Carbon footprint estimator.
Estimate the greenhouse gas burden of any lab reaction from upstream material carbon intensities and direct energy consumption. Results update live as you type — and every session stays in your browser, never on a server.
What is carbon footprint — and why does it matter?
Carbon footprint (CF), sometimes expressed as greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity, quantifies the total climate-change impact of a chemical process in terms of CO₂ equivalents (CO₂e) per unit of desired product. It captures both upstream emissions from producing raw materials and reagents (Scope 3) and on-site energy use (Scope 1/2). For lab-scale assessments, CF is typically reported in kg CO₂e per kg of product.
The formula
| Symbol | Term | Units |
|---|---|---|
| $\text{CF}$ | Carbon footprint (GHG intensity) | kg CO₂e kg−1 product |
| $m_i$ | Mass of each input material (reagent, solvent, workup chemical) | g |
| $\text{CI}_i$ | Upstream carbon intensity of that material (from ecoinvent, literature, or supplier data) | kg CO₂e kg−1 |
| $E$ | Total electrical energy consumed by all equipment | kWh |
| $\text{EF}_{\text{grid}}$ | Grid emission factor for your electricity supply (UK 2023 ≈ 0.233) | kg CO₂e kWh−1 |
| $m_{\text{product}}$ | Mass of isolated desired product (g ÷ 1000 converts to kg in denominator) | kg |
This tool calculates a simplified process CF covering material upstream emissions and direct energy use. It does not capture waste treatment, transport, or end-of-life impacts — a full Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is needed for those. Reference carbon intensities (kg CO₂e/kg): ethanol ≈ 1.5, ethyl acetate ≈ 2.3, DCM ≈ 1.4, THF ≈ 3.5, toluene ≈ 1.0, salicylic acid ≈ 3.0, acetic anhydride ≈ 1.5, water ≈ 0.001. UK grid 2023: 0.233 kg CO₂e/kWh.
Typical carbon footprint by process type
| Process / Product type | Typical CF (kg CO₂e/kg) | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Bulk commodity chemicals (e.g. ethanol, acetic acid) | < 5 | Excellent |
| Biotechnology / enzymatic synthesis | 1–5 | Excellent |
| Lab-scale green synthesis (ambient, catalytic) | 5–20 | Good |
| Pharmaceutical intermediates (optimised) | 20–50 | Moderate |
| Fine chemicals / typical lab synthesis | 20–100 | Moderate–Poor |
| Complex multi-step pharmaceutical APIs | > 100 | Poor |
Strengths and limitations
Strengths
- Directly links chemistry decisions to climate impact
- Highlights high-carbon solvents and reagents invisible in mass-only metrics
- Encourages energy accounting alongside mass efficiency
- Compatible with institutional sustainability reporting and net-zero commitments
- Can be calculated from readily available data (masses, energy logs, literature CIs)
Limitations
- Upstream CI values vary widely by supplier, country, and data source
- Does not capture toxicity, waste hazard, water use, or land use impacts
- Lab-scale energy use is notoriously difficult to measure precisely
- Grid emission factors change over time and vary by location
- This tool covers Scope 1/2/limited Scope 3 — not a full LCA
Carbon footprint in context: complementary green metrics
| Metric | What it measures | Captures climate impact? |
|---|---|---|
| Carbon Footprint (CF) | Greenhouse gas burden per kg product (kg CO₂e/kg) | Yes — primary purpose |
| E-factor | Mass of all waste per mass of product | Partially (if energy waste included) |
| Atom Economy (AE) | Theoretical fraction of reactant mass in desired product | No |
| PMI (Process Mass Intensity) | Total mass input per mass of product | No |
| RME (Reaction Mass Efficiency) | Combined practical mass efficiency | No |
| GWP Horizon | Climate forcing of specific gases relative to CO₂, and how that ranking depends on time horizon | Yes — this tool assumes GWP100 |
Experiment details
Input materials
Enter every consumed material: reagents, solvents, catalysts, and workup chemicals. For each, enter the actual mass used in grams and the upstream carbon intensity (kg CO₂e/kg) from ecoinvent, literature, or supplier data. Do not enter the product here — enter it in section 04.
