Green Chemistry Principle #8 says: minimize unnecessary derivatization. A protecting group (PG) temporarily masks a reactive site so a later step is cleaner and more selective — but attaching and removing it costs two extra steps, extra reagent mass, and extra chances to lose material.
Overall yield = y1 · y2 · y3 · ... (product of every step's yield)
Mass in = m_core + Σ (reagent mass added at step i, scaled by the
fraction of the batch still present when it reaches step i)
Mass out = (overall yield) × m_product
E-factor = (mass in − mass out) / mass out
Atom economy = mass out / mass in × 100%
- Protecting-group route: Protect (fixed 95% yield) → Functionalize (your slider — high, because the reactive site is masked) → Deprotect (fixed 90% yield). The protecting-group mass is added at Protect and leaves as waste at Deprotect — it never appears in the product.
- Direct route: Functionalize directly on the unprotected molecule at your chemoselectivity slider's yield — usually lower, because the reactive site can trigger side reactions, but there are no extra steps and no protecting-group mass to waste.
- Watch the numbers cross over as you move the sliders: a very selective direct reaction can beat the protecting-group route on every metric, while a poorly selective one loses badly to it despite the extra steps.
Real-world relevance: this trade-off drives real process-chemistry decisions — pharmaceutical route selection weighs exactly this balance of step count, reagent mass and yield when scaling a synthesis from grams to tonnes.
2D view note: this is a side-view schematic of the same conveyor model as the 3D version — molecules travel left→right through the same gates, roll the same per-step yield, and feed the same mass-balance formulas above. Drag the canvas to pan, scroll/pinch to zoom.