Bioeconomy needs “breakthrough” thinking

Co-founder of World Bioeconomy Forum outlines how to make broader use of renewable biological resources

A growing bio-based chemical industry is critical to the transition towards a carbon neutral and circular bioeconomy to extend the lifecycle of products, minimize waste, efficiently use renewable raw materials and develop bio-based products (BBPs).

“We started in 2005 with the bioeconomy and now we have 30-35 countries, including China as of May 2022, and maybe the same number of regions with bio-strategies,” says Christian Patermann, co-founder and honorary chair of the World Bioeconomy Forum’s advisory board.  “But what is missing is the breakthrough in the minds of decision-makers and the population at large. I don’t expect that very soon. The bioeconomy works very slowly, but steadily.”

The European Commission defines the bioeconomy as “using renewable biological resources from land and sea like crops, forests, fish, animals and micro-organisms to produce food, materials and energy.” The circular bioeconomy involves extending the lifecycle of such products by recycling or reusing them.

Patermann points to the potential of bio-based rhamnolipids for detergents; HFDA for nylon, coatings and adhesives; aniline for aromatics; and polyethelene glycol for additives and surfactants found in many chemical platforms today. “These products directly and indirectly reduce fossil carbon usage all over the world,” he says.

According to Cefic’s position paper, bio-based products are still a small part (2.5%) of the overall European bioeconomy, which has a turnover of approximately €2.4 trillion. About 50% of this is generated by food and beverages, around 25% from agriculture and forestry, and the remaining 25% in the pharmaceutical, pulp and paper, textile, fuels and energy sectors.

The need for both a bioeconomy and circularity

For Patermann, the pursuit of circularity needs to go hand-in-hand with the development of the bioeconomy. For example, the toxicity of substances, such as some textile dyes, is not reduced or eliminated by recycling or biodegradability. Plus, a lot of recycling processes need enormously large volumes of water and energy. In order to reduce the toxicity of chemicals and make natural resources for recycling climate-friendly, microorganisms, enzymes and other biological resources can be utilised.

The use of non-food crops and second- and third-generation feedstocks (biowaste and residues) is particularly important given the disruptions to global food, feed and fuel supplies with the war in Ukraine, notes Patermann. He predicts the food versus fuel debate will end as the bioeconomy focuses on materials that are not in direct competition with food and feed. “The next five years will be very decisive.”

Are there enough non-food feedstocks to go around?

“If we really exploit the enormous amount of waste, in particular urban waste – which has been completely neglected up to now – we have a tremendous canopy of opportunities,” Patermann states. “And that’s just the beginning … The volume of urban waste cannot be compared to anything you have in a rural area.”

There is also an opportunity for the “repatriation of value chains and supply chains,” Patermann says. For example, northern Germany is cultivating Russian dandelion to supplant rubber trees from Southeast Asia in areas where food crops cannot grow to supply the automotive industry with a renewable source for tires.

Biological resources cannot yet replace all raw materials, but they might one day, Patermann adds, noting the potential of enzymes, fungi and other microorganisms in the chemical industry. He estimates that more than half of the chemicals in raw materials still need to be discovered in order to find bio-replacements.

Engaging the private sector in the bioeconomy

How can the private sector be incentivised to invest and innovate in the bioeconomy? “The best incentive is a successful showroom of innovative, affordable products to show the value of using waste and biomass to create new products,” Patermann responds. “We will need, at least for certain period of transition, some public help [like] the U.S. BioPreferred Program,” which facilitates public procurement of bio-based products. It’s also important to level the playing field for all stakeholders and offer equal access to new markets, he adds.

The bioeconomy should first be introduced in school, then continue at the university level with green chemistry curricula, Patermann says. Master courses in green chemistry are already available in Austria, Finland, France, Latvia and Switzerland. The chemical industry can also collaborate with universities and offer its personnel life-long learning. For example, Cefic organises green chemistry boot camps.

Processes involving bio-based feedstocks play an increasingly important role in the bioeconomy. For example, an enzymatic process for the interesterification (rearrangement of fatty acids) of oils and fats avoids production of harmful trans fatty acids. In addition to eliminating these artery-clogging substances, the process reduces the use of toxic chemicals and water, prevents vast amounts of by-products and reduces waste.

“The chemical industry is one of the last industrial branches in Europe that still has a strong lead globally,” Patermann concludes. “With its influence today, it should work much harder to build up sustainable future developments through education, training and funding for green chemistry. That would be very good for Europe and the planet. The chemical industry has the power to do that.”