Tag Archives: united-states
Novel Enzyme May Prove Beneficial To Biofuels Industry.
June 18, 2013 – Researchers from the U.K., NREL, and the University of Kentucky have published a paper describing novel cellulose-degrading enzyme from a marine wood borer Limnoria quadripunctata, commonly known as the gribble. Gribbles exhibit a relatively unique ability to produce their own enzymes instead of using symbiotic microbes to break down the biomass they eat. New biomass-degrading enzymes from novel sources such as the gribble may prove beneficial to biofuels industry. Novel Enzyme from Tiny Gribble Could Prove a Boon for Biofuels Research http://news4.thomasn…4&cb=f9bd758dd2 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 901 D. Street, S.w. Suite 930 Washington, DC, 20024-2157 USA Press release date: June 11, 2013 Wood borer makes its own enzyme, which could thrive in industrial setting Researchers from the United Kingdom, the Energy Department’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and the University of Kentucky have recently published a paper describing a novel cellulose-degrading enzyme from a marine wood borer Limnoria quadripunctata, commonly known as the gribble. Gribbles are biologically intriguing because they exhibit a relatively unique ability to produce their own enzymes instead of using symbiotic microbes to break down the biomass they eat. New biomass-degrading enzymes from novel sources such as the gribble may prove beneficial to the biofuels industry. Gribbles are 1-3 millimeters in length, but collectively they bore through wood quickly, and are responsible for significant natural and man-made marine timber damage around the world. Scientists at Universities of Portsmouth and York in the United Kingdom and the University of Kentucky in the United States, with researchers from NREL, are hoping to turn that special talent into a source of novel enzymes for the biofuels industry. A paper describing the crystal structure of a key enzyme produced by the gribble appears online in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. http://www.pnas.org/…301502110.short Gribbles live in inter-tidal zones and, similar to termites, they burrow into wood. Gribbles, unlike termites or many other animals including people, do not rely on gut bacteria to make enzymes to aid their digestion. Gribbles instead exhibit a sterile gut, and secrete their own enzymes into their guts made in a special organ termed the heptopancreas that runs the entire length of their body. Interestingly, several of the enzymes produced by gribbles are in the same important enzyme classes that are typically harvested from fungi in the biosphere for industrially deconstructing the cellulose in biomass. The gribble enzymes hold promise of tolerating salts much better, likely due to the fact they evolved in a marine environment. This unique adaptation may have beneficial implications for the ability of the gribble enzymes to more efficiently operate in a high-solids, industrial environment, breaking biomass down more effectively into sugars, which can then be converted into ethanol or a hydrocarbon fuel to replace gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. The biofuels industry needs tough, efficient enzymes that are tolerant of industrial processes. “For biochemical conversion with enzymes, industry needs to push up to very high solids, with very little water around,” NREL Senior Scientist Gregg Beckham, one of the co-authors, said. “The structure of the gribble enzyme reveals new evolutionary adaptations that may suggest mechanisms for producing more robust, industrial enzymes for high-solids loadings environments.” NREL ran computer simulations and aided in the structural and biochemical analysis of the enzyme. The work leading to the paper provided deeper understanding of how the organism adapts and survives. NREL and UK scientists are now examining how features of the gribble enzymes could be incorporated into industrially relevant enzymes and settings. NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy’s primary national laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development. NREL is operated for DOE by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Visit NREL online at www.nrel.gov Media may contact: William Scanlon 303-275-4051 William.Scanlon@nrel.gov Continue reading
Glimmer Of Hope For Carbon Markets
Eco-Business looks at the state of play in the first of a new series on the global carbon markets The UN’s Clean Development Mechanism has issued 2.4 billion carbon credits so far and generated billions of dollars in revenues for businesses in developing countries. It has supported 6,556 carbon market projects and $356 billion in investments. Image: UNFCCC Carbon markets suffered a heavy setback recently when the European Parliament rejected a plan to boost the flagging price of carbon in the region’s emissions trading scheme (ETS). But while carbon trading worldwide has been floundering, experts say carbon markets have a permanent role in combating climate change and are predicting an industry revival in the coming years. The controversial plan called ‘back-loading’ – which is now being reworked and put to the vote again on 2 July – was meant to temporarily withdraw a huge supply of carbon allowances from the ETS to prop up prices, which peaked around 30 euros per tonne in 2008 but have since plunged to new lows of 