Emerging Technologies 2023

Welcome back. Four years ago, I reviewed the World Economic Forum’s Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 2019 in a blog post Emerging Technologies. Covering 10 topics in one post was a new experience that I’ll try to repeat with the 2023 report.

Authored by the World Economic Forum in collaboration with Frontiers Media and over 90 experts in 20 countries, the new report identifies technologies poised to have the biggest positive impact on society over the next three to five years.

Though space limits this post to a glimpse of the technologies, the report has broadened its scope, adding a qualitative assessment of how each technology will impact people, the planet, prosperity, industry and equity. Also new, the report provides interactive transformation maps that connect each technology to other topics on the global agenda, in addition to highlighting articles on the topic.

The Top 10 Emerging Technologies

World Economic Forum’s Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 2023 (from www.weforum.org/reports/top-10-emerging-technologies-of-2023/in-full).

Artificial Intelligence-Facilitated Healthcare
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed weaknesses of public health systems worldwide, hastening incorporation of artificial intelligence and machine learning. AI-based healthcare solutions are likely to become increasingly prevalent; however, data privacy concerns, public acceptance and patient compliance must be addressed with a carefully crafted ethical framework.

Designer Phages
Phages--viruses that can selectively attack specific types of bacteria--may be strategically deployed to engineer the human microbiome--microbes on and in the body that are crucial for human health. By reprogramming phages, biologists can target bacterial species, inducing them to produce therapeutic molecules or to become sensitive to specific drugs. Such “designer” phages have demonstrated the potential to improve human, animal and plant health.

Flexible Batteries
Flexible batteries now appear in everything from wearable medical devices to flexible displays, smartwatches and textile-based electronics. The market is expected to expand rapidly to meet increased demand for wearable devices, greater miniaturization and elasticity. Companies are developing and commercializing related technology, though there is room for innovation and advances.

Flexible Neural Electronics
Brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) capture electrical signals from the brain to control machines. While BMI-like systems are already used for treating epilepsy and some prosthetic devices, traditional probes can cause discomfort and lack signal accuracy. Recently developed flexible BMIs that conform to the brain could improve our understanding of brain diseases, provide greater control of prosthetics and boost development of brain-monitoring devices and brain stents. Future advances might lead to true human-artificial intelligence interfacing, though ethical issues must first be considered.

Generative Artificial Intelligence
Generative AI can produce new and original content by learning patterns in data through algorithms and methods inspired by the human brain. Used mostly for text, code, images and sound, it will likely be applied for other purposes, including drug design, architecture and engineering. It will also be deployed for educational materials and in the workplace, though ethical issues must be considered to ensure its responsible use. With controls in place, generative AI may have the potential to boost creativity and challenge conventional thinking.

Metaverse for Mental Health
Excessive screen time and social media use can decrease psychological well-being, yet the responsible use of virtual shared spaces in the metaverse may actually aid mental health. This immersive iteration of the internet (e.g., gaming platforms, electrode-containing headsets) has the potential to support multiple aspects of mental healthcare.

Spatial Omics
Spatial omics combines advanced imaging techniques with DNA sequencing to map biological processes at a molecular level. Visualization of previously unobservable cell architecture and biological events can be used to develop molecular-level “cell atlases” of different species and potentially aid therapeutic discovery, characterization of tumors and study of infectious diseases. Though technical challenges remain, spatial omics could ultimately revolutionize our understanding of biological systems.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel
Sustainable aviation fuel, produced from biological and non-biological resources, is one strategy the aviation industry is investigating to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. Currently, aviation accounts for 2% to 3% of global carbon emissions, and sustainable aviation fuel accounts for less than 1% of global jet fuel demand. Airlines, manufacturers and fuel companies are working to create hundreds of new sustainable fuel production plants.

Sustainable Computing
Data centers contribute an estimated 1% of global electricity consumption and a worsening environmental crisis. Innovative computing solutions, aided by multiple energy-efficiency techniques, are being developed to promote sustainable energy use. Achieving net-zero-energy data centers will require even more creative approaches to integrate and co-design technologies for electricity generation, storage and management.

Wearable Plant Sensors
Sensor-equipped tractors and satellite data have helped farmers boost efficiency. The next frontier is attaching small devices to crops to continuously monitor temperature, humidity, moisture and nutrients. Though challenges remain, wearable plant sensors may revolutionize crop production and management.

Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
World Economic Forum Top 10 Emergency Technologies of 2023 report: www.weforum.org/reports/top-10-emerging-technologies-of-2023/in-full
Article on report on EurekAlert! website: www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/993827

Dairy vs Non-Dairy Yogurts

Welcome back. Blogging about dairy vs plant-based, non-dairy yogurts while residing in “America’s Dairyland,” on a former dairy farm no less, is probably unwise. If dairy yogurts come out best, I may appear biased. If non-dairy yogurts come out best, I may have to move. Nevertheless, I’ll proceed.

A 1940 license plate from America’s Dairyland (from www.ebay.com/itm/255375422976).

Why? Because a recent study by researchers with the University of Massachusetts Amherst compared the nutrient density and nutritional profile of commercially available U.S. dairy and non-dairy yogurts.

