By David Biello
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=tweaking-photosynthesis
|
This picture shows one leaf that is genetically enhanced.
You could make them smaller or bigger based on what you want to happen in
photosynthesis.
|
Summary:
Researchers have been trying to find a way for plants to make biofuels for many years. The biggest problem is that photosynthesis is very inefficient. Out of all the sun’s energy, plants can only turn about 1-3 percent of it into carbohydrates. The U.S.Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy will fund 10 projects to genetically engineer plants for their growth and pigments. The University of Florida will use $6 million to enhance pine trees to make more turpentine, which could be used as fuel. They are thinking in the future, engineers may make a black plant to absorb all of the sun’s rays. Scientists also have to face the problem that we only have so much water. We can’t really use the water we need to drink on making energy.
Reaction:
I thought this was a very interesting article. The engineers on the job still need to come up with a few solutions to some of the problems of genetically engineering plants. These new, more powerful plants would need to use more resources that humans need as well.
Questions:
1. Why is photosynthesis so inefficient?
2. How is the US researching more ways to improve natural energy production?
3. What are some ways being currently researched or considered to improve plant energy?
4. How is our water quantity limitation a factor in photosynthesis?
Max Griffith
Expand with a new link:
ReplyDeletehttp://nextbigfuture.com/2009/07/project-to-re-engineer-photosynthesis.html
This article is similar to the above article because it involves changes to the photosynthesis process. The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) is leading an experiment to try to change photosynthesis in rice. They will be granted 11 million dollars, over 3 years, from Bill and Melinda Gates. The IRRI wants to change the photosynthesis to produce more rice. Billions of people live in poverty and live on less than one dollar a day, and if rice could be produced faster, less people would go hungry. The IRRI would have to change the carbon atoms in the photosynthesis for this to happen. The scientists do not know how effective it will be, but they do know that it will take at least 15 years to alter the rice and have successful results.
-Natalie Laurito
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI invited Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Hartmut Michel to view and comment on our blog. I chose him as a professional because aside from being a professor at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysics in the Department for Molecular Membrane Biology, he was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in Chemistry. He also has one of the strongest arguments against biofuels, contrary to what the article said. I invited him so that we might be able to see an opinion from a different point of view. I sent the email to this address: secretariat.michel@biophys.mpg.de.
ReplyDeleteGreetings Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Hartmut Michel,
Hello! My name is Toni Santacroce, and I am a ninth grade student in Environmental Science class at Hatboro-Horsham High School. We are currently learning about ecosystems, which involves learning about the water, carbon, nitrogen and phosphorous cycles, photosynthesis and cellular respiration, energy types, and the transfer of energy. We are also holding a blog discussion about biofuels and how photosynthesis may be altered in the future to make biofuels more efficient. If you have the time, would you please consider visiting our blog at http://brainybloggers101.blogspot.com/2013/02/scientists-tweak-photosynthesis-in.html#comment-form and offering your opinion and scientific findings on the subject? It would be highly appreciated, and my classmates and I would benefit from hearing the point of view of a college professor such as you. Thank you for your time.
Thanks again,
Toni Santacroce, 9th grade student
Opinion and new question:
ReplyDeleteI found it extremely interesting while reading the article that scientists are trying to make a plant that turns energy right into a hydrocarbon molecule for fuel. That seems to be a good solution to the problem because it will definitely increase our source of energy since, as you stated, only one to three percent of sunlight is turned into carbohydrates. On the other hand though, while an engineered plant would give us more energy, it would cost a lot more since regular plants are able to fix themselves when damaged. In my opinion, I do not feel like we should totally go up the path of engineering plants. While it seems to have many advantages, the disadvantages level it off. I do not think that we should replace photosynthesis because photosynthesis is a piece of our nature, and if we try to replace everything in nature with something "better" then what will nature be at all? It could be a good idea to use the engineered plants along side photosynthesis though. In class, it seems that photosynthesis is an extremely important process. Since we are learning about photosynthesis as such a major topic that branches out and relates to other topics, I feel that we should learn about the tweaked photosynthesis as well, so we can learn more in-depth about how an engineered plant will fit into the cycles we are learning about.
My questions:
How soon will it be that we start using these engineered plants, or do we already have them?
Will engineered plants be able to give off all of the same things and be able to take place of regular plants in other processes/cycles?
If photosynthesis is such an important process, then why do we have such ideas to modify it greatly, and will modifying it create anything bad or harmful?
Will kids 50 years in the future learn about photosynthesis the same way we do in their science classes?
-Madison Dall
Answer Questions:
ReplyDelete1. Why is photosynthesis so inefficient? There are several reasons for this. First, when the sunlight shines down on the plants, the plants can only capture about 1- 3% of the energy, as the article above said. According to Michigan State University, solar cells would be more efficient because they would only have to send electricity down a wire, whereas plants have to power a living thing also.
2. How is the U.S. researching more ways to improve natural energy production? The Agency for energy is funding experiments to engineer plants, to see how is would work. Also, the University of Florida is putting money into it as well, to see how it works out.
3. How is our water quantity limitation a factor in photosynthesis? We do not want to waste our clean water on trying to produce more oxygen. That would be terrible for our environment. We need as much clean water as possible, and although oxygen is important, clean water is as well. We cannot waste our pure, clean drinking water on making energy, because we need it for survival over anything.
Source (for #1): http://research.msu.edu/stories/solar-cells-more-efficient-photosynthesis-%E2%80%93-now
Nice start group! Way to go!
ReplyDelete