Abstract
Dear Colleagues:
Since prehistoric times, a bioeconomy has existed, likely made up of bartering for fermentation-derived products such as alcohol from brewing, baking, and cheese (recall Homer in 800 BC.) All of this, provided by bacteria and fungi, the workhorses of industrial biotechnology. In modern times, the industrial bioeconomy has given us proteins, enzymes, antibiotics, vitamins, nucleotides, organic acids, immunosuppressive agents, pharmaceutical drugs, recombinant DNA drugs, polymers, fuels, and agricultural agents for health, nutrition, and defense against various biotic stressors, to name a few! Every day you use, eat, or wear something made with a microbially derived enzyme, metabolite, or polymer.
The industrial bioeconomy just keeps on giving, and there is no end to it. In fact, it is the industrial bioeconomy that will be the major contributor leading to technological advancements that will help this planet deal with sustaining a growing population, which will increase from 7.2 billion to 9.6 billion people by 2050. From the perspective of sustenance alone, we will need about 100% more food, produced on less arable land, with erratic weather patterns, drought, limiting natural resources, in the face of massive plant stressors. Only the bioeconomy can lead us on a sustainable path. Today, microbiology/industrial biotechnology is a key participant in almost all global industry, providing sustainably produced and applied products, and soon to become transformative in the bioenergy economy, as well.
Thus, the bioeconomy is both very ancient, as well as modern, new, and innovative. The bioeconomy has been built by a combination of the intellect and brute force of entrepreneurs, often themselves, with private investors carrying the large risks in investments. In a number of important cases, governmental policies and support have aided the cause. Many market entry hurdles exist for these new technological advances. The foundation for market entry and growth can be further aided by the removal of unnecessary barriers by consistent and coordinated public governmental policies.
The fostering of the development of new technologies and their implementation into existing and new industries has had a long history by both state and federal governments, and this needs to continue and be adapted to today's technological advances. Such aid can include R&D funding, grants and collaborative agreements, loan guarantees, tax incentives, subsidies, development of infrastructure, as well as help initiating new markets through market pull/purchasing programs.
In the US, the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) BioPreferred® program is a good example of market pull for biobased chemicals and fuels. It was established by Congress under the 2002 Farm Bill and further expanded under the 2008 Farm Bill. Two important aspects of this program include the certification and voluntary labeling system for BioPreferred products in 77 categories, and a mandate to most civilian agencies to give preference in procurement for biobased products over those based on conventional petrochemicals. The program now has more than 10,400 specific certified products for preferred procurement.
In 2009, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) publication, “The Bioeconomy to 2030: Designing a Policy Agenda,” which discussed the need to de-couple economic growth from environmental degradation, was an impetus for many nations to develop science, policy initiatives, and strategies to foster the growth of the bioeconomy. These include the following: • Australia: Bioenergy — Strategic Plan 2012–2015 • Brazil: Biotechnology Development Policy (2007) • Denmark: Agreement on Green Growth (2009) • Germany: Nationale Forschungsstrategie BioÖkonomie 2030 (2010) • European Union/European Commission: A Bioeconomy for Europe (2012) • Finland: National Resource Strategy Bio-Economy (2011) • Ireland: Delivering our Green Potential (2012) • Canada: Biorefining Conversions Network (2009) • Malaysia: Bioeconomy Initiative and National Biomass Strategy (2011) • Netherlands: Biobased Economy 2010–2015 • Russia: Bioindustry and Bioresources – BioTech 2030 (2012) • Sweden: Research and Innovation Strategy for Bio-based Economy (2011) • UK: Bioenergy Strategy (2011) • US: National Bioeconomy Blueprint (2012)
Sustainably produced, safe, and secure availability of food, energy, medicines, water, and industrial raw materials will drive the future of mankind. The locus of sustainable economic strategies is in the bioeconomy, which produces, transforms, and uses biobased materials and products to great socioeconomic benefit. In order for optimal fruition of these benefits, society will need policy frameworks that support and encourage coordinated and collaborative relationships between various public, private industry sector, and governmental groups. Such policy frameworks will need to deal effectively with the mix of incremental, disruptive, radical, and transformative biotechnological innovations.
In this issue of Industrial Biotechnology journal, we start off with a summary of what Golden and Handfield refer to as “The Emergent Industrial Bioeconomy.” The report findings include the effect of important governmental policies and B2B sustainability programs driving the bioeconomy, as well as public/private partnerships for worldwide consumer and economic benefit. The authors note the need for continued investments for biobased infrastructure and economic development of processes to become cost effective vs. current petroleum based feedstocks, as well as polices that can encourage further investment.
In the Policy Forum section, we have two articles. The first by Popescu offers a discussion for identifying the best pathways to boost the growth of the bioeconomy in the EU, from its current position of about $35 billion to what could be over $65 billion by 2030. These include, more supportive governmental polices for biotechnological process and products, which deliver opportunities for job creation, economic regeneration, and positive environmental impacts. The second Policy Forum article by Philp focuses on finding the right policy balance for biobased chemicals and bioplastics. It notes that the policy backdrop over the last several years has been dominated by support initiatives for biofuels and bioenergy applications, and that these support mechanisms are not available to many biobased materials; that there is an imbalance in support for biobased plastics and chemicals, which needs to be addressed.
Continuing with policy frameworks, Carus, Dammer, and Essel write about various options for designing a new political framework for the EU biobased economy. They note that the current EU policy frameworks do not create sufficient market pull for implementing needed, innovative biobased technologies. They discuss reforming the existing infrastructure to include biobased materials, in addition to bioenergy; the use of mandates and bans to create sustainable solutions; expansion of R&D to activities outside specific applications of biomass; and the guarantee of the supply chain of high value industries.
This issue of the journal also has two peer-reviewed papers. The first by Yang et al. advances the understanding of intrinsic hydrolysis reaction mechanisms of cellulose-mediated degradation of pretreated lignocellulosic biomass, by looking into the porous structural change during enzymatic hydrolysis. The authors discover novel nano-scale reaction space changes that lead to a better understanding of overall lignocellulosic degradation—still the ultimate challenge of cost-effective biomass-derived fuels and materials. The second paper, by Brennan-Tonetta et al., investigates the feedstock opportunities for bioenergy production, with a focus on biomass energy potential in the state of New Jersey. Their conclusion indicates that biomass could deliver up to 7% of NJ's electricity needs or about 4.4% of NJ transportation fuel consumed, if the proper technologies and infrastructure were in place. NJ Governor Chris Christie will need to get a special reprint of this paper, if he hasn't already received an advance copy from the authors.
Industrial biotechnology, the gift that keeps on giving…