Reference carbon intensities (kg CO₂e/kg): salicylic acid ≈ 3.0 · acetic anhydride ≈ 1.5 · ethanol ≈ 1.5 · ethyl acetate ≈ 2.3 · THF ≈ 3.5 · DCM ≈ 1.4 · toluene ≈ 1.0 · water ≈ 0.001.
| Material name | Category | Mass used (g) | CI (kg CO₂e/kg) | CO₂e (kg) |
|---|
Energy use & product output
Enter the total electrical energy consumed by all equipment during this reaction (hotplates, stirrers, pumps, condensers). Use a plug-in energy meter for accuracy or estimate from rated power × time. Also record the product name and mass isolated.
Results
Emissions by source
Materials vs. energy emissions
Detailed breakdown & interpretation
| Material / Source | Category | Mass (g) | CI (kg CO₂e/kg) | CO₂e (kg) | % of total | Visual |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enter input materials and product above to see breakdown. | ||||||
Interpretation
Save & load sessions
Sessions are stored in your browser only. No data leaves your device.
Export
Export your carbon footprint calculation as a PDF report or CSV data file. PDF opens in a new tab and uses your browser's print function. CSV downloads directly.
Where can I read more?
References are sorted alphabetically by first author.
- P. T. Anastas and J. C. Warner, Green Chemistry: Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press, 1998. ISBN 978-0-19-850698-0. — Foundational text for the 12 Principles including energy efficiency (Principle 6).
- D. J. C. Constable, C. Jiménez-González and R. K. Henderson, "Perspective on Solvent Use in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Org. Process Res. Dev., 2007, 11, 133–137. DOI. — Solvent contribution to process carbon footprint.
- DESNZ/BEIS, UK Government GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting, 2023. — Source for UK grid electricity emission factor (0.233 kg CO₂e/kWh for 2023).
- C. Jiménez-González, C. S. Ponder, Q. B. Broxterman and J. B. Manley, "Using the Right Green Yardstick," Org. Process Res. Dev., 2011, 15, 912–917. DOI. — Framework for selecting appropriate green metrics, including CF alongside mass metrics.
- E. Lucas, A. J. Martín, S. Mitchell, A. Nabera, L. F. Santos, J. Pérez-Ramírez and G. Guillén-Gosálbez, "Integration of mass- and energy-based metrics with life cycle impacts," Green Chem., 2024, 26, 9300–9309. DOI. — Integrating process CF with broader LCA frameworks.
- P. Patel, D. Sherwood, S. Sherwood and A. Sherwood, "Reducing the carbon footprint of pharmaceutical manufacturing," Green Chem., 2023, 25, 4908–4917. DOI. — Practical strategies for reducing CF in pharmaceutical synthesis.
Contributors
Roles follow the CRediT taxonomy (Contributor Roles Taxonomy), adapted for educational software. Hover a contributor's name for a summary, or a column header for the definition of that role.
| Contributor |
|---|
© 2025– DodecaGreen Project. All rights reserved. · Last updated: 05/06/2026
This portal was built with the assistance of a large language model (Claude, Anthropic), which was used to generate and refine code, articulate and structure contributed ideas within the defined page format, and support iterative design decisions. All scientific content, conceptual frameworks, pedagogical choices, and final outputs were directed, reviewed, and verified by the contributors listed above.
Whilst every effort has been taken to ensure accuracy, mistakes can happen. If you notice something that doesn’t look quite right, kindly reach out to the DodecaGreen team via the Contact page.
How do I cite this page?
If you use this tool in teaching or published work, please cite the DodecaGreen portal as the source.