5 Ways That Bacteria Might Save The World

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

Huffington Post   |  Johanna Smith   |   September 25, 2008 05:22 PM


Bacteria gets a bad rap. Sure, certain harmful strains such as E. coli and staph occasionally reek havoc in our food chain and hospitals, but overall these potent unicellular microorganisms help more than they harm -- and are the secret ingredient of certain budding green technologies.

Recycling Plastics

As Discovery News' Alyssa Danigelis reports, scientists worldwide are working on ways to put bacteria to work in recycling plastics. One of the biggest problems with current plastic recycling methods is that the only possible end result is polyethylene terephthalate, a relatively low-grade material that isn't as desired or useful as other plastics like PHA.

Microbiologist Kevin O'Connor and his team came up with a process that sounds a little like alchemy at first, but should work. O'Connor's group heated PET to break it down into a gas, a liquid, and a solid. From there, they grabbed a particular strain of bacteria that was partial to the plastic at a local bottling plant in Dublin. Sure enough, the bacteria took a liking to O'Connor's snack and turned the solid into PHA. The other byproducts will be burned as a heat source to make more of the stuff. While it won't outright solve our plastic problems, this process should encourage more recycling and open up new markets.

Easing Ethanol Production
Similarly, Matthew McDermott recently blogged on Treehugger about how thermophilic bacteria can be used to produce cellulosic ethanol -- which is the biofuel you already hear so much about, but without using food sources.

Renewable Petroleum
As Chris Ayres described this summer in the Times of London, bacteria also can be tapped directly as an alternative energy source. Scientists in Silicon Valley are currently experimenting with bacteria that have been genetically altered to excrete what is being termed 'renewable petroleum'.

Because crude oil (which can be refined into other products, such as petroleum or jet fuel) is only a few molecular stages removed from the fatty acids normally excreted by yeast or E. coli during fermentation, it does not take much fiddling to get the desired result. Using genetically modified bugs for fermentation is essentially the same as using natural bacteria to produce ethanol, although the energy-intensive final process of distillation is virtually eliminated because the bugs excrete a substance that is almost pump-ready.

Identifying Harmful Chemicals
Not only has bacteria begun to play an essential role in the development of alternative energy sources, but it also proves useful in identifying harmful pollutants. For example, living bacteria are modified to glow when they detect certain chemicals, a technique that could allow for more rapid and less expensive testing of pollutants. Jocelyn Rice recently explained the phenomenon in MIT's Technology Review:

Last spring, on a research vessel cruising through the North Sea, Swiss scientists examined tiny vials of bacteria mixed with seawater for hints of fluorescent light. By analyzing how brightly the bacteria glowed, and with which colors, they were able to diagnose and characterize the early aftermath of an oil spill.


"The extreme simplicity of this is that the heart of the sensor is the bacterial cell, and that the cell is a multiplying entity," says Van der Meer. "It's extremely simple to reproduce them, and then you have enough for thousands of tests."


Water Purification
Although bacteria is typically considered a contaminant, it can be used to purify water by feeding on organic waste material. Chris O'Brien of Fermenting Revolution explains how progressive breweries have begun to employ this technology as a means of decreasing their impact on their local water processing plants. The process is also a great producer of methane gas, which can be harnessed and channeled back to the production line.

Brewers can reduce treatment fees by operating their own wastewater treatment plants. In fact, Coors designed and built the first modern wastewater treatment plant in Colorado in 1952, adding a secondary treatment process decades before it was required to do so. But treatment still requires large amounts of electricity and energy. It may save the tax-payer a little bit of money (or it might not) but either way it doesn't do much to reduce water usage. However, some breweries are using anaerobic digesters to clean their water and reduce the need for conventional treatment options. As a result, they also recover energy through the generation of biogas.

Bacteria will almost certainly outlive us, but in the meanwhile it continues to contribute to our well-being, enhance our lifestyles by providing us with various fermented delicacies like beer, and play a key role in our attempts to stem climate change.

Bacteria gets a bad rap. Sure, certain harmful strains such as E. coli and staph occasionally reek havoc in our food chain and hospitals, but overall these potent unicellular microorganisms help more ...
Bacteria gets a bad rap. Sure, certain harmful strains such as E. coli and staph occasionally reek havoc in our food chain and hospitals, but overall these potent unicellular microorganisms help more ...
 
Comments
26
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

Dr. Frankenstein is working on his special bacterial life form. This sounds very green.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:59 PM on 09/28/2008

Did it ever occur to these lunatics what might happen if bacterium genetically modified to produce petroleum got out of the lab and into the Streets or into the water supply? Because they have been genetically modified they may have no natural predators & might start to reproduce exponentially, filling the streets & farmlands of the World with an Oil spill making the Exxon Valdez look like a Red Cross Ship. As a character in Ferris Bueller's Day Off said. " I weep for the future ".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:32 AM on 09/27/2008
photo

Yes, but Exxon's CEO would go bankrupt - so have nary a worry, your fears have as much substance as any pop song made 1992 or later...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:50 AM on 09/27/2008

You really don't need to worry about a oil producing strain of bacteria going mad in the water supply. I don't recall reading any research where scientist where able to get strains to produce long chains, it's just not energetically favorable to them. But Hey, what if they do? Let's think about this. For bacteria to produce long chains of hydrocarbons, it would require a lot of energy. That energy would have to be supplied to the cultures for growth. I don't think our water supply could support growth for something like that. Also, most genetic manipulations are done with E. coli and that is something that just doesn't grow large quantities in oligotrophic sources.

