Carbon Catchers or Bioengineered Troubles?
Living Carbon’s Genetically Modified Trees Stir Controversy
Living Carbon, an ambitious biotech startup, is venturing into the realm of ecological engineering by modifying trees to absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Aiming to create an effective countermeasure against climate change, the company is standing at the forefront of scientific innovation, although not without a barrage of raised eyebrows and criticisms.
Utilizing cutting-edge genetic engineering techniques, Living Carbon has developed poplar trees that reportedly grow faster and have a higher resilience to droughts compared to their unaltered counterparts. The secret lies in the enhancement of photosynthesis, the natural process that trees use to convert sunlight into energy, resulting in these so-called “super trees” that absorb and store more carbon.
Genetically Modified Trees
Moreover, the company is exploring an intriguing innovation – genetically modifying trees to accumulate nickel, a trait that could potentially be leveraged to remediate polluted soils. However, critics are concerned about the potential ecological risks and unforeseen long-term impacts of such modifications.
Living Carbon’s co-founder Shyamal Patel has said in an interview to the MIT Technology Review that their trees “are normal in every other way.” He further explains, “We’ve only made a tweak that makes them better able to pull CO2 from the atmosphere.” This perspective, however, has not been enough to quell the concerns of sceptics who question the company’s rapid push for field trials without having a solid grasp on the trees’ long-term effects on the environment.
The USDA is Concerned
The company’s operations have also caught the attention of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the regulatory body overseeing genetically modified organisms. For Living Carbon’s initial experiments, the USDA allowed the genetically modified trees to be grown under older, less rigorous rules. However, the agency has since updated its approach to regulation, focusing on the traits inserted into plants rather than the methods used to get them there. This means any future modifications by Living Carbon will face more rigorous scrutiny, and if there is any potential increase in pest risk, the trees will need to go through a comprehensive regulatory review.
Are These Trees Really Good for the Environment?
Dr. Marjorie Lundgren, a researcher at Lancaster University, voices her concerns about the
company’s focus solely on carbon absorption. She reminds us that trees require more than just carbon and sunlight to grow, “they need water and nitrogen, too.” The supercharged growth rates observed in lab conditions, according to her, might not be replicated in the field unless substantial resources, both financial and environmental, are invested.
Selling Carbon Credits
Despite regulatory hurdles and critical voices, Living Carbon has found a way to monetize their venture. The company is selling carbon credits, essentially tokens representing the extra carbon their trees are expected to absorb. While this might seem like an effective way to attract investment and fund their operations, it is a business model that’s attracted its share of criticism.
The cost of these credits and the methodology used to calculate it have come under scrutiny,
particularly because of the lack of empirical data on the trees’ actual performance.
Grayson Badgley, an ecologist at the non-profit CarbonPlan, points out that the cost of the credits sold by Living Carbon is “on the high side for a reforestation project.” He is wary of the company’s lack of transparency, stating that “People should know exactly what they’re buying when they plug in their credit card number.”
Living Carbon’s management, however, defends their approach. According to company
spokesperson, the company is completely transparent with large-scale buyers and the issues that seem like “problematic embellishments and elisions” are just growing pains of a young startup still learning how to effectively communicate about its work.
Only the Future Will Tell
Despite the controversies surrounding their venture, Living Carbon is pushing forward. Their future plans include modifying more tree species and exploring the creation of a long-lasting biopolymer, a synthetic material produced by the trees, which the company aims to use as a new form of carbon storage.
Living Carbon’s pioneering work in bioengineering trees is indeed ground-breaking, poised to revolutionize the carbon sequestration industry. Yet, as they navigate the complexities of scientific innovation, regulatory requirements, and public scrutiny, it becomes clear that their path to success is laden with significant challenges. Will their genetically modified trees serve as our much-needed carbon catchers, or will they bring about a cascade of unforeseen ecological issues? Only time will tell.
Author Shweta writes about the impact of technology on people, businesses, and society. She is a contributor for Forbes Advisor and has also been published in Newsweek and Huffington Post.
