A California company called LS9 says it has done the impossible: come up with cheap, homegrown, renewable “carbon-negative” oil to satisfy the world’s growing fuel needs. With bug poo.
From the Times:
To be more precise: the genetic alteration of bugs -– very, very small ones –- so that when they feed on agricultural waste such as woodchips or wheat straw, they do something extraordinary. They excrete crude oil.
Unbelievably, this is not science fiction. Mr Pal holds up a small beaker of bug excretion that could, theoretically, be poured into the tank of the giant Lexus SUV next to us. Not that Mr Pal is willing to risk it just yet. He gives it a month before the first vehicle is filled up on what he calls “renewable petroleum.” After that, he grins, “it’s a brave new world.”
The researchers argue that unlike hydrogen cells — which require new technologies, new vehicles and new habits — this oil would not require a re-engineering of the world’s transportation system. Which is true, but also beside the point — hydrogen is preferable as a fuel not only because it’s cheap and plentiful, but also because it doesn’t pollute.
It’s awfully misleading of these guys to tout this stuff as carbon-negative — meaning that more carbon is sucked up by the plants that feed the bugs than is emitted by the burning of the oil. If you look at it another way, it’s far worse than conventional oil, since we still get all the carbon dioxide and other toxic chemicals that we’d have burning regular gas, plus the added problems of chopping down all the carbon-removing vegetation needed to feed the bugs. We’d be polluting more, with less plants around to clean it up. Environmentally speaking, it’s a lose-lose. Which is why heartstring-tuggers like this one are all the more infuriating:
Besides, [Pal] says, there is greater good being served. “I have two children, and climate change is something that they are going to face. The energy crisis is something that they are going to face. We have a collective responsibility to do this.”
But Pal promises the stuff for $50 a barrel, and with current prices nearly three times that, environmental concerns are as usual taking a backseat to financial ones. Will Americans furious about $4 a gallon gas — or Turks who pay $11 — say no to the promise of a two-thirds drop in oil prices?
Image via The Emirates Network.
4 responses so far ↓
1 PuterPrsn // Jun 20, 2008 at 2:01 pm
It doesn’t have to be “lose-lose” if we use agricultural waste to feed the bugs - stuff that would normally be burned or wasted anyway. Dross from canneries and such could be put to good use. Then the equation goes more to the plus side than the minus, with the added advantage of lowering the amount of waste going into the landfills.
2 mark // Jun 20, 2008 at 2:29 pm
There’d be nowhere near enough agricultural waste to feed these insects on the scale you’d need to supply a meaningful chunk of our fuel demand.
And the fundamental problem is that this technology still relies on a heavy polluter — gasoline — to power our transportation networks. Rather than moving in the right direction — hydrogen cells, electric cars or another practical clean alternative — this sends consumers the message that it’s okay to continue guzzling gas and pumping pollutants into the atmosphere.
3 Rawda // Jun 21, 2008 at 6:17 pm
I wonder if this is another evil we’re releasing from Pandora’s box..
What if they over-populate and we create a problem similar to that of the Mountain Pine Beetle?
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/_pvw370829/Campaigns_and_Programs/Canadian_Rainforests/News_Releases/newsforestry11200302.asp
4 Asher Vijay // Jun 24, 2008 at 11:48 pm
G-d willing, yes. (In response to the last question of the article)
Leave a Comment