Before I get carried away with terms, please note that I’ve defined nutrient density, nutritional profiling and one I’ve yet to mention, nutrient rich food index, below, under the P.S.

Background
The dairy industry’s greenhouse gas emissions, use of water resources and required land area have a significant impact on the environment. In 2015, the global dairy industry was estimated to have emitted more than 1,700 million tons of CO2 equivalent, primarily from enteric fermentation and emissions from feed production and manure management. In the U.S., livestock is estimated to be directly responsible for 38% of methane emissions.

Approximately 6.3% of all dairy consumed in the U.S. is yogurt. Given that plant-based yogurt production emits fewer greenhouse gases and requires less land, environmental cognizance is a driver for adopting non-dairy yogurt. In 2021, consumers spent nearly five times more on dairy yogurt and yogurt drinks than on non-dairy yogurt products; however, the latter is growing.

Yogurt Comparison
The researchers collected nutritional information on 612 yogurts, launched between 2016 and 2021, using the Mintel Global New Products Database (GNPD). GNPD monitors consumer packaged goods in 86 markets, 46 categories and 270 subcategories, with more than 40,000 food, drink, household, beauty, personal care and pet products added monthly.

The 612 yogurts included full-fat dairy (159), low- and nonfat dairy (303), coconut (61), almond (44), cashew (30) and oat (15).

To compare and rank the yogurts, the researchers used the Nutrient Rich Foods (NRF) Index 6.3, which assigns a positive sub-score based on six encouraging (qualifying) nutrients and a negative sub-score based on three limiting nutrients. The qualifying nutrients and their reference amounts are protein (50 g), fiber (28 g), calcium (1300 mg), iron (18 mg), potassium (4700 mg), and vitamin D (20 mcg). The limiting nutrients and their reference amounts are saturated fat (20 g), total sugar (50 g) and sodium (2300 mg).

Of the 612 yogurts, 275 were removed from the NRF model calculations because the products did not report one or more nutrient values required for the calculation. The remaining 337 yogurts were assigned an average score based on their nutrient density.

The highest to lowest nutrient density yogurts were: almond, oat, low- and nonfat dairy, full-fat dairy, cashew and coconut.

Comparison of NRF 6.3 scores by yogurt showing number of each yogurt base and scores as mean ± SD; superscript letters indicate significant differences among yogurts (Table 1 from www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2023.1195045/full).

Wrap Up
Don’t fret, dairy farmers. Although the nutrient density of almond and oat yogurts scored higher than that of dairy yogurts--likely because of less sugar and sodium and more fiber--dairy yogurts contain significantly more protein, calcium and potassium.

The researchers note that the study’s findings point to ways the food industry can improve plant-based yogurt nutrition, such as formulating a plant- and dairy-based hybrid yogurt.

Stay tuned it would seem. And thanks once again for stopping by.

P.S.
Study of dairy vs. non-dairy (plant-based) yogurts in Frontiers in Nutrition journal: www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2023.1195045/full
Articles on study on EurekAlert! and Healthline websites:
www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/990885
www.healthline.com/health-news/almond-milk-yogurt-or-dairy-based-heres-which-one-is-better-for-you
Review of Nutrient Rich Foods Index in The American Jour of Clinical Nutrition: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523017847?via%3Dihub
Review of nutrient dense foods on HealthCentral website: www.healthcentral.com/nutrition/most-nutrient-dense-foods

Some Terms:
Nutrient density is simply the nutrient content of foods expressed per a reference amount. Typically that reference amount is 100?kilocalories, 100?grams or per serving. Most calculations rely on nutrient-to-calorie ratios.

Nutrient or nutritional profiling refers to classifying or ranking foods based on their nutrient content per reference amount. Nutrient profiles can be based on qualifying nutrients (protein, fiber and a variety of vitamins and minerals); on disqualifying nutrients (typically fat, sugars and sodium), or both. Nutrient profiles are usually nutrient based, though some models consider food groups.)

Nutrient Rich Food Index (NRF) refers to a family of nutrient profiling models that balance nutrients to encourage against 3 nutrients to limit (saturated fats, sugars and sodium), using 100?kcal as the basis of calculation. Versions of the score exist that vary in the number of positive nutrients from 6 (NRF 6.3) to 15 (NRF 15.3). The NRF score can be applied to individual foods or to total diets.

Trees for Climate Change

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide, due mostly to burning of fossil fuels, are responsible for about two-thirds of the total energy imbalance that is causing Earth's temperature to rise. Growing plants remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (carbon sequestration) through photosynthesis. Why don’t we just plant lots of trees?

Welcome back. Last February, I blogged about the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting, “Davos 2020,” whose theme was climate and sustainability (see Davos Focuses on Climate). One meeting announcement I mentioned was financial support for the forum’s global reforestation initiative. 

I mistakenly referred to the initiative as One Trillion Trees; that’s another trillion-trees project. Unbeknownst to me, quite a few nonprofit organizations and governments have begun large-scale tree-planting projects for a host of social, ecological and aesthetic reasons.

A Trillion-Trees effort in Western Australia (from www.landcarewa.org.au/news/trillion-trees-has-inspiring-global-landcare-vision/).

