Why is it that if biotechnology has been making its way for more than a century, we still consider it an emerging technology? This is because of the extension of alternatives it offers us that have not yet been explored. Since the decoding of the human genome, known as a milestone that has marked a before and after in its application, biotechnology still fails to penetrate all aspects of our life. While in medicine it has given brilliant solutions to complex problems, offering unique therapies for rare diseases even considering the differences between individuals, biotechnology has still had a secondary role in issues associated with sustainability.
It is worth noting that biotechnology is widely recognized for complying with the principles of green chemistry. And this is because its essence comes from the observation of nature, where all processes are related and each stream of the flow serves to feed another natural process, without discards of any kind. It has taken nature thousands of years of learning, and trial and error, to reach what we know today, and biotechnology can learn not only from the present, but also from the past and from the whole process to take the maximum advantage for our interest.
However, these biotechnological processes taken to an industrial scope have not had all the necessary care to ensure a minimum environmental impact. This is because many of the metrics used in green chemistry have not been considered in the original design of the biotechnological process. Rather, they are compared with previous processes, which while allowing us to advance toward sustainable solutions, does not mean they are completely so.
Another interesting aspect is that biotechnology has not offered a new productive model, but has adapted to the existing model, which is an intensivist model. For example, in agriculture we can find great contrasts. On one hand, biotechnology has helped us increase yields per planted area, but this does not resolve the environmental problems associated with monoculture. However, the development of biofertilizers or biopesticides has indeed been crucial to leave aside practices harmful to biodiversity.
Another example can be found in food processing, where current biotechnology can offer green synthesis to produce sweeteners, but it does not change people’s dietary habits. Let us not forget that sucrose is also obtained from a plant. And let us also remember biodegradable plastics, which emerged as an attractive promise against harmful plastics of fossil origin, but which have become a great image-renewal strategy for several companies. That is to say, we return to the previous point: biotechnology has not offered a change to the consumption model, for a more effective strategy that gives priority to reducing and refusing. Because producing, transporting, and managing the waste of biodegradable plastics also has energy and water costs, among others.
If the purpose of biotechnology was to help humanity return to the natural, it has still not achieved it. But let us not forget an area in which biotechnology has indeed managed to be superior to other technologies: in the sanitary industry. Without the water treatment processes with microorganisms that we know today, we could not enjoy the water quality we have today. Although there are still challenges to resolve, it has undoubtedly shown us that the path through biotechnology is the adequate one to achieve a true development thought of in and toward our planet.
For those of us who worry about the care of the environment, who respect all living beings that cohabit this planet, we do not want solely to have one more green seal, or a biodegradable bottle; we want biotechnology, just as it knows how to observe nature, to also offer us solutions to regenerate it. For this, maybe we have to change the focus, and not think about solving solutions for existing industries, but about how to think of a planet that, maintaining its current standards of quality of life, does not lose its biodiversity and its capacity for regeneration. Could it be that if we changed the focus, instead of thinking that it is people who demand solutions, we put the planet at the center, as if it were our main client, we could offer solutions with real sense and compliant with the demands? The idea is not how to transform an existing industry into a circular one through biotechnology, but how biotechnology can cement the foundations of a new organization. For that, we have not yet been capable of observing nature well, because it is not enough to observe a single organism or a single metabolic pathway, but we have to observe the interrelations considering the factors of time and space. This places us in a complex observation, which requires a true and extensive collaborative and multidisciplinary work.
