(Page 2 of 2)
The researchers have already created a strain of Rhodococcus that can eat a mix of two types of sugars, glucose and xylose. Once scientists have found a way to break down cellulosic biomass into simpler sugars, the ability to use more than one will simplify the production process. "They are not like wimpy E. coli that can't use different sugars simultaneously," says Sinskey. "These bacteria gobble them up." The researchers have also engineered strains that can feed on glycerol, which is a waste product in the production of biodiesel.
Sinskey and his team hope to develop better ways of isolating the lipids from bacteria at a commercial scale, perhaps via additional genetic engineering. For example, altering production of a specific protein encourages the lipids to aggregate into balls, called lipid bodies, which makes the molecules easier to recover. "Ideally, we want to develop a way to make the lipid body pop out of the cell," says Sinskey.
It's not yet clear how long it will take to create a process that is efficient enough for commercial production. "I don't think I'm far behind lots of companies that have lots of publicity in this area," says Sinskey. "I think in two to three years I will have a robust process."
Sinskey previously developed a way to make polymers from bacteria, founding a bioindustrial company called Metabolix in the early 1990s. A $300 million plant that will produce the company's biodegradable plastic is slated to begin operations later this year in December, as part of a joint venture with agricultural giant ADM.
Amyris's large-scale demonstration plant will make diesel from sugarcane.
Making ethanol from corn is expensive. Better biofuels are years away from the gas tank. Farmers are reluctant to change their practices. But do we really have any alternative to biofuels?
The tweaks they are making to these "bugs" that make them more efficient producers will likely render them poor survivors outside their "vats". In fact I would bet because most bacteria are randy plasmid swaping gene whores contamination with more "natural" strains would pose a serious threat to these "super bugs" if only because they put more energy into reproduction.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
boustrephon
50 Comments
Specificity is Good
I am not sure that engineering a more general bug is good. What happens if we manage to engineer a super-bug that likes to eat everything....! We could end up with biodiesel and nothing else...
Reply
erbium
340 Comments
What if it escapes?
The problem with the idea of this bug escaping and converting the world into biodiesel is also the problem with the nanobot 'grey goo' theory.
It might work if the world was a giant homogenous cupcake, but the real world is filled with incredible diversity we barely understand. VERY quickly something would start eating this 'bug'.
And as the other poster mentioned, vat 'bugs' don't survive well outside the vat. Why hasn't everything in the world turned into flowing 'sam adams' beer? they brew huge vats filled with their 'superbug' yeast that makes super beer.
Reply