Bacteria grown in a lab is not how bacteria grow in the environment. It is usually a lot slower.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:06 PM on 09/27/2008

Scientists know squat about the Nano Technology of mutant life forms. Water can't supply energy ?Water is not an inert substance, Water IS energy. MOST genetic manipulations ?
Is that like MOST Banks didn't give out bad loans ? One of the major down sides of nano technology is the potential malfunction of replicators which could possibly fill the world with the infamous " gray goo". The Scientists at Los Alamos weren't sure they Nuclear Bomb wouldn't engulf the entire atmosphere. The last thing we need is mutant organisms serving the profit motive.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:43 AM on 09/29/2008

Opps.. sorry about that. Can't post percent signs on Huffpo...

I was about to say that we consume over 20 million barrels of oil a day but only 250 million barrels of oil are used as chemical feedstock. That's about 3.5 percent.

So if we assume that the world has oil for another 50 years or so (which is about realistic), it means that we could convert that into 50*30=1500 years worth of chemicals.

So in the end what all this bacteria research is all about is the building a giant biochemical Rube Goldberg machine to avoid having to look at the real problem: that we are throwing resources away like mad.

Lower the speed limit to 55mph and you won't have to produce plastics any other way than usual for another 50 years. Double the fuel efficiency standards now, convert to electric vehicles in a decade or two, build more public transportation and put oil reserves aside for later to be used as feedstock for the chemical industry. And suddenly you are probably good for two centuries.

I don't see us doing it. But that shouldn't stop anybody from knowing the real source of the problem and the real solution.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 PM on 09/26/2008
photo

What's wrong with the percentage symbol? Does it scare off werewolves? Does Count Dracula suffer from myopia and thinks it's a cross? Does it make economists eat Twinkies?

And why did Clinton rescind the federal 55MPH speed limit in the first place? Nixon wasn't perfect, but comparing the two, they're about tied, 50p each...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 09/27/2008

"What's wrong with the percentage symbol? Does it scare off werewolves? Does Count Dracula suffer from myopia and thinks it's a cross? Does it make economists eat Twinkies?"

It breaks the Javascript that submits the post and instead of the percentage sign appearing in the post, the remainder of the post gets suppressed.

But thanks for playing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:49 PM on 09/27/2008

All right, bacteria aficionados, let's look for a moment at reality.

Mother nature has given us enormous reserves of hydrocarbons. They are called crude oil and natural gas deposits. We use them mostly to make heat. A tiny fraction (probably

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:16 PM on 09/26/2008

The 6th way:

A particularly inspired strain of bacteria might kill off those species that are destroying the planet in the first place.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 09/26/2008
photo

Yes, I too hate cockroaches and novel writers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 09/27/2008
photo

A post-petroleum economy will not mean bye-bye to polymer plastics:

Scientific American: September 16, 2008
Turning Bacteria into Plastic Factories
"A new company has found a way to produce polymers from genetically engineered microbes that feed on sugars, replacing fossil-fuel based processes"

By David Biello

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=turning-bacteria-into-plastic-factories-replacing-fossil-fuels&ec=su_bacteriaplastic

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:13 AM on 09/26/2008

One does not need bacteria to make plastics. Conventional organic chemistry can start with CO2, water and an energy source and synthesize its way up to complex polymers just fine. And it will do so at a much smaller thermodynamic cost than any organism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 AM on 09/26/2008

We need to get off this "save the planet" message. No matter how badly we screw up, the planet will be fine. We'll be extinct, along with perhaps most of the higher-level species, but the planet will survive us. Gigantic balls of rock and metal are resilient like that.

But bacteria are extremely promising as an ecological counterpart to humanity. At the most abstract level, the impact of humanity on the biosphere is that we convert oxygen and large organic molecules into carbon dioxide and energy with the help of water. We do this through our natural respiratory processes as well as through our various mechanized respiration technologies.

If humans are the ultimate respirators, then bacteria are the ultimate synthesizers. They convert carbon dioxide and energy into oxygen and large organic molecules with the help of water. We break stuff, they put stuff back together. If it didn't matter what we break, then perhaps the natural balance would be fine, but our mechanical mega-respirators are picky about which organic molecules they rip apart.

That's were the domestication of bacteria comes into play. This could be the greatest advance in the way humanity interacts with the food chain since the Agricultural Revolution. We could create "pet" microorganisms that perform every macro-metabolic process we conduct in reverse.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:07 PM on 09/25/2008

"We could create "pet" microorganisms that perform every macro-metabolic process we conduct in reverse."

Except that performing metabolic processes "in reverse" violates the second law of thermodynamics. And that will be very hard to get around.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:59 PM on 09/25/2008

The bacteria would be powered by either hydrogen gas from biomass gasification, biomass digestion, or cyanobacterial photosynthesis, all in conjunction with the Calvin Cycle of carbon fixation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 09/26/2008

You don't seem to understand thermodynamics at all. You can run any reaction backwards; it's just that if you get energy out in one direction, you have to put energy back in to make it go the other way. Where the energy comes from is a different issue, but basically it all comes from the sun.

Plants are capable of turning sunlight into food for us, aren't they? I guess we should RoundUp (TM) all of them for breaking the laws of thermo....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 AM on 09/26/2008

Whoever makes the headlines is a real drama queen.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 09/25/2008
photo

Quite. Yon queen needs a king to bounce these ideas off of.

I'll volunteer! :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 AM on 09/27/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect