An Energy Efficient Laboratory Delivers 'Green' Results
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in conjunction with Department of Energy (DOE) have placed increasing emphasis on laboratory design and operation that are environmentally friendly - the ubiquitous 'Green Awareness' 21st Century laboratory initiative. Taking a clue from our northern neighbors in Canada, the Health Science Centre (HSC) in Winnipeg, Manitoba - one of Canada’s largest tertiary healthcare facilities - has instituted an energy awareness program and web site to aid all of its employees reduce the cost of energy of their operations. The HSC’s Energy web site calculates an average $137.00 / year in energy (electricity cost) reduction per employee. Imagine the savings scale for the typical laboratory as a similar figure is multiplied by the $137.00 / person / year. That is exactly what HSC’s executive management had in mind when they commissioned developing a special section of their web site devoted to exclusively to energy savings.
The reason for 'green lab' emphasis is quite simple and easy to comprehend; laboratories use more energy and water per square foot than the typical office building due to intensive ventilation requirements and other health and safety concerns. There is no question, the critical utilities (temperature, humidity & light regulation, water and air quality) in laboratories must be controlled and managed to allow successful operation while meeting regulatory and production criteria. Additionally, laboratory operation is a management challenge for number of reasons. Going ‘green’ is easier said than done for most operators. Many northern U.S. labs like the HSC have program plans and initiatives to reduce energy consumption. U.S. Government Labs have a mandate to become 'green'. Realizing total cost savings while going 'green' is what is of utmost importance to smart laboratory operators.
Regulatory and quality assurance requirements coupled with reduced access to qualified laboratory technologists, long processes/incubation time rate based thermodynamic reactions have driven the laboratory to adopt automation. Robotic fluid handling and sample transfer assistance have become of paramount importance in the attainment of high throughput testing with low cost reportable results. In 2009, the age of digital automation has been with us for 30 years, since the incorporation of 4-bit microprocessor into early spectrophotometers. The age old problem of maximizing the performance and reliability of laboratory automation and instrumentation has been a challenge for all of us since the early days of hardwired electro-mechanical logic and the first integrated spectrum analyzers.
It is well known that appropriate use of automation and robotics actually reduces the complication associated with tedious sample preparation and handling, as well as the cost. Analyzer reflexive testing protocols and algorithms allow for high levels of performance that reduce the overall cost of a reportable result. Because the automated laboratory is a complex environment, attention has been focused on attaining: a) high throughput, b) lowest cost per reportable result, c) timely sample processing and d) reliability of the entire operation, including both human and automation resources.
Laboratory design consultants and architectural firms place emphasis on ‘green lab’ designs. These state of the art laboratories are marvels of efficiency. If your operation is contemplating a laboratory expansion, you are certainly familiar with energy conservation and efficient laboratory space and environmental design. You are also considering new instrumentation and communication interfaces. When we refer to laboratory energy conservation, we are referring to electrical energy (electrical power). If you are like most lab operators, you have a fixed instrumentation and equipment asset base in an existing laboratory design, with limited budget for personnel, equipment, and/or facilities. With operational constraints such an older lab faces, cost savings are awarded to those managers who look at the total cost of operation (TCO) and seek was to reduce that cost while improving performance. TCO includes equipment maintenance, efficiency, reliability, process, procedures, personnel and operating philosophy.
With limited prospects for government grants and funding in the next 24 months, it is imperative the lab manager look at 'doing it better' than the competition. An analogy for the 'green lab' is operating a new electric hybrid automobile. Imagine the fuel cost savings from such a vehicle realizing 48 MPG vs. an existing vehicle that may yield 20 MPG. The reality of this dream is that if we do not have a grant or a funding mechanism, most of us cannot afford the acquisition cost of the new vehicle (equipment) to allow us to double our MPG and realize the economy of the new technology to its full potential. Due to economic constraints we continue to operate our existing asset. But we do have an option to save some 'green' in our existing automobile analogy and that includes simple maintenance and attention to detail. Adding air to the tires, changing air filters, tuning up your vehicle, slowing down and car-pooling are some examples that may result in 10% or better in fuel consumption. Saving some green (cash) for adopting a ‘green’ attitude about driving. Everybody wins in a scenario like this, the operator and the environment.
Taking our analogy one step further, the most overlooked area in laboratory operational effectiveness and management is the quality of the energy that is driving all of the processes and instrumentation. An improvement in operational effectiveness is ‘green’ to the lab in two ways: 1) it reduces the impact on the environment to produce the electrical power consumed by the laboratory and 2) the direct cost savings to the laboratory means expense or capital budget reserves. The question arises on how can we go ‘green’ with existing equipment and instrumentation? The answer is equally simple, as the example above: 1) maintain the instrumentation, 2) optimize its utilization and 3) provide it with energy that is reliable. The latter element is the least obvious but the most important. For like a vehicle that is not serviced and maintained or uses the incorrect grade of fuel, it cannot operate effectively or efficiently. An instrument system that is provided poor power cannot operate per specification and will have higher than normal operational problems and failure rate. An instrumentation system that is down in a highly automated laboratory is a very expensive proposition as it impacts throughput, personnel and operating budget to produce its mission objective – a low cost reportable result in a timely manner.
So how can a laboratory, whether operating a new or existing facility prevent down time due to electrical energy (power quality) issues? The good news is that the answer is not complex or costly either. If the laboratory operator considers electricity as a utility as they do for water (USP reagent grade) and installs category III-3 instrumentation grade laboratory power-protection systems (LPS) for their critical instrumentation and equipment, they will realize a substantial cost savings in overall laboratory operation while delivering 'green' to their bottom line. With maximum instrumentation performance, lowest costs reportable results and improved reliability, the lab has become energy efficient and gone 'green'. Paying attending to the details protects their bottom line and the environment by managing the fundamentals.
Franek Technologies, Inc. - January 2, 2009
