By the time this editorial is published the Copenhagen Climate Conference 2009 will be going on. This is the perfect opportunity to reflect upon the relationship between conservation-restoration and the rest of the world in general, and more precisely, its sustainability.

Nowadays sustainability as a word has become almost a cliché, however its concept should be reconsidered. The term sustainability is most commonly used when referring to environment but it is quite rarely used in conservation issues. However, our activity does affect other areas, having a particularly direct impact on three main sectors which are all interconnected: works of art, environment and society.

Obviously the correct intervention on works of art is the main focal point of we professionals, but there are some factors that have not yet been assessed well enough, such as the real consequences of repetitive interventions on the same artwork. The environment involves not only the short-term consequences of our decisions but more so the long-term consequences which are, if not disregarded, often ignored. We are becoming evermore aware of our carbon footprint and indeed carbon is mainly responsible for climate change. We tend to forget that there are many processes that could be more eco-friendly than most of our usual professional practices. And finally, society because it involves a wide set of factors such as cultural tourism or the socio-economical impact of conservation.

The technological revolution that our society is going through has had a positive influence on our methodologies and even some of our techniques. However conservation practice in workshops has not changed that much in past few decades. In fact, new equipment and materials may be available to us but the practical work is still performed in the same basic ways.

Being aware of the sustainability factor could even be understood as a measure of preventive conservation. The best practical methods are already dictating principles that reduce and minimise consumption; for example, the use of ‘cold’ lights in exhibitions is art and environment-friendly. However, best practices are not always the priority concerns that we may take into our workshops. For example, what exactly do we do with the remains of the solvents? Do we all store and then deliver them to a specialised residue company? Unfortunately, I’m afraid not.

In the case of solvents, very few are innocuous for ourselves or the environment, they are dangerous and extremely toxic, even cancerous. Still, they are vital for conservation procedures such as consolidation or cleaning. From this point of view, the use of gels was a major breakthrough as it helps to significantly reduce the actual amount of solvents that are later released into the environment or manipulated by the technician. The use of laser technology is non-toxic and is already a common practice in stone-based materials but there is still much research to be done about its use on organic materials. But are there really any ecological treatments? Is there any research being carried out in this field? Not to my knowledge. The use of nanomaterials (solvent-free) is advancing in huge steps and its application to conservation should be better considered, not only because of its impact but also for ethical concerns.

It would be interesting to assess the consequences of our profession on the environment, on society and even on the economy. The study of these aspects is still at a teething stage. We lack much information which may be required to make decisions and to take on responsibility for more conscientious practices.