2 to 3 euros. Prices of United Nations-issued carbon credits under its Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) similarly have plunged some 98 per cent from their peak in 2008 to 39 euro cents per tonne. Carbon market players were looking to the European plan to restore confidence in the market and revive investments into carbon projects. The ailing markets in the past year or so have forced many carbon companies to consolidate or go out of business and dried up financing for further investment into clean energy projects. The underwhelming performance is the result of a combination of factors, including a lack of clarity from governments on the future of the Kyoto Protocol, a global agreement which binds developed countries to reduce their carbon emissions, and a weak global economy that has reduced demand for carbon credits. The market also suffers from a crisis of confidence stemming from questionable credits being issued by the CDM board, and its approval process that has been criticised for being bureaucratic and opaque. KPMG director for climate change and sustainability services, Rahul Kar, however, noted that despite the setbacks, carbon markets are here to stay. “It’s now in a transformational stage. We need to weed out the deficiencies, make the system more realistic in terms of affordability and eligibility criteria,” he told Eco-Business in an interview this week. “Even though the carbon markets are depressed today, chances are it will be hot again in about three years’ time,” noted Kar. This is because new regional carbon markets are emerging, such as in China, Australia and the United States, which would revive demand for carbon credits on the international markets, he added. “ The innovation, energy and farsightedness among the people developing these national and sub-national systems that convinces us at the World Bank that carbon pricing is emerging and carbon markets have a future Rachel Kyte Recent reports issued by institutions such as the World Bank and the Center for American Progress affirm the view that carbon markets have a key role to play in addressing climate change. Policymakers continue to recognise the importance of putting a price on carbon – regarded the culprit for climate change – and there are 40 national and 20 sub-national jurisdictions that are implementing carbon markets or putting a price on carbon, noted the World Bank in a report released last month, called ‘Mapping Carbon Pricing Initiatives – developments and prospects’. World Bank vice president for sustainable development, Rachel Kyte, noted it is the progress at country level that gives hope. “The innovation, energy and farsightedness among the people developing these national and sub-national systems that convinces us at the World Bank that carbon pricing is emerging and carbon markets have a future,” she said. The new initiatives build on previous experiences and valuable lessons learned, developing a range of novel design features, such as pricing stabilization mechanisms, which make them flexible and adjustable to new economic realities, the report noted. These emerging pricing schemes can make an important dent in greenhouse gas emissions. Today, countries with implemented and scheduled carbon pricing mechanisms emit the equivalent of roughly 10 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide per year, equal to about 20 per cent of global emissions. To gain efficiencies and benefits from larger markets, linkages and agreements are being put in place, such as the one between the EU ETS and Australia’s Carbon Pricing Mechanism. Team leader of the report, Alexandre Kossoy, senior financial specialist at the World Bank said: “There may not be a one-size-fits-all, but it is clear that the foundation of the first generation of market-based instruments is informing what will constitute the future landscape of carbon pricing,” Indeed, the Center for American Progress and Climate Advisers in an April report outline how, despite the rocky road for carbon markets, they have catalysed climate action in major countries. Titled ‘Carbon Market Crossroads – New Ideas for Harnessing Global Markets to Confront Climate Change’, the report noted that the sale of the 2.4 billion CDM credits issued so far has generated billions of dollars in revenues for businesses in developing countries, which has in turn spurred even more local economic activity by providing jobs and wages that benefit local businesses. The CDM has supported 6,556 carbon market projects and $356 billion in investments in emission reductions, it said. These projects have helped to create an ecosystem of climate entrepreneurs and elicited millions of dollars in government spending on climate. Each of the 10 developing nations that participated most actively in global carbon markets over the past decade are today out front experimenting with new, more ambitious climate policies, noted the report. China, South Korea, Mexico, Brazil, and India, for example, are establishing domestic carbon markets largely because of their positive experiences with the CDM. Lead author of the report and president of Climate Advisers, Nigel Purvis, noted that critics and defenders of international emissions trading have “missed the big picture”. “The developing nations that participated the most in global carbon markets are now taking the lead in adopting domestic carbon-pricing policies. The benefits