Acceptability of genetically engineered algae biofuels in Europe: opinions of experts and stakeholders

Abstract

Background The development of alternative pathways for sustainable fuel production is a crucial task for politics, industry and research, since the current use of fossil fuels contributes to resource depletion and climate change. Microalgae are a promising option, but the technology readiness level (TRL) is low and cannot compete economically with fossil fuels. Novel genetic engineering technologies are being investigated to improve productivity and reduce the cost of harvesting products extracted from or excreted by microalgae for fuel production. However, high resource efficiency and low costs alone are no guarantee that algae fuels will find their way into the market. Technologies must be accepted by the public to become valuable for society. Despite strong efforts in algae research and development, as well as political commitments at different scales to promote algae biofuels for transport sectors, little is known about public acceptance of this alternative transport fuel. Despite the advantages of algae technology, genetically engineered (GE) microalgae can be controversial in Europe due to risk perception. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate, for the first time, the knowledge and views of European experts and stakeholders on the conditions and requirements for acceptability of GE microalgae for next generation biofuel production. Results The results of the survey-based study indicate that the majority of the respondents believe that GE algae biofuels could provide strong benefits compared to other fuels. The majority would choose to be final consumers of engineered algae biofuels, if there is clear evidence of their benefits and open communication of potential risks. They believe that closed production systems with high security standards and rigorous risk assessment should be applied to avoid unintended impacts on humans and nature. Some respondents, however, are not convinced about the need to alter natural occurring algae strains to increase productivity, arguing that there is a huge unexplored variety, and that the consequences of using genome editing are still unknown. Conclusions This evaluation of the opinions held by European experts and stakeholders regarding GE algae biofuels provides valuable and differentiated insights, both for future research and for the development of feasible socio-technical algae systems for next generation biofuel production. The identified conditions and requirements for achieving public acceptability can support the (re-)design of this innovative technology and adaptation of the framework conditions towards the implementation of algae biofuels in Europe.

The Role of Carbon Capture and Storage in the Energy Transition

“…Fourth-generation biofuels come from genetically modified algae and wastes. 85 However, third-and fourth-generation biofuels are only in the early research stage. 86 Overall, use of second-generation biofuels suffers from sustainability issues, 87 including clearing of forests for its growth, competition of land for agriculture, high production cost, lack of infrastructure, 88 and low public acceptance in some countries.…”

Advanced Metabolic Engineering Approaches and Renewable Energy to Improve Environmental Benefits of Algal Biofuels: LCA of Large-scale Biobutanol Production with Cyanobacteria Synechocystis PCC6803

“…Beyond that, LCA results have an impact on research and development targets and funds. Therefore, biologists and process engineers strongly motivate LCA experts to work with the best available data to produce "good" results required from society to develop further and implement engineered microorganisms [3,63]. The comparison with other studies addressing this technology, e.g.…”

“…Technological innovations such as fuel production with genetically engineered microalgae and cyanobacteria had to be evaluated at the earliest possible stage of development, especially concerning their climate and environmental compatibility to inform, advise and guide decision-makers in research, politics and industry. While first risk [2] and acceptance studies [3], as well as a techno-economic analysis [4] have already addressed this issue, the probable environmental implications of this technology have so far not been analysed or quantified in LCA studies in the literature [5], which underlines the novelty of the present work.…”

Recent Advances in Feedstock and Lipase Research and Development towards Commercialization of Enzymatic Biodiesel

“…This illustrates the need for more viable alternative biodiesel feedstocks such as low-cost waste and non-edible oils. In addition, oleaginous microorganisms such as algae [33], yeast [34], and bacteria [35] are aggressively studied as promising feedstocks for biodiesel that can help reduce the feedstock shortage [36].…”