New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Scientists Tweak Photosynthesis in Pursuit of a Better Biofuel

By altering how plants turn sunlight into chemical energy, scientists hope to produce biofuels that make economic sense

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

For years researchers have been trying to figure out the best ways of making plants produce biofuels. But there is a funda­mental problem: photosynthesis, the process by which plants convert sunlight into stored chemical energy, is highly inefficient. Plants turn only 1 to 3 percent of sunlight into carbohydrates. That is one reason why so much land has to be devoted to growing corn for ethanol, among other bad biofuel ideas. And yet plants also have many advantages: they absorb carbon dioxide at low concen­trations directly from the atmosphere, and each plant cell can repair itself when damaged.

Scientists have begun a new effort to soup up photosynthesis and help humans make greener fuel. The U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, known as ARPA-e, has funded 10 such projects so far, most of which use genetic engineering to tweak a plant’s DNA-based instruction manual for growth, pigments, and the like. The largest grant—more than $6 million—has gone to the University of Florida to alter pine trees to make more turpentine, a potential fuel. Another project, led by Davis, Calif.–based Arcadia Biosciences, is aimed at inducing fast-growing grasses such as switchgrass to produce vegetable oil for the first time in history.

In the future, engineers might create a black plant that would absorb all incoming sunlight or a plant that uses different wavelengths of light to power the different steps of photo­synthesis; plants now use the same wavelengths for everything. An engineered biofuel-producing plant might even have smaller leaves, re­ducing its own energy demands for growth, or it might no longer store energy as sugar but turn it directly into a hydrocarbon molecule for human use as fuel.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The scientists in the program, dubbed PETRO, for plants engineered to replace oil, will also have to deal with the challenges of increasingly limited water supplies for crops and public skepticism of gen­etic­ally modified organ­isms. And they will face comp­etition from efforts to replace photosynthesis altogether, such as ARPA-e’s own Electrofuels program, which aims to induce microbes to make hydro­carbons, or from efforts to build artificial leaves that use the electricity from solar cells to split water into oxygen and hydro­gen for use as fuel. For plants, simply being green is no longer enough.

David Biello is a contributing editor at Scientific American.

More by David Biello
Scientific American Magazine Vol 306 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Scientists Tweak Photosynthesis in Pursuit of a Better Biofuel” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 306 No. 1 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican012012-3RLHARpmfYAULP75NEsaCD

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe