DodecaGreen Score.

Assess a chemical process against all twelve Principles of Green Chemistry using an anchored rubric. Score each principle 0–5 and watch the radar chart and overall score update live. All data stays in your browser and nothing is sent to any server.

What is the DodecaGreen Score — and how does it work?

The DodecaGreen Score is a holistic, rubric-based assessment of how well a chemical process adheres to the 12 Principles of Green Chemistry (Anastas & Warner, 1998). Unlike single metrics such as atom economy or E-factor, it provides a 360° view across all principles simultaneously.

GoalIdentify the strengths and weaknesses of a process across all 12 Principles and guide targeted improvements.

HowAssign each principle a score of 0–5 using the anchored rubric. The radar chart visualises balance; the Score summarises overall performance.

OutputA percentage score (0–100%), an interactive radar plot, and a per-principle breakdown with comments, interpretation, and export options.

The formula

$$\text{DodecaGreen Score (\%)} = \frac{\displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{12} P_i}{60} \times 100$$

Symbol	Term
$P_i$	Score for Principle $i$ (0 = very poor / no data, 5 = excellent); maximum 5 per principle
60	Maximum possible total (12 principles × 5)

Score interpretation

DodecaGreen Score	Rating	Typical interpretation
≥ 75%	Excellent	Process exemplifies green chemistry across most principles
50–74%	Good	Strong in several areas; targeted improvements possible
35–49%	Moderate	Notable gaps; multiple principles need attention
< 35%	Needs improvement	Fundamental redesign recommended across several principles

Strengths and limitations

✓ Strengths

Holistic — covers all 12 Principles simultaneously
Flexible — works at any stage from lab-scale to industrial
Communicable — percentage is easy to understand and compare
Reveals imbalances that single metrics miss
Anchored rubric criteria improve inter-rater reliability

⚠ Limitations

Subjective element — expert judgement and available data required
All 12 Principles weighted equally (context may differ)
A high overall score can mask a very poor score on one critical principle
Does not replace quantitative metrics — use alongside E-factor, AE, PMI
Inter-rater reliability improves with the anchored rubric, but is not guaranteed

The DodecaGreen Score in context: complementary metrics

Metric	What it measures	Stage
DodecaGreen Score	Holistic rubric assessment across all 12 Principles	Any
Atom Economy (AE)	Fraction of reactant mass in desired product (theoretical)	Design
E-factor	Total waste per unit of product (includes solvents)	Experimental
PMI	Total input mass per unit product	Experimental
RME	Combined practical efficiency (AE × yield × stoichiometry)	Experimental

Assessment rubric

Each level is anchored to measurable criteria to improve inter-rater reliability. Use this table alongside the individual principle guides (click any principle name in the Score section below).

Principle	0 — Very Poor or Missing Data	1 — Poor	2 — Needs improvement	3 — Satisfactory	4 — Good	5 — Excellent
1. Prevention	E_f ≥ 4.00	2.00 ≤ E_f < 4.00	1.00 ≤ E_f < 2.00	0.50 ≤ E_f < 1.00	0.25 ≤ E_f < 0.50	E_f < 0.25
2. Atom Economy	AE < 30%	30 ≤ AE < 45%	45 ≤ AE < 60%	60 ≤ AE < 75%	75 ≤ AE < 90%	AE ≥ 90%
3. Less Hazardous Synthesis	>1 GHS Cat. 1–2	Only 1 GHS Cat. 1–2	≥1 GHS Cat. 3	≥1 GHS Cat. 4	Only GHS Cat. 5	No GHS hazard codes
4. Designing Safer Chemicals	No LD₅₀/LC₅₀ data	LD₅₀ < 5 mg/kg or LC₅₀ < 0.5 mg/L	5 ≤ LD₅₀ < 50	50 ≤ LD₅₀ < 300	300 ≤ LD₅₀ < 2000	LD₅₀ ≥ 2000 mg/kg
5. Safer Solvents	Multiple GSK "red" solvents	Single GSK "red" solvent	Multiple GSK "yellow"	Only one GSK "yellow"	Only GSK "green" solvents	No solvents used
6. Energy Efficiency	kWh ≥ 20	5 ≤ kWh < 20	2 ≤ kWh < 5	0.5 ≤ kWh < 2	0.05 ≤ kWh < 0.5	kWh < 0.05
7. Renewable Feedstocks	0% renewable	0–20% renewable	20–40% renewable	40–60% renewable	60–80% renewable	80–100% renewable
8. Reduce Derivatives	≥5 deriv. steps	4 steps	3 steps	2 steps	1 step	0 steps
9. Catalysis	No catalyst	TON = 1 (stoichiometric)	1 < TON ≤ 50	50 < TON ≤ 1000	1000 < TON ≤ 100 000	TON > 100 000
10. Design for Degradation	t_½ ≥ 365 d or no data	180 ≤ t_½ < 365 d	60 ≤ t_½ < 180 d	10 ≤ t_½ < 60 d	1 ≤ t_½ < 10 d	t_½ < 1 d
11. Real-time Analysis	No analysis	Post-reaction only	Occasional in-process	Frequent in-process	Continuous in-process	Automated monitoring & feedback
12. Inherently Safer Chemistry	ΔT > 200 K or ΔP > 50 bar or explosive	100 < ΔT ≤ 200 K or 10 < ΔP ≤ 50 bar	50 < ΔT ≤ 100 K or 1 < ΔP ≤ 10 bar	0 < ΔT ≤ 50 K and 1 < ΔP ≤ 10 bar, Cat. 4–5	ΔT ≤ 50 K and ΔP = 0, Cat. 4–5	ΔT = 0, ΔP = 0, no GHS codes

AE = atom economy · E_f = E-factor · GHS = Globally Harmonized System · TON = turnover number · t_½ = environmental half-life

Score your process

−

Use the rubric above to assign each principle a score of 0–5. Click a principle name to open its full guide page.

💡

Check the scoring rubric first

Use the anchored rubric in to assign each principle a consistent 0–5 score before moving the sliders.

Results

−

Average Score

— /5

At Maximum (5/5)

— of 12

At Minimum (0/5)

— of 12

DodecaGreen Score

0%25%50%75%100%

Detailed breakdown & interpretation

−

Principle	Score	Level	Comment

Interpretation & recommendations

Adjust the sliders above to see the interpretation.

Experiment details

Experiment / Reaction Name

Researcher(s)

Date

Lab / Institution

Reaction Type

Solvent

Temperature

Catalyst / Additive

Reference / DOI

Notes

Export

Export the current assessment as a PDF report, CSV data file, or SVG radar chart.

Save & load sessions

Data is stored only in your browser's localStorage — nothing is sent to any server. Delete all data at any time using the button below.

No saved sessions yet.

Where can I read more?

P. T. Anastas and J. C. Warner, Green Chemistry: Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press, 1998. — Original statement of the 12 Principles of Green Chemistry.
R. A. Sheldon, "The E-Factor 25 years on: the rise of green chemistry and sustainability," Green Chem., 2017, 19, 18–43. DOI
C. Jiménez-González et al., "Using the Right Green Yardstick," Org. Process Res. Dev., 2011, 15, 912–917. DOI
B. M. Trost, "Atom Economy: a Challenge for Organic Synthesis," Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 1995, 34, 259–281.
ACS Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable, PMI/E-factor benchmarking reports (ongoing).

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

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.

Reference

BibTeX