Carbon Footprint of Inhaled Anesthetics – Do the Risks Outweigh the Benefits?

Global warming presents many challenges to the healthcare system. Not only does the increasing global temperature have detrimental health effects itself, but the healthcare sector is also a huge contributor to global warming. One big contributor to global warming is the use of inhaled anesthetics, which possess global warming potentials up to 2,000 times greater than carbon dioxide. Recent proposals, such as a prospective ban of desflurane in 2026 by the European Commission, demonstrate the need to reevaluate many of the common practices within anesthesiology. This review looks to investigate the environmental impact, cost, and clinical efficacy of various anesthetic agents. 17 articles from PubMed were retrieved and thoroughly examined. Findings show that intravenous (IV) anesthetics such as propofol significantly reduce carbon emissions and postoperative complications when compared to their inhaled counterparts. Additionally, strategies like low-flow anesthesia, use of renewable energy, and reusable equipment further reduce the detrimental environmental effects of anesthesia. A shift toward IV anesthetics, combined with institutional efforts such as carbon pricing and clinician education, may result in both ecological and economic benefits. Further research is essential to achieve more environmentally friendly and effective anesthesia care.