3 Responses

  1. Joel Vera 16 March 2015 at 16:36 | | Reply

    Your very description of solazyme is wrong. Solazyme utilizes known genes found in other organisms and therefore qualifies as “ordinary” genetic modification per your article.

    The only ones claiming solazyme is using synthetic biology are the agenda-driven activists like Friends of the Earth and ETC Group and their supporting allies.

  2. upL8N8 17 March 2015 at 17:55 | | Reply

    This article would have been great had you actually attempted to answer the title question. What exactly was the point in your title? You seem to do everything you can to *not* answer the question of whether the products produced from synbio tech are or could be sustainable.

    No, I’m sorry, whether a person will or will not use synbio products based on a misguided faith that these products cause harm to our health has nothing to do with sustainability. The question is, assuming people were willing to use these products, would they be more sustainable than the alternatives?

    For instance, Saffron is one of the most expensive spices, and a very labor intensive product to produce naturally. Syn Bio can, at least partially, replace this ingredient, thereby requiring substantially fewer resources to produce it. Less land to farm it. Fewer people to farm it. Less energy to transport it across the world, etc.

    It is a much more environmentally sustainable product.

    The Palm kernel algae alternative definitely is more environmentally friendly.

    Frankly, organizations like Friends of the Earth are not ok with destroying the habitat to farm PKO. However, when given an alternative, they will insist that PKO farming is still better than syn bio because syn bio takes jobs away from PKO farmers. Since when is it ok to support farmers that destroy our earth? I don’t care if they lose their jobs. Find a job that doesn’t destroy the planet!

Leave a Reply