The chemical storage graveyard has to go

I must admit to being a habitual collector, dare I say even a hoarder. I fear that this behavior is common in chemistry—and not just a problem for those of us who maintain stockpiles of rare compounds, reagents, and substances with potential for an as-yet-undefined use but for our increasingly fragile earth.The practices of collectors often extend beyond simple accumulation. They reflect complex motivations that range from aesthetic appreciation and intellectual curiosity to the pursuit of social status, investment value, or increased knowledge and understanding. It’s actually not that far from what many of us do as chemists. We are trained to meticulously cultivate knowledge, ideas, observations, experimental data, and much, much more. As we pass through the formal stages of our education and then into professional practice, we extrapolate our affinity for stockpiling such that every product we make, every reagent we purchase, and indeed every molecule, compound, starting material, or sample we are given or inherit becomes part of a sometimes carefully documented personal collection.Even if we generally take care of these treasures, we need a reality check. Our chemical storage cupboards can become an eclectic archive of reagent bottles. When we design experiments, we often procure enough reagent to last what amounts to a scientific lifetime. The legacy of this time-honored approach is the nonsustainable growth of huge trove of materials. Some of them don’t see the deck of a fumehood for many years. We often don’t even know if a similar approach is also taking root