Before diving into the details of this exciting new research, I want to answer an intriguing question: how in the world could algae replace the gasoline in my car? It turns out that algae produces oil that can be processed to make biofuel. The only problem is that harvesting and drying the algae is not cost-efficient.

Zimmerman and his team may have resolved this issue. Previously, his team discovered a way to increase the growth rate and density of algae via microbubble technology. Microbubbles are used for flotation as well as removing impurities from water. Generally, the microbubble method is very expensive. This time scientists found a cheaper and less energy-consuming way to develop microbubbles. Through this new method, microbubbles will allow algae particles to float to the surface of water. In return, the algae harvesting process will be easier as well as more cost-efficient.

Zimmerman and his team are working with Tata Steel in hopes of implementing his research findings on an industrial level. This one-of-a-kind research is exciting news for our future long-term goal of reducing carbon emissions.

Discussion Question: Why would the process harvesting and water drying the algae cause the biofuel making procedure to be costly?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120126092540.htm
Press Release: http://www.shef.ac.uk/mediacentre/2012/microbubbles-boost-biofuel-production.html

Image: shef.ac.uk

Researchers focused on xyloglucan (type of hemicelluloses) while looking for enzymes that acetylate the polysaccharides in bio fuel feed stock. Using Arabidopsis thaliana as their model plant, researchers identified a mutant from the population that showed a 20%-50% reduction of xyloglucan O-acetylation. After mapping the mutation to a location in the Arabidopsis genome, they named the gene locus Altered Hemicellulose Xyloglucan (AXY4). They noticed that blocking the expression of AXY4 in Arabidopsis stops xyloglucan O-acetylation.

Scientists hope that this research will allow them to find others genes in biofuel feedstock similar to the gene that encodes for O-acetylation in Arabidopsis. They believe that this will aid in breeding biofuel feedstocks for optimal product and reduced lignocelluloses acetate. Ultimately, this research could result in lower prices for biofuels. In fact, an economic model predicts that with 20% reduction in acetylation equals to a 10% reduction in bioethanol price.

Discussion Question: What factors in the bio fuel making process contribute to its high prices? Is there a solution that could help reduce its impact on bio fuel’s price?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111116104350.htm
Press Release:  http://my.aspb.org/members/blog_view.asp?id=700954&post=134371
Image:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Arabidopsis_thaliana.jpg

There are many reasons why scientists desire to push towards commercial wood-based biofuels. One is that they are considered to be more environmental friendly than corn ethanol. Not only do wood-based biofuels emit fewer green house gasses, they require less water for production.  Furthermore, wood-based fuels don’t compromise with our food source. Despite the numerous positive aspects of using wood-based ethanol, the costs of production are still higher than corn ethanol.

Research shows that the cost of wood-based ethanol can be greatly reduced by cutting costs of facilities, equipment and enzymes. Essentially, as the demand for bio fuels grows, production costs will drop. Income generated by co-products of bio fuel, such as electricity, can also help reduce costs.

Wood-based ethanol still has many obstacles to overcome.  Enzymes, which are used to break down wood, are a major hurdle today in reducing cost of cellulosic ethanol.  As the bio fuel industry expands, researchers are certain that they will stumble upon a discovery that will help reduce the cost of enzymes. With the government’s support by funding research, scientists hope that their prediction for the future of bio fuels will become reality.

Discussion Question:  What are some specific plants and other sources that produce wood-based ethanol?

News Article:http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111108133045.htm
Press Release: http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2011/11/08/wood-biofuel-could-be-a-competitive-industry-by-2020-ubc-study/

Image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Drva.JPG

Scientists are interested in tension wood’s unique cell wall, which contains almost twice the cellulose compared to regular wood cell walls. More specifically, tension wood consists of more crystalline forms of cellulose and less lignin, characteristics great for making bio fuel. Essentially, more cellulose means more sugars.

Unfortunately, tension wood is not a practical feedstock option. Instead of using tension wood itself, researchers are studying tension wood on a molecular level in anticipation that it will help in designing or selecting better bio fuel crops. On a broader scale, this study works to ease natural plant barriers that stop sugars from being released.

