely on resource-intensive, outdated techniques that score poorly on key greenness criteria [11]. These methods typically consume substantial amounts of hazardous solvents, generate significant waste, and require high energy input—all contributing to substantial environmental footprints [11] [26].

The problematic characteristics of conventional methods include large solvent volumes (often >10mL per sample), hazardous reagents, high energy consumption during extraction or digestion, and inadequate waste management strategies [26]. Sample preparation is particularly impactful, accounting for as much as 60% of all spectroscopic analytical errors when improperly executed [57]. This statistic is especially significant because inadequate preparation not only produces unreliable results but often necessitates repeat analyses—further multiplying environmental impacts. The persistence of these suboptimal methods in official standards creates a significant barrier to laboratories seeking to improve their sustainability profile, as regulatory requirements often mandate these very procedures [11].

Green Alternatives and Their Advantages

In contrast to conventional methods, greener spectroscopic approaches focus on miniaturization, solvent reduction or elimination, and integration of sustainable materials. Vibrational spectroscopic techniques exemplify this transition, offering non-destructive, reagent-free analysis with minimal sample preparation [58]. Techniques including attenuated total reflectance infrared (ATR-IR), near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), and Raman spectroscopy enable rapid analysis while eliminating the need for hazardous solvents and reducing waste generation [58].

Microextraction techniques represent another green alternative, dramatically reducing solvent consumption to less than 10mL per sample while maintaining analytical performance [26]. These approaches align with multiple GAC principles through miniaturization, reduced reagent toxicity, and decreased waste generation. The practical implementation of these methods demonstrates that green alternatives can compete with traditional methods in terms of accuracy and sensitivity while offering superior environmental profiles. For instance, ATR-IR has successfully quantified water content in Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES) with excellent accuracy (RMSEP = 0.27%), providing a green alternative to traditional Karl Fisher titration which consumes large volumes of reagents and solvents [58].

Table 2: Greenness Comparison of Analytical Techniques for Water Quantification

Technique	Solvent Consumption	Waste Generation	Sample Preparation	Accuracy (RMSEP)	Greenness Advantages
Karl Fisher Titration	High volumes of reagent and solvent	Significant waste from titration	Extensive sample handling	High (gold standard)	-
Gravimetric Method	Solvent-free	Minimal solid waste	Simple drying procedure	Variable, thermal decomposition issues	Solvent-free, cost-effective [58]
ATR-IR Spectroscopy	Reagent-free	Virtually no waste	Minimal, non-destructive	0.27% added water concentration	Non-destructive, reagent-free, rapid [58]
NIRS (Benchtop)	Reagent-free	Virtually no waste	Minimal, non-destructive	0.56% added water concentration	Non-destructive, reagent-free, potential for handheld use [58]
Raman Spectroscopy	Reagent-free	Virtually no waste	Minimal, non-destructive	0.67% added water concentration	Non-destructive, reagent-free, promising for in situ analysis [58]

Implementing Green Workflows: Practical Strategies

Sample Preparation Optimization

Sample preparation represents the most significant opportunity for green improvements in spectroscopic analysis. Laboratories should prioritize techniques that minimize solvent use, reduce energy consumption, and eliminate hazardous chemicals. Microextraction techniques demonstrate particular promise, consistently showing improved greenness scores in AGREEprep assessments due to dramatically reduced solvent volumes [26]. Similarly, solid-phase microextraction offers solventless extraction options that eliminate hazardous solvent waste entirely [56].

The principles of green sample preparation (GSP) provide a framework for optimization, emphasizing miniaturization, integration, and automation [10]. Specifically, laboratories should:

• Implement in-line or on-line sample preparation when possible, reducing transportation impacts and sample degradation [10]
• Select non-destructive techniques that preserve sample integrity and enable reuse [10]
• Choose green solvents including Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES), which offer biodegradable alternatives to traditional hazardous solvents [58]
• Employ microextraction approaches that reduce solvent consumption to micro- or milliliter volumes [26]

For solid sample preparation, modern grinding and milling machines designed specifically for spectroscopic analysis can improve homogeneity while minimizing contamination risks—addressing the major source of analytical errors [57]. For XRF analysis, proper pelletizing with appropriate binders creates uniform samples with consistent density, reducing matrix effects and improving analytical accuracy while minimizing waste [57].

Instrumentation and Method Selection

Strategic instrument selection significantly impacts a laboratory's environmental footprint. Laboratories should prioritize energy-efficient equipment with automated shutdown features and low standby power consumption [10]. Miniaturized and portable instruments often provide substantial energy savings compared to traditional benchtop systems while offering the additional benefit of field-deployability for on-site analysis, reducing transportation impacts [10].

When selecting analytical methods, the principles of White Analytical Chemistry encourage balancing environmental considerations with analytical performance and practical utility [56]. This triadic approach ensures that green methods remain practically viable and analytically sound. Techniques like Raman spectroscopy and ATR-IR offer particularly favorable profiles, providing non-destructive, reagent-free analysis with minimal sample preparation while maintaining excellent analytical performance [58]. For elemental analysis, portable XRF instruments enable rapid in-situ measurement without extensive sample preparation or hazardous waste generation [59].

Method development should also consider sample throughput and multiplexing capability. Methods that enable multiple analyte determination in a single run significantly improve greenness scores in metrics like GEMAM by reducing overall resource consumption per data point [10]. Similarly, high-throughput approaches that process multiple samples simultaneously improve energy and resource efficiency—a key consideration in GAC principle implementation [56] [10].

Training Strategies for Green Culture Adoption

Foundational Knowledge and Practical Skills

Building a sustainable green culture requires comprehensive training that moves beyond theoretical principles to practical implementation. Laboratory personnel should receive foundational education in GAC principles and assessment metrics, enabling them to critically evaluate methods and identify improvement opportunities [56] [10]. Training should cover the application of major assessment tools—including GAPI, AGREE, AGREEprep, and GEMAM—through hands-on workshops using the laboratory's own methods [26] [10].

Effective training programs should address:

• Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry and their practical implementation [56]
• Greenness assessment tools and their appropriate application across different analytical scenarios [26] [10]
• Solvent selection guidelines focusing on reducing toxicity and environmental impact [56] [57]
• Waste management protocols including treatment, recycling, and disposal options [10]
• Miniaturization and microextraction techniques for sample preparation [26] [57]
• Energy-efficient instrument operation and maintenance [10]

Training should emphasize the balanced approach of White Analytical Chemistry, ensuring that environmental improvements don't compromise analytical quality or practical utility [56]. Case studies demonstrating successful green method implementation—such as the replacement of Karl Fisher titration with ATR-IR for water quantification—provide concrete examples of principles in action [58].

Organizational Implementation and Monitoring

Sustainable green culture requires systematic organizational support beyond individual training. Laboratories should establish formal green method assessment protocols integrated into method development and validation processes [10]. This includes requiring greenness metrics as part of method documentation and creating review procedures for existing methods against current sustainability standards [11] [10].

Successful implementation involves:

• Establishing green chemistry committees or designated sustainability champions with authority to implement changes
• Creating standardized assessment templates using agreed-upon metrics for consistent evaluation
• Implementing recognition systems for successful green method developments or improvements
• Developing vendor assessment criteria that prioritize equipment and reagents with superior environmental profiles
• Establishing waste tracking and reduction targets with regular progress reviews

Continuous monitoring through metrics like the Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI) enables laboratories to track their progress and identify areas for further improvement [26]. This tool, introduced in 2025, aligns analytical chemistry with broader climate goals by estimating and encouraging reduction of carbon emissions associated with analytical procedures [26]. Regular audits of laboratory practices against GAC principles help maintain focus on sustainability and identify evolving opportunities for improvement as new technologies and methods emerge.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The transition to greener spectroscopic methods requires not only procedural changes but also careful selection of reagents and materials. The following solutions represent key components for implementing sustainable analytical practices.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Green Spectroscopy

Reagent/Material	Function	Green Attributes	Application Examples
Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADES)	Extraction and solubilization medium	Biodegradable, low toxicity, renewable sourcing [58]	Replacement for organic solvents in sample preparation [58]
Microextraction Devices	Miniaturized sample preparation	Dramatically reduced solvent consumption (<10mL/sample) [26]	Pre-concentration of analytes prior to spectroscopic analysis [26]
Green Solvents (Water,乙醇,丙酮)	Replacement for hazardous solvents	Reduced toxicity, improved safety profile [56] [26]	Liquid extraction, cleaning procedures [26]
Biopolymer-Based Binders	Matrix for solid sample pelletization	Renewable sourcing, biodegradable [57]	XRF sample preparation as replacement for conventional binders [57]
Recyclable/Reusable Sampling Materials	Sample collection and storage	Reduced waste generation, resource conservation [10]	Field sampling, sample transport and storage [10]

Building a green culture in analytical laboratories requires systematic approach encompassing assessment, implementation, and training. The current state of spectroscopic method greenness reveals significant room for improvement, with most standard methods scoring poorly on comprehensive metrics [11]. However, proven frameworks and tools now exist to guide this transition, enabling laboratories to reduce their environmental impact while maintaining analytical excellence.

