Green Chemistry Resources in the Classroom and Laboratory: Part 2

ACS certification requires that undergraduate students graduate with a working knowledge of the green chemistry principles and receive instruction in green chemistry. However, there is currently no consensus on which topics should be covered within each course. Because most reported integrations of green chemistry occur within organic chemistry, this study focused on identifying the essential green and sustainable chemistry knowledge and skills that students should develop in the course to guide instructional planning. Using the Delphi method, a series of Qualtrics surveys were administered to organic chemistry faculty from across the United States to capture their perspectives on what should be identified as the essential knowledge and skills. In the first round, faculty reported their key concepts, skills, and case comparisons, resulting in the identification of 31 concepts, 50 skills, and 9 comparisons. The second round refined this list by having faculty rate the importance of each identified item for inclusion in the course. This presentation will summarize the study’s central findings, drawing attention to consensus points and instructional recommendations.

The green chemistry education community has created amazing resources, experiments, courses, and degree programs to educate high school, college, and graduate students about green and sustainable chemistry. Education of chemists in green and sustainable chemistry must continue beyond formal degree programs. Many practicing chemists require either a refresher or an initial introduction to these concepts, yet standardized, asynchronous training options remain limited. To address this gap, the American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute has developed the Fundamentals of Green Chemistry professional development course. Informed by resources developed by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable and available on the Green Chemistry and Engineering Learning Platform (GChELP), this course covers the core principles and essential components of green chemistry, including the 12 principles, solvents, reagents and feedstocks, metrics, route selection, work-up and isolation, and life-cycle analysis. This presentation will outline the course design, key learning objectives, and selected course content.

Green chemistry has garnered immense attention from chemists and been enthusiastically taken up in chemistry curricula in the last quarter century. Meanwhile, parallel efforts in chemical engineering have largely lagged behind. Although much attention is devoted to research in greener chemical engineering and sustainable development, the “siloing” of green chemistry into an outwardly disparate branch of chemical science relegates it to a sometimes inaccessible corner of chemical engineering. Engineering education also faces barriers due to perceived “softness” and poor academic rigor of sustainability education, inhibiting its curricular adoption. In this talk, I will share highlights of my approach to bridging the gap between chemical engineering education and research, from laboratory research efforts to curriculum development.

My approach to greening undergraduate chemical engineering curriculum through a process design course demonstrates the technical rigor of the twelve green chemistry principles (GCPs) codified by Anastas and Warner. Evolving from a small teaching approach (through a two-lesson mini-module) to larger-scale curricular changes (integrating a scalable “product selection” exercise into homeworks and design projects), this approach is informed by experience in topics germane to green chemistry and engineering. Recognition biases, however, may inadvertently obscure useful examples of greener research and practice, limiting the breadth and depth of student learning outcomes. Using my research efforts in CO₂ capture and curriculum development work as examples, I show that using wide range of examples to broaden the definition of what qualifies as “green chemistry and engineering” makes the GCPs accessible to wider audiences.

I also argue that general education in civic life and environmental ethics is critical to realize green chemistry and engineering practically. Starting with the premise that our collective approaches to education, research, and practice are underpinned by personal and professional backgrounds, motivations, and ethics (i.e., “positionality” in the social sciences and humanities), I posit that tying the relevance of green chemistry and engineering to both technical and social issues can widen opportunities for implementation. I ultimately argue that unifying education and practice depends on our ability and willingness to reach across academic “siloes,” industries, and communities for effective and enduring societal change.

As part of an ongoing research initiative at GGC, students are evaluating existing laboratory activities and providing changes to make the labs greener. Work to date has focused primarily on the General Chemistry and Physical Chemistry lab sequences. One lab of interest involves heating copper (II) sulfate pentahydrate to drive off the waters of hydration. Traditionally, the compound was heated in a ceramic crucible; the procedure was modified to use a disposable metal foil pan in order to reduce the heating time and breakage. This change created an opportunity to examine the question of whether or not this substitution made the experiment greener. Previous work on greening labs emphasized alignment with the 12 Principles of Green Chemistry but has not incorporated broader sustainability metrics, for example, differences in water use associated with using a crucible vs. a foil pan. Preliminary work suggested that the ceramic crucible required less energy than the foil pan, which was unexpected. We have undertaken a more rigorous study to quantify energy consumption as well as explore water use, opportunities for reagent recovery and reuse, determine whether alternative, less toxic materials could be substituted in the experiment.

