The ACT® (Accountability, Consistency, Transparency) Ecolabel evaluates the environmental impact of lab products across five major categories.
With the new ACT Ecolabel 2.0, My Green Lab® provides a 100-point based Environmental Performance Factor (EPF).
Here, we will provide you with a short explanation of what is assessed and discuss some nuances that you should know about:
Category Overview:
🔍 1. Audit of the Product
- Total Points: Consumables (26), Chemicals/Reagents (23), Equipment (30)
Content:
- Recycled & Renewable Content
Measures the percentage of the product made from recycled or renewable materials by weight. - Commonly Recyclable Materials
Scores based on the weight percentage of qualified recyclable materials (e.g. glass, metals, certain plastics). - Chemicals of Concern
Assesses presence of substances listed in the EU REACH SVHC Candidate List or PFAS chemicals.
Use Phase:
- Energy Consumption (Equipment)
Evaluates energy use compared to similar equipment and features like auto shut-off or energy-saving modes. Standards like ENERGY STAR may be used. - Water Consumption (Equipment)
Based on water use compared to similar equipment using the Typical Use protocol. - Refrigerant Global Warming Potential (Equipment)
Scores higher if refrigerants have a GWP <150 (or <10 for extra credit). - Storage Temperature (Chemicals/Reagents)
Products stored at ambient or near-ambient temperatures receive better scores.
Lifetime:
- Use Phase (Consumables)
This scoring category evaluates the duration of the typical use phase of the product. - Supported Lifetime (Equipment)
Considers public commitment to product support and repair, with optional data on durability and service records. - Circularity Support
Assesses manufacturer-provided info or programs for recycling/refurbishing.
📦 2. Audit of the Packaging
- Total Points: Consumables (8), Chemicals/Reagents (11), Equipment (4)
Evaluation Criteria:
- Recycled & Renewable Packaging Content
- Commonly Recyclable Packaging Materials
- Shipping Temperature (Chemicals/Reagents)
- Availability of Cold Chain Takeback Program
🏭 3. Audit of the Manufacturing Facility
- Total Points: 40 for all product categories
Evaluation Criteria:
- Best Practices
Includes certifications like ISO 14001, participation in sustainability programs (e.g. Freezer Challenge), and internal initiatives like Green Teams. - Climate & Energy
Measures GHG emission reductions or presence of certifications like ISO 50001 or LEED. - Waste Diversion
Recognizes high landfill diversion rates or third-party certifications (e.g. TRUE Zero Waste). - Water Use Reduction
- Renewable Electricity
Compares renewable electricity used versus total electricity over 12 months. - Use of Renewable Energy
🌍 4. Company GHG Reductions
- Total Points: 17 for all product categories
Evaluation Criteria:
- Scope 1/2/3 Tracking
Checks if the company tracks and reports all levels of GHG emissions. - GHG Reduction Commitments
Assesses public reduction targets; Validation of the Near Term and Net Zero targets by third-party Standard Setting Organizations like SBTi receive additional ACT scoring credit.
🧮 5. Product Carbon Reporting
- Total Points: 6 for all product categories
Evaluation Criteria:
- Product Carbon Footprint & Framework
Product must have a “cradle-to-gate” CO₂e estimate and disclose the reporting framework. - Third-party Verification
Extra credit for carbon footprints reviewed by a third party or through internal audit.
♻️ 6. Improvements
- Total Points: 3 for all product categories
Evaluates recent product improvements across ACT categories that significantly reduce environmental impact.
🌟 7. Innovation (Bonus Category)
- Up to 6 Bonus Points (all product types)
To qualify, the product must meet at least one of the following:
- Demonstrate >50% GHG reduction vs. common alternatives for its function or disposal.
- Use a novel, patented material that cuts carbon footprint by >50%.
- Be manufactured with a unique, patented process reducing the manufacturing carbon footprint by >50%.
If you want know in detail what each category covers and how many points can be achieved for each category, you can do so here.
Discussion:
Some Nuances You Should Note:
- The ACT Ecolabel scoring counts both bio-based content and recyclability as separate contributing factors.
- It differentiates based on the item of question. For example, the ACT Ecolabel 2.0 distinguishes between use phase (for consumables) and supported lifetime (for equipment), recognizing the unique sustainability challenges of each category.
- For circularity support, points are awarded when manufacturers provide information about recycling or refurbishing service providers and/or offer financial support for such programs. This means that mere take-back schemes, especially those that result in disposal in developing countries, are not counted.
- A company can score additional points by providing an estimated CO₂e footprint for a product. However, it receives equal credit if that estimate is third-party evaluated—though it’s not specified which kind of third party qualifies.