The most successful laboratories will be those that treat sustainability not as a separate initiative but as an integrated dimension of analytical quality—applying the White Analytical Chemistry model to balance environmental responsibility with analytical performance and practical utility [56]. Through strategic workflow adjustments, targeted training, and continuous improvement guided by standardized metrics, laboratories can transform their operations to align with global sustainability goals while positioning themselves as leaders in modern, responsible analytical science.

Proving Performance: Validating Green Methods and Comparative Metric Analysis

The principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) have revolutionized how scientists evaluate the environmental impact of analytical methods, moving beyond performance metrics to include sustainability criteria [60]. Green sample preparation, a cornerstone of GAC, emphasizes miniaturization, solvent reduction, and energy efficiency [61]. Within this framework, microextraction techniques—particularly Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME)—have emerged as frontrunners for sustainable method development [62] [63].

Evaluating the greenness of these methods requires robust, specialized tools. While numerous assessment metrics exist, applying multiple tools provides a more comprehensive sustainability profile. This case study examines a specific miniaturized SPME method for analyzing biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) from Spanish trees, evaluating its environmental performance using three distinct greenness assessment tools: AGREE, AGREEprep, and ComplexGAPI [5]. We objectively compare these tools' outputs, provide experimental protocols, and contextualize findings within broader greenness assessment research.

Experimental Protocol: The Target Microextraction Method

The methodology under evaluation is a miniaturized Headspace Solid-Phase Microextraction Gas Chromatography–Quadrupole Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS) method for determining BVOC profiles from native Spanish trees [5].

Sample Preparation and Collection

• Sample Material: Plant material (leaves, needles) was collected from mature trees in the Piedrahíta Environmental Region (Ávila, Spain) [5].
• Sampling Standardization: Collections occurred early in the day to minimize diurnal variation. Technicians collected samples from defined canopy zones to control for intra-tree variability [5].
• Sample Preservation: Immediately after collection, samples were flash-frozen and stored at -86 °C to preserve volatile profiles until analysis [5].
• Sample Size: The method used only 0.20 g of frozen plant material, highlighting its miniaturized nature [5].

HS-SPME Extraction Protocol

• Extraction Mode: Headspace (HS) SPME, a solvent-free technique [5].
• SPME Fiber: A commercially available divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS) fiber was used [5].
• Extraction Optimization: Key parameters like extraction time, temperature, and sample amount were systematically optimized to maximize sensitivity and reproducibility while maintaining green principles [5].
• Throughput: The temperature ramp in the GC program limits sample throughput to approximately one analysis per hour [5].

Instrumental Analysis: GC-QTOF-MS

• Separation: Gas Chromatography.
• Detection: Quadrupole Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (QTOF-MS).
• Energy Consumption: A notable trade-off is the instrument's high energy consumption, exceeding 1.5 kWh per sample [5].
• Data Collection: The method performs high-resolution, non-targeted screening of complex BVOC mixtures [5].

Chemometric Analysis

• Data Validation: The method's performance was validated using chemometric tools, including Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) [5].
• Performance: PCA explained nearly 70% of the variance with two components, clearly separating species and confirming method selectivity and sensitivity [5].

Greenness Assessment Tools and Scoring Criteria

The greenness of the above protocol was evaluated using three specialized tools, each with a unique scoring methodology.

AGREEprep (Analytical Greenness Metric for Sample Preparation)

AGREEprep is a dedicated tool for evaluating the sample preparation stage, using weighted criteria from the 10 principles of Green Sample Preparation (GSP) [5] [18]. It generates a score from 0 to 1, where higher scores indicate greener performance.

AGREE (Analytical Greenness Calculator)

AGREE employs the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, providing a final pictogram with a score from 0 to 1. It offers a broader overview of the entire analytical method [5].

ComplexGAPI (Complex Green Analytical Procedure Index)

ComplexGAPI is a comprehensive and restrictive visual tool. It uses a pentagram pictogram to evaluate multiple steps of an analytical procedure, color-coding each segment (green, yellow, red) to represent environmental impact [5].

The GET (Green Extraction Tree) Tool

While not applied in the primary case study, the GET tool is a novel metric specifically designed for natural product extraction. It integrates the 10 principles of GSP with the 6 principles of Green Extraction of Natural Products. Its "tree" pictogram uses color-coded "leaves" (green, yellow, red) across 14 criteria in 6 aspects (e.g., samples, solvents, energy, waste) [61]. It is highly relevant for assessing methods involving biological materials.

Greenness Assessment Workflow: This diagram illustrates the multi-tool evaluation process, from tool selection to final reporting.

Results and Comparative Analysis

The following tables summarize the quantitative and qualitative results from the greenness assessment of the HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS method.

Table 1: Overall Scores and Performance of the HS-SPME Method Across Assessment Tools

Assessment Tool	Final Score	Key Strengths Identified	Key Limitations Identified
AGREEprep	Not explicitly stated [5]	Solvent-free microextraction, minimal sample handling, automation [5]	High energy consumption, ex-situ sample treatment [5]
AGREE	Not explicitly stated [5]	Favorable green profile, strong sustainability metrics [5]	High energy consumption from GC-QTOF-MS [5]
ComplexGAPI	Not explicitly stated [5]	Comprehensive visual representation of the entire method [5]	Offline analysis, high instrument energy demand [5]
BAGI (for context)	67.5 [5]	Good practical applicability and operator safety [5]	Not a primary greenness tool; focuses on practicality [5]

Table 2: Detailed Evaluation of Method Aspects by Different Tools

Method Aspect	Tool-Specific Evaluation & Impact
Sample Size (0.20 g)	AGREEprep/AGREE: Rated positively for miniaturization and waste reduction [5].
Solvent Usage (None)	All Tools: Highlighted as a major strength (solvent-free HS-SPME) [5].
Energy Consumption (>1.5 kWh/sample)	AGREEprep/ComplexGAPI: Consistently penalized; a primary trade-off for performance [5].
Throughput (~1 sample/hour)	ComplexGAPI/AGREEprep: Identified as a limitation due to slow GC temperature ramp [5].
Waste Generation	AGREE/AGREEprep: Scored highly due to minimal waste from microextraction [5].
Operator Safety	Implicitly high in scores; BAGI score of 67.5 confirms good practicality and safety [5].

Comparative Analysis of Tool Outputs

The three tools provided a generally consistent but nuanced evaluation [5]. AGREE and AGREEprep highlighted the method's strengths in waste reduction and automation. ComplexGAPI, being more restrictive, gave greater visual weight to inherent technical limitations like offline analysis and energy consumption. No significant discrepancies were reported between the tools; instead, they offered complementary perspectives that reinforced the critical balance between analytical performance and sustainability [5].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for SPME-Based Green Methods

Item	Function / Role in Green Analysis
DVB/CAR/PDMS SPME Fiber	A versatile, commercial fiber coating for extracting a wide range of volatile and semi-volatile compounds; enables solvent-free sampling [5] [63].
Cryogenic Storage (-86 °C)	Preserves the integrity of labile volatile profiles in biological samples prior to analysis, ensuring analytical accuracy [5].
Green Assessment Software (AGREE, AGREEprep)	Open-access software toolkits used to calculate and visualize the greenness score of an analytical method, promoting GAC adoption [5] [61].
Chemometric Software (PCA, HCA)	Statistical tools for validating method performance, differentiating complex sample profiles, and identifying key biomarkers without additional wet-lab work [5].
Biocompatible Sorbent Coatings (e.g., MOFs, COFs)	Advanced materials that enhance extraction selectivity and efficiency, often with improved environmental footprints compared to traditional coatings [60] [63].
Ultrapure Water (e.g., from Milli-Q systems)	Essential for preparing mobile phases, sample dilution, and cleaning in LC- and GC-based methods; purity is critical for minimizing background interference [13].

Discussion and Future Outlook

This case study demonstrates that a multi-tool approach delivers a more holistic and critical greenness evaluation than any single tool. The consensus among the tools confirms that the miniaturized, solvent-free HS-SPME method embodies core GAC principles, with its primary environmental trade-off being high energy consumption from the high-resolution mass spectrometer [5].

Future research directions are focused on mitigating these trade-offs. Direct-SPME-MS techniques, which eliminate the energy-intensive chromatography step, can reduce analysis times to seconds and further minimize solvent use [64]. Furthermore, the development of novel green assessment tools like the Green Extraction Tree (GET) offers enhanced specificity for natural product extraction, evaluating previously overlooked aspects like raw material renewability and industrial production prospects [61].

The evolution of green metrics is empowering scientists to make more informed decisions, guiding the development of analytical methods that are not only precise and accurate but also environmentally responsible and sustainable for the future.

The adoption of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has transformed how researchers evaluate spectroscopic and sample preparation methods, shifting focus from solely performance-based criteria to comprehensive environmental impact assessments. [26] This paradigm evolution has resulted in a proliferation of assessment tools, each designed to quantify different aspects of methodological greenness, practicality, and analytical performance. The concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) further expanded this framework by integrating three color-coded dimensions: red for analytical performance, green for environmental impact, and blue for practical and economic factors. [65] [31] For researchers and drug development professionals, navigating this complex landscape of assessment metrics presents significant challenges. This comparative analysis provides a structured evaluation of predominant greenness assessment tools, examining their foundational principles, application methodologies, and comparative strengths and weaknesses specifically within the context of spectroscopic sample preparation methods. By synthesizing experimental data and practical case studies, this guide aims to equip analytical scientists with the evidence-based insights needed to select appropriate metrics for their specific research contexts and methodological requirements.

