Varela Villarreal Jessica, Burgués Cecilia, Rösch Christine
Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlstr.11, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany.
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2020 May 22;13:92. doi: 10.1186/s13068-020-01730-y. eCollection 2020.
The development of alternative pathways for sustainable fuel production is a crucial task for politics, industry and research, since the current use of fossil fuels contributes to resource depletion and climate change. Microalgae are a promising option, but the technology readiness level (TRL) is low and cannot compete economically with fossil fuels. Novel genetic engineering technologies are being investigated to improve productivity and reduce the cost of harvesting products extracted from or excreted by microalgae for fuel production. However, high resource efficiency and low costs alone are no guarantee that algae fuels will find their way into the market. Technologies must be accepted by the public to become valuable for society. Despite strong efforts in algae research and development, as well as political commitments at different scales to promote algae biofuels for transport sectors, little is known about public acceptance of this alternative transport fuel. Despite the advantages of algae technology, genetically engineered (GE) microalgae can be controversial in Europe due to risk perception. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate, for the first time, the knowledge and views of European experts and stakeholders on the conditions and requirements for acceptability of GE microalgae for next generation biofuel production.
The results of the survey-based study indicate that the majority of the respondents believe that GE algae biofuels could provide strong benefits compared to other fuels. The majority would choose to be final consumers of engineered algae biofuels, if there is clear evidence of their benefits and open communication of potential risks. They believe that closed production systems with high security standards and rigorous risk assessment should be applied to avoid unintended impacts on humans and nature. Some respondents, however, are not convinced about the need to alter natural occurring algae strains to increase productivity, arguing that there is a huge unexplored variety, and that the consequences of using genome editing are still unknown.
This evaluation of the opinions held by European experts and stakeholders regarding GE algae biofuels provides valuable and differentiated insights, both for future research and for the development of feasible socio-technical algae systems for next generation biofuel production. The identified conditions and requirements for achieving public acceptability can support the (re-)design of this innovative technology and adaptation of the framework conditions towards the implementation of algae biofuels in Europe.
开发可持续燃料生产的替代途径是政治、工业和研究领域的一项关键任务，因为目前对化石燃料的使用导致资源枯竭和气候变化。微藻是一个有前景的选择，但技术成熟度较低，在经济上无法与化石燃料竞争。正在研究新型基因工程技术，以提高生产力并降低从微藻中提取或微藻排泄的用于燃料生产的产品的收获成本。然而，仅高资源效率和低成本并不能保证藻类燃料能够进入市场。技术必须被公众接受才能对社会有价值。尽管在藻类研发方面付出了巨大努力，以及不同层面在政治上承诺推广用于运输部门的藻类生物燃料，但对于这种替代运输燃料的公众接受度知之甚少。尽管藻类技术有诸多优势，但由于风险认知，基因工程微藻在欧洲可能会引发争议。因此，本研究的目的是首次调查欧洲专家和利益相关者对基因工程微藻用于下一代生物燃料生产的可接受性的条件和要求的了解和看法。
基于调查的研究结果表明，大多数受访者认为与其他燃料相比，基因工程藻类生物燃料能带来显著益处。如果有明确的益处证据且能公开潜在风险，大多数人会选择成为基因工程藻类生物燃料的最终消费者。他们认为应采用具有高安全标准和严格风险评估的封闭生产系统，以避免对人类和自然产生意外影响。然而，一些受访者并不确信有必要改变天然藻类菌株以提高生产力，他们认为存在大量未被探索的藻类品种，且使用基因组编辑的后果仍不明朗。
对欧洲专家和利益相关者关于基因工程藻类生物燃料的观点进行的此次评估，为未来研究以及开发用于下一代生物燃料生产的可行社会技术藻类系统提供了有价值且有差异的见解。确定的实现公众可接受性的条件和要求有助于重新设计这项创新技术，并调整框架条件以促进欧洲藻类生物燃料的实施。
