The race is on to find ways to reduce the United States' dependence on oil and cut our global warming emissions. Unfortunately, in the haste to solve these two pressing issues, scientists, corporations, Congress and some environmental groups are looking to advanced forms of genetic engineering for answers.
Scientists and engineers are seeking to use synthetic biology to reengineer the processing, refining, and growing of biological material for use as transportation fuels (biofuels) or for electricity (biomass). The altruistic goal, like the “Green Revolution” begun in the 1940’s, is to maximize the production of biofuels from an acre of land in order to reduce global warming emissions and oil consumption. Biofuels could be the first large-scale commercial application of this new form of genetic engineering.
The world’s largest oil, agricultural, and pharmaceutical companies are already pouring millions of dollars into synthetic biology research, both within their own companies and in universities. They are joined by small, privately held firms. To date in the United States, more than 15 companies and many top universities have begun major synthetic biology programs to develop the first synthetic organism that produces biofuels. BP, Cargill, Chevron, Dupont, Royal Dutch Shell, and Virgin Fuels are all investing in the development of synthetic biology fuels. In one particularly controversial research agreement, the oil company BP invested $500 million in the University of California Berkeley to develop synthetic biology fuels.
The initial research is producing some scientific buzz. For example, LS9, a company based in San Carlos, California, has re-engineered microbes—creating a new form of life—to produce hydrocarbons that are similar to those found in petroleum, possibly creating a new source of crude oil which could potentially replace fossil fuels. Similarly, in addition to creating a new form of life, this does nothing to address emissions since it simply replaces oil from fossil fuel with oil from synthetic organisms. J. Craig Venter’s company, Synthetic Genomics, has successfully fabricated a chassis for all life by building a basic, stripped-down form of a simple bacterium. Venter aims to insert synthetic chromosomes into this chassis to create an organism that might be able to take carbon out of the atmosphere, and either produce hydrogen fuel or methane, or be used as feedstock for other fuels.
These and other approaches to use synthetic biology to create new forms of bacteria and plants for biofuels present extreme environmental risks. Since the widespread use of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops, we have seen that GMO plants have the ability to share genes across species, evolve and mutate over time, and drastically affect entire ecosystems. Genetic pollution is perhaps the most devastating type of pollution because unlike other forms of pollution, nature has no mechanism to clean it up over time—rather, genetic pollution grows more destructive as it evolves and mutates over generations.
Synthetic biology could produce the greatest pollutants ever seen. Engineering life from scratch ignores nature’s inherent wisdom, gained from billions of years of evolution, and removing all natural controls that prevent life from past lessons learned. We know very little about the genetic nature of life, so assuming that we can engineer life ourselves is extremely arrogant. For example, just last year, we learned that what we previously called “junk DNA” in fact played a key role in the development of life, and may hold many secrets that sustain life, which have been created, modified and retained by nature over billions of years.
A synthetic organism could be engineered to become so successful that it could potentially wipe out all competing species—including ourselves. We have already seen how devastating natural born microbes can be, such as the 1918 influenza virus and HIV. We cannot even imagine how devastating an engineered microbe could be, but it is feasible that an engineered organism without naturally balancing genetic traits could cause widespread virulent disease, destroy the world’s basic crops, or lead to the emergence of a new super-species.
Synthetic biology’s manipulation of the basic code of life is being done in the complete absence of regulation. Three federal agencies—the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department of Agriculture (USDA)—have refused to regulate any new form of genetically modified organisms. There are no industrial safeguards in place to protect lab workers from infection or contamination from synthetic biology products, nor are there any protocols to prevent the release of synthetic biology products into the environment. Anyone can order online manufactured pieces of DNA, and build a synthetic organism in their basement, since there are no regulations on the rapidly growing market of manufactured DNA. For example, in two separate instances scientists used publicly available genomic maps to order pieces of DNA and create deadly viruses—Eckard Wimmer created the polio virus in 2002 and Hamilton Smith created the 1918 pandemic influenza virus in 2005.
Companies investing in synthetic biology are seeking not only to sell energy, but to own the patents on the energy source. The corporate benefits to reengineering the biofuels production chain lies in the opportunity to patent not only the process for converting biological matter into biofuels, but also the plants and bacteria that were engineered to make biofuels. The United States currently allows DNA to be patented. The first company to own a patented organism that produces biofuels could make a tremendous profit.
Emerging technologies are presenting new opportunities and threats for society. While companies promise cures for world hunger and food quality in order to garner financial and regulatory support, loss of individual control and biodiversity are real consequences which affect every person. The lesson learned from GMOs is that we must be ahead of the game, which is why it is crucial for Friends of the Earth to develop our campaign on synthetic biology before we lose our chance to bring this technology to public debate to the companies developing synthetic biology projects. We must broaden the debate on genetic technologies to biofuel applications now.
Millions of dollars are flowing from oil, agriculture, and pharmaceutical companies into research to create new forms of life with synthetic biology. The first application of synthetic biology is aimed towards creating new biofuels, but there are many other possible applications of synthetic biology, especially in the medical field. For example, Jay Keasling, a scientist at the University of California at Berkeley, received part of a $42.6 million grant to develop an organism that produces a synthetic form of artemisinin to treat malaria. Synthetic biology is the key to many new genetic manipulation technologies being researched right now, such as using manufactured viruses to deliver synthetically created drugs or genes.
Our work on synthetic biology and other emerging technologies, including animal cloning, human genetic modification, nanotechnology, and genetically modified organisms, has begun to spread the word about these hazardous technologies. However, much more work is needed to prevent potentially irreversible damage to the natural world and human health.