Methodology of Comparison

Literature Search and Metric Selection

The comparative analysis incorporated systematic evaluation of current assessment metrics through comprehensive literature review spanning scientific databases, peer-reviewed journals, and chromatographic publications. Selected metrics were required to have documented application in analytical chemistry literature, clearly defined assessment criteria, and reproducible output systems. The evaluation prioritized tools specifically relevant to spectroscopic methods and sample preparation protocols, excluding metrics dedicated exclusively to synthetic chemistry processes.

Evaluation Criteria Framework

Each metric was analyzed against a standardized set of parameters designed to assess its comprehensiveness, practicality, and scientific rigor. The evaluation framework included:

• Theoretical Foundation: Examination of underlying principles (GAC, WAC, etc.) and their relationship to established green chemistry concepts
• Assessment Scope: Analysis of the methodological stages covered (sample preparation, analysis, waste management)
• Scoring System: Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative output mechanisms, including numerical scores, visual outputs, and categorization systems
• Practical Implementation: Assessment of accessibility, computational requirements, and technical barriers to adoption
• Validation Status: Review of documented applications in peer-reviewed literature and comparative studies

Case Study Integration

Where available, published case studies applying multiple metrics to identical analytical methods were incorporated to provide empirical evidence of comparative performance. These experimental applications enabled validation of claimed strengths and identification of potential limitations through direct methodological comparison.

Comprehensive Metric Profiles

AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric)

Theoretical Foundation: AGREE operates on the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, incorporating weighted criteria across the analytical workflow. [31] [26] The tool generates a circular pictogram with twelve segments, each representing one GAC principle, providing immediate visual identification of methodological strengths and weaknesses. [33] [26] The software-based implementation produces a composite score ranging from 0-1, with higher values indicating superior greenness performance. [26]

Strengths and Limitations: AGREE's primary strength lies in its comprehensive coverage of environmental factors and user-friendly visual output that facilitates method comparison. [26] The open-access software enhances accessibility and standardization across applications. [33] Documented limitations include potential subjectivity in weighting criteria and insufficient consideration of pre-analytical processes such as reagent synthesis. [26]

GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)

Assessment Methodology: GAPI employs a five-component pictogram that color-codes environmental impact across the analytical lifecycle from sample collection through final detection. [26] Each component assesses specific process stages using a traffic-light color system (green, yellow, red) to indicate environmental performance. [66]

Applications and Evolution: GAPI has been extensively applied in pharmaceutical analysis, including spectrophotometric methods for drug quantification. [66] The metric has spawned modifications including Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) and ComplexGAPI, which extend assessment scope to preliminary operations and incorporate cumulative scoring systems. [26] While valued for visual intuitiveness, GAPI has been criticized for lacking a unified numerical score and maintaining subjective elements in color assignments. [26]

AGREEprep (Analytical GREEnness Metric for Sample Preparation)

Specialized Focus: AGREEprep addresses the critical need for targeted assessment of sample preparation stages, which typically represent the most environmentally impactful phase of analytical workflows. [33] [26] The metric evaluates ten principles of green sample preparation through dedicated software that generates a circular pictogram with final score ranging 0-1. [33]

Performance Characteristics: Methods scoring above 0.5 are considered environmentally acceptable. [33] Comparative studies demonstrate AGREEprep's particular utility in evaluating microextraction techniques, where it effectively highlights advantages of miniaturized approaches. [33] As a specialized tool, AGREEprep must be used alongside comprehensive metrics for complete method evaluation. [26]

Emerging Metrics

Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA): Introduced in 2025, AGSA employs a star-shaped visualization to represent performance across multiple green criteria including reagent toxicity, waste generation, and energy consumption. [31] [26] The total star area provides immediate visual comparison, with larger areas indicating superior greenness. [26]

Carbon Footprint Reduction Index (CaFRI): Reflecting growing climate concerns, CaFRI estimates and encourages reduction of carbon emissions associated with analytical procedures. [31] [26] This metric aligns analytical chemistry with broader environmental targets through life-cycle assessment of methodological carbon footprints. [26]

Comparative Analysis of Metrics

Table 1: Comprehensive Comparison of Major Greenness Assessment Metrics

Metric	Theoretical Basis	Output Format	Scope	Scoring System	Key Strengths	Documented Limitations
NEMI	4 environmental criteria	Binary pictogram	Overall method	Pass/fail per criterion	Simplicity, accessibility	Lacks granularity, limited scope [26]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty point system	Numerical score (0-100)	Overall method	Subtractive from ideal (100)	Quantitative comparison	Subjective penalties, no visual component [66] [26]
GAPI	5-stage analysis	Color-coded pictogram	Comprehensive workflow	Qualitative (colors)	Visual identification of weak points	No unified score, somewhat subjective [66] [26]
AGREE	12 GAC principles	Circular pictogram + numerical	Overall method	0-1 scale	Comprehensive, user-friendly software	Subjective weighting, limited pre-analytical focus [31] [33] [26]
AGREEprep	10 GSP principles	Circular pictogram + numerical	Sample preparation	0-1 scale	Specialized for sample preparation	Must be combined with other tools [33] [26]
AGSA	Multiple green criteria	Star diagram	Overall method	Area-based comparison	Intuitive visualization, multi-criteria	Recent introduction, limited validation [31] [26]
RAPI	Analytical performance criteria	Star pictogram	Analytical performance	0-100 scale	WAC complement, validation-focused	No environmental assessment [65] [31]
BAGI	Practicality criteria	Star pictogram	Practical/economic factors	25-100 scale	WAC complement, practicality focus	No environmental assessment [65] [31] [66]

Table 2: Performance Assessment in Spectroscopic Method Evaluation

Metric	Pharmaceutical Spectroscopy [66] [51]	Microextraction Methods [33]	Multi-technique Comparison	Ease of Implementation	Inter-method Correlation
NEMI	Limited application	Poor discrimination	Limited utility	High	Low with comprehensive metrics
Analytical Eco-Scale	Moderate use	Moderate application	Good for ranking	Moderate	Moderate with quantitative metrics
GAPI	Extensive application	Good performance	Good visual comparison	Moderate	Moderate with AGREE
AGREE	Growing adoption	Strong performance	Excellent comparison	Moderate (software required)	High with other quantitative tools
AGREEprep	Limited direct use	Excellent performance	Specialized comparison	Moderate (software required)	Low with comprehensive metrics
AGSA	Emerging application	Limited documentation	Promising for comparison	Moderate	Under investigation
RAPI	Complementary use	Complementary use	Performance focus	Moderate	High with BAGI
BAGI	Complementary use	Complementary use	Practicality focus	Moderate	High with RAPI

Experimental Protocols and Case Studies

Pharmaceutical Spectroscopy Application

A validated comparative study evaluated five UV spectrophotometric methods for analyzing chloramphenicol and dexamethasone sodium phosphate using multiple assessment tools. [66] The experimental protocol included:

• Method Implementation: Five spectrophotometric techniques (zero-order, induced dual wavelength, Fourier self-deconvolution, ratio difference, and derivative ratio) were developed and validated according to ICH guidelines. [66]
• Greenness Assessment: Analytical Eco-Scale, GAPI, and AGREE were applied to all methods with detailed penalty point assignments and pictogram generation. [66]
• Blueness Assessment: The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) was implemented to evaluate practical considerations including cost, time, and safety factors. [66]
• Whiteness Integration: Results from greenness and blueness assessments were combined with analytical performance data to calculate overall whiteness scores according to White Analytical Chemistry principles. [66]

Key Findings: The study demonstrated that complementary metric application provided more nuanced understanding of method sustainability than single-metric approaches. The zero-order method for chloramphenicol detection achieved superior greenness scores due to minimal reagent requirements and waste generation, while maintaining satisfactory analytical performance. [66]

Microextraction Method Evaluation

A systematic comparison of ten chromatographic methods for UV filter determination in cosmetics applied AGREE and AGREEprep to evaluate greenness performance: [33]

• Method Selection: The study included conventional solvent-based extraction, solid-phase extraction, pressurized liquid extraction, and five microextraction techniques. [33]
• Software Implementation: Both AGREE and AGREEprep software tools were used with standardized input parameters to ensure comparative consistency. [33]
• Detailed Assessment: Each method received comprehensive evaluation with particular attention to sample preparation stages through AGREEprep. [33]

Critical Results: Microextraction methods consistently outperformed conventional techniques in greenness assessments, with dynamic HF-LPME-HPLC-UV achieving the highest scores. [33] AGREEprep provided more nuanced differentiation between microextraction techniques than general metrics, highlighting its value for sample preparation optimization. [33]

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Case Study

A quantitative NMR method for concurrent analysis of aspirin and omeprazole underwent comprehensive sustainability assessment: [51]

• Method Optimization: 1H-qNMR technique was developed with phloroglucinol as internal standard and DMSO-d6 as deuterated solvent. [51]
• Multi-metric Evaluation: The method was assessed using NEMI, GAPI, eco-scale, AGREE, and BAGI to profile environmental, practical, and performance characteristics. [51]
• Comparative Analysis: Results were benchmarked against previously reported chromatographic and spectrophotometric methods. [51]

Significant Outcome: The NMR method demonstrated superior greenness credentials compared to separation-based techniques, attributed to minimal sample preparation, absence of derivatization, and reagent recovery potential. [51] The case study illustrated the importance of technique selection in sustainable method development.

