FraMiTrACR: A Sustainable and Economical Technology for Analytical Sample Preparation.

Jan-Michael Steils, Alexander Kaluza, Klaus Schöne, John Cashman, Christian Baumgartner, Maren Lang, Melina Kraus
{"title":"FraMiTrACR: A Sustainable and Economical Technology for Analytical Sample Preparation.","authors":"Jan-Michael Steils, Alexander Kaluza, Klaus Schöne, John Cashman, Christian Baumgartner, Maren Lang, Melina Kraus","doi":"10.1093/jaoacint/qsae092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are several globally recognized methods for preparing laboratory samples. Of these, the QuEChERS and QuPPe methods are commonly used for food laboratory sample preparation. As an alternative, we developed the fractionation method using FraMiTrACR.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We present a life cycle assessment for the QuEChERS-, QuPPe- and FraMiTrACR methods. Our objective was to collect data to evaluate the carbon footprint of each method. However, as the ecological factors alone do not inform suitability of any given method, we also evaluated economic factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our life cycle assessments followed ISO 14040/44 to determine the carbon footprint of each method. Also, we have analyzed existing data to support our comparison of all three methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mass of consumables and packaging for our FraMiTrACR method was observed to decrease by 45% and 34% from those required for the QuPPe and QuEChERS methods, respectively. Furthermore, we calculated a 43% reduction in carbon footprint when using FraMiTrACR compared to QuPPe and a 31% reduction compared to QuEChERS. In addition, we determined that our method offers time savings >87% and >71% compared to QuEChERS and QuPPe, respectively. The main economic benefit of FraMiTrACR comes from 84% and 70% labor cost savings compared to QuEChERS and QuPPe, respectively. The laboratory using fractionation method can process 320 samples with FraMiTrACR within 8 hours, an 87% increase in potential compared to QuEChERS and a 71% increase compared to QuPPe.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Fractionation using FraMiTrACR is a more sustainable method for analytical sample preparation, offering the same quality of results and far-reaching economic advantages.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>In comparison, FraMiTrACR uses up to 45% less consumables and packaging by weight and a reduction in kg CO2eq of up to 43%. In addition, the fractionation method offers up to 85% time savings and up to an 84% reduction in labor cost per sample.</p>","PeriodicalId":94064,"journal":{"name":"Journal of AOAC International","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of AOAC International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaoacint/qsae092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There are several globally recognized methods for preparing laboratory samples. Of these, the QuEChERS and QuPPe methods are commonly used for food laboratory sample preparation. As an alternative, we developed the fractionation method using FraMiTrACR.

Objective: We present a life cycle assessment for the QuEChERS-, QuPPe- and FraMiTrACR methods. Our objective was to collect data to evaluate the carbon footprint of each method. However, as the ecological factors alone do not inform suitability of any given method, we also evaluated economic factors.

Methods: Our life cycle assessments followed ISO 14040/44 to determine the carbon footprint of each method. Also, we have analyzed existing data to support our comparison of all three methods.

Results: The mass of consumables and packaging for our FraMiTrACR method was observed to decrease by 45% and 34% from those required for the QuPPe and QuEChERS methods, respectively. Furthermore, we calculated a 43% reduction in carbon footprint when using FraMiTrACR compared to QuPPe and a 31% reduction compared to QuEChERS. In addition, we determined that our method offers time savings >87% and >71% compared to QuEChERS and QuPPe, respectively. The main economic benefit of FraMiTrACR comes from 84% and 70% labor cost savings compared to QuEChERS and QuPPe, respectively. The laboratory using fractionation method can process 320 samples with FraMiTrACR within 8 hours, an 87% increase in potential compared to QuEChERS and a 71% increase compared to QuPPe.

Conclusions: Fractionation using FraMiTrACR is a more sustainable method for analytical sample preparation, offering the same quality of results and far-reaching economic advantages.

Highlights: In comparison, FraMiTrACR uses up to 45% less consumables and packaging by weight and a reduction in kg CO2eq of up to 43%. In addition, the fractionation method offers up to 85% time savings and up to an 84% reduction in labor cost per sample.

FraMiTrACR:一种可持续且经济的分析样品制备技术。
背景:有几种全球公认的实验室样品制备方法。其中,QuEChERS 和 QuPPe 方法常用于食品实验室样品制备。作为一种替代方法,我们开发了使用 FraMiTrACR 的分馏方法:我们对 QuEChERS、QuPPe 和 FraMiTrACR 方法进行了生命周期评估。我们的目标是收集数据,评估每种方法的碳足迹。不过,由于生态因素本身并不能说明任何特定方法的适用性,我们还对经济因素进行了评估:我们的生命周期评估遵循 ISO 14040/44,以确定每种方法的碳足迹。此外,我们还分析了现有数据,以支持我们对所有三种方法进行比较:结果:与 QuPPe 和 QuEChERS 方法相比,我们的 FraMiTrACR 方法的耗材和包装质量分别减少了 45% 和 34%。此外,我们还计算出使用 FraMiTrACR 时的碳足迹比 QuPPe 减少了 43%,比 QuEChERS 减少了 31%。此外,我们还确定,与 QuEChERS 和 QuPPe 相比,我们的方法分别节省了大于 87% 和 71% 的时间。与 QuEChERS 和 QuPPe 相比,FraMiTrACR 的主要经济效益来自于分别节省了 84% 和 70% 的劳动力成本。使用 FraMiTrACR 分馏法的实验室可在 8 小时内处理 320 个样品,与 QuEChERS 相比,潜力提高了 87%,与 QuPPe 相比,潜力提高了 71%:结论:使用 FraMiTrACR 进行分馏是一种更可持续的分析样品制备方法,可提供相同的结果质量和深远的经济优势:亮点:相比之下,FraMiTrACR 使用的耗材和包装重量最多可减少 45%,二氧化碳当量公斤数最多可减少 43%。此外,这种分馏方法可节省 85% 的时间,每个样品的人工成本最多可降低 84%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信