Everyone knows that capitalism and mercenary science go hand in hand. It tinkers and cares nought for the impact when money is at stake.
Deepwater Horizon anyone? Its painfully obvious that fallout from a biofuel production accident would be a lot easier and cheaper to contain and clean up than what we are dealing with now.
Is it sustainable to tip the scales in the old traditional way? No, it is not, I say. Energy production remains messy and will be that way until we find a real alternative to fuels - even hydrogen - and start tapping the energy that sustains the universe, not whats released as it breaks down.
Algae, or million-year old fermented algae, makes no odds. They are filthy scraps from the table, not the meal, our dependence on them has to stop before we can move forward...
Peace.
The Great American Algae Rush is in full swing.
Dozens of companies and hundreds of scientists are working hard to engineer algae to produce green — literally and figuratively — fuel.
The endeavor is at the crossroads of energy and science, and the trend is spreading worldwide.Why? Because some algae strains can produce 10 or more times more fuel per acre than the corn that is used to make ethanol, or the soybeans used to make biodiesel.
Better still, you can grow algae on arid land and in brackish water, which avoids competing with food production, unlike the corn and soybeans that coat much of the Midwest’s farmland.
Best of all: algae consume carbon dioxide, combating greenhouse gas emissions.
But a new profile of the industry in the New York Times demonstrates that this technology has its share of pitfalls.
For one, efforts to engineer and manipulate the organisms has environmentalists concerned because algae are the base of the marine food chain.
For example: Screw up and over-engineer a strain, and suddenly you have an organism that’s out of whack with the biosphere, stripping water of its oxygen and harming fish — and maybe humans — in the process.
But supporters say there’s nothing to worry about, because an organism out of whack means its defenses are, too.
Quoted in the article is Sapphire Energy co-founder Stephen Mayfield and Synthetic Genomics founder J. Craig Venter (the guy behind the first self-replicating synthetic cell), who are at odds over the risk of engineered algae escaping into the wild.
Venter says algae should be engineered with a “suicide gene” to shut down if they escape.
Mayfield says he’s not losing sleep over it. His three-year old company has raised $100 million from investors, including Bill Gates. It is also the recipient of $100 million in federal financing to build a demonstration project consisting of 300 acres of open ponds in New Mexico.
There’s no doubt that the topic is a heated one. Take a gander at recent articles about algae right here on SmartPlanet:
- Video: Turning algae into oil the NASA way
- Scientists create high-capacity batteries from algae
- Pressure-cooking method makes an algae-based biofuel
- Plane takes first flight on 100% biofuel
- Can algae-based plastics reduce our plastic footprint?
- Green algae used to make plastics that don’t contain petroleum
- The algae bloom of alternative energy
- Video: Growing the next ‘green’ fuel
- Clean, sustainable hydrogen from algae could reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil
- Solazyme founder Harrison Dillon: Why the U.S. Navy wants our green jet fuel
- What ’synthetic life’ could mean for the energy industry
- The Algaeus algae-fueled Prius hits the road
Just look at that diversity! Algae can impact our environment, consumer electronics, cars, military — you name it.
But the debate really comes down to this: like genetically modified (GM) food — such as Roundup Ready soybeans — should we be concerned that scientists are tinkering with Mother Nature?
Or simply: is it really sustainable to tip nature’s scales so drastically?