Why the ACT Eolabel Is Currently the Best Sustainability Standard in Science
- Unlike most other labels and certifications, the ACT Ecolabel 2.0 assesses individual products—not just entire companies or product lines—and considers multiple environmental impact categories.
- Provides transparency by surfacing environmental impacts that would otherwise remain hidden or difficult to quantify.
- Enables direct comparison between similar products, helping scientists and procurement teams make informed, sustainable decisions.
- Motivates manufacturers to: A) track, B) report on, C) improve sustainability-related metrics across their operations.
- Rewards companies for providing product-level carbon footprint data, which supports end-users in reporting their Scope 3 emissions.
- Clear, structured, and easy to understand – the ACT Ecolabel is more transparent and readable than many other sustainability labels or certifications.
Preempting Criticism – What the ACT Ecolabel Cannot Do
- The ACT Ecolabel cannot be perfect. There’s ongoing debate about the sustainability of bioplastics, bio-based materials, and even green energy sources. The label must make simplifying assumptions to ensure consistent scoring, even when science and opinions differ.
- The ACT Ecolabel cannot enforce full transparency. Manufacturers retain the right to keep proprietary chemicals undisclosed if revealing them would compromise intellectual property or competitive advantage.
- It does not determine the greenest product on the market. If a competing product isn’t labeled—or if you’re unaware it has an ACT score—you can’t compare them side-by-side.
- It cannot cover everything. For instance, standardized “typical use protocols” may result in differing energy scores for equipment whose efficiency depends on use settings (e.g., high vs. low RPM in centrifuges).
- It does not consider regional context. Environmental impact varies significantly across geographies—e.g., electricity in France (mostly nuclear) versus Poland (mostly coal). Similarly, water use reduction matters more in water-scarce regions, but the ACT Ecolabel cannot fully account for such nuances.
- It needs to rely on third-party desktop verification, which cannot guarantee a company’s integrity in data creation.
What Could Be Done Differently
- We feel the Innovation Bonus feels too strict. Requiring patented solutions or >50% GHG reductions sets a very high bar and may penalize impactful, yet unpatented or incremental innovations.
- For Product Carbon Footprinting, limiting the evaluation to “cradle to gate” is understandable since there are challenges and uncertainties in estimating product end-of-life impacts, but excluding them underrepresents total impact. A “cradle-to-grave” should be considered.
- The “Audit of Manufacturing Facility” includes multiple related yet overlapping categories:
- Manufacturing Facility – Best Practices: subsection Climate and Energy
- Renewable Electricity
- Renewable Energy
These address similar aspects—GHG emissions from energy use—but under different lenses. While a facility may rightfully receive credit in more than one category, an alternative would be measuring GHG emissions directly from the outset, rather than through fragmented proxies.
- The emphasis on manufacturing energy and electricity use (40 points) makes it by far the largest category. Increasing the weight of product-level design and Scope 3 Emission impact could better incentivize innovation where manufacturers still have substantial room to improve.
- The 17 points dedicated to Scope 1, 2, and 3 tracking and target-setting underscore the value of climate accountability. The weakness lies in the fact atht setting targets is a valuable first step but does not necessarily guarantee implementation, and because scope tracking is becoming a regulatory standard, the ACT Ecolabel could evolve to reward demonstrable progress or third-party-verified reductions more heavily.
What You Should Assess Beyond the ACT Ecolabel
- 🔬 Reduced Reagent Use
Products that allow for smaller volumes of chemicals or reagents—whether through design, improved efficiency, or innovative protocols—can significantly reduce upstream environmental impact.
- ⚖️ Reduced Product Weight
Lighter products require fewer raw materials to produce and generate lower transportation emissions.
- ♻️ Reusability of the Product
Products designed for multiple uses instead of single use can dramatically reduce waste, especially in high-throughput laboratory settings – this is especially important e.g., for tubes or tips and their resistance to autoclavation.
- 📦 Innovations Like Minimized Shipping Frequency
Some suppliers reduce environmental impact not by changing the product itself, but through other innovations. Those could be streamlined logistics—for example, through bulk shipments, consolidated deliveries, or modular systems that reduce how often restocking is required.
In Essence
The ACT Ecolabel is currently the top choice for scientists to assess the environmental impact of lab items. Few other fields offer a multi-category label that transparently provides quantified impact data like the ACT Ecolabel does. This is an outstanding initiative, and thanks to its clarity and conciseness, it’s a tool you should definitely use for your next procurement decision.
For more, visit our main Website