Is Tree Planting the Way to Go?
While endorsing the benefits of well-planned tree-planting projects, a recent commentary in Science Magazine warns against a simplistic view of tree planting as a solution to climate change.

Coauthored by an environmental scientist with the University of California, Santa Cruz, and a forest scientist with the University of São Paulo, Piracicaba, Brazil, the commentary points out that tree planting can have negative as well as positive outcomes depending on how and where trees are planted. 

Negative consequences might include reduced water supply, destruction of native grasslands, spread of invasive tree species, increased social inequity, displacement of farmland and increased deforestation.

The authors emphasize the importance of involving stakeholders, noting that tree-planting projects imposed by governments and external investors without engaging stakeholders have repeatedly failed. The planted trees are not maintained, farmers use the land for livestock grazing or the land is re-cleared. 

Ethiopia celebrates planting 350 million trees in one day to combat climate change and desertification (from www.rte.ie/news/newslens/2019/0730/1066005-ethiopia-plants-350-millions-trees/).

There are many reasons to plant trees--reforestation, sequestering carbon, providing income from timber harvesting and more. It’s not uncommon for the goals to conflict. 

Planning Tree-Planting Projects
The commentary offers guidance for new tree-planting projects.

Reduce forest clearing and degradation: Protecting and maintaining intact forests is more efficient, more ecologically sound and less costly than planting or replanting trees.

Treat tree planting as one element of multifaceted environmental solutions: Enhancing tree cover is one of the best options to offset greenhouse gas emissions, yet it addresses only a small portion of the needed carbon reductions. The estimates of how much vary more than tenfold.

Balance ecological and social goals: Acknowledge competing land uses and focus on landscapes with the potential to generate large-scale benefits. As an example, they suggest the Atlantic Forest in Brazil, where regional planning of tree-planting initiatives can lead to three times the conservation gains at half the cost.

Plan, coordinate and monitor: Work with local stakeholders to resolve conflicting goals and ensure maximum long-term effectiveness. Simply planting trees is not enough. Millions of dollars were spent to plant mangrove trees in Sri Lanka following the 2004 tsunami. Some five years later, most of the monitored restoration sites experienced tree losses of more than 90% because of poor project planning and lack of seedling maintenance.

Wrap Up
Growing trees is a long-term endeavor. It is not a substitute for, nor should it overshadow, actions that have greater potential for rapidly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, such as converting from fossil fuels to renewable energy technologies.

We should also recognize that the direct and indirect effects of climate change on tree mortality make it difficult to forecast how much carbon trees will sequester in the future.

That said, I’m all for planting, growing, restoring and conserving many trillions of trees. Of course, it must be done right. Thanks for stopping by.

Reforestation in Burkina Faso (USDA photo from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Burkina_Faso_-_Tolotama_Reforestation.jpg).

P.S.
Commentary on tree planting for climate in Science: science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6491/580
University of California, San Cruz press release on commentary: news.ucsc.edu/2020/05/holl-trees.html
Study on planting 1 trillion trees in Science: science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6448/76
Three different trillion-tree projects:
www.1t.org/
www.plant-for-the-planet.org/en/home
trilliontrees.org.au/

Hemp and CBD Revisited

Welcome back. Two years ago, I blogged about hemp on another website (reposted here as Industrial Hemp). Though I commented on the extraordinary number of applications of hemp’s fiber, seed and oil, I didn’t dwell on the potential therapeutic benefits of one component, cannabidiol (CBD).

Neon sign advertising CBD (from
www.amazon.com/Jantec-Sign-Group-Sell-Neon/dp/B01N28A462).

Well, times have changed. The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (aka the 2018 Farm Bill) legalized CBD from hemp with certain restrictions, and CBD now seems to be available everywhere as drugs, food, dietary supplements, cosmetics, animal health products and probably more. 

CBD on sale at video store in Illinois (photo by Byron Hetzler, thesouthern.com/news/local/pain-buster-or-placebo-cbd-oil-craze-hits-southern-illinois/article_7b4fa98c-0e7b-537a-8061-9492526dc986.htm).

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expressed concern that people may mistakenly believe CBD “can’t hurt.” It all suggests that I should dwell longer on CBD.

What Is CBD?
CBD is one of many cannabinoids found in Cannabis sativa L., a plant better known as marijuana or hemp. The other cannabinoid of interest here is the psychoactive compound associated with marijuana highs, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol or THC. Although marijuana and hemp are both cannabis plants, they differ in the concentration of THC, legal hemp having THC less than 0.3% and marijuana having much higher levels.

The arbitrary 0.3% THC limit that keeps hemp legal can be a problem, as farmers and states learned. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s interim regulations, released October 2019, required testing a sample “from the flowering material” of hemp (the part of the plant with the most cannabinoids) at a DEA-approved lab within 15 days of anticipated harvest. Delays in state sampling and testing and other triggers--especially genetics, as a Cornell University study found--caused too many farmers’ crops to exhibit higher THC and be destroyed. Adjustments are in progress.

Potential Therapeutic Uses
Notwithstanding CBD’s wide availability, research on the cannabinoid is just warming up. Studies have considered a variety of conditions--anxiety, depression, fibromyalgia, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis and many more.

