Keasling has already accomplished this type of thing once with an antimalarial drug. Keasling was able to engineer bacteria and yeast to produce artemisinin. This is an expensive compound normally from plants. With Keasling’s system, however, plants are no longer needed to help manufacture artemisinin, but rather, huge batches can be generated with the bacteria and yeast. Artemisinin is essentially a hydrocarbon that the bacteria and yeast are genetically altered to make. In the October 24 issue of Science, Keasling says, “Artemisinin is a hydrocarbon…we’re just trying to engineer organisms to produce different hydrocarbons.” These other hydrocarbons are what he hopes can be used to artificially reproduce gasoline, jet fuel and plastics.

While Keasling believes this technology “is just…the beginning”, it is still too expensive to beat the price of conventional oil, even with prices as high as $140 per barrel. Even so, several companies both small and large are looking into the possibilities. In fact, some companies have decided to begin manufacturing fuel, regardless of its more expensive cost. The hope is that although the price is high now, advances in the technology will deflate the cost to be competitive with conventional products. Optimistically, it could also become possible for conventional oil to become an option, rather than an imperative.

Ethanol’s Shortcomings

One of the first goals Keasling hopes to accomplish is to shift the public’s desire for ethanol. The Renewable Fuels Association reported in 2007 that 50 billion liters of ethanol was produced. Unfortunately, debate surrounds ethanol since it is derived from corn in the U.S. Opponents of this method contend that using corn for fuel increases the cost of food. Furthermore, they believe the progress made by using the environmentally friendly fuel is absorbed by the conventional gas and oil needed to grow, harvest and convert the corn. Ethanol is also problematic since it cannot be distributed through the pipeline infrastructure already in place for oil. For all of these reasons, Keasling and others like him believe the true answer lies in artificially generated fuel.

While Keasling believes the technique of using bacteria and yeast to produce fuel is promising, it is still far from perfect or practical on a large scale. When his group was working to make artemisinin, it required 50 changes to the bacterial DNA. By adding certain genes, Keasling was able to turn the bacteria into millions of little manufacturing plants. Initially, however, the bacteria were only able to produce small amounts of the antimalarial compound. Through optimization of his method, Keasling was able to increase the yield of artemisinin by a million fold. While this brought the production price down to competitive levels with the conventionally produced compound, accomplishing the same task with fuel will prove more of a challenge. While they were able to reduce the cost of artemisinin to $1 per gram, this same price for artificially generated oil would equal $125 per liter. Keasling has already started to increase the bacteria-produced hydrocarbon yield. At a meeting in September, he reported a method that has amplified the yield 77-fold.

Other Efforts

Keasling isn’t the only one getting involved. In San Francisco, bacteria are being manipulated to produce renewable petroleum and biodiesel. Gregory Pal, the senior director for corporate development at LS9, stated in Science that they have already made several hydrocarbons that could be used for fuel and that they are currently scaling up production. Although a pilot fermentation experiment is currently being conducted, if all goes as planned, a small fuel production plant could be operational by 2010.

While these two groups and others are manipulating different metabolic pathways of the bacteria to produce the desired results, the consequences will be the same, and relatively soon. By using an organism as easy to grow as the bacterium they have chosen and manipulating it, it is possible these scientists have opened a new door for energy solutions. With continued advancements, families in the future may be saved from facing the personal economic stresses they have struggled with for more than a year in areas such as gas for the family vehicle, food and air travel.

Reference

Service, Robert. Science, 322 (5901): 522-523 (24 October 2008). Eyeing Oil, Synthetic Biologists Mine Microbes for Black Gold.

Energy can come from many sources. Fossil fuels are the most abundant and the most readily recognized by everyone. Unfortunately, they are also seen as a direct cause of pollution and several environmentally problematic consequences. Ethanol, from corn and sugarcane, is becoming an increasingly popular alternative². However, many worry that we will convert too much agricultural land and crops to strictly energy-producing acreage. This is especially true since some already see conflicts between our food resources and a world where many are starving. Biodiesel is another alternative growing in popularity. Although more energy is obtained with this method than with corn ethanol, gasoline must still be used, and biodiesel uses the same ingredients needed to produce vegetable oil for cooking. Due to the prevalence of vegetable oil in our diet, only a small destabilization in supply can create a large increase in cost, making it too expensive to use for fuel².