of helping to spur climate policies in these major emerging economies greatly outweigh whatever environmental benefits or problems early carbon projects may have produced,” he said. The report’s authors also had a few recommendations that offered solutions for restoring global carbon markets, including: • The World Bank and International Monetary Fund convening an emergency climate summit to agree on new measures • Countries making political commitments to increase demand for global carbon-market credits, either through a new specialized fund at the World Bank or through coordinated but decentralized bilateral actions • Countries should establish a new International carbon-market coordinating body to encourage carbon markets to converge on the same high standards and help nations link their markets KPMG’s Rahul Kar says intervention by multilateral institutions such as the IFC or ADB can help lift the carbon markets by buying up credits in the short- to medium-term. In the longer term, the market will stabilise when regional trading markets give their demand projections and pricing for carbon. “ In terms of reliability and quality, the CDM is still far superior Rahul Kar, KPMG Meanwhile, carbon entrepreneurs awaiting the markets to spark back to life have either put their business and projects in cold storage, or moved into developing clean energy projects where carbon credits are a side product and not a main revenue generator. Singapore-based Blue World Carbon managing director for Southeast Asia, Joost van Acht, told Eco-Business that companies that depended on selling carbon credits for revenues have gone out of business. Projects that have multiple revenues, such as power generation, have been able to weather the storm. “Reform of the entire system is now urgently needed to make the markets work again,” he said, adding that the CDM board needed, for example, to remove controversial projects such as on air conditioning coolants known as HFC-23 or large hydropower projects to restore confidence in the process. Critics have questioned if these projects achieved the aim of cutting emissions. There is also the voluntary market, which is still thriving despite the current woes, where companies have bought carbon credits of differing standards directly from project developers as part of their social responsibility efforts. Carbon companies have also increasingly turned to consumers to generate demand. The explosion of social media and online “crowd-based” finance may prove a sustainable alternative source of demand while the regulated markets are still being reformed. Kar pointed out, however, that such credits will remain on the fringe. Besides administrative difficulties, the level of scrutiny that each project goes through under the UN’s CDM is much more rigorous than any voluntary scheme. “In terms of reliability and quality, the CDM is still far superior. So perhaps the UN may come up with a piece of legislation which allows CERs to be used for voluntary purposes, and this would put some life back into the global carbon markets.” What are carbon credits? Each carbon credit allows the holder to emit one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent. Carbon trading is the buying and selling of these credits. The credits are created in two ways – one is based on allowances, which are given to developed countries emitters who set a quota on their pollution. The second is created under the United Nations’ Clean Development Mechanism, which verifies and approves projects in developing countries that permanently reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Owners of the project can then sell the credits to developed country buyers. The CDM was created as part of the Kyoto Protocol, the only global agreement that binds developed countries to cut their emissions. The credits are traded on exchanges and through financial institutions, which buy up credits from projects across the world and sell them on to end-buyers. There are also companies that sell carbon credits to companies and individuals on a voluntary basis. These credits may be verified by third party standards such as the Verified Carbon Standard. Continue reading
Senate Passes Half-Trillion Dollar Farm Bill; Ball’s In House’s Court
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 9:24 am, Tue Jun 11, 2013. 0 comments WASHINGTON (AP) – The last time Congress passed a farm bill, Democrats had control of the House and the food stamp program was about half the size it is today. That was five years ago. Conservatives calling for an overhaul of the domestic food aid program will try to trim the nation’s nearly $80 billion grocery bill when the House weighs in on farm legislation in a few weeks. The Senate overwhelmingly voted Monday to expand farm subsidies and make small cuts to food stamps in a five-year, half-trillion dollar measure. But passage in the House isn’t expected to be so easy – or so bipartisan. