Existing biotechnology could save energy and cut CO2 by 100 percent

Dec 17, 2007

A new analysis has concluded that use of existing biotechnology in the production of so-called bulk chemicals could reduce consumption of non-renewable energy and carbon emissions by 100 percent. The study appeared in the Nov. 15 issue of ACS’ Environmental Science & Technology.

Bulk chemicals like ethylene, butanol or acrylic acid are the basic raw materials used in the production of everything from plastics and fertilizers to electronic components and medicines.

Currently derived from crude oil and natural gas, bulk chemical production creates billions of tons of carbon dioxide each year. Still, the application of industrial biotechnology for the production of bulk chemicals has received much less attention than alternative fuel or biomass-derived energy production.

B. G. Hermann and colleagues analyzed current and future technology routes leading to 15 bulk chemicals using industrial biotechnology, calculating their carbon emissions and fossil energy use. With biotechnology advances in the future, the researchers suggest that worldwide CO2 savings in the range of 500-1000 million tons per year are possible.

Even today, bio-based bulk chemicals “offer clear savings in non-renewable energy use and green house gas emissions with current technology compared to conventional petrochemical production.”

Source: ACS

Explore further: New scientific review investigates potential influences on recent UK winter floods

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Coffee withdrawal

Aug 14, 2014

Coffee: It leaves some people feeling fit and refreshed; in others, it makes their heart race. Scientists have developed several decaffeination processes to allow even people who react badly to caffeine to ...

Recommended for you

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gopher65
5 / 5 (1) Dec 17, 2007
I hate it when they say "could reduce XXXXXX by 100%". Yet another disingenuous back-a**ward attention grabbing heading.
NeilFarbstein
not rated yet Dec 17, 2007
Doesnt seem unbelieveable to me.
Argiod
1 / 5 (1) Dec 18, 2007
...the operative term is 'could reduce'... that is, it could do the job, if the money grubbing industrialists could see more profit in it than the current methods...
It takes more than theory to go from an idealistic possibility to an actualized reality. It takes politics; and politics is controlled by money from 'special interest groups'.