2017 overview of conditions CBD might benefit
(from www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0163725817300657).

To date, however, the FDA has approved only one CBD product--a prescription drug for treatment of two rare, severe forms of epilepsy. The agency relies on others to conduct the research and submit data in an application for approval.

Risks and Side Effects
The FDA reports that the limited data it has seen on CBD safety point to risks. CBD can cause liver injury. It can interact with other drugs you may be taking, with potentially serious side effects. Use of CBD with alcohol or drugs that slow brain activity (e.g., those used for anxiety, panic, stress or sleep disorders) increases the risk of sedation and drowsiness and possible injury. Studies of animals exposed to CBD have reported male reproductive toxicity. Observed side effects include changes in alertness, gastrointestinal distress and mood changes, most commonly irritability and agitation.

Legal Status
Hemp-derived CBD with less than 0.3% THC is legal at the federal level, yet states have different restrictions (e.g., CBD is illegal in South Dakota).

Although you may find different CBD products, the FDA maintains that CBD is an approved drug and is thus precluded from being added to food and beverages or included in dietary supplements. FDA enforcement has been limited to sending warning letters to manufacturers.

Wrap Up
CBD’s potential therapeutic uses are extremely promising. Still, it has to be emphasized that the FDA has not evaluated unapproved CBD products.

CBD on sale in Massachusetts
(from www.buzzardsbaybotanicals.com/).

Are they effective for the claimed effect? What is the proper dosage? What happens if you take CBD daily for long periods of time? And again, the limited data on CBD safety point to risks.

The FDA is working to answer the many unanswered questions about the science, safety and quality of products containing CBD. (My comment: Like other government agencies, the FDA is short on staff and budget, even with the reduction in compliance and enforcement actions since President Trump took office.)

Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
CBD
www.who.int/medicines/access/controlled-substances/5.2_CBD.pdf
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325871
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/327518
www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/can.2019.0101
FDA and CBD: www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/fda-regulation-cannabis-and-cannabis-derived-products-including-cannabidiol-cbd
Hemp farming regulations and problems:
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/10/31/2019-23749/establishment-of-a-domestic-hemp-production-program
www.projectcbd.org/industry/tough-times-after-high-hopes-hemp-harvest
hempindustrydaily.com/arizona-climate-blamed-for-off-the-charts-thc-failure-in-first-hemp-crops/
modernfarmer.com/2020/02/what-makes-industrial-hemp-spike-to-illegal-levels-of-thc/
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.12667

Urban Agriculture for Phoenix Sustainability

Welcome Back. I apologize if you’ve been waiting to learn what happened with my idea to convert the farm’s long inactive dairy barn to an indoor vertical farm. (For the few who may have missed those blog posts, five years ago, I reviewed Indoor Farming, then featured the barn in a photo addendum, Indoor Farm Barn Addendum) 

Sadly, before I developed a business plan, they rented the barn to a beef cattle and chicken venture, which has since ended. The barn is now being used for storage and miscellaneous.

But since you’re here and I’m going on about agriculture, you might be interested to learn about the citywide analysis of Phoenix conducted by researchers with Arizona State University and Google, Inc. I was attracted to the study by the topics covered--urban agriculture (not indoor), sustainability and remote sensing.

EPA-commissioned
National Research Council
consensus study report,
2011 (www.nap.edu/read/13152).

Sustainability
EPA bases sustainability on the principle that everything that we need for our survival and well-being depends, either directly or indirectly, on our natural environment. To pursue sustainability is to create and maintain the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony to support present and future generations.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (enacted 1 January 1970) committed the U.S. to sustainability, declaring it a national policy. NEPA’s most significant outcome was the requirement that all executive Federal agencies prepare environmental assessments and environmental impact statements that describe the potential environmental effects of proposed Federal agency actions.

United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals (from
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs).

Over 100 nations have enacted national environmental policies modeled after NEPA. Further, in 2015, all United Nations Member States adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Goal 11 is to make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

Achieving Phoenix’s Sustainability Goals
Phoenix is the fifth largest and second fastest growing U.S. city. The subtropical desert climate allows year-round crop production with irrigation, but climate change and growing population are water resource concerns.

In 2016, with substantial community input, the Phoenix City Council adopted eight 2050 Environmental Sustainability goals toward becoming a Sustainable Desert City, as envisioned in the city's General Plan.

The researchers set out to quantify the benefits of urban agriculture for achieving desired outcomes associated with three of the city’s sustainability goals: eliminate "food deserts," provide open green spaces, and reduce energy and CO2 emissions from buildings.

Three Phoenix 2050 Sustainability Goals addressed by study
(from iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab428f).

Urban Agriculture for Sustainability Goals
Urban agriculture or urban farming is pretty much what you would expect--producing food in a city or heavily populated municipality--except there is normally an element of commerce. The food is grown to be sold.

Eliminate Food Deserts
To address food deserts, the researchers estimated the total annual amount of food that urban agriculture could produce based on available area and most suitable crops.

The area potentially available for urban agriculture included unpaved vacant lots, flat rooftops and building façades amenable to growing plants vertically with trellises, cages or the like. The area of vacant lots was derived from an inventory of all vacant property. Rooftop and vertical surface areas were derived from 2014 lidar building footprint data provided by the US Geological Survey.