Visualization of Metric Relationships

Diagram 1: Metric Relationships and Evolution. This visualization shows the developmental relationships between assessment metrics within the White Analytical Chemistry framework, highlighting the specialization and evolution of tools from foundational to advanced implementations.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Green Spectroscopic Method Development

Reagent/Material	Function in Analysis	Green Characteristics	Application Examples
Ethanol	Solvent for extraction and dissolution	Biobased, low toxicity, biodegradable	Pharmaceutical dissolution (CHL/DSP) [66]
Dimethyl Sulfoxide-d6	Deuterated NMR solvent	Recoverable, minimal waste generation	NMR quantification of aspirin/omeprazole [51]
Phloroglucinol	Internal standard for qNMR	Enables accurate quantification without derivatization	NMR method for drug combinations [51]
Water	Solvent for hydrophilic analytes	Non-toxic, safe, readily available	Alternative to organic solvents
Liquid Carbon Dioxide	Extraction solvent in SFE	Non-flammable, recyclable, low energy requirement	Green extraction techniques
Biobased Solvents	(e.g., ethyl lactate, limonene)	Extraction and separation	Renewable feedstock, biodegradable	Solvent replacement strategies
Ionic Liquids	Extraction media	Non-volatile, reusable, tunable properties	Microextraction methodologies

The comparative analysis of greenness assessment metrics reveals a dynamic ecosystem of tools with complementary strengths and applications. For spectroscopic sample preparation methods, the selection of appropriate metrics depends significantly on research objectives, methodological characteristics, and desired assessment comprehensiveness. Established tools like GAPI and AGREE provide robust general assessment, while specialized metrics like AGREEprep offer granular evaluation of sample preparation stages. The emerging framework of White Analytical Chemistry represents a paradigm shift toward holistic method evaluation, integrating functional characteristics with environmental considerations.

Future developments in greenness assessment will likely focus on standardization and integration to address current fragmentation challenges. [31] The proliferation of overlapping tools creates confusion in metric selection and interpretation, highlighting the need for consolidated frameworks. [31] Promising directions include digital dashboards incorporating artificial intelligence for real-time method evaluation, interactive interfaces for dynamic assessment, and integration with open-access databases for comparative benchmarking. [31] Additionally, the growing emphasis on climate-specific impacts through tools like CaFRI reflects alignment with broader environmental sustainability goals beyond traditional green chemistry principles. [26]

For researchers and drug development professionals, the strategic application of complementary metric combinations provides the most comprehensive sustainability assessment. Based on documented case studies, the integration of AGREE or GAPI for environmental impact with BAGI for practicality and RAPI for analytical performance delivers balanced evaluation aligned with White Analytical Chemistry principles. [65] [66] This multidimensional approach supports informed methodological decisions that balance analytical quality, practical feasibility, and environmental responsibility in spectroscopic analysis and sample preparation.

The pursuit of sustainability in analytical laboratories presents a complex triple challenge: maintaining high analytical performance while adopting greener methodologies and ensuring practical applicability for routine use. This balance is particularly critical in pharmaceutical and food analysis, where method reliability directly impacts public health and regulatory compliance. The emerging framework of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) seeks to harmonize these often-competing goals by equally weighting analytical performance (red), environmental impact (green), and practical applicability (blue) [67]. This guide objectively compares current green sample preparation alternatives, providing researchers with evidence-based insights for method selection and development.

The fundamental shift from traditional "take-make-dispose" linear models to Circular Analytical Chemistry (CAC) frameworks requires rethinking every stage of analysis, especially sample preparation, which often accounts for over 60% of total analysis time and approximately one-third of all analytical errors [41]. This transition demands collaboration across manufacturers, researchers, routine laboratories, and policymakers to overcome the traditional conservatism in the field and accelerate the adoption of sustainable practices [20].

Theoretical Framework: Assessing the Balance

From Green to White Analytical Chemistry

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has evolved beyond simply reducing hazardous chemicals to a comprehensive framework encompassing all twelve principles, including energy efficiency, waste minimization, and operator safety [67]. The recently proposed White Analytical Chemistry model provides a more holistic assessment framework, visualizing the balance between three critical dimensions:

• Red - Analytical Performance: Selectivity, sensitivity, accuracy, precision, linearity, robustness
• Green - Environmental Impact: Resource consumption, waste generation, toxicity, energy efficiency
• Blue - Practical Applicability: Throughput, cost, availability, simplicity, operational safety [67]

A method approaching "white" status demonstrates optimal balance across all three dimensions, enabling laboratories to meet both analytical and sustainability goals without compromising practical implementation in routine settings.

Essential Assessment Metrics and Tools

Quantitative assessment tools are indispensable for objectively evaluating method greenness and applicability. The following table summarizes the most widely adopted metrics:

Table 1: Greenness and Applicability Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Focus	Output Type	Key Parameters Measured	Strengths
AGREE [67]	Overall analytical method	Radial chart (0-1 score)	All 12 GAC principles	Comprehensive, intuitive visualization
AGREEprep [20] [68]	Sample preparation specifically	Pictogram + score (0-1)	10 sample preparation criteria	First dedicated sample prep metric
ComplexGAPI [67]	Entire workflow + pre-analytical steps	Extended color-coded pictogram	Multiple lifecycle stages	Comprehensive greenness coverage
BAGI [67] [68]	Practical applicability	Pictogram + % score	Throughput, cost, availability, safety	Bridges greenness and practical use

These metrics enable objective comparison between methods and identify specific areas for improvement. For example, AGREEprep has revealed that 67% of standard methods from major pharmacopeias score below 0.2 on the 0-1 scale, highlighting the urgent need for updating official methods with greener alternatives [20].

Comparative Analysis of Green Sample Preparation Strategies

High-Performance Sample Preparation Approaches

Modern sample preparation strategies can be classified into four principal categories, each offering distinct advantages for balancing performance and sustainability:

Table 2: High-Performance Sample Preparation Strategies

Strategy	Mechanism	Key Techniques	Impact on Performance	Impact on Greenness
Functional Materials [41]	Additional phases disrupt system equilibrium	Molecularly imprinted polymers, magnetic nanoparticles	Enhances sensitivity & selectivity	May increase operational complexity
Chemical/Biological Reactions [41]	Alters chemical potential distribution	Derivatization, enzymatic conversion	Improves detection sensitivity	Often requires additional reagents
Energy Field Assistance [41]	Accelerates mass transfer kinetics	Ultrasound, microwave, electric fields	Reduces extraction time	May require specialized equipment
Device Integration [41] [40]	Miniaturization and automation	Microfluidic chips, online systems	Improves precision & automation	Reduces reagent consumption & waste

Green Solvent Alternatives

The transition from traditional solvents to greener alternatives represents a pivotal shift in sample preparation. The following table compares solvent options based on their properties and environmental impact:

Table 3: Comparison of Green Solvents for Sample Preparation

Solvent Type	Sources & Examples	Environmental & Safety Profile	Analytical Compatibility	Limitations
Bio-based Solvents [14]	Ethanol (sugarcane), ethyl lactate (corn), D-limonene (orange peels)	Renewable feedstocks, typically biodegradable	Compatible with HPLC, extraction techniques	May require purification, variable quality
Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES) [14] [69]	Choline chloride + urea, menthol + fatty acids	Low volatility, non-flammable, often biodegradable	Excellent extraction efficiency for various compounds	High viscosity, potential interference in analysis
Supercritical Fluids [14] [69]	CO₂, often with ethanol co-solvent	Non-toxic, non-flammable, easily removed	Selective extraction, compatible with SFE-GC/SFC	High energy demand for pressure maintenance
Water [70] [14]	-	Non-toxic, non-flammable, renewable	Ideal for spectrophotometry, limited for chromatography	Limited solubility for non-polar compounds

Case Studies: Direct Method Comparisons

Extraction Techniques for Bioactive Compounds

A direct comparison of Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE) and Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction (UAE) for anthocyanin recovery from purple corn provides valuable quantitative insights:

Table 4: PLE vs. UAE for Anthocyanin Extraction [68]

Parameter	Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE)	Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction (UAE)
Solvent System	2% o-phosphoric acid in ethanol:water (1:1, v/v)	2% o-phosphoric acid in ethanol:water (1:1, v/v)
Extraction Conditions	95°C, 1500 psi, 3 min static cycle	Room temperature, 15 min sonication
Sample Throughput	Higher	Moderate
Detection Limits	0.30–1.70 mg/kg	0.30–1.70 mg/kg
Precision (RSD)	≤5.4%	≤5.4%
Accuracy (Recovery)	97.1–101.9%	97.1–101.9%
AGREEprep Score	0.73/1	0.76/1
BAGI Score	77.5/100	72.5/100
Energy Consumption	Higher (temperature & pressure maintenance)	Lower
Waste Generation	Moderate	Minimal

This comparison demonstrates that both techniques maintain excellent analytical performance while achieving strong greenness scores, with PLE offering better practicality for high-throughput scenarios while UAE excels in waste reduction.

