SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Results from a collaborative study by Tokyo Institute of Technology and Tohoku University, Japan, raise prospects for large-scale production of algae-derived starch, a valuable bioresource for biofuels and other renewable materials. Such bio-based products have the potential to replace fossil fuels and contribute to the development of sustainable systems and societies.
[...] The researchers demonstrated that starch content could be dramatically increased in C. merolae through inactivation of TOR (target of rapamycin), a protein kinase known to play an important role in cell growth.
They observed a notable increase in the level of starch 12 hours after inactivation of TOR through exposure to rapamycin, and this led to a remarkable ten-fold increase after 48 hours.
[...] For example, the findings could accelerate the production of environmentally friendly fuel additives, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and bioplastics that are now in high demand with the phasing out of single-use plastic bags and straws in many parts of the world.
Algae is easy to grow on marginal land or in urban settings close to where it can be further processed. Will it constitute a key solution to providing civilization's material requirements in the 21st century?
(Score: 3, Touché) by Blymie on Saturday November 03 2018, @09:58PM (1 child)
This is interesting, and as someone else mention.. some do eat seaweed.
But what's the point? We already let much of our food rot. There's pleeeenty of food to go around, at least 10x more than we need. We use food for fuel, we let it rot in silos (about 30%), more is lost to vermin (but it's not worth the $$$ to completely fix that), and on and on.
We also have so much farmland sitting idle.. just not being used. People are paid NOT to farm in the EU, for example.
So what are people trying to solve? I suppose I can see this, if it can be used in areas where traditional crops won't grow. "Marginal land", as said.... but the problem again isn't land or transport, or getting food places. In fact, there is no problem.. except that people expect $$ for their work to grow food, and some can't pay.
Sad, but true.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Unixnut on Sunday November 04 2018, @12:06AM
> But what's the point? We already let much of our food rot. There's pleeeenty of food to go around, at least 10x more than we need. We use food for fuel, we let it rot in silos (about 30%), more is lost to vermin (but it's not worth the $$$ to completely fix that), and on and on.
I suspect part of it is because there is a goal to reduce the amount of carbon being pumped out. In order to do that, we need to find a good substitute for fuel (in dense urban cities electric cars might be a good substitute, but there are other use cases for liquid fueled vehicles).
In addition, we need a feedstock for plastics and other such materials.
At the moment, most of those needs are met by oil. If we were to switch from oil to just processing the the (currently rotting) food waste from our current system, there would not be enough, and we would start eating into human food requirements, causing the price of food to go up, and generally making things harder for humans.
It would be beneficial if we developed the technology to efficiently turn sunlight and CO2 into a feedstock for the above needs, even if it is not needed right this instant. R&D like this is done now, then passed on to engineers who develop scalable systems that can work on large quantities (enough to supply industry/commercial needs), and then the regulations and plans in place to build the processing infrastructure, etc in a cost effective manner. We could easily be looking at this tech actually making it to market in 30 years time, so it makes sense to start the research now.