Lidar-derived 3D buildings and trees in downtown Phoenix
(from lib.asu.edu/geo/news/robust-usgs-lidar-data-now-available).

(Lidar, an active remote sensing method that uses a pulsed laser, is increasingly employed in diverse fields, especially for airborne mapping of terrain and preparing 3D building models.)

Crop suitability was ranked, based on estimated water use, historical yields and supermarket retail prices. The area devoted to each crop was proportional to its suitability.

Open Green Spaces
The researchers addressed the open green space provision by repurposing unpaved vacant lots as urban farms or community gardens.

When urban agriculture on vacant lots added open green space to an area without a public park, they considered that area no longer underserved. They also estimated how the added open green space could improve walkability.

Building Energy and Emissions
The researchers estimated the reduction in building energy that would result from the increased insulation afforded by rooftop agriculture. The difference between electrical power needed with and without rooftop agriculture was used to estimate the reduction in CO2.

Example of rooftop agriculture
(from www.growingmagazine.com/rooftop-farming-an-alternative-growing-system/).

Wrap Up
The study found that, if fully implemented, urban agriculture could supply 183,000 tons/year of food, providing produce in all food deserts and meeting 90% of fresh produce consumption; increase green space area by 17%, reducing underserved areas by 60%; and reduce building energy use by nearly 125,500 MWh, potentially displacing 51,270 tons of CO2 per year.

Overall, the analysis highlights the importance of merging a data-driven framework with local information and serves as a template for other city sustainability assessments. Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
Urban Agriculture:
www.greensgrow.org/urban-farm/what-is-urban-farming/
www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/urban-agriculture
Sustainability: www.epa.gov/sustainability/learn-about-sustainability#what
National Environmental Policy Act: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Environmental_Policy_Act
UN Sustainable Development Goals: sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs
Goal 11: Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable: www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/cities/

Phoenix 2050 Environmental Sustainability Goals: www.phoenix.gov/sustainability/goal
Phoenix videos on becoming a carbon-neutral city:
www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22YB12L5NbTBCp3WuSiv3KG98oFkFkdB

Phoenix urban agriculture assessment in Environmental Research Letters: iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab428f
Article on study on EurekAlert! website: eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-09/asu-tpg092719.php
Article on lidar and available lidar data sources on Geospatial World website: www.geospatialworld.net/blogs/did-you-know-the-sources-for-free-lidar-data/

My 2014 blog post about the application of airborne lidar for detecting stone walls in a forested area, Stone Walls Photo Addendum.

Emerging Technologies

Welcome Back. Longtime readers of this blog know how tuned in I am to technology. Perhaps recounting my discovery of self-lowering toilet seats (Technology Update Photo Addendum) wasn’t an appropriate beginning, but over the years, I’ve highlighted many honest-to-goodness technology topics.

Today’s post is a first: Ten topics in one post. Blame it on the World Economic Forum, because I’ll be reviewing the Forum’s Top 10 Emerging Technologies 2019 report.

Searching for the next technology breakthrough (photo from campustechnology.com/articles/2019/04/25/6-key-ed-tech-developments-on-the-horizon.aspx).

World Economic Forum Report
The World Economic Forum describes itself as the international organization for public-private cooperation. Established in 1971 and headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, the Forum is an independent, impartial organization that engages the foremost political, business and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.

The Forum’s report was prepared by an international steering committee of leading technology experts, who also sought input from other experts. Technologies were evaluated based on their potential to produce major benefits to societies and economies; alter established ways of doing things; attract researchers, companies or investors; and make significant inroads in several years.

The Top 10 Emerging Technologies

Bioplastics--Shifting to biodegradable plastics would alleviate many of the environmental problems arising from the millions of tons of plastics produced each year; however, current biodegradable plastics lack strength and the visual characteristics of standard plastics. Look for breakthrough products that use cellulose or lignin from plant waste.

Social Robots--Robots are becoming common in industry and in different aspects of our lives. Look for advances in artificial intelligence to continue improving their ability to serve as assistants and even friends, recognizing voices, faces and emotions with eye contact and expanded social and emotional intelligence.

Eldercare (sort of) robot from 2012 movie Robot & Frank (from
spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/home-robots/where-are-the-eldercare-robots).

Metalenses--The difficulty of reducing the size of glass lenses has interfered with efforts to reduce the size of cellphones, computers and other devices. Advances in physics have resulted in smaller, lighter metalenses. Look for further miniaturization of laboratory and consumer products and possible improvements in optical fibers.

Disordered Proteins as Drug Targets--Intrinsically disordered proteins are a class of proteins known to cause diseases, including cancer. Because they lack a fixed or ordered structure like conventional proteins, they are difficult to treat. A recent breakthrough showed a way to stop the structural transformation long enough for drugs to take effect. Look for improved patient treatments.

Smarter Fertilizers--Recent advances have promoted controlled release of fertilizers tailored to specific crops and growing conditions. Delivery efficiency and yields have increased, while environmental impact has decreased. Look for fertilizers to incorporate new sources of nitrogen and microorganisms that boost nutrient uptake.