Spectrophotometry vs. Chromatography for Pharmaceutical Analysis

Green spectrophotometric methods offer a compelling alternative to chromatographic techniques for routine pharmaceutical analysis:

Table 5: Green Spectrophotometry vs. HPLC for Drug Analysis [71] [70]

Parameter	Green Spectrophotometric Methods	Conventional HPLC
Solvent Consumption	Water only (2-10 mL/sample)	Acetonitrile/methanol (500-1000 mL/day)
Energy Demand	Low (instrument operation only)	High (pumps, column oven, detector)
Waste Generation	Minimal, non-hazardous	Significant, often hazardous
Capital Cost	Low	High
Operational Expertise	Moderate	Advanced
Sample Throughput	High (rapid analysis)	Moderate
Sensitivity	µg/mL range	ng/mL range
Selectivity	Requires mathematical resolution	High inherent selectivity
Multi-analyte Capability	Limited to 2-3 components	Extensive

The factorized response spectrum (FRS) approach enables spectrophotometric methods to resolve overlapping spectra of drug combinations like chlorphenoxamine HCl and caffeine without separation steps, achieving accuracy of 98-102% across concentration ranges of 3-35 μg/mL and 3-45 μg/mL, respectively [71]. Similarly, methods for alcaftadine and ketorolac tromethamine in ophthalmic formulations successfully addressed interference from the preservative benzalkonium chloride while using only water as solvent [70].

Experimental Protocols for Green Sample Preparation

Miniaturized HS-SPME-GC-QTOF-MS for VOC Analysis

This protocol demonstrates a solvent-free approach for analyzing biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) from plant materials:

Materials and Reagents:

• Sample: 0.20 g plant material (fresh or frozen)
• SPME Fiber: Divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS)
• Internal standards: Deuterated VOC analogs (as needed)
• GC vials: 10-20 mL, suitable for SPME

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation: Precisely weigh 0.20 g of plant material into a headspace vial. Immediately seal with crimp caps to prevent VOC loss.
• Equilibration: Incubate samples at 40°C for 5 minutes with constant agitation (250 rpm).
• Extraction: Expose the SPME fiber to the sample headspace for 30 minutes at 40°C.
• Desorption: Transfer the fiber to the GC injector port for thermal desorption at 250°C for 5 minutes in splitless mode.
• Chromatographic Separation: Use a mid-polarity column (e.g., DB-35MS) with the following temperature program: 40°C (hold 2 min), ramp to 240°C at 10°C/min, final hold 5 min.
• Detection: Employ QTOF-MS with electron ionization (70 eV); mass range: m/z 35-350; acquisition rate: 5 spectra/sec.

Validation Data: The method achieved detection limits of 0.01-0.5 μg/g, precision of RSD <12%, and high linearity (R² >0.995) across calibration ranges. Greenness assessment yielded strong AGREEprep scores (>0.7) despite the energy-intensive GC-QTOF-MS instrumentation [5].

Green Spectrophotometric Methods for Pharmaceutical Combinations

This protocol outlines the factorized response spectrum approach for analyzing drug mixtures without separation:

Materials and Reagents:

• Solvent: Ultrapure water only
• Standard solutions: Primary reference standards of target analytes
• Equipment: Dual-beam UV-Vis spectrophotometer with 1 cm quartz cells

Methodology:

• Stock Solution Preparation: Accurately weigh and dissolve each drug component in water to obtain 1 mg/mL stock solutions.
• Working Solution Preparation: Dilute stock solutions with water to obtain working solutions of 50 μg/mL.
• Spectral Acquisition: Scan all solutions across 200-400 nm range with 1 nm resolution using water as blank.
• Factorized Response Spectrum Generation:
  • For Absorbance Resolution (AR): Calculate FRΔAS = aY/[Δ(a₁-a₂)]' where aY is the zero-order spectrum of pure Y, and Δ(a₁-a₂) represents absorbance difference at two wavelengths where component X shows equal absorbance.
  • For Factorized Zero-order Method (FZM): Generate factorized spectrum by dividing the zero-order spectrum of pure X by its absorbance at an isopoint wavelength.
• Mixture Analysis: Apply the corresponding factorized spectrum to resolve individual components in mixture spectra through multiplication and subtraction algorithms.

Validation Data: Methods for chlorphenoxamine HCl and caffeine demonstrated excellent linearity (R² >0.999) across 3-35 μg/mL and 3-45 μg/mL ranges, respectively, with precision of RSD <2% and accuracy of 98.5-101.5% [71]. Greenness assessment using AGREE and ComplexGAPI showed superior environmental performance compared to reference HPLC methods [71] [70].

Pressurized Liquid Extraction for Natural Products

Materials and Reagents:

• Extraction solvent: 2% o-phosphoric acid in ethanol:water (1:1, v/v)
• Sample matrix: 0.5 g purple corn powder dispersed in 1.5 g diatomaceous earth
• Equipment: PLE system with 5 mL stainless-steel cells

Methodology:

• Cell Preparation: Place two cellulose filters at the bottom of 5 mL PLE cells.
• Sample Loading: Mix 0.5 g sample with 1.5 g diatomaceous earth using mortar and pestle, then load into cell.
• Extraction: Perform one static extraction cycle of 3 minutes at 95°C and 1500 psi.
• System Flushing: Use 3.5 mL flush volume (70% cell capacity) with 90-second purge time.
• Extract Handling: Dilute resulting extract 1:9 with mobile phase before analysis.

Validation Data: The method showed excellent linearity (R² ≥ 0.9992), detection limits of 0.30-1.70 mg/kg, precision of RSD ≤ 5.4%, and accuracy of 97.1-101.9% recovery at 50, 100, and 150 mg/kg fortification levels [68].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 6: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Green Sample Preparation

Item	Function	Green Attributes	Application Examples
DVB/CAR/PDMS SPME Fibers [5]	Solventless extraction of VOCs	Eliminates solvent use, reusable	BVOC analysis from plants, environmental monitoring
Deep Eutectic Solvents [14]	Tunable extraction media	Low toxicity, biodegradable, renewable	Natural product extraction, metal analysis
Molecularly Imprinted Polymers [41]	Selective recognition of target analytes	Reusable, reduce repeated synthesis	Selective enrichment from complex matrices
Magnetic Nanoparticles [41]	Solid-phase extraction sorbents	Easily separated, reusable, reduce solvent use	Preconcentration of trace analytes
Water as Solvent [70]	Primary extraction and dilution medium	Non-toxic, non-flammable, renewable	Spectrophotometric drug analysis
Ethanol-Water Mixtures [68]	Extraction solvents for polar compounds	Renewable, low toxicity, biodegradable	Anthocyanin extraction from plants
AGREEprep Software [20] [67]	Quantitative greenness assessment	Guides sustainable method development	Method optimization and comparison
Automated Sample Preparation Systems [40]	Integrated extraction and cleanup	Reduce human error, optimize reagent use	High-throughput pharmaceutical analysis

Achieving the optimal balance between greenness, analytical performance, and practicality requires strategic methodological choices rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. The comparative data presented in this guide demonstrates that significant sustainability improvements can be realized without compromising analytical quality through several key strategies:

First, method substitution presents immediate opportunities - replacing traditional HPLC with green spectrophotometric approaches when sensitivity requirements permit, or implementing solvent-free microextraction techniques for VOC analysis [71] [5] [70]. Second, solvent replacement with bio-based alternatives, deep eutectic solvents, or simple water-ethanol mixtures substantially reduces environmental impact and occupational hazards [68] [14]. Third, workflow integration through automated online systems minimizes manual intervention while improving reproducibility and throughput [40].

The framework of White Analytical Chemistry provides a valuable conceptual model for method development and evaluation, encouraging researchers to simultaneously consider all three dimensions rather than optimizing one at the expense of others [67]. As the field progresses toward stronger sustainability models that acknowledge ecological limits and planetary boundaries, the analytical community must continue developing innovative solutions that align environmental responsibility with the practical demands of routine analysis [20].

The Role of Regulatory Agencies and the Path to Modernizing Official Methods

The modernization of official analytical methods represents a critical challenge and opportunity for regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical developers, and researchers. Traditional standard methods, many developed decades ago, often conflict with contemporary sustainability goals while failing to leverage technological advancements. Recent research reveals that 67% of official standard methods with sample preparation steps score below 0.2 on the AGREEprep greenness scale (where 1 is optimal), with methods for environmental analysis of organic compounds performing particularly poorly at 86% scoring below this threshold [11]. This quantitative evidence underscores the urgent need for modernizing official methodologies to align with green analytical chemistry (GAC) principles while maintaining analytical rigor.

