An ambitious project to reduce both costs and environmental impact of the labs at the Bon Secours Hospital, Tralee, Ireland, has caught the attention of The Royal College of Pathologists. Chief Medical Scientist Laura Clifford and Medical Scientist Ignetious Makozhombwe accepted a coveted team achievement award at the Royal College’s London headquarters in June 2025.
We caught up with Clifford after the event to find out more about the initiative, its impact, and how it could act as a blueprint for greening labs everywhere.
Why is sustainability a key concern in your laboratory?
The Bon Secours Health System is committed to the conservation of energy having implemented ISO 50001 across all sites to provide a structured approach to energy management. Accordingly, sustainability has become a high priority for the pathology laboratory at the Bon Secours Hospital, Tralee.
Cellular pathology laboratories consume high quantities of chemicals and generate significant chemical and clinical waste. To mitigate this impact, we decided to move to a more sustainable approach for our histology department, focused on reducing chemical consumption and waste, clinical waste, and energy consumption.
What process changes were implemented in order to reduce reagent consumption, and what was the impact?
Prior to commencing the project, all reagents on board both tissue processors were emptied weekly, generating 84 liters of chemical waste a week. Following a period of consultation with the suppliers, as well as a national survey of other cellular pathology laboratory practices, we decided to switch to using the onboard reagent manager function.
The reagent manager function on the Sakura Tissue Tek VIP tissue processors allows for the exchange of reagents from the bulk reservoirs instead of having to empty all containers. Only the first two alcohol stations and the first xylene station are changed weekly. All other stations are moved along one.
Following a period of verification, whereby we confirmed that the change had no impact on the quality of the tissue or patient results, we implemented the new procedure. Overall, we saw a 64% reduction of chemicals required for the changing of both tissue processors weekly.
Although this was the most time-consuming part of the project as the verification involved running multiple different tissue types on both processors (one with the new method and one with the old method), it was the largest cost saving initiative in our project and also the initiative that had the greatest impact in our workflow.
How did you approach reducing the amount of clinical waste?
Disposal of clinical waste comes at a high cost for healthcare providers. Sometimes, in a busy lab environment, there can be a tendency for staff to use the closest bin, and they may not always focus on whether this bin is for domestic waste or clinical waste.
For a short period of time, we observed waste disposal and noted that domestic and recyclable items were being placed in the clinical waste bin. During this observation phase, we weighed all waste in the laboratory daily. Bins were repositioned, ensuring that clinical bins were found only in areas where clinical waste was produced. We also reduced the number of clinical waste bins and increased the numbers of domestic and recycling bins.
After the period of observation, we moved towards staff education sessions which included presentations in the laboratory on correct disposal of waste and additional signage being displayed. During this period, we observed what went into the bins and showed all staff when the incorrect item was placed in a bin.
After the educational phase, we weighed waste daily to see if the changes introduced had made a difference. We saw an average decrease of 1.2 kg of clinical waste daily. There was an increase in domestic waste of 1 kg and a slight increase in recyclable waste. These changes saw positive impacts – both environmentally and financially – for the hospital.
What were the key considerations in reducing the lab’s energy consumption?
One of the goals that must be met to achieve ISO 50001 is to reduce energy consumption by at least 1% annually. Cellular pathology laboratories contain a lot of high energy consumption units: fume hoods, water baths, hot plates, ovens, and embedding centers, to name a few.
We decided to focus on our embedding centers, which were timed to come on each day at 5.30am and remain on all day. After reviewing staff rosters and monitoring usage of the embedding stations, we optimized the “on” time for both embedding centers. This small initiative saw a reduction in electrical consumption from 17.16KWH per day to 7.52 KWH for both embedding centers. Although the cost savings were low, the exercise demonstrates that small gains that can be made easily in every lab. In the future we may expand this approach to other instruments in the laboratory.
What were the overall cost savings of these initiatives? Did you notice any other benefits?
Overall, the sustainability project saved approximately €37,000 annually. It has the potential to be upscaled and, for a larger laboratory, could yield much greater savings.
The project involved input from the entire histology team, who – in a wonderful example of teamwork – all became deeply invested in ensuring our laboratory achieved its sustainability goals.
As well as significant cost savings for the laboratory, we found that the project improved health and safety conditions for laboratory staff, reducing both manual handling and chemical exposure.
Prior to implementing, we had regular trips to the outside chemical stores to take waste out and bring fresh chemicals into the laboratory. Introducing the reagent management system not only saved on manual tasks but also cut down on the overall time it took to change the processors. Using less chemicals in the laboratory also ensures that staff have less exposure to harmful substances.
What advice would you give to other labs who are looking to operate more sustainably?
First things first: it is crucial to include, and get buy-in from, the whole team. As Helen Keller famously said, “Alone we can do so little, together we can do so much.”
It can be difficult to know where to start with trying to move towards more sustainable practices. We recommend starting with quick and easy wins – even small changes can result in substantial savings. A good starting place could be to audit your practices – this may identify an unexpected finding and give you a focus.
And finally, share your work with colleagues from other laboratories. There is an abundance of knowledge out there on this topic and working with other sites can yield great results. There are loads of networks and initiatives out there. Join them and get involved.