Open Collections

Abstract

Laboratories are among the most emissions-intensive spaces in universities, due to their reliance on energy-demanding equipment and infrastructure. At the University of British Columbia (UBC), efforts to meet Climate Action Plan 2030 (CAP2030) goals—which include an 85% reduction in operational greenhouse gas emissions by 2030—must address the continued use of natural gas in laboratory settings. This study investigates how natural gas-based equipment is used in UBC’s Chemistry Buildings and examines the perspectives of laboratory users on the transition toward lower-carbon alternatives. We partnered with UBC’s Green Labs Program through the SEEDS Sustainability Program and used a mixed-methods approach consisting of site visits, semi-structured interviews, and a department-wide survey targeting staff, faculty, researchers, and graduate students. Our goal was to explore what types of equipment in the Chemistry Buildings still rely on natural gas, why it remains in use, and what forms of support users would require to facilitate a transition. Findings show that Bunsen burners, butane torches, and gas-connected fume hoods are the most common gas-based tools still in use. Tradition, ease of use, and existing infrastructure were key reasons for continued reliance. While natural gas remains important in some contexts such as glassblowing and certain research techniques, 85% of respondents expressed support for department-wide efforts to transition to electric alternatives, contingent on proper funding, training, and policy support. Our research highlights how user perspectives are shaped by a web of technical, institutional, and cultural factors. By applying a sociomaterial lens, we show that decarbonizing laboratory spaces requires more than technical substitutions but also demands an understanding of how people, practices, and technologies are co-constituted. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”