The regulatory landscape is simultaneously driving change, with agencies like the FDA implementing deadlines for impurity testing and updated guidance on nitrosamine drug substance-related impurities (NDSRIs) [72]. Beyond compliance, modernization offers significant scientific and operational benefits, including reduced environmental impact, enhanced analytical performance, and improved cost efficiency. This article examines the current state of official methods, evaluates greenness assessment tools, compares spectroscopic techniques, and outlines a strategic pathway for method modernization that balances regulatory requirements with sustainability objectives.

The Current State of Official Methods

Quantitative Greenness Deficits

Comprehensive assessment of 174 standard methods from CEN, ISO, and Pharmacopoeias reveals systematic sustainability challenges across analytical domains. The AGREEprep metric evaluations demonstrate that pharmaceutical methods perform relatively better (45% below 0.2) than environmental analysis methods (86% below 0.2), suggesting that regulatory pressure varies across sectors [11]. These findings highlight that the majority of official methods still rely on resource-intensive, outdated techniques that generate substantial hazardous waste, consume excessive energy, and utilize dangerous reagents.

The persistence of these suboptimal methods creates significant operational and ethical dilemmas for researchers and manufacturers. Laboratories must choose between compliant but unsustainable official methods and greener alternatives that may lack regulatory acceptance. This conflict is particularly acute in regulated industries like pharmaceuticals, where method validation requirements create disincentives for adopting improved methodologies even when they demonstrate superior analytical performance.

Consequences of Inadequate Sample Preparation

Sample preparation represents a particularly problematic stage in analytical workflows, accounting for approximately 60% of all spectroscopic analytical errors [57]. Inadequately prepared samples compromise data quality, potentially leading to inaccurate conclusions in research, quality control, and regulatory submissions. The traditional approach of investing in advanced instrumentation while neglecting sample preparation optimization represents a critical misallocation of resources that perpetuates both analytical and environmental inefficiencies.

Greenness Assessment Frameworks

Evolution of Assessment Tools

The development of comprehensive greenness assessment metrics has transformed researchers' ability to quantitatively evaluate and compare analytical methods. These tools have evolved from basic checklists to sophisticated multi-dimensional frameworks that capture environmental, practical, and performance considerations:

Table 1: Greenness Assessment Tools for Analytical Methods

Tool Name	Scope of Assessment	Output Type	Key Advantages	Limitations
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	Basic environmental criteria	Binary pictogram	Simple, accessible	Lacks granularity; doesn't assess full workflow [26]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)	Entire analytical process	Color-coded pictogram	Comprehensive; visual identification of high-impact stages [26]	No overall score; somewhat subjective [26]
AGREE (Analytical Greenness)	12 principles of GAC	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1)	Comprehensive; facilitates comparison [26]	Doesn't fully account for pre-analytical processes [26]
AGREEprep	Sample preparation specifically	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1)	Addresses often-overlooked high-impact stage [11] [26]	Must be used with broader tools for full method evaluation [26]
White Analytical Chemistry (WAC)	Green, practical, and analytical aspects	RGB color model	Holistic assessment balancing all key dimensions [24]	More complex implementation [24]

AGREEprep: Specialized Tool for Sample Preparation

AGREEprep has emerged as a particularly valuable specialized metric focused exclusively on sample preparation, which often represents the most environmentally problematic analytical stage. The tool evaluates ten criteria aligned with the principles of green sample preparation (GSP), generating both a visual pictogram and a numerical score from 0-1 [26] [24]. Each criterion is weighted according to its environmental significance, with default values that can be adjusted for specific contexts. The output provides immediate visual identification of methodological weaknesses while facilitating quantitative comparisons between alternative approaches.

White Analytical Chemistry: A Holistic Framework

The emerging concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) represents a significant evolution beyond purely environmental assessments. WAC integrates three complementary dimensions: green (environmental sustainability), red (analytical performance), and blue (method practicality) [26] [24]. Just as white light combines all colors, the ideal "white" method harmonizes environmental responsibility, analytical validity, and practical implementation. The RGB 12 algorithm operationalizes this concept by evaluating methods against twelve criteria across these three domains, providing a more balanced assessment than purely environmental tools [24].

Comparative Analysis of Spectroscopic Sample Preparation

Greenness and Performance Trade-offs

Different spectroscopic techniques present distinct greenness profiles and performance characteristics that must be balanced when selecting methods. Recent comparative studies demonstrate these trade-offs:

Table 2: Comparison of Spectroscopic Techniques for Elemental Analysis [73]

Technique	Sample Preparation Requirements	Key Analytical Strengths	Greenness Considerations	Optimal Applications
EDXRF (Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence)	Minimal; non-destructive	Rapid analysis; minimal sample preparation	Excellent: no solvents, minimal waste	Determination of light elements (S, Cl, K, Ca) at high concentrations [73]
TXRF (Total Reflection X-ray Fluorescence)	Moderate; may require digestion	Broad element coverage	Good: small sample volumes	Multi-element analysis excluding light elements [73]
ICP-MS (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry)	Extensive; total dissolution required	Exceptional sensitivity; wide element range	Poor: high acid consumption, significant waste	Trace element determination; highest sensitivity requirements [73]
ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy)	Extensive; total dissolution required	Good sensitivity; multi-element capability	Poor: high acid consumption, significant waste	Major, minor, and trace element analysis except chlorine [73]

Greenness Evaluation of Microextraction Techniques

Microextraction techniques have emerged as particularly promising alternatives to conventional sample preparation, especially for environmental monitoring of emerging contaminants like UV filters in water. A comprehensive assessment of ten sample preparation methods for UV filter determination by GC-MS revealed that microextraction techniques generally outperform conventional approaches across greenness metrics [24]. The most popular techniques include:

• Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) (~24% of applications)
• Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) and variants (~24%)
• Stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) (~16%)

These techniques typically demonstrate superior greenness profiles due to dramatically reduced solvent consumption (often <1 mL vs. >50 mL for conventional methods), miniaturization, and potential for automation [24]. The AGREEprep assessments consistently show scores 2-3 times higher for these microextraction approaches compared to traditional solid-phase extraction (SPE) or liquid-liquid extraction (LLE).

Modernization Pathways and Regulatory Alignment

A Strategic Framework for Method Modernization

The modernization of official methods requires a systematic approach that balances innovation with regulatory compliance. The following diagram illustrates a strategic pathway for method modernization:

Key Drivers for Successful Modernization

Regulatory Pressure and Deadlines

Regulatory agencies increasingly recognize the need for method modernization, establishing both deadlines and updated guidance. The FDA's revised NDSRI guidance with extended compliance deadlines demonstrates a pragmatic approach that encourages thorough method development while maintaining momentum toward improved impurity control [72]. Similarly, the EPA's Method 1633 for PFAS analysis in diverse matrices reflects regulatory acceptance of advanced sample preparation techniques like dual-bed SPE cartridges that improve accuracy while reducing analysis time [74].

Technological Innovations

Recent technological advancements enable greener alternatives without compromising analytical performance:

• Enhanced Matrix Removal (EMR) Cartridges: Simplify workflows while reducing solvent consumption and waste generation for PFAS, mycotoxin, and lipid analysis [74]
• Automated Sample Preparation Systems: Instruments like the Samplify automated sampling system improve reproducibility while minimizing cross-contamination and operator exposure [74]
• Microextraction Techniques: Provide dramatic reductions in solvent consumption while maintaining or improving sensitivity [24]

Strategic Implementation Considerations

Successful modernization initiatives share several common elements:

• Comprehensive Method Validation: Modernized methods must demonstrate equivalent or superior performance to established official methods across all validation parameters
• Stakeholder Engagement: Early collaboration between researchers, quality control personnel, and regulatory affairs specialists ensures smooth transition from development to implementation
• Phased Implementation: Gradual introduction of modernized methods alongside existing approaches minimizes disruption while building confidence in new methodologies
• Documentation and Knowledge Transfer: Detailed documentation of method development, optimization, and validation facilitates regulatory acceptance and technology transfer

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Modernizing spectroscopic sample preparation requires specific reagents and materials that enable greener approaches while maintaining analytical performance:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Sample Preparation

Reagent/Material	Function	Greenness Advantages	Application Examples
Enhanced Matrix Removal (EMR) Cartridges	Selective matrix removal	Reduce processing time; eliminate manual cleanup steps; automation compatible [74]	PFAS analysis in food; mycotoxin multi-class analysis [74]
Dual-bed SPE Cartridges (e.g., WAX/GCB)	Simultaneous extraction and cleanup	Minimize clogging; reduce organic interference; improved permeability [74]	EPA Method 1633 for PFAS in aqueous and solid samples [74]
Microextraction Devices (SPME, SBSE)	Solvent-free or minimal solvent extraction	Dramatically reduced solvent consumption; minimal waste generation [24]	UV filter determination in water; volatile organic compound analysis [24]
QuEChERS Kits	Rapid pesticide residue extraction	Simplified workflow; reduced solvent consumption vs. traditional approaches [74]	Pesticide analysis in fruits, vegetables, grains; veterinary drug residues [74]
High-Purity Solvents	Sample preparation and analysis	Reduced background interference; improved detection limits; fewer repeat analyses	LC-MS/MS applications requiring ultra-low detection limits [72]

The modernization of official analytical methods represents both an urgent necessity and a significant opportunity for regulatory agencies, researchers, and pharmaceutical developers. The quantitative evidence clearly demonstrates that most current standard methods perform poorly on greenness metrics, with environmental analysis methods showing particularly concerning results. However, the evolving toolkit of greenness assessment frameworks, combined with technological innovations in sample preparation and increasing regulatory acceptance of modernized approaches, creates a favorable environment for meaningful change.