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Monday that his chamber will take up its version of the farm bill later this month. He made clear his own dislike for generous farm subsidies included in the bill, saying his “concerns about our country’s farm programs are well-known.” But Boehner acknowledged that the rest of the chamber might not agree with him. “If you have ideas on how to make the bill better, bring them forward,” Boehner said in a statement directed to his colleagues. “Let’s have the debate, and let’s vote on them.” House consideration will come after more than a year’s delay. The Senate passed a similar version of its farmbill last year, but the House declined to take it up during an election year amid conflict over the amount to cut from food stamps, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. One in seven Americans now use the program. The Senate bill would cut the food stamp program, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, by about $400 million a year, or half a percent, and Senate Democrats have been reluctant to cut more. The farm bill approved by the House Agriculture Committee last month would cut the program by $2 billion a year, or a little more than 3 percent, and make it more difficult for some people to qualify. In his statement Monday, Boehner signaled support for the House bill’s level of food stamp cuts, saying they are changes that “both parties know are necessary.” Other Republicans are expected to offer amendments to expand the cuts, setting up a potentially even more difficult resolution with the Senate version. At the same time, Democrats are expected to try and eliminate the cuts. Food stamps were added to the farm bill decades ago to gain urban votes for the rural measure, which sets policy for farm subsidies, programs to protect environmentally sensitive land and other rural development projects. But with the program’s exponential growth during the recent economic downturn, food stamps are now making passage harder. “I expect it to come from all directions,” House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., said last month, acknowledging the complications of moving the bill through his chamber. On the Senate floor, senators rejected amendments on food stamp cuts, preserving the $400 million annual decrease. The bill’s farm-state supporters also fended off efforts to cut sugar, tobacco and other farmsupports. Senators looking to pare back subsidies did win one victory in the Senate, an amendment to reduce the government’s share of crop insurance premiums for farmers with adjusted gross incomes of more than $750,000. Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said their amendment would affect about 20,000 farmers. Currently the government pays for an average 62 percent of crop insurance premiums and also subsidizes the companies that sell the insurance. The overall bill expands crop insurance for many crops and also creates a program to compensate farmers for smaller, or “shallow,” revenue losses before the paid insurance kicks in. The crop insurance expansion is likely to benefit Midwestern corn and soybean farmers, who use crop insurance more than other farmers. The bill would also boost subsidies for Southern rice and peanut farmers, lowering the threshold for those farms to receive government help. The help for rice and peanuts was not in last year’s bill but was added this year after the agriculture panel gained a new top Republican, Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran. Critics, including the former top Republican on the committee, Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts, said the new policy could guarantee that the rice and peanut farmers’ profits are average or above average. The House has similar provisions expanding crop insurance and rice and peanut subsidies. Dairy programs could also be contentious on the House floor. Both the Senate and House bills would overhaul dairy policy by creating a new insurance program for dairy producers, eliminating other dairy subsidies and price supports. The new policy includes a market stabilization program that could dictate production cuts when oversupply drives down prices. The program faced little opposition in the Senate but a similar overhaul in the House bill is expected to face resistance in that chamber, where Boehner last year called the new stabilization program “Soviet-style.” Boehner reiterated those concerns in his statement Monday, saying he will support an amendment on the floor to challenge the proposed policy. The Senate bill also would: Overhaul dairy policy by creating a new insurance program for dairy producers, eliminating other dairy subsidies and price supports. The new policy includes a market stabilization program that could dictate production cuts when oversupply drives down prices. The program faced little opposition in the Senate but a similar overhaul in the House bill is expected to face resistance in that chamber, where Boehner last year called the new stabilization program “Soviet-style.” He reiterated those concerns in his statement Monday, saying he will support an amendment on the floor to challenge the proposed policy. Make modest changes to the way international food aid is delivered, a much scaled-back version of an overhaul proposed by President Barack Obama earlier this year. Senators adopted an amendment that would slightly boost dollars to buy locally-grown food close to needy areas abroad. Currently, most food aid is grown in the United States and shipped to developing countries, an approach the Obama administration says is inefficient but that has support among farm-state members in Congress. Consolidate programs to protect environmentally-sensitive land and reduce spending on those programs. Expand Agriculture Department efforts to prevent illegal trafficking of food stamp benefits. Continue reading
