Study | Country | Topic | GHG Protocol Corporate Standard scopes | Setting | Devices | Aim/objective | Sustainable actions | Principal results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Woolen (2023) [25] | USA | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | MRI scanners | Consumption and potential energy saving | Turning off MRI scanners during idle periods | Projected annual energy consumption per scanner: 82,700–171,100 kWh Nonproductive energy: 72–91% of total consumption |
Gendy (2022) [24] | UK | Carbon footprint | Scope 1, Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | N/a | Current attitudes to environmental sustainably in radiology | Reducing travel, energy-saving measures | 92% of survey participants showed high concern about climate crisis |
Brown (2022) [26] | Canada | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | CT scanners | Consumption and potential energy saving | Turn off CT scanners in nonoperational hours | Potential energy saving for 1 CT scanner: 14,180 kWh per year Nonproductive energy: 40–80% of total consumption |
McAlister (2022) [27] | Australia | Life-cycle assessment | Scope 2, Scope 3 | Radiology imaging service | Ultrasound, x-ray, CT and MRI scanners | Greenhouse gas emissions and direct and indirect energy consumption | Reducing unnecessary imaging, choose lower energy imaging exams, turning off devices during idle periods | CO2 emissions were 17.5 kg/scan for MRI, 9.2 kg/scan for CT, 0.8 kg/scan for x-ray, and 0.5 kg/scan for US |
Peters (2021) [23] | UK | Carbon footprint | Scope 1 | Radiology training | N/a | Environmental impact of radiology trainees travel | Reducing travel, teleconferencing, and distance learning | Total emissions by radiology trainees: 122.5 tonnes of CO2 |
Büttner (2021) [18] | Germany | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | Monitors and workstations in radiology department | Consumption and potential energy saving | Energy-saving plan with automated shutdown/restart of workstations during idle periods | Potential energy consumption saving: 35,970 kWh (22.2 tons of CO2 and 14,388.28 USD/year) |
Hainc (2020) [13] | Switzerland | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | Monitors and workstations in Radiology department | Consumption and potential energy saving | Turning off devices during idle periods | 23,692 kWh potential energy saving per year, 45% of the initial energy consumption |
Heye (2020) [14] | Switzerland | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | CT and MRI Scanners | Consumption and potential energy saving | Energy and cost-saving during idle and system-off states can be converted to more energy-efficient operating modes | Energy consumption imaging 614,825 kWh per year CT idle period: 78% (42 867 kWh) MRI idle period: 5.5–13.4% (8,177–16 038 kWh) |
Alshqaqeeq (2020) [28] | USA | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | Ultrasound, x-ray, CT and MRI Scanners | Appropriateness of imaging exams related with energy consumption | Choose lower energy imaging exams | Potential US healthcare improvement: 24–240 million kWh per year (US $2.5–$25 million dollars per year) |
Brodbeck (2019) [29] | Switzerland | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | N/a | Energy consumption | Development of informatic tools | Inform energy reduction strategies and improve scan protocols |
Esmaeili (2018) [30] | USA | Life-cycle assessment | Scope 2, Scope 3 | Radiology imaging service | MRI imaging services (MRI scanners and MRI room devices) | Greenhouse gas emissions and direct and indirect energy consumption | N/a | MRI scanner life-cycle energy: 104 kWh per patient 28% inhospital energy consumption (direct) 72% out-hospital energy consumption (indirect) |
Martin (2018) [31] | USA | Life-cycle assessment | Scope 2, Scope 3 | Radiology imaging service | Ultrasound, CT, and MRI scanners | Greenhouse gas emissions and direct and indirect energy consumption | N/a | Ultrasound has the least environmental impact compared to CT and MRI |
Esmaeili (2015) [32] | USA | Life-cycle assessment | Scope 2, Scope 3 | Radiology imaging service | CT imaging services (CT scanners and CT room devices) | Carbon footprint of CT scans by quantifying inhospital and out-of-hospital energy use | Expanding radiologists’ knowledge of unseen energy impacts of CT scans | CT scan life-cycle energy: 24–34 kWh per scan 25% inhospital energy consumption (direct) 75% out-hospital energy consumption (indirect) |
McCarthy (2014) [33] | Ireland | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | Monitors and workstations in radiology department | Consumption and potential energy saving | Turning off computers, air-conditioning units, enabling sleep mode | 116.304 kWh potential energy saving per year US $11,629 potential cost-saving per year 15 metric tons of CO2 emissions per year |
Esmaeili (2011) [34] | USA | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | CT imaging services (CT scanners and CT room devices) | Energy consumed per month by CT machine in different states | Energy savings during CT idle period | Potential energy savings: 2,065 KWh per month (88% of the total) |
Prasanna (2011) [35] | USA | Energy consumption | Scope 2 | Radiology imaging service | Monitors and workstations in radiology department | Consumption and potential energy saving | Turn off devices at the end of workday and on weekends | Potential energy and cost savings: 76.31% (83,866.6 kWh and US $9,225.33, respectively) |