Sustainability comparison between a traditional electronics measurement laboratory and an immersive metaverse laboratory: An extended life cycle assessment analysis

Abstract

University laboratories are essential for engineering education but often require significant resources in terms of energy, equipment, and space. This paper presents a comparative Life Cycle Assessment of two models: a traditional measurement laboratory with 20 physical workstations and an immersive digital twin-based laboratory (IM-MetaLAB) supported by one high-performance workstation and 20 virtual reality headsets. The study extends the Life Cycle Assessment framework to the triple bottom line, jointly addressing environmental, economic, and social dimensions.

Results highlight substantial advantages of the immersive model. Energy demand decreases from 18,000 to 7,000 kW h/year, with associated emissions reduced by more than 60 %. Over a seven-year horizon, electronic waste is reduced from 500-600 kg to about 200 kg. Economically, capital expenditures drop from approximately 100,000 € to 25,000 €, while annual operating costs fall from 17,000 € to 5,000 €, yielding a per-student exercise cost four times lower. Socially, immersive access enables remote 24/7 participation, improves completion rates (70 % vs 56 %) and average grades (27.4/30 vs. 25/30), and eliminates commuting emissions (≈ 24 tCO₂/year for 40 students).

The immersive laboratory thus proves to be a sustainable, cost-effective, and pedagogically effective alternative to the traditional activities, showing how digital twin and virtual reality technologies can support both innovation in teaching and institutional sustainability goals.