Discussion question: Why is tension wood not a practical feedstock bio energy option? What are some viable feedstock options?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111025163121.htm
Press Release: http://www.ornl.gov/info/press_releases

Image source:   http://www.ornl.gov/info/press_releases

When Heald and anthropologist Susannah Chapman initially set out, they fully expected not to refute but to confirm the persistent myth that crop diversity fell throughout the twentieth century. Heald admits, “we came to this with the exact same preconceptions as everyone else.” And why wouldn’t they? We hear the story everywhere: in conversation, in the media, in public debates on industry and the environment. We even see it in our grocery stores, where any customer hungry for more than the typical red apple is likely to be disappointed. According to Heald and Chapman, all these sources of misinformation fuel our conviction: we harvested our resources sterile, or at least boring.

Not so, argue the researchers. “Overall varietal diversity of the $20 billion market for vegetable crops and apples in the U.S. actually has increased over the past 100 years.” On the evidence of forty-two vegetable crops from 1903 to 2004, they found that, contrary to an annual impoverishment of diversity, varieties increased in the twentieth century. How? Imports. Specifically, individuals–immigrants–bringing new seeds, stocked with “new germplasm,” furtively adding to the market’s diversity by introducing new crop strains. In fact, approximately forty percent of the total diversity came from immigration–“off-the-grid seed savers, small farmers and local gardeners preserving and innovating,” Heald clarifies. By contrast, they found that gains from patents comprised less than three percent of the growth, with biotechnological gains practically non-existent, at one percent.

For Heald and Chapman, the implications are twofold. First, because the myth is just that, the argument over whether patent and biotechnological intervention bolsters or blunts crop diversity is moot. As Heald states bluntly, “both sides are wrong”–economists urging the vital influence of patent law on plant diversity and ethno-botanists vilifying patents as the agent of crop exhaustion. Crops were not impoverished, and patents had little to do with it. Second, “a very efficient market for diversity” can emerge “in the absence of significant legal regulation.” On first consideration, both implications may seem remote. But remember them the next time you visit your local grocery store and lament its poor produce selection. Just because you don’t see the diversity, Heald cautions, doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

Discussion Question: What other commonly believed environmental narratives may be unfounded or mistaken?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111102161301.htm
Journal Article: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1928920
Image Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apples_supermarket.jpg

The proposed solution consists of various components. One is to convert desert landscapes to grow viable vegetation. Many parts of the world, including central Asia and the Sahara Desert, are not compatible for growing plants. But if we convert these barren lands to forests, we can reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  Another component of the solution involves conserving fresh water by using recycled low quality water for irrigation instead. Lastly, the researchers had to find a plant that could survive in a harsh desert environment. They found that tamarix (botanical genus) did the trick. These plants can be used to produce renewable energy.

This solution has been implemented in Israel’s Aravah Desert successfully and therefore researchers believe it also has potential to work over a larger land area such as the Sahara Desert. This fresh new approach will help in the mass production of bio fuels as well as save agricultural land that is needed for food production.
Discussion question:  What problems could occur if desert landscapes are converted to forests? How would this impact native species living in the desert?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111026143809
Press Release: http://www.aftau.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=15427

Image source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Libya_4985_Tadrart_Acacus_Luca_Galuzzi_2007.jpg

Normally, corn stover is crushed and mixed together to generate cellulosic ethanol. But, Michael Ladisch, Eduardo Ximenes and Meijuan Zeng from Purdue discovered that there might be a more efficient way of processing the corn stover. The team found that the rind, pith, and leaves, the three parts of the of the corn stover, are degraded in their own distinct ways. The process of converting corn stover into ethanol commences by using sugar-extracting enzymes and then fermenting and distilling the sugars. It is noted that the pith is the softest tissue part, allowing for easy digestion by enzymes. On the other hand, the rind, composed of substantial amounts of lignin, is the hardest, making it more difficult to break down. Experiments show that transforming the rinds of corn stover to sugars is an energy-intensive process requiring ten times more enzymes while adding only twenty percent more cellulosic ethanol. Ladisch believes that separating the parts of the corn stover and then converting them into sugars would prove much more efficient than processing it as a whole.

