Growth of biofuel industry hurt by GMO regulations: study

Oct 01, 2010

Faster development of the promising field of cellulosic biofuels - the renewable energy produced from grasses and trees - is being significantly hampered by a "deep and thorny regulatory thicket" that makes almost impossible the use of advanced gene modification methods, researchers say.

In a new study published today in the journal BioScience, scientists argue that major regulatory reforms and possibly new laws are needed to allow cellulosic to reach its true potential as a form of renewable energy, and in some cases help reduce that cause global warming.

"It's extraordinary that gene modification technology, which has been adapted more rapidly than any other technology in the history of agriculture, and had some profound environmental and economic benefits, has been regulated virtually out of existence for perennial cellulosic biofuels crops," said Steve Strauss, a distinguished professor of forest biotechnology at Oregon State University, and lead author of the paper.

In the report, the authors noted that exotic plant species pose a serious risk of spread and ecosystem impacts, but face much less stringent regulation or obstacles than genetically engineered crops, which are carefully designed to solve problems, not cause them.

A genetically modified plant in which one or a few genes have been changed is treated as more of a risk than an that has thousands of new genes, and as a result is often resistant to multiple pests and has novel adaptive traits such as drought and heat tolerance, they said.

Companies that have the technical expertise to conduct advanced research have been forced to stay away from gene modification methods, rather than adopt them to speed breeding progress and insert novel traits important to the growing biofuels industry.

Traits that could be improved with gene modification include enhanced , reduced costs of conversion to , reduced use of water and fertilizer in cultivation, avoiding dispersal into the environment, and synthesis of new, renewable products such as industrial enzymes.

But virtually none of that potential is now being developed, they said.

The current environment poses enormous legal risks that can and have cost some companies millions of dollars in civil lawsuits, the scientists said, sometimes for damages that were more of perception and market issues, than of safety or environmental impact.

"Even research on traits expressly intended to reduce environmental impacts face the same legal risks and regulatory barriers as other traits," Strauss said. "Our own federally-funded research on means to promote ecological containment of gene-modified and exotic biofuel crops has been brought to a standstill by regulations."

The scientists said that the end result of a gene modification project - the trait produced, and whether it is safe and beneficial or not - should be the primary consideration for regulation, not the process used to produce it. Low-level risk and high benefit projects should be identified and allowed to move forward with much less stringent regulation or none at all. They also made several other suggestions for reform to make the overall system less slow, costly and uncertain.

"It is essential that we create an intelligent regulatory system that does not indiscriminately penalize the gene modification process and obstruct essential field research," Strauss said. "The one-size-fits-all style system of today treats the process of genetic modification as inherently dangerous, although many high-level science panels have concluded that the process is at least as safe as conventional breeding methods."

In some cases, the stringent regulations make it virtually impossible to do the very research needed to adequately understand issues of value and safety, the researchers said.

"The regulations in place, forthcoming, and those that have been imposed by legal actions result in the presumption that all forms of gene modified trees and grasses are 'plant pests' or 'noxious weeds' until extensive experimentation and associated documentation 'prove' otherwise," the scientists wrote in their report.

Solving these problems will require new ways of thinking and strong scientific and political leadership to create a regulatory system that enables, rather than arbitrarily blocks, the use of gene modification as a tool to accelerate and diversify the breeding of perennial biofuel crops, the researchers concluded.

Explore further: Sieving for genes: Developmental regulation of important plant phloem components discovered

Related Stories

Anti-biotech groups obstruct forest biotechnology

Jun 30, 2009

The potential of forest biotechnology to help address significant social and environmental issues is being "strangled at birth" by the rigid opposition of some groups and regulations that effectively preclude ...

Researchers demonstrate way to control tree height

Jun 18, 2007

Forest scientists at Oregon State University have used genetic modification to successfully manipulate the growth in height of trees, showing that it’s possible to create miniature trees that look similar to normal trees ...

Study cites abundance of genetically modified canola crops

Aug 14, 2010

Genetic engineering has been hailed as a tool to produce crops that are left unharmed by weed-killing pesticides and that are more productive than their forebears. But critics have worried that modified plants might take ...

Discovery May Speed Tree Breeding, Biotechnology

May 31, 2006

Researchers have discovered the genetic controls that cause trees to stop growing and go dormant in the fall, as well as the mechanism that causes them to begin flowering and produce seeds – a major step forward in understanding ...

Recommended for you

Getting a jump on plant-fungal interactions

Jul 29, 2014

Fungal plant pathogens may need more flexible genomes in order to fully benefit from associating with their hosts. Transposable elements are commonly found with genes involved in symbioses.

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

robbor
5 / 5 (1) Oct 01, 2010
gee, could the petroleum industry have anything to do with this dilemma? any way, forget the crops and develop something that can break down wood and straw; wood because the lumber industry generates millions of tons of unusable wood waste as does agriculture.
jerryd
5 / 5 (2) Oct 02, 2010
What they need is a cost effective process to turn biomass into fuel.. We already have many fast growing plants plus crops and yard wastes for the biomass. Hemp alone could supply biomass needed without much water, etc as it's a desert plant to begin with.

Present GM crops can't keep their genes to themselves, contaminating other crops. Monsanto is even suing people for using their genes despite they were the ones contaminating the, suing them for growing crops without the genes before contaminated.
Caliban
3 / 5 (2) Oct 02, 2010
Agreed. Plus, as jerryd and robbor point out, it's Monsanto/Petro that needs regulation first and foremost- this is much more likely to be an attempt at backdoor deregulation to benefit them, than untangle unecessary regulation of research-based tech development.

Virtually all biomass and plastics can be -alternatively- converted to methanol as feedstock for production of petroleum-based products replacements, including fuel and other consumer goods.