In 2004, Iogen, a Canadian biotechnology company based in Ottawa, began selling modest amounts of cellulosic ethanol, made using common wheat straw as feedstock and a tropical fungus genetically enhanced to hyperproduce its cellulose-digesting enzymes. But Iogen estimates that its first full-scale commercial plant, for which it hopes to break ground in 2007, will cost $300 million -- five times the cost of a conventional corn-fed ethanol facility of similar size.
The more one can fiddle with the ethanol-producing microbes to reduce the number of steps in the conversion process, the lower costs will be, and the sooner cellulosic ethanol will become commercially competitive. In conventional production, for instance, ethanol has to be continually removed from fermentation reactors, because the yeasts cannot tolerate too much of it. MIT's Greg Stephanopoulos, a professor of chemical engineering, has developed a yeast that can tolerate 50 percent more ethanol. But, he says, such genetic engineering involves more than just splicing in a gene or two. "The question isn't whether we can make an organism that makes ethanol," says Stephanopoulos. "It's how we can engineer a whole network of reactions to convert different sugars into ethanol at high yields and productivities. Ethanol tolerance is a property of the system, not a single gene. If we want to increase the overall yield, we have to manipulate many genes at the same time."
The ideal organism would do it all -- break down cellulose like a bacterium, ferment sugar like a yeast, tolerate high concentrations of ethanol, and devote most of its metabolic resources to producing just ethanol. There are two strategies for creating such an all-purpose bug. One is to modify an existing microbe by adding desired genetic pathways from other organisms and "knocking out" undesirable ones; the other is to start with the clean slate of a stripped-down synthetic cell and build a custom genome almost from scratch.
Lee Lynd, an engineering professor at Dartmouth University, is betting on the first approach. He and his colleagues want to collapse the many biologically mediated steps involved in ethanol production into one. "This is a potentially game-changing breakthrough in low-cost processing of cellulosic biomass," he says. The strategy could involve either modifying an organism that naturally metabolizes cellulose so that it produces high yields of ethanol, or engineering a natural ethanol producer so that it metabolizes cellulose.
This May, Lynd and his colleagues reported advances on both fronts. A team from the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa that had collaborated with Lynd announced that it had designed a yeast that can survive on cellulose alone, breaking down the complex molecules and fermenting the resultant simple sugars into ethanol. At the same time, Lynd's group reported engineering a "thermophilic" bacterium -- one that naturally lives in high-temperature environments -- whose only fermentation product is ethanol. Other organisms have been engineered to perform similar sleights of hand at normal temperatures, but Lynd's recombinant microbe does so at the high temperatures where commercial cellulases work best. "We're much closer to commercial use than people think," says Lynd, who is commercializing advanced ethanol technology at Mascoma, a startup in Cambridge, MA.
Comments
Guest (Lee McClune) on 07/19/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
interested, see > sorganol.com < ,
been trying to get some Government support, but have been unable to get any help,, it not only has High Potential, it is Very Low Cost to Grow, and is drought resistant, and can be grown anywhere in the US, with no exotic chemicals/enzymes needed,,
Sugar cane can only be grown in tropical areas,, LFM, knoxville,Ia
Guest (plugged in) on 07/21/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (Mike) on 07/21/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Also - what temp will the ethanol boil/distill off at and at what % efficiency? Otherwise - good stuff!
Guest (Marty Riske) on 07/24/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
ssrao@nrcsorghum.res.in on 08/18/2006 at 6:55 AM
1
reoplan on 08/21/2006 at 5:56 PM
2
Let's chat. I'll explain all when we do.
info@reoplan.com or waxman44@verizon.net
Send me your contact information.
Thanks,
Alan
sweetsorghum on 09/19/2006 at 7:36 PM
1
My e-mail is flinqian@hotmail.com
waygmcgo on 11/06/2006 at 5:29 PM
1
Guest (sirlanse) on 07/21/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (Mike) on 07/21/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (Alex) on 07/23/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (Keith) on 08/02/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
While i generally disagree with ongoing government funded research programs ware there is little to no incentive for results and often the incentive to use up all the monies given in yearly budgets in fear that next year those budgets will be reduced, all with out regard to how well the monies are used in research.
The use of prize monies by the government, would provide incentives to companies to compete in areas ware the people want the country to go.
reoplan on 08/21/2006 at 6:02 PM
2
You are absolutely right. And, there are some business models out there that form the blueprint you suggest we need. Interestingly, the model has nothing whatsoever to do with the petroleum industry. I want to talk to Lee first. Then we'll determine which way to go. I've been down that road and I'm proud to say my thumbprint is on one of them. In this case, Yankee Doodle HAS A FARM!
Guest (Jim D) on 07/23/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (Mike) on 07/24/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (Sean) on 07/24/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (John) on 07/24/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Either way, if it is something that can survive "in the wild", I can see it being very dangerous to crops.
Guest (C. Scott Miller) on 07/26/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
Guest (R. Kellmer) on 08/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
1
1. Grow the grain and harvest it. That's food for people.
2. Havest the stalks and use enzymes to convert to ethanol. There's energy.
3. Feed the byproducts of the ethanol process to cattle or other animals. That gives us more food.
4. Use the manure from the cattle to produce methane and use it to run a generator. Sell the electricity to the power grid.
jhawkmurph on 09/01/2006 at 10:18 AM
2
Wood chips are suggested and are fine, but eventally, those with septic tanks, who need to convert NH3-nitrogen, to NOx-nitrogen, will be forced by EPA, et al, to compete in that deciduous market.
But, I do like the octane route, but favor the bio-diesel route from algae (Green Fuels). TPM
Cpt_Nemo on 01/22/2007 at 2:08 AM
14
A woman received a MacArthur genius award for her pioneering research on the communication pathways between bacteria.
I believe that it is possible to find and develop a cooperative slime mould that has as its primary purpose conversion of nutrient rich fluids - the unprocessed sap from sugar cane, or other plants that have a high proportion of sugars - into ethanol. With tuning (selective breding) and creative use of microfluidics the systems could be designed to increase the ratio of ethanol to other byproducts that are unwanted. It should be arranged with the provision of an intake reservoir and also a reservoir that collects its continual output.
In otherwords, I believe that it should mimic the urinary(ethanol output) and digestion(consuming juice to be processed)/excretion(elimination of digested material) that is found in multicellular lifeforms.