A greener and more sustainable epoxidation experiment has been developed for the undergraduate organic chemistry laboratory using Oxone® as a benign oxidant, acetone as solvent for the in situ formation dimethyldioxirane (DMDO), and the naturally occurring terpene (–)-isopulegol as the substrate. The reaction can be completed within a single 2-hour laboratory period and reproducibly affords the epoxide product as a mixture of diastereomers in 80–90% isolated yield.
This laboratory exercise highlights key principles of green chemistry, including the use of safer oxidants and sustainable derived materials. The experiment provides a strong pedagogical framework for reinforcing core organic chemistry concepts. Students analyze diastereomeric product mixtures using thin-layer chromatography (TLC) and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Optional column chromatography allows separation of the individual diastereomers, enabling the preparation of authentic analytical standards for structural assignment and comparison.
The observed diastereoselectivity favors formation of the S-epoxide and can be rationalized by hydrogen-bond-directed delivery of the DMDO oxidant to the alkene from the most stable chair conformation of (–)-isopulegol. As a result, students are required to integrate concepts from intermolecular forces, conformational analysis, and stereochemical control to explain the experimental outcome.

This presentation introduces a green chemistry teaching experiment that uses a natural tea extract as a reversible pH indicator to explore equilibrium and acid–base behavior. The activity replaces traditional indicator-based labs with safe, food-derived materials, reducing chemical hazards and waste while maintaining strong conceptual connections to molecular structure and equilibrium. Designed for both high school and undergraduate classrooms, the experiment uses vivid color changes to engage students and connect everyday phenomena to core chemical principles. Implementation strategies and instructional resources will be shared to support adoption in a range of educational settings.

When academic institutions pivoted to online instruction during COVID, the simplest lab option often involved students watching a video, recording provided data, and using this data to perform calculations and interpret results. After so-called normal operations resumed, there was a sustained demand for online courses at GGC, but the corresponding online lab experiences evolved unevenly across the curriculum. In the introductory Organic-Biochemistry sequence, for example, many labs remain largely unchanged from the COVID-era approach. The authors have begun modifying the online lab portion of the Organic-Biochemistry course during the Sprin g2026 term. To make the lab activities more engaging and meaningful, systems thinking, green chemistry, and the UN SDGs have been integrated into the lab (and course) work. This presentation will highlight selected examples of these adaptations.

Undergraduate teaching laboratories function as innovation infrastructure—training the future workforce while consuming significant water, energy, and materials. Yet many experiments remain legacy protocols designed before sustainability and responsible innovation became core criteria. Here we report a curriculum-wide sustainability audit of 25 undergraduate chemistry laboratory modules (Stages 1–3) at University College Dublin, using the 2025 IUPAC Guiding Principles of Responsible Chemistry alongside the established 12 Principles of Green Chemistry to move from fragmented “single-experiment fixes” toward program-scale decision making. Sustainability-relevant features (solvents, hazardous reagents, energy-intensive steps, and waste streams) were mapped through manual analysis and stakeholder input from technical officers and teaching staff. We developed a qualitative scoring rubric to estimate “Responsible Chemistry Benefit” and implementation difficulty, and deployed visual decision tools (module-feature heatmaps, chemical co-occurrence networks, stakeholder maps, and a benefit-vs-difficulty prioritization matrix) to identify actionable leverage points. Guided by this framework, 15 improvements were implemented across laboratory streams (6 physical, 5 introductory, 4 synthetic), including 8 protocol optimizations, 5 equipment upgrades (e.g., water-saving condenser replacements and reusable measurement/spectroscopy hardware), and 2 targeted chemical substitutions (e.g., safer indicator choices). This work offers a transferable, evidence-informed roadmap for institutions seeking to modernize laboratory infrastructure, reduce hazardous chemical pollution and resource use, and align chemistry training environments with SDG-9-relevant priorities in industry, innovation, and resilient infrastructure.