A Breakthrough For Cutting CO2 Emissions
David Ginter | Dec 21, 2009 | Comments 2
Like it or not, finding ways to cut CO2 emissions is the focal point in debates over what course of action we should take in combating climate change. Even if you reject the human influence, the fact is that fossil fuels are limited and they will get more expensive because they’re becoming harder to get to. Well, get ready for some really good news.Interestingly enough, researchers from UCLA’s School of Engineering and Applied Sciences have developed a brilliant way to extract biofuel from bacteria. A team has genetically modified some cyanobacterium to consume carbon dioxide and turn it into a liquid fuel called isobutanol, which can potentially be used as an alternative to gasoline. To be more precise, researchers say that the engineered bacteria can produce isobutanol directly but that it is currently easier to use an existing and relatively inexpensive chemical catalysis process to convert isobutyraldehyde gas to isobutanol, as well as other useful petroleum-based products.
The team genetically increased the quantity of an enzyme called RuBisCO. RuBisCo is the enzyme that enables plants to fix atmospheric carbon dioxide to themselves, which they then use as energy. They then spliced genes from other microorganisms to engineer a strain that intakes carbon dioxide and sunlight and produces isobutyraldehyde gas. The low boiling point and high vapor pressure of the gas allows it to easily be stripped from the system, a fact which makes this breakthrough all the more appealing.
Many past efforts to find alternative biofuels actually cost so much energy to produce and refine them that it undermined any environmental benefits that we would have otherwise gotten. Hydrogen fuels have the same problem. But here, the reaction is powered directly by energy from sunlight through the process of photosynthesis, so it carries dual benefits. Not only does it reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels by recycling the CO2, it uses solar energy to convert the CO2 into a liquid fuel.
The new approach is potentially much more efficient and less expensive than current approaches. It avoids the need for biomass destruction, will help us avoid the agricultural monocultures which are necessary for biofuel, and it can be used in the existing energy infrastructure, including in most cars. These alone help eliminate some major economic barriers for biofuels.
Another major hurdle in making this economically viable is scalability. In spite of past breakthroughs in curbing CO2 emissions, excitement fades when faced with economic realities. Many innovations are very difficult to implement, especially on a large scale. Of course, the way we’ve designed our cities doesn’t help with this matter.
Yet the researchers say that placing the new system next to existing fossil fuel burning power plants would be ideal as it would potentially allow the greenhouse gases emitted from the power plants to be captured and directly recycled into liquid fuel. Lead researcher James C. Liao is very clear-eyed about the realities of implementing this system noting that “We are continuing to improve the rate and yield of the production. Other obstacles include the efficiency of light distribution and reduction of bioreactor cost. We are working on solutions to these problems.”
Given our knowledge of genetics, solutions for improving yields and reducing bioreactor costs should be only a matter of time. I’m not entirely sure how the distribution of light will be resolved, though harnessing and focusing sunlight should be easy enough if some form of artificial light cannot be utilized. Many have complained that big oil companies haven’t invested enough in clean energy and, in their turn, oil companies have complained that there’s been nothing of real promise for them to pour money into. I suspect this might be worth their investment though, especially if they want to survive in a carbon-constrained economy.
I’m only going to venture a cautious optimism here. I do think that this is some of the best environmental and economic news we’ve received in a very long time. I’m no expert in this scientific matter, so additional insight is more than welcomed.
Filed Under: 1 Person
About the Author:
Research breakthroughs like these are certainly good, but much less so than popular perception likes to believe. The first and biggest hurdle is certainly the groundbreaking research, but for any meaningful & sizable results to follow, there are two other hurdles that will have to be proven surmountable: economic viability, and practical viability.
The research may establish that this chemical reaction can be spurred by organisms, but at this point does not provide reliable assurance that the cost of the energy required (solar energy comes at the cost of harvesting it) is substantially less than the energy output. A small scale lab experiment quickly multiplies in complexity (& problems not apparent in the lab) when you move to commercial scale.
Many challenges still lie ahead. In the best case scenario, this technology will be a relatively small contributor to total future energy production, which will still rely mainly on unsustainable use of fossil fuels.
[...] morality? Coal will still be around for quite some time (another 50 years or so) and with recent scientific breakthroughs we might all find ourselves a little more able to live with the environmental outcome of such an [...]