Comparing the Energy Consumption of Different UHPLC Systems

Importance of the topic

Energy consumption of UHPLC systems is a critical factor in laboratory sustainability and operating costs. High-throughput facilities that run instruments around the clock can significantly reduce their environmental footprint and electricity bills by choosing and operating analytical platforms more efficiently.

Study objectives and overview

This overview compares the energy use of four leading UHPLC systems—Agilent 1290 Infinity II, Shimadzu Nexera LC-40 X3, Thermo Scientific Vanquish Flex, and Waters Acquity H-Class Plus Bio—across three operational states (idle, ready, run). Daily and per-sample energy metrics are derived to inform practical instrument selection and scheduling.

Methodology and instrumentation

Energy readings were recorded at 23 ± 2 °C using a CLM 221 power meter and ALMEMO 2590 data logger. Each UHPLC system was maintained in three states:

• Idle: pumps and detectors off, sample thermostat active
  
• Ready: system warmed up with pump, column oven, and detector on
  
• Run: sequence of 30 injections under a fast gradient (2.1 × 50 mm C18 column, 0.8 mL/min, 30–95 % methanol in 2 min)

Autosamplers were loaded with water-filled vials to simulate real-world sample capacity. Measurements spanned two hours per state and were extrapolated to an 8 h run, 2 h ready, and 14 h idle daily cycle.

Instrument details

• Agilent 1290 Infinity II: Flexible Pump, Multisampler, Multicolumn Thermostat, Diode Array Detector
• Shimadzu Nexera LC-40 X3: Binary Solvent Delivery Module, Autosampler, Column Oven, Photodiode Array Detector
• Thermo Scientific Vanquish Flex: Quaternary Pump, Autosampler, Column Oven, Diode Array Detector
• Waters Acquity H-Class Plus Bio: Quaternary Solvent Manager, Sample Manager FTN, Column Manager, TUV Detector

Main results and discussion

Hourly energy consumption trends:

• Idle: 550–600 kJ (Shimadzu lowest); Ready/run: 800–1 200 kJ (Waters highest)
• Agilent and Thermo show similar profiles; Shimadzu is most efficient at idle but uses more in active states

Extrapolated daily use over 24 h yielded 4.5–5.0 kWh for Agilent, Shimadzu, and Thermo, while Waters consumed ~6.7 kWh.
Per-sample consumption (8 h run): Agilent 151 kJ, Shimadzu 160 kJ, Thermo 169 kJ, Waters 233 kJ. Extending to a 16 h run reduces per-sample energy to 84–97 kJ (Agilent, Shimadzu, Thermo) and 131 kJ (Waters). This highlights the importance of matching instrument operational schedules to sample throughput.

Benefits and practical applications

Laboratories can:

• Optimize instrument choice based on both idle and active energy profiles
• Adjust run schedules (e.g., extended shifts) to lower per-sample energy
• Implement energy-aware workflows for high-throughput analysis

Future trends and possibilities

Advances may include more energy-efficient pump and detector designs, smart scheduling via laboratory information management systems, integration of real-time energy monitoring, and software-driven idle-state minimization. Adoption of green solvents and micro-flow UHPLC could further reduce power demands.

Conclusion

Energy consumption of UHPLC systems must be evaluated in the context of daily use patterns and sample throughput. While idle-state efficiency is important, the number of analyses per day and active-state performance determine the true energy footprint. Selecting and scheduling UHPLC platforms based on these metrics supports both environmental and cost objectives.

References

• Rieck F. Do You Know the Environmental Impact of Your HPLC? Energy consumption of four InfinityLab LC systems during routine operation. Agilent Technologies Technical Overview, 5994-2335EN, 2022.