Energy consumption is a major contributor of endoscopy department’s environmental impact. A significant portion of the energy consumption comes from the reprocessing of reusable endoscopes, however, data on the amount of electricity used for drying endoscopes is limited. We measured and compared the energy consumption of conventional drying cabinets and a novel automated drying process, the PlasmaTYPHOON (Pentax medical), that dries endoscopes within 1 to 3 minutes. Our aim was to understand the environmental impact of both drying processes and to evaluate if the PlasmaTYPHOON could contribute to the reduction of carbon footprint and costs.

Energy consumption of conventional drying cabinets and the automated drying process were measured for one week, using a Voltcraft SEM500 energy measurement device. Measurements were conducted on a 24/7 basis, capturing both active operation and standby power consumption. To assess workflow implications and material use, a Product Journey Map (PJM) analysis was performed, documenting all process steps, task durations, staffing requirements, and consumables for each of the two drying methods.  

The automated drying process required 34.5 times less energy per endoscope than conventional drying cabinets: drying a single endoscope in a drying cabinet consumed 1.08 kWh, whereas the automated drying process used 0.03 kWh. Over one week, the automated drying process died 109 endoscopes compared with 25 endoscopes dried in the drying cabinets. 

Using grey electricity, the nine drying cabinets at Erasmus MC generate an estimated 6,257 kg CO₂ annually, whereas the automated drying process accounts for only 88 kg CO₂ per year. The reduction in energy use also resulted in 71 times lower energy costs annually, 3777 euros for the drying cabinets and 53 euros for the automated drying process. PJM analysis demonstrated that the automated drying process required 3 times more workflow steps, 5 additional consumables, and an extra staff person to manage the drying cycle. However, consumable-related environmental impact to incinerate was little compared with reduced environmental impact caused by energy savings.  

The automated drying process substantially reduces the energy consumption of endoscope drying while enabling higher throughput. Although the automated drying process introduces additional workflow steps and requires additional consumables, its net environmental benefits remain substantial due to reduced energy consumption. Optimizing workflow integration and reducing consumable use may further strengthen the sustainability advantages of this novel technology.