Teen Discovers Plastic-Decomposing Bacteria

ganelo writes to tell us that 16-year-old Waterloo Collegiate Institute student Danel Burd has made quite a stir with his plastic-eating bacteria discovery. For his efforts Burd won top prize at a Canada-wide science fair claiming a $10,000 prize and a $20,000 scholarship. "Tests to identify the strains found strain two was Sphingomonas bacteria and the helper was Pseudomonas. A researcher in Ireland has found Pseudomonas is capable of degrading polystyrene, but as far as Burd and his teacher Mark Menhennet know -- and they've looked -- Burd's research on polyethelene plastic bags is a first."

Well, Ma'am..

[by Anonymous Coward]

Now when people come back into my store and complain about their shopping bags breaking, I can tell them why!

hey I know

[ILuvRamen (1026668)]

You know what would be cool is instead of just saying ooh I wonder if it eats plastic too and finding out it does, though that's definitely stll amazing...put some bacteria that are at least close to maybe being able to eat X substance and put it on the surface of that substance and blast them with regular, mild radiation every day until some mutate until a colony mutates and starts eating the rubber/plastic/whatever. I've heard very little about forcing mