1
Sep
Glass vs Plastic Pipettes: Which Supports Sustainable Laboratory Practices?
Pipettes are one of the most widely used tools in laboratories, from classrooms to advanced research facilities. But when it comes to sustainability, the choice between glass pipettes and plastic pipettes can have major environmental and cost implications. For Australian schools, universities, and industry labs, adopting sustainable pipetting practices helps reduce waste while maintaining compliance and accuracy.
Why Pipette Choice Matters
Laboratories worldwide generate large volumes of plastic waste, with disposable plastic pipettes being a significant contributor. While plastic pipettes offer convenience and safety in certain applications, reusable BORO 3.3 glass pipettes provide a durable, eco-friendly alternative. Choosing the right type depends on balancing sustainability, sterility, and practicality.
Glass vs Plastic Pipettes Comparison
| Feature | Glass Pipettes (BORO 3.3) | Plastic Pipettes (PP / PS) |
|---|---|---|
| Reusability | Reusable, withstands autoclaving | Typically single-use, disposable |
| Accuracy | High, stable graduations | Good, but markings may fade |
| Chemical Resistance | Excellent against acids, alkalis, solvents | Resistant to many chemicals, but not all |
| Environmental Impact | Low waste, recyclable through specialised streams | High waste, contributes to plastic pollution |
| Cost Efficiency | Higher upfront, lower long-term cost | Low upfront, high ongoing replacement cost |
| Best Use | Research, QC labs, teaching | Cell culture, sterile/contaminated work |
Case Study: Reducing Waste in Pipetting
A Melbourne university teaching lab transitioned from plastic to LabChoice BORO 3.3 glass pipettes for general chemistry classes. Over one academic year, they reduced disposable plastic waste by over 60%, while also lowering procurement costs by reusing autoclaved glass pipettes across multiple teaching cycles.
Meanwhile, a Sydney microbiology lab continued using sterile plastic pipettes for cell culture work where contamination control is critical, but adopted glass pipettes for all non-sterile liquid transfers, striking a balance between safety and sustainability.
LabChoice Advantage
LabChoice Australia supplies both BORO 3.3 glass pipettes and plastic alternatives (polypropylene, polystyrene) to meet diverse lab needs. Glass options are ideal for teaching, QC, and analytical chemistry, while plastic is available for sterile and disposable applications. By offering both, LabChoice helps Australian labs adopt sustainable pipetting strategies without compromising on functionality.
FAQs
Are glass pipettes more sustainable than plastic?
Yes. Glass pipettes are reusable, reducing waste and long-term costs compared to disposable plastics.
Can glass pipettes be autoclaved?
Yes. BORO 3.3 glass pipettes withstand repeated autoclaving and sterilisation cycles.
Do plastic pipettes have advantages?
Yes. They are safer for sterile, high-contamination-risk work such as microbiology and tissue culture.
Which type is best for schools?
Glass pipettes are cost-effective and sustainable for teaching labs, while plastic pipettes may be safer for junior students in high-risk experiments.
📚 References
Standards & Specifications
- ISO 835:2007 – Laboratory glassware — Graduated pipettes. International Organization for Standardization.
https://www.iso.org/standard/42474.html - ASTM E1293-20 – Standard Specification for Glass Volumetric Pipettes. ASTM International.
https://www.astm.org/e1293-20.html - ASTM E275-01(2018) – Standard Practice for Describing and Measuring Performance of Laboratory Pipetting. ASTM International.
Academic & Sustainability Reports
- CSIRO – Sustainable Labs Guidance – Reducing Single-Use Plastic in Australian Research Labs.
https://www.csiro.au - University of Melbourne – School of Chemistry – Best Practices in Pipette Use: Glass vs Plastic Sustainability.
- American Chemical Society (ACS) – Green Chemistry and Lab Waste Reduction: Pipetting Practices.
https://www.acs.org