Scientists are currently exploring ways to improve conversion technology. They are also searching for a better method of creating sugars from cellulose and removing those elements that impair the function of enzymes. Working on solving these problems would create an overall more efficient approach of creating cellulosic ethanol.

Discussion Question: What are some advantages and disadvantages to this new conversion process?

Article source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111025135934.htm
Journal source: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bit.23335/abstract

Picture Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Corn_Zea_mays_Plant_Row_2000px.jpg

The answer is simple; bisabolane and D2 diesel shared properties. In particular, the scientists noted that the cyclic chemical structure of bisabolane made it more compatible as a fuel. Unlike most other biofuels that originate from sugars, bisabolane is made in a very distinct way. The recipe consists of developing the precursor of bisabolane, bisabolene, using two engineered microbes, a bacteria and a yeast. The team used biosynthesis to extract pure bisabolene from microbial culture. Bisabolene was then hydrogenated to bisabolane. By using engineered microbes, bisabolane promises to be cost-effective for mass production.

Moreover, bisabolane is compatible with current diesel engines.   Despite its great advantages, this new biofuel is still being evaluated for its fuel properties. Scientists must also consider the effect of the byproducts of hydrogenating bisabolane, which include farnesane and aromatized bisabolane.

With the exciting new discovery of bisabolane as a biofuel and more to come, we can be sure that JBEI’s research will advance the biofuel industry.

Discussion question: What are the advantages of using microbes in biofuel making process? Disadvantages?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110927134254.htm
Research Article:  http://www.lbl.gov/Tech-Transfer/publications/2837pub2.pdf
Image source:  Berkeley National Laboratory

In order for biofuels to be considered advantageous, the carbon debt must be paid off before the actual fuel is produced. Unfortunately, paying off the debt can decades and until that point is reached, crop-based fuel maybe worse for the environment than oil. In order to reduce the carbon debt, the Conservation Reserve Policy (CRP) aims to encourage farmers to grow natural vegetation instead of food crops.

CRP land grows grasses, which require less fossil fuel for production and keep the soil intact. Also, these grasses can provide a great income source for farmers who can sell bio-energy feedstock once cellulosic biofuels are more in demand. Along with reducing carbon dioxide emissions, CRP land is valuable for wildlife and climate conversation.

By using land carefully, biofuels can be made with the minimal side effects, making them a favorable energy choice in the future.

Discussion Question: Besides carbon emission, what are other negative effects of land conversion from its natural vegetation to a crop field?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110809104307.htm
Press Release: http://news.msu.edu/story/9646

Image source: http://www.chisagoswcd.org/habitat%20restoration_2.htm

Why use switchgrass for ethanol? This warm seasoned grass can be easily produced in high yield and is known for its drought and flood tolerance. Compared to ethanol produced with corn, switchgrass has higher yield of ethanol per hectare at lesser cost.
According to the study by Purdue University, pretreated switchgrass shows a higher percentage of cellulose converted into glucose.

The pretreatment consists of boiling the switchgrass under pressure for ten minutes. Essentially, this step works to dissolve the bonds between cellulose and lignin in the plant resulting in an increase surface area for enzymes to digest cellulose.

Using the pretreatment step will allow producers to take advantage of the switchgrass harvested in the spring.  In spring, switchgrass has more cellulose, which is great. But, the spring harvested switchgrass also has more lignin – not so great.  Lignin is tough material in plants that makes cellulosic ethanol difficult to make. The pretreatment step eases this issue by allowing access to cellulose around the lignin.

Scientists believe that this research is a good indication that even better ways of extracting ethanol from switchgrass can be made.

Discussion Question: Besides harvest time and the pretreatment step, what are other things that could impact ethanol production from switchgrass? Would location matter? What about the weather?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110831160046.htm
Press Release: http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2011/110831LadischSwitchgrass.html

Image source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Panicum_virgatum.jpg