Collaborative Telepresence--Video conferencing is not new, but with advances in augmented and virtual reality, coupled with 5G networks and advanced sensors, look for remote interactions that feel physically real, from handshakes to robotic medical practice.

Advanced Food Tracking and Packaging--Globally, food poisoning affects some 600 million people each year with deaths exceeding 400,000. Technologies are addressing two aspects of the problem. Blockchain technology is being applied in tracking food items through the supply chain, allowing rapid identification of the source of food poisoning. In addition, sensors to monitor food quality are being developed and added to both bulk and individual food packaging. Look for continued advances in tracking and packaging.

Example of packaging sensor for monitoring food freshness (from www.elsevier.com/physical-sciences-and-engineering/chemistry/journals/new-chemistry-research/smart-food-packaging).

Safer Nuclear Reactors--Nuclear power can contribute to the reduced use of fossil fuels and reduced carbon dioxide. New fuels and reactors are being developed that can greatly increase the safely of nuclear power. The fuels are more resilient, and if they overheat, produce little or no hydrogen. Look for continued improvements and trials.

DNA Data Storage--Current data-storage systems are high-energy users and are reaching their capacity to store the quantities of data we generate. Alternatives to hard drives are actively being explored. Look for breakthroughs in DNA-based data storage, a low-energy alternative with a huge data capacity.

Utility-Scale Storage of Renewable Energy--Electricity from renewable sources, especially wind and solar, has increased substantially, yet storage of energy when sun or wind are lacking has been a hindrance. Although alternatives are being pursued, look for lithium-ion batteries to dominate storage technology, with advances producing 4 to 8 hours of energy.

Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
The World Economic Forum: www.weforum.org/about/world-economic-forum
The Top 10 Emerging Technologies 2019 report: www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Top_10_Emerging_Technologies_2019_Report.pdf
Write-up on report: www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/07/these-are-the-top-10-emerging-technologies-of-2019/

Who Knows GMOs?

Welcome back. In an earlier blog post (Science and Society), I highlighted Pew Research Center surveys from 2014 that measured agreement with several statements, including It’s safe to eat genetically modified foods.

At the time, 88% of U.S.-based scientists agreed with the statement compared with only 37% of the U.S. public.

The 10 genetically modified crops available in the U.S.: corn (field and sweet), soybeans, cotton, canola, sugar beets, alfalfa, papaya, squash, apples and potatoes (from gmoanswers.com/current-gmo-crops).

While those surveys set a marker for scientists versus the general public, Pew surveys of the American public in 2016 and 2018 found those who believe genetically modified (GM) foods are unhealthier than non-GM foods increased from 39% to 49%.

Scientists weren’t surveyed separately, yet additional survey questions established that the increased concern about GM foods was primarily from those with low levels of science knowledge. There was essentially no change from those with high science knowledge.

Comparison of 2016 and 2018 Pew Research Center surveys of U.S. adults regarding health effects of genetically modified foods, categorized by respondents’ science knowledge (from www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/11/19/public-perspectives-on-food-risks/).

Given those results, I suppose we shouldn’t be too surprised that a recent study found the most extreme opposition to GM foods was from those who think they know the most--but actually know the least--about GM food science.

I’ll review that study after a look at GM foods.

Genetically Modified Organisms and Foods
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are plants, animals and microorganisms whose genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally or through traditional crossbreeding. Selected genes are transferred from one organism into another or between unrelated species. The goal is to proffer some advantage, such as crop protection from disease or insects.

Foods produced from or using GMOs are referred to as genetically modified or genetically engineered foods.

The scientific consensus is that GM foods pose no greater risk to human health than conventional foods and can provide substantial benefits, but that each GM food needs to be tested before it’s introduced.

GM food safety testing normally covers direct health effects (toxicity, allergenicity), specific components thought to have nutritional or toxic properties, stability of the inserted gene and any unintended effects of gene insertion.

Characterizing U.S. GM Food Opponents
The assessment of extreme opponents to GM food was conducted by a team of researchers from the University of Colorado, Boulder, Washington University in St. Louis, the University of Toronto and the University of Pennsylvania.

They initially surveyed a representative sample of 501 U.S. adults asking two questions about GM foods: opposition (1-none to 7-extreme) and concern (1-none to 7-extreme).

Next, they asked participants to rate their understanding of GM foods (1-vague to 7-thorough).

Finally, they tested the participants’ scientific literacy with 15 true-false questions drawn from such sources as the American Association for the Advancement of Science Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Five of the 15 items concerned genetics (e.g., All plants and animals have DNA).

The results showed that as opposition to and concern about GM foods increase, knowledge about science and genetics decreases; however, perceived understanding of GM foods increases. In other words, extreme opponents know the least, but think they know the most.

International GM Food Opponents
The researchers conducted a parallel assessment using nationally representative samples from France (500 participants), Germany (519) as well as the U.S. (540).

Objective genetics knowledge was measured with 10 true-false questions. Self-assessed knowledge was measured by asking, “How much do you know about genetically modified food?” (1-not at all to 5-a great deal).