The path forward requires a balanced approach that leverages comprehensive assessment tools like AGREEprep and White Analytical Chemistry to identify optimal methodologies that harmonize environmental sustainability, analytical performance, and practical implementation. Microextraction techniques, advanced extraction materials, and automated systems provide viable alternatives to traditional methods that simultaneously improve greenness profiles and analytical performance.

As regulatory agencies continue to update guidance and establish realistic compliance timelines, researchers and manufacturers have an unprecedented opportunity to align methodological choices with both regulatory requirements and sustainability objectives. The resulting modernization of official methods will deliver significant benefits across the scientific enterprise, including reduced environmental impact, enhanced analytical performance, improved operational efficiency, and strengthened public trust in analytical data quality.

The paradigm of analytical chemistry is shifting. Driven by the urgent need for sustainability, the field is increasingly embracing the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), which advocate for minimizing waste, reducing energy consumption, and using safer solvents [75]. Simultaneously, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are emerging as powerful catalysts for this green transition. These technologies are not merely incremental improvements but are fundamentally future-proofing method development by enabling more efficient, precise, and sustainable analytical processes. This guide explores the pivotal role of AI and ML in advancing green method development, with a specific focus on spectroscopic and chromatographic techniques central to pharmaceutical impurity profiling and environmental monitoring. By objectively comparing AI-driven approaches against traditional and human-optimized methods, we provide researchers and drug development professionals with a data-backed framework for adopting these transformative technologies.

AI Technologies Powering Green Analytical Chemistry

The application of AI in green method development is not monolithic; different AI technologies offer distinct mechanisms for enhancing sustainability and efficiency. Research on Chinese enterprises has demonstrated that the positive impact on Green Total Factor Productivity (GTFP) varies significantly with the type of AI technology deployed [76].

Computer Vision and Machine Learning

• Computer Vision: This technology uses intelligent recognition and in-depth analysis of unstructured visual data like images and videos. In green manufacturing and analysis, it enables precise identification of key visual indicators such as production line status, pollutant appearance, and resource use efficiency. This facilitates real-time monitoring and intelligent adjustments, effectively reducing pollution risks and energy waste [76]. Its application in spectroscopic imaging allows for automated, non-destructive analysis of samples.
• Machine Learning: Through autonomous learning and deep pattern recognition of large-scale data, ML significantly enhances capabilities in data mining and knowledge generation for green innovation. It is widely applied to key areas such as energy consumption forecasting, equipment operation optimization, and emission management, enabling refined and intelligent environmental control [76]. In spectroscopy, ML algorithms like Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are used to extract meaningful information from complex spectral data, reducing the need for reagent-intensive preliminary tests.

The Limited Role of Logic-Based AI

In contrast to the above, logic-based AI technologies, which excel in knowledge representation and rule-based reasoning, have shown a limited impact on enhancing green productivity. These systems rely on predefined knowledge structures and are less effective in the dynamic, complex environments typical of green production and analysis. They lack the capacity to integrate unstructured information or uncover implicit knowledge from data, making them less responsive to the innovation demands of green technologies [76].

Table 1: Comparative Impact of Different AI Technologies on Green Method Development

AI Technology	Core Mechanism	Application in Green Analysis	Impact on Sustainability
Computer Vision	Intelligent analysis of images and video	Real-time monitoring of processes; non-destructive sample inspection	High (Reduces material waste and energy via process control)
Machine Learning	Pattern recognition from large datasets	Spectral data analysis; predictive modeling of optimal methods	High (Optimizes resource use and accelerates eco-friendly development)
Logic-Based AI	Predefined rules and symbolic reasoning	Automated reasoning based on established chemical principles	Low (Less adaptive to dynamic, complex green innovation needs)

Experimental Comparisons: AI vs. Human-Optimized Methods

A critical step in evaluating AI's role is a direct, quantitative comparison with human-generated methods under controlled conditions. The following case studies and aggregated data provide objective insights into the performance, efficiency, and environmental footprint of both approaches.

Case Study: HPLC Method Development

A seminal 2025 study directly compared an AI-generated High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) method with an experimentally optimized ("In-Lab") approach for analyzing a mixture of Amlodipine (AMD), Hydrochlorothiazide (HYD), and Candesartan (CND) [77].

• Experimental Protocol: The In-Lab method used an Xselect CSH Phenyl Hexyl column with a mobile phase of acetonitrile:water (0.1% trifluoroacetic acid) at a flow rate of 1.3 mL/min. The AI-generated method used a C18 column with a gradient elution of phosphate buffer and acetonitrile at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min. Both methods were validated per ICH guidelines [77].
• Performance and Greenness Results: The human-optimized method demonstrated superior performance and sustainability. It achieved faster analysis times (e.g., 0.95 min for AMD vs. 7.12 min in the AI method) and outperformed the AI-based method in MoGAPI, AGREE, and BAGI greenness assessments due to its reduced solvent use, lower waste generation, and shorter runtime [77].

Broader Performance Metrics in Spectroscopy

Beyond chromatography, AI and ML combined with spectroscopic techniques have shown remarkable efficacy. The table below summarizes key performance metrics from various applications, such as pesticide residue detection in fruits and vegetables [78].

Table 2: Performance Metrics of ML-Spectroscopy Combinations for Detection Tasks

Technique Combination	Task / Analyte	Key Performance Metrics	References
NIRDRS + 1D-CNN	Pesticides on Hami melon	Test-set accuracy: 95.83% (4-class), 99.17% (binary)	[78]
NIRDRS + PSO-PLS	Dichlorvos on Navel Orange	R²P = 0.8735, RMSEP = 0.8755	[78]
HSI + GANs	Pesticide levels in Cantaloupe	R²P = 0.8781, RMSEP = 0.6962, RPD = 2.7882	[78]
Terahertz Spectroscopy + WGANs-ResNet	Pesticide Detection	Accuracy rate: 91.4%	[78]

R²P: Prediction correlation coefficient; RMSEP: Root Mean Square Error of Prediction; RPD: Ratio of Performance to Deviation.

Environmental Impact of AI vs. Human Programmers

A 2025 study provided a unique perspective by comparing the environmental impact of AI and human programmers generating functionally equivalent code for USA Computing Olympiad problems [79]. The study employed a life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, accounting for both usage and embodied impacts of AI inference.

• Experimental Protocol: A multi-round correction process was built to iteratively fix erroneous code generated by various GPT models (GPT-4o-mini, GPT-4o, GPT-4-turbo, GPT-4). The environmental footprint was calculated based on the number of API calls required to produce correct code, compared to the energy consumption of human programmers working on the same problems within a timed contest [79].
• Key Finding: The results showed significant variation. While smaller AI models could sometimes match the environmental impact of human programmers, larger, standard models were far more energy-intensive. For example, GPT-4 emitted between 5 and 19 times more CO₂ equivalent than humans for the same programming task, highlighting a critical trade-off between model capability and environmental cost [79].

A Framework for Green AI and Sustainable Method Development

The experimental data indicates that AI is not an automatic green solution. Its sustainability depends on how it is implemented. The emerging field of "Green AI" addresses this directly, aiming to reduce the environmental footprint of AI itself while leveraging it for sustainability goals [80].

Strategies for Energy-Efficient AI

• Dynamic Model Selection: This approach involves selecting the most sustainable AI model for a given task that still meets accuracy requirements. Techniques like Green AI dynamic model cascading (invoking progressively more complex models only if needed) and Green AI dynamic model routing (using a classifier to select the most efficient model upfront) can achieve substantial energy savings (up to ~25%) while retaining most of the accuracy (~95%) of the most powerful models [81].
• Hardware and Infrastructure Optimization: Major initiatives focus on powering data centers with renewable energy, improving cooling efficiency, and designing next-generation, low-power computing hardware [82] [80].

Green Assessment Tools for Analytical Methods

To objectively evaluate the "greenness" of any method, whether AI-generated or human-developed, researchers can use standardized assessment tools. The study comparing HPLC methods utilized [77]:

• MoGAPI (Metric for Green Analytical Procedures Index)
• AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric)
• BAGI (Biannual Assessment of Greenness of Instruments)

These tools provide a comprehensive, multi-criteria evaluation of a method's environmental impact.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Solutions

The integration of AI does not replace the need for physical reagents and materials; rather, it optimizes their use. The following table details key solutions used in the green analytical techniques discussed [75].

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Method Development

Reagent / Solution	Function in Green Analysis	Example Application
Supercritical CO₂	Principal mobile phase in Supercritical Fluid Chromatography (SFC)	Replaces hazardous organic solvents; used for impurity profiling and chiral separations.
Ethanol-Water Mixtures	Green mobile phase for Liquid Chromatography	A safer alternative to acetonitrile in HPLC/UHPLC for analyzing various pharmaceuticals.
Ionic Liquids	Additives in mobile phases or green extraction solvents	Improve chromatographic peak shape and reduce the need for conventional organic solvents.
Deep Eutectic Solvents	Solvents for liquid-liquid microextraction	Used in green sample preparation to minimize solvent waste and toxicity.

