How neuroscience labs can limit their environmental impact

Measuring and reducing the carbon footprint of fMRI preprocessing in fMRIPrep

Computationally expensive data processing in neuroimaging research places demands on energy consumption-and the resulting carbon emissions contribute to the climate crisis. We measured the carbon footprint of the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) preprocessing tool fMRIPrep, testing the effect of varying parameters on estimated carbon emissions and preprocessing performance. Performance was quantified using (a) statistical individual-level task activation in regions of interest and (b) mean smoothness of preprocessed data. Eight variants of fMRIPrep were run with 257 participants who had completed an fMRI stop signal task (the same data also used in the original validation of fMRIPrep). Some variants led to substantial reductions in carbon emissions without sacrificing data quality: for instance, disabling FreeSurfer surface reconstruction reduced carbon emissions by 48%. We provide six recommendations for minimising emissions without compromising performance. By varying parameters and computational resources, neuroimagers can substantially reduce the carbon footprint of their preprocessing. This is one aspect of our research carbon footprint over which neuroimagers have control and agency to act upon.

Climate crisis and ecological emergency: Why they concern (neuro)scientists, and what we can do

Our planet is experiencing severe and accelerating climate and ecological breakdown caused by human activity. As professional scientists, we are better placed than most to understand the data that evidence this fact. However, like most other people, we ignore this inconvenient truth and lead our daily lives, at home and at work, as if these facts weren’t true. In particular, we overlook that our own neuroscientific research practices, from our laboratory experiments to our often global travel, help drive climate change and ecosystem damage. We also hold privileged positions of authority in our societies but rarely speak out. Here, we argue that to help society create a survivable future, we neuroscientists can and must play our part. In April 2021, we delivered a symposium at the British Neuroscience Association meeting outlining what we think neuroscientists can and should do to help stop climate breakdown. Building on our talks (Box 1), we here outline what the climate and ecological emergencies mean for us as neuroscientists. We highlight the psychological mechanisms that block us from taking action, and then outline what practical steps we can take to overcome these blocks and work towards sustainability. In particular, we review environmental issues in neuroscience research, scientific computing, and conferences. We also highlight the key advocacy roles we can all play in our institutions and in society more broadly. The need for sustainable change has never been more urgent, and we call on all (neuro)scientists to act with the utmost urgency.

The Neuroscience Community Has a Role in Environmental Conservation

We previously argued that the neuroscience community has a role in environmental conservation because protection of biodiversity and the specialized behavioral adaptions of animals is essential to understanding brain structure and function. Preserving biodiversity and the natural world is also linked to human mental health and broadens our insight on the origins of psychiatric disorders like stress, anxiety, and depression. The study of neuroscience has become a global scientific pursuit that involves thousands of researchers and has an economic impact in the billions of dollars. As a group of biomedical research scientists, neuroscientists have the knowledge base and public credibility to convincingly promote sustainable environmental actions and policies. Here, we outline several key areas in which we as a neuroscience academic community can participate to preserve a rich global biodiversity and confront the environmental crises that lie before us.