Not Just Pond Scum
SAN DIEGO -- In a laboratory where almost all the test tubes look green, the tools of modern biotechnology are being applied to lowly pond scum. Foreign genes are being spliced into algae and native genes are being tweaked. Different strains of algae are pitted against one another in survival-of-the-fittest contests in an effort to accelerate the evolution of fast-growing, hardy strains.
The goal is nothing less than to create superalgae, highly efficient at converting sunlight and carbon dioxide into lipids and oils that can be sent to a refinery and made into diesel or jet fuel.
Algae are attracting attention because the strains can potentially produce 10 or more times more fuel per acre than the corn used to make ethanol or the soybeans used to make biodiesel. Moreover, algae might be grown on arid land and brackish water, so that fuel production would not compete with food production. And algae are voracious consumers of carbon dioxide, potentially helping to keep some of this greenhouse gas from contributing to global warming.
But efforts to genetically engineer algae, which usually means to splice in genes from other organisms, worry some experts because algae play a vital role in the environment. The single-celled photosynthetic organisms produce much of the oxygen on earth and are the base of the marine food chain.
''We are not saying don't do this,'' said Gerald H. Groenewold, director of the University of North Dakota's Energy and Environmental Research Center, who is trying to organize a study of the risks. ''We say do this with the knowledge of the implications and how to safeguard what you are doing.''
At a meeting this month of President Obama's new bioethics commission, Allison A. Snow, an ecologist at Ohio State University, testified that a ''worst-case hypothetical scenario'' would be that algae engineered to be extremely hardy might escape into the environment, displace other species and cause algal overgrowths that deprive waters of oxygen, killing fish.
A week earlier, at an industry-sponsored bioenergy conference, David Haberman, an engineer who has worked on an algae project, gave a talk warning of risks. Many scientists, particularly those in the algae business, say the fears are overblown. Just as food crops cannot thrive without a farmer to nourish them and fend off pests, algae modified to be energy crops would be uncompetitive against wild algae if they were to escape, and even inside their own ponds.
''Everything we do to engineer an organism makes it weaker,'' said Stephen Mayfield, a professor of biology at the University of California, San Diego, and a co-founder of Sapphire. ''This idea that we can make Frankenfood or Frankenalgae is just absurd.''
Dr. Mayfield and other scientists say there have been no known environmental problems in the 35 years that scientists have been genetically engineering bacteria, although some organisms have undoubtedly escaped from laboratories.
The goal is nothing less than to create superalgae, highly efficient at converting sunlight and carbon dioxide into lipids and oils that can be sent to a refinery and made into diesel or jet fuel.
Algae are attracting attention because the strains can potentially produce 10 or more times more fuel per acre than the corn used to make ethanol or the soybeans used to make biodiesel. Moreover, algae might be grown on arid land and brackish water, so that fuel production would not compete with food production. And algae are voracious consumers of carbon dioxide, potentially helping to keep some of this greenhouse gas from contributing to global warming.
But efforts to genetically engineer algae, which usually means to splice in genes from other organisms, worry some experts because algae play a vital role in the environment. The single-celled photosynthetic organisms produce much of the oxygen on earth and are the base of the marine food chain.
''We are not saying don't do this,'' said Gerald H. Groenewold, director of the University of North Dakota's Energy and Environmental Research Center, who is trying to organize a study of the risks. ''We say do this with the knowledge of the implications and how to safeguard what you are doing.''
At a meeting this month of President Obama's new bioethics commission, Allison A. Snow, an ecologist at Ohio State University, testified that a ''worst-case hypothetical scenario'' would be that algae engineered to be extremely hardy might escape into the environment, displace other species and cause algal overgrowths that deprive waters of oxygen, killing fish.
A week earlier, at an industry-sponsored bioenergy conference, David Haberman, an engineer who has worked on an algae project, gave a talk warning of risks. Many scientists, particularly those in the algae business, say the fears are overblown. Just as food crops cannot thrive without a farmer to nourish them and fend off pests, algae modified to be energy crops would be uncompetitive against wild algae if they were to escape, and even inside their own ponds.
''Everything we do to engineer an organism makes it weaker,'' said Stephen Mayfield, a professor of biology at the University of California, San Diego, and a co-founder of Sapphire. ''This idea that we can make Frankenfood or Frankenalgae is just absurd.''
Dr. Mayfield and other scientists say there have been no known environmental problems in the 35 years that scientists have been genetically engineering bacteria, although some organisms have undoubtedly escaped from laboratories.