Problems such as these have led many scientists to strive for a way to use water as a fuel source. Water is abundant, environmentally friendly and a premium source of the hydrogen used to create hydrogen gas. Until recently, the only way to accomplish these goals was to use catalysts, which split the atoms of water molecules at an increased rate, though these were only active with ruthless chemicals and the very expensive platinum metal. Nocera and his colleagues, however, have finally found a catalyst which will allow water molecules to separate under environmentally-friendly conditions using cobalt and phosphorous which are both plentiful and inexpensive³. Although adjustments must be made before this technology can begin replacing current fuel sources, the future use and cost of this type of energy production could have a steep inverse relationship.

Ultimately, scientists would like to see a combination between solar power and splitting of the water molecule. If catalysts such as the one created by Nocera can be made for large-scale use, it could be possible to use seawater for the process³. This could circumvent the need to use fresh water or desalinize ocean water which could save money and allow the first ocean-based energy plants to be funded and erected sooner. Add to this, the possibility of using solar energy to drive the reaction and the overall cost of such a project could continue to decrease over time. This predicts, however, that the cost of alternative fuels will decrease as research increases. The expense will be forced to decrease if alternative methods are to be used since, in 2000, prices for wind and solar energy were two and 21 times as much coal, respectively⁵.

Even with this new method of separating the hydrogen and oxygen atoms in water, the amount of water necessary to fully replace fossil fuels is extreme. According to Nocera, it would require 10¹⁵, or 10,000 trillion, moles of water per year¹. Fossil fuels provide the bulk of our energy at 95% which equaled 170 million barrels of oil per day in 2000⁴. It is thought that oil from known deposits will continue to last for 42 years, natural gas 60 years and coal for over 200 years². With these numbers, research such as Nocera’s is vital for a comfortable future.

Scientists aren’t the only ones to show concern over our current dependence on depleting resources. Congressman Tim Holden who is Chairman on the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy, and Research has been noted as saying that “our energy demands are at a critical point⁶.” Congressman Frank Lucas went on to say, “Expansion of traditional forms of energy, such as oil, coal, and natural gas must be pursued alongside development of alternative and renewable sources⁶.”

In a written statement to the Subcommittee, Jetta Wong, a senior policy associate with the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, noted that in 2007 transportation in the U.S. was “96% dependent on petroleum and consumed 70% of total U.S. petroleum demand⁷.” More importantly, 60% of this was imported. Making oil more expensive are the subsidies given to oil companies. Over the last 32 years, they have received more than $130 billion. This does nothing if not push alternative fuels more forcefully. It has even pushed the government, which on December 19, 2007, approved the Energy Independence and Security Act. The act called for “36 billion gallons of renewable fuel” in only 14 years. From this, 21 billion gallons is required to be biofuel based⁷.

As views shift away from reliance on foreign oil and other polluting fuel sources, research into alternative fuels is bound to grow. While many of the alternative fuels may not be able to replace fossil fuels singly, a combination of hydrogen power, wind, solar and perhaps even food-based resources might show enough efficiency and promise in the future to relieve the existing pressure on non-renewable energy sources.

1 – Kanan, Matthew and Daniel Nocera. In Situ Formation of an Oxygen-Evolving Catalyst in Neutral
Water Containing Phosphate and Co²⁺. Science 321 (5892), 1072-1075. August 22, 2008.

2 – Somerville, Chris. Primer: Biofuels. Current Biology 17 R115-R119. February 20, 2007.

3 – Service, Robert. New Catalyst Marks Major Step in the March Toward Hydrogen Fuel.
Science 321 (5889), 620. August 1, 2008.

4 – International Energy Annual 2001 Edition (EIA, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 2003).

5 – Commission of the European Communities, Green Paper Towards a European Strategy for the Security of Energy Supply. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2000.

6 – Subcommittee Reviews Electricity Reliability in Rural Areas. News from the House Agriculture Committee. U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture, July 30, 2008.

7 – Written Testimony by Ms. Jetta Wong of the Environmental and Energy Study Institute to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy, and Research. July 24, 2008.