Extremity of opposition was measured by averaging across 12 items that encompassed reluctance to buy, desire to regulate and willingness to oppose GM products, for example, through public demonstration.

The results were similar to the initial U.S. assessment. Across the entire sample, and controlling for country, extremity of opposition and self-assessed knowledge increase as objective knowledge decreases.

Predicted relationships between extremity of opposition and both objective and self-assessed knowledge by country; shading represents the 95% confidence interval (from www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0520-3).

Wrap Up
Although the study focus was on GM foods, the researchers also surveyed for concern about and belief in human-caused climate change. The direction of the effects was the same, but the results were not statistically significant.

Unlike beliefs about GM foods, whose opposition was shared by liberals, moderates and conservatives, climate change beliefs were highly polarized by political identification. Conservatives were much more likely to oppose the scientific consensus. The researchers posit that, for highly politicized issues, ideological commitments may supersede individual knowledge.

Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
Pew survey of public perspectives on food risks: www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/11/19/public-perspectives-on-food-risks/
Background on GM foods:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food
www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/
gmoanswers.com/gmo-basics
Study of GM food opponents in Nature Human Behaviour journal: www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0520-3
Article on study on ScienceDaily website: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190114114221.htm

A version of this blog post appeared earlier on www.warrensnotice.com.

Industrial Hemp

Welcome back. Although I live on my wife’s family farm in Wisconsin, I have no farm duties, not even to kibitz. But occasionally something arouses my interest.

When I heard local farmers were thinking about growing industrial hemp, I was curious. Why grow hemp? Why weren’t they already growing it? How does it differ from marijuana, which Wisconsin hasn’t legalized for any purpose?

I found the popular, scholarly and government literature about all things hemp could keep me going for weeks. Here’s a sample of what I learned.

Hemp vs. marijuana (from
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS63sK0cIfo).

Hemp vs. Marijuana
Hemp and marijuana are the same plant species, Cannabis sativa; however, hemp has been bred to produce low levels--and marijuana, high levels--of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the chemical responsible for most of marijuana’s psychoactive properties. In the U.S., the legal distinction is that hemp has less than 0.3% THC, while marijuana has much higher levels.

Applications of Hemp
Hemp has been used for thousands of years. Someone counted that today its fiber, seed and oil have over 25,000 uses, with more than 5,000 applications in the textile industry alone.

Producing the strongest natural plant fiber, hemp is used widely for pulp and paper, rope and twine, construction materials, animal bedding and mulch, in addition to textiles. Nevertheless, its primary market may be as a food and feed product. The plant provides up to 24% protein; essential amino acids and the ideal 1:3 ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 for cooking, salad dressing and dietary supplements as well as for confectionery, snacks, dietary fiber, beer, flour, baking, non-dairy milk, cheese and animal feed.

Along with uses in cosmetics, biodegradable plastics, paint and biofuel, secondary products are being tested in clinical trials for treatment of childhood epilepsy, and health benefits have been claimed for chronic pain, Parkinson’s, muscular dystrophy, restless leg symptom and other neuro-muscular complications.

Hemp in the U.S. and Elsewhere
At least 23 countries grow hemp commercially, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain and China. The U.S. is not on that list.

1912 postcard “In a Southern
Hemp Field" (from
exploreuk.uky.edu/catalog/xt7x696zwx82_1_877).

Cultivation of hemp in the U.S. began with the first settlers in the 1600s and was encouraged for years. That changed in the early 1900s when states started labeling cannabis a poison. 

Prohibitions followed in the 1920s, and the first national regulation, the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, effectively shut down the hemp industry until World War II, when the country needed hemp fiber for the war. The end of the war ended the campaign to grow hemp.

The crop was banned internationally in 1961 under the United Nations’ Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and in 1970, it became illegal in the U.S. under the Controlled Substances Act.

The hemp world brightened in the 1970s, when THC was identified as the psychoactive component of marijuana, and the two plants could be differentiated. That light came slowly in the U.S.

In 2014, President Obama signed the Federal Farm Bill, whose Section 7606, Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research, allowed universities and state agriculture departments to grow or cultivate industrial hemp for research under state approval. Most states and many universities moved ahead.

Field of industrial hemp in Kentucky (from
twitter.com/kyhempsters/status/783790100442390528).

Bigger news is that the 2018 Farm Bill (Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018) legalized hemp as an agricultural commodity and, with restrictions, included other measures to promote its cultivation.

Wrap Up

Virginia Cooperative Extension
industrial hemp outreach,
August 2017.

States with approved pilot programs are providing rules, regulations and notices, including requirements for growers. Drawing upon the experience in other countries and research since 2014, those states and universities are providing seed-to-harvest guidance, insofar as possible, for their local conditions.

In general, industrial hemp is a hardy, fast growing, high yield crop, with a relatively short growth period, suitable for typical crop rotations. The plant’s deep roots can tap soil nutrients lost to other crops. Given a good start, it reportedly suppresses most weeds, while insect and disease problems must be managed like other crops.