Workflow and Signaling Pathways

The integration of AI into green method development follows a logical workflow, from data acquisition to final greenness assessment. The diagram below illustrates this integrated pipeline.

Workflow for AI-Driven Green Method Development

The pathway towards sustainable AI itself involves a dynamic decision-making process to balance accuracy with environmental cost, as shown in the model selection strategy below.

Green AI Model Selection Strategy

Conclusion

The greenness assessment of spectroscopic sample preparation is no longer a niche interest but a fundamental component of modern, responsible analytical science. The journey begins with a stark realization: a majority of current standard methods are environmentally unsustainable, scoring poorly on established metrics. However, a powerful and evolving toolbox of assessment methodologies, from AGREEprep to GEMAM, now provides scientists with the means to quantify impact, identify inefficiencies, and drive meaningful improvement. By adopting strategies like miniaturization, automation, and solvent-free techniques, laboratories can significantly reduce their environmental footprint while maintaining, and often enhancing, analytical rigor. The future of the field hinges on a collaborative effort—where researchers, industry, and regulators work in concert—to phase out outdated, resource-intensive methods and embrace innovative, sustainable practices. For biomedical and clinical research, this transition is not just about regulatory compliance; it represents an opportunity to lead in ecological stewardship, reducing the environmental cost of scientific discovery and healthcare advancement.

References

• 1. Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095177924001102]
• 2. Green Analytical Chemistry—Recent Innovations [https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4532/6/1/10]
• 3. Green and White Analytical Chemistry [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40998048/]
• 4. Green Sample Preparation 2024 [https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/advances-in-sample-preparation/special-issue/10FVBNCQHTC]
• 5. A Sustainable Approach to Green Sample Preparation and ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/a-sustainable-approach-to-green-sample-preparation-and-analytical-performance-using-hs-spme-gc-qtof-ms]
• 6. Green analytical chemistry and experimental design [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10108544/]
• 7. Green metrics and green analytical applications [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000685]
• 8. Comparison of green sample preparation techniques in the ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28372842/]
• 9. Green vibrational spectroscopic approach for simultaneous ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-97485-3]
• 10. Greenness evaluation metric for analytical methods and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12318332/]
• 11. Greenness assessment of 174 CEN, ISO, and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772582025000336]
• 12. Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA) as a new tool to assess ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352554125001494]
• 13. 2025 Review of Spectroscopic Instrumentation [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/2025-review-of-spectroscopic-instrumentation]
• 14. Green solvents and their role in modern sample ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44371-025-00325-6]
• 15. Greenness of official sample preparation standard methods [https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ci-2024-0117/html?srsltid=AfmBOopLa0XxSRaLFBhtCg7Ij6_IFu_JZwOPsguK7nmJZpmxp9BDNWwX]
• 16. Green Approaches to Sample Preparation Based on ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7180442/]
• 17. Greenness assessment of microextraction techniques in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11216521/]
• 18. Assessment of greenness for solid phase microextraction ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000764]
• 19. Optimization of Green Sample Preparation for the ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/13/5781]
• 20. HPLC 2025 Preview: The Road To Sustainable Analytical ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/hplc-2025-preview-the-road-to-sustainable-analytical-chemistry]
• 21. Circular Chemistry → Term [https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/term/circular-chemistry/]
• 22. From Linear to Circular: Chemistry's Pathway to Sustainability [https://www.lindau-nobel.org/blog-from-linear-to-circular/]
• 23. Sustainability and Separation Science: An Update [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/sustainability-separation-science-update]
• 24. A Comprehensive Assessment of Sample Preparation ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/17/7690]
• 25. Application of NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale and GAPI tools ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0026265X19333454]
• 26. Assessing the Environmental Impact of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/the-green-component-assessing-the-environmental-impact-of-analytical-methods]
• 27. Environmental impact of the reported chromatographic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8801062/]
• 28. A Comparative Study - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8467375/]
• 29. AGREEprep – Analytical greenness metric for sample ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016599362200036X]
• 30. A Perspective on Current and Future Metric Tools - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12590457/]
• 31. Emerging Tools for Holistic Evaluation of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/emerging-tools-for-holistic-evaluation-of-analytical-methods]
• 32. A Modified Green Star Area (MoGSA) and software to ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39630641/]
• 33. Comparison of the Greenness Assessment ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4532/4/4/32]
• 34. Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11697060/]
• 35. How to correctly evaluate greenness, whiteness and other ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc00615e]
• 36. Comparing the Greenness and Validation Metrics of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137692/]
• 37. Miniaturization in action: High-resolution, low-cost ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949771X25000404]
• 38. Modern automated sample preparation for the ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993623002583]
• 39. Recent Trends and Developments in Sample Preparation [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/recent-trends-and-developments-in-sample-preparation]
• 40. Chromatography 2025: Sample Preparation Goes Automated [https://www.sepscience.com/chromatography-2025-sample-preparation-goes-automated-11259]
• 41. Recent progress in high-performance sample preparation ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0021967325007083]
• 42. The 2025 Emerging Leader in Atomic Spectroscopy Award [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/the-2025-emerging-leader-in-atomic-spectroscopy-award]
• 43. Computer aided greenness by design approach for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12325619/]
• 44. Solvent Selection from the Green Perspective [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/solvent-selection-from-the-green-perspective]
• 45. Innovative spectrophotometric methods for the analysis of ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-25067-4]
• 46. Utilisation of Analytical Method Greenness Score to drive ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/pt-br/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc01574j]
• 47. Development and validation of derivative UV spectroscopic ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40380259/]
• 48. Evaluation of green and practical analytical techniques for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026265X25029649]
• 49. Greenness metrics for analytical methodologies linked to ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000491]
• 50. Assessment of greenness for the determination of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8982219/]
• 51. Greenness, blueness, and whiteness evaluation of a ... [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-025-01477-3]
• 52. PMC - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10689731/]
• 53. Comparing the Performance of Raman and Near-Infrared ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10534500/]
• 54. The Rise of GC–IMS as a Sustainable Alternative to GC–MS [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/an-inside-look-at-green-analytical-chemistry-the-rise-of-gc-ims-as-a-sustainable-alternative-to-gc-ms]
• 55. Setting new benchmarks in AI-driven infrared structure ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/dd/d5dd00131e]
• 56. Insights on ecological spectroscopic techniques recently ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993623005228]
• 57. Spectroscopic Sample Preparation: Techniques for ... [https://www.metkon.com/spectroscopic-sample-preparation/]
• 58. Comparison of Vibrational Spectroscopic Techniques for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9370017/]
• 59. A Brief Review of the Latest Spectroscopic Research in ... [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/a-brief-review-of-the-latest-spectroscopic-research-in-environmental-analysis]
• 60. Recent advances in solid phase microextraction with ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11363066/]
• 61. Green Extraction Tree: A Novel Tool to Greenness Metric ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12593995/]
• 62. A development in greener microextraction methods for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872204024001038]
• 63. Sorbent-Based Microextraction Combined with GC-MS: A Valuable Tool in Bioanalysis [https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9040/13/2/71]
• 64. Direct Solid-Phase Microextraction-Mass Spectrometry Advances Green Analytical Chemistry [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/direct-solid-phase-microextraction-mass-spectrometry-advances-green-analytical-chemistry]
• 65. Red analytical performance index (RAPI) and software [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc05298f]
• 66. Comparative statistical evaluation of greenness, blueness ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-96091-7]
• 67. Green Approaches in High-Performance Liquid ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12430196/]
• 68. Green sample preparation for anthocyanin extraction from ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12276115/]
• 69. Innovative sample preparation techniques in food analysis [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772582025000440]
• 70. Eco‐Friendly Spectrophotometric Methods for Resolving ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12282673/]
• 71. Smart green spectrophotometric estimation and content ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-92166-7]
• 72. 2025 and Beyond: Another Look at Upcoming NDSRI ... [https://www.skpharmteco.com/news-insights/blog/2025-and-beyond-another-look-at-upcoming-ndsri-regulations/]
• 73. Evaluation of the Quantitative Performance of Different ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X25001646]
• 74. New Sample Preparation Products and Accessories for ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/new-sample-preparation-products-and-accessories-for-2024-2025]
• 75. Advances in Green Analytical Techniques for Impurity ... [https://jyoungpharm.org/10.5530/jyp.20250075]
• 76. Artificial intelligence, green transition and green total factor ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-18878-y]
• 77. Greenness and performance evaluation of AI-predicted ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266683192500075X]
• 78. Spectroscopic and Imaging Technologies Combined with ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12346310/]
• 79. A comparative study of AI and human programming on ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12603251/]
• 80. Green AI: Navigating the Path to Sustainable AI [https://www.ivy.partners/green-ai-navigating-the-path-to-sustainable-ai/]
• 81. Advancing Green AI via Dynamic Model Selection [https://arxiv.org/html/2509.19996v1]
• 82. 2025 Second Green AI Summit Concludes, Charting a ... [https://www.greenai.institute/news/2025-Second-Green-AI-Summit-Concludes]