The offspring of Jay Keasling’s synthetic biology research and vision, Emeryville, CA-based Amyris Biotechnologies has made a double impact. First, the company, with more than $40 million of backing from the Bill Gates’ Institute for One World Health charity, developed a microbial route to the anti-malarial compound artemisinin. In and of itself this work was a stunningly successful scientific achievement, and the resulting process has been licensed to Sanofi-Aventis for low-cost manufacturing and distribution in the third world.

But how does that relate to biofuels? Well, producing the anti-malarial drug relied on the engineering of a metabolic pathway to produce a key intermediate that is in the class of chemicals called terpenes. Chemically, terpenes are hydrocarbons, similar to diesel or gasoline, and are therefore very good fuel compounds. Thus, the same basic science that led to artemisinin can be applied, with appropriate tweaking, to produce fuels based on terpenes. And according to the company, a desired fuel compound can be selected based on its properties (flash point, cloud point, boiling point, density, fuel value, etc), and then the pathway to produce it can be designed. Voila! You have a designer fuel. And being hydrocarbons with properties similar to gasoline, terpenes do not suffer from the limitations that alcohols (particularly ethanol) have as fuels. If you want to put something into your gas tank or jet engine, a designer hydrocarbon is likely to be superior to any alcohol. At least that is what Amyris argues.

Amyris has the backing of a well-heeled group of VCs: Kleiner Perkins, TPG Biotech, and DAG Ventures. In the area of bio-based production of gasoline-like fuels, Amyris is at the head of the class. Economics remain to be proven, but Amyris has formed a joint venture with the second largest Brazilian sugar producer, Crystalsev, to get access to inexpensive sugar feedstock, and the first demonstration plant is scheduled to be built right on the sugar plantation in Brazil by 2010. It will produce a biodiesel (with the interesting name of “No CompromiseTM”), currently being piloted at Amyris’ Emerville facility. Amyris promises that a bio-gasoline and a bio-aviation fuel are not far behind. If any company can make terpene-based fuels successfully, Amyris appears to be that company.

The Biofuel Debate – What’s all the fuss about?

There has been much talk of biofuels and in particular biodiesel being touted as a more carbon friendly alternative to traditional petroleum based fuel…

• Because biodiesel is made from renewable resources (unlike fossil fuels) and it has lower emissions compared to petroleum diesel
• Because it is less toxic than table salt and biodegrades as fast as sugar
• Because it is made entirely from renewable resources such as soybeans, sunflowers, rapeseed and palm oil as well as waste vegetable oil (used cooking oils)

it surely follows biodiesel must be better for the environment…or is it?

Over the last few years through the Kyoto Protocol, governments have discussed the global issue of climate change with a view to setting targets to reduce greenhouse gases. Whilst there has been general agreement that something needs to be done and targets have been set, the United States is the only developed country that has not ratified the treaty and yet it is one of the significant greenhouse gas emitters.

The dilemma seems to be that biodiesel is undoubtedly greener than traditional petroleum based fuel. On the other hand however, as there is no stipulation how and where this fuel is produced, could this ‘green’ fuel actually be doing more harm to our environment than good?

Let’s look at some of the contributing factors to this debate…

Biodiesel – The Good

As an alternative fuel, biodiesel would seem to be a very good alternative to fossil based fuels:-

• Mitigating the effects of greenhouse gas emissions
• Making best use of the remaining limited supplies of fossil fuels
• Reducing air pollution along with the associated health risks to the public
• Benefiting domestic economies by reducing the dependence on importing foreign petroleum
• Relatively easy to produce in small or large volumes

Biodiesel – The Bad

The main problem with bio-fuels today is the source of the raw materials:-

• Biodiesel and ethanol are produced from plant oils and from edible crops meaning competition for basic foodstuffs, food or oil?
• Rain forests are being converted to palm oil production (palm oil is a key ingredient of food and other consumables…it can also be used to produce biodiesel)
• Current crops cannot keep pace with the bio-materials needed for producing biodiesel 

Does this mean if we replace traditional petroleum based diesel with biodiesel we’ll compromise our supply of foodstuffs?