Though I’ve conducted field research on marijuana, seeing the first crop of hemp on my wife’s family farm will be a new experience. Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
Hemp-centered organizations (each provides a range of information):
nationalhempassociation.org/
www.thehia.org/
www.votehemp.com/
Additional articles on hemp vs. marijuana:
ministryofhemp.com/hemp/not-marijuana/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp
Additional articles on applications of hemp:
www.rdmag.com/article/2018/06/researcher-explains-how-industrial-hemp-could-transform-multiple-industries-if-restrictions-were#disqus_thread
www.onlinemastersinpublichealth.com/hemp-cash-crop/
Additional articles on hemp’s legal and general history:
foundershemp.com/history-of-hemp/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_the_United_States
Countries where hemp is grown: ministryofhemp.com/hemp/countries/
State industrial hemp statutes: www.ncsl.org/research/agriculture-and-rural-development/state-industrial-hemp-statutes.aspx
2014 Farm Bill with hemp amendment:
www.votehemp.com/2014_farm_bill_section_7606.html
usda.gov/industrial-hemp
2018 Farm Bill with hemp amendment:
www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/12/14/the-farm-bill-hemp-and-cbd-explainer/
Congressional Research Service report Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity: fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32725.pdf
Example university outreach and extension programs on hemp:
dev.purduehemp.org/
coolbean.info/2018/02/07/wisconsin-industrial-hemp-production-a-basic-faq-guide-for-growing-an-old-crop-in-a-new-era/
sips.cals.cornell.edu/sites/sips.cals.cornell.edu/files/shared/documents/industrial-hemp-from-seed-to-market.pdf

A version of this blog post appeared earlier on www.warrensnotice.com.

Cutting Crop Water Use

Welcome back. In the early 1970s, when I was a visiting instructor at the University of the Philippines Los Baños collecting data for my PhD dissertation, the International Rice Research Institute next door was developing rice varieties that contributed to the Green Revolution.

Rice field trials at International
Rice Research Institute (from irri.org/).

IRRI, established in 1960, is now one of 15 members of the CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers, a global network of organizations engaged in research for a food-secured future.

There are many other researchers working to increase food production. They’re found in government, academia, industry and organizations, such as RIPE--Realizing Increased Photosynthetic Efficiency--an international research project supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research and the U.K. Department for International Development.

I became aware of RIPE through one of its research studies.

RIPE Crop Water-Use Study
One major hurdle to meeting the ever-increasing demand for food is the availability of water. While research has successfully increased crop yields over the years, there has been no attendant change in crop-water demand.

RIPE researchers affiliated with the University of Illinois, Polish Academy of Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, and the U.K.’s University of Lancaster set out to improve crop water-use efficiency without affecting crop yield. Reducing a crop’s water requirements would increase its viability in drier periods and drier regions.

Corn growing under drought conditions (from
modernfarmer.com/2014/09/heres-drought-solution-just-stop-watering-crops/).

Factors Involved
Though a short-course in plant physiology would help, I’ll try to hit the high spots.

The researchers’ goal was to improve the efficiency of photosynthesis, the process plants, algae and certain bacteria use to harness energy from sunlight into chemical energy; the process that uses solar radiation to transform water, carbon dioxide (CO2) and minerals into oxygen and organic compounds, such as glucose.

For a plant to capture atmospheric CO2 during photosynthesis, its stomata (plural of stoma), the microscopic pores found mainly in plant leaves, must stay open. The open stomata allow most of the water absorbed by plant roots to be transpired to the atmosphere.

Scanning electron microscope image of stomata
from underside of hybrid cherry tree leaf  (from
onychophoran.deviantart.com/art/Stomata-under-SEM-108399834).

Engineering the Plant
Because stomatal opening controls both CO2 influx and water vapor efflux, stomata have to respond to many different cues to balance the fluxes. The researchers predicted that genetic manipulation to increase the expression of a specific protein, PsbS, in the photosystem of a plant’s light-harvesting complex would decrease stomatal openings in response to the quantity of light and, thus, decrease water loss.

To test their hypothesis, they generated tobacco plants (Nicotiana tabacum) with both increased and decreased PsbS expression and monitored the plants’ growth under controlled and field conditions.

The results showed the light response of stomata was clearly affected by PsbS expression. Under field conditions, the tobacco plants with increased PsbS expression had an average reduction in water loss per CO2 assimilated of 25% with no effect on yield.

Wrap Up
The study demonstrated that tweaking one gene could improve tobacco’s water-use efficiency without affecting its yield. The researchers point out that, although tobacco offers properties that facilitated the experiment, the role of PsbS is universal in higher plants. The genetic manipulation should be applicable with all crops.

They emphasize the urgency to test and adopt strategies to improve crop water-use efficiency in light of the time required to develop new crop varieties and the rise in global temperatures.

Thanks for stopping by.

P.S.
International Rice Research Institute (IRRI): irri.org/
CGIAR Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers: www.cgiar.org/
Realizing Increased Photosynthetic Efficiency (RIPE): ripe.illinois.edu/
Study of increasing crop water-use efficiency in Nature Communications journal: www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03231-x
Article on study on ScienceDaily website: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180306115814.htm
Example background articles:
Photosynthesis: www.livescience.com/51720-photosynthesis.html
Plant light-harvesting complexes and photosystems:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-harvesting_complexes_of_green_plants
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosystem

A version of this blog post appeared earlier on www.warrensnotice.com.