Accelerating Chemical Production With Biology

A new report by the National Research Council says the U.S. can accelerate its ability to manufacture chemicals using biological methods by broadening the use of synthetic biology; developing better models and tests of biological processes; and ensuring that regulations, risk assessments, and workforce education is in place for a shift to biobased manufacturing.

The report, “Industrialization of Biology: A Roadmap To Accelerate Advanced Manufacturing of Chemicals,” was commissioned by the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. It was written by a panel of experts chaired by Thomas M. Connelly Jr., formerly of DuPont. Connelly is now the executive director and chief executive officer of the American Chemical Society, the publisher of Chemical & Engineering News.

The committee’s vision is to put biological routes for chemical production on par with the techniques of chemical synthesis. The report notes that biological tools, such as the use of genetically engineered microbes, can make specialty chemicals and high-volume chemicals from nonpetroleum inputs including sugar, cellulose, waste gases, and even minerals. Using new tools and feedstocks will also result in new chemical products with improved performance or costs, it says.

Biotechnology has brought some early successes, including scaled-up processes for industrial enzymes, 1,3-propanediol, and alcohol-based biofuels, the report notes. But by adopting genetics advances used by the pharmaceutical and agriculture industries, chemical makers can make many more chemicals with help from biology and bring them to market faster.

The committee offers a 10-year scientific road map targeting milestones in all phases of industrialization. It recommends that federal grant-making agencies support “the scientific research and foundational technologies required to advance and to integrate the areas of feedstocks, organismal chassis and pathway development, fermentation, and processing.”

Milestone targets include reducing feedstock costs and increasing the types of carbon inputs, developing tools for continuous fermentation production, and inserting synthetic DNA into organisms used to manufacture chemicals.

The report also addresses possible social hurdles facing the industry’s growth. It proposes that the government quantify the contribution of biobased manufacturing to the economy and says industrial biotechnology firms should partner with academia to ensure training of qualified workers. On the regulatory front, the committee raises concerns about the timeliness of the Environmental Protection Agency’s processes for regulating industrial microbes and assessments of chemical risks under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976.

The report shows that adding biology and genomics tools to manufacturing makes this an exciting time for chemists, Connelly says. “It’s an expansion of the tool kit for chemical synthesis. Synthesis in the future may well involve both conventional chemical steps as well as biological and enzyme-mediated steps,” he says. “When I see the kind of things you can do biologically at room temperature and pressure, under benign conditions, I see the same principles but deployed in new and exciting ways.”