Biodiesel – The Future

The Biotech Industry has begun to help with the need to find alternative fuel sources for the future by looking at how to get more from less:-

• Increased production of more plants
• Improving crop yields – corn, a common biofuel crop in the USA, yields under 200 barrels (per square mile per year) whereas Jatropha for instance can yield over 2,000 barrels
• Use of marginal land – look at crops (see below) that can be grown on arid land rather than take away arable farmland needed for essential food production. Using arid land in the poorer regions could provide social and economic benefits for that region

New sources that lessen the threat of environmental impact include:-

• Algae – grows quickly, renews quickly but to be a viable option cost effective harvesting remains a challenge
• Jatropha – can be grown in arid climates, has a high yield compared with traditional biocrops, has the potential to increase fertility of the land
• Camalina – Researchers say the Camelina plant is an excellent source of biofuel; it can be grown in arid land, with less water, fertilizer and pesticides

Biodiesel – Many Complex Issues

• clomid and iui success rate

Diesel engines were in fact originally designed in the early 1900′s to run on biodiesel made from oil seed crops and not to run on petroleum-based diesel. Was it a mistake not to encourage the development and take up of biodiesel back then instead of depending almost solely on petroleum?

Despite agreement in principle that biodiesel has a role to play in helping to reduce emissions unless politicians give clear guidelines about the future of renewable fuels there will continue to be a haphazard take up around the world. Most governments have been proceeding with caution and rightly so but mixed messages from governments around the world have only added to the uncertainty around the use biodiesel fuel. What should be the governments role be in promoting the use of biodiesel?

We live in a world today that has largely grown up in a throw away society without due regard to the consequences of waste. This wasteful attitude has been exacerbated by the lack of proper education in the basic skills of survival. It is only relatively recently that modern day governments have begun to encourage large scale recycling.

The challenge we face is to educate the public about the issues surrounding biofuels and what is good or bad. Honest debate not influenced by individual hidden agenda’s is the only way to arrive at political choices that embrace all the issues surrounding the use of biofuel.

So, is biodiesel good or bad for the environment?

One thing is for sure, first generation biofuels once thought to be the alternative fuel source of the future, have come under increased scrutiny recently. It is becoming clear that more information is needed about the potentially destructive elements of first-generation biofuels and the impact they have on the environment.

Environmentalists are concerned that the inadvertent consequence of using biodiesel fuel is unrecoverable damage to the environment. Furthermore, developing a dependence on traditional first generation biocrops may result in food competing with fuel over the use of land. We need to determine what the true balance is between good and bad from an environmental perspective.

Clearly governments need to further embrace the concept of reducing greenhouse gas emissions but should they be more proactive in finding a green source for our fuel as well?

Instead of destroying forests maybe we should look to new more “green” raw materials for producing biofuels. We must embrace the promotion of second and third-generation biofuels in an effort to help solve many of the current problems surrounding the use of first generation biodiesel.

As fuel prices skyrocket, personal financial situations and entire economies are threatened. Biomass energy has been offered up as a possible solution.

An Overview of Biomass Energy

Energy can be produced in a number of ways. We can burn fossil fuels, use the sun’s light for solar energy, use water for hydroelectric generators or even the heat of the Earth’s core in geothermal energy. One often overlooked source of energy that belongs among all these others is biomass energy. Indeed, President Bush seems particular keen on the subject.

Biomass is biological (natural) material that was once living, or still is living, that can be used to produce energy. For example, lawn clippings, dead trees, unused crops, wood chips and other wood byproducts are all biomass. Even household trash can be considered biomass, as can “landfill gas”, produced when garbage decomposes in landfills.

Biomass energy is produced when these materials are burned as fuel to produce energy. Some biomass materials are burned to produce steam, which is then used with generators to produce energy and heat. Other biomass materials, such as landfill gas, ethanol (produced from corn and other leftover crops) and biodiesel (this fuel is made from leftover animal fats and vegetable oils) can be used to create biomass energy that can even power transportation vehicles.

While biomass energy should be used as frequently as possible, as the biomass fuels are readily available, this type of energy is often overlooked. Biomass energy only accounts for about three percent of the energy used yearly in the United States. Some people feel that using biomass for energy is not safe for the environment, or that they do not want a “garbage” burning power plant in their area. In fact, biomass energy is actually very safe for the environment – the only byproduct is carbon dioxide, which comes from the burning of any fuel. This greenhouse gas does have some harmful properties, but not near as many as the pollutants that are released with the burning of fossil fuels.

In order to see just what biomass energy can do for our world, society needs to become more open to the use of biomass as an energy source. Using discarded and waste products can help to reduce the amount of trash going into our landfills, as well as cut down on our need to use fossil fuels. This, in turn, will not only help the environment but also the world’s economy. Biomass energy is an under-utilized energy source that needs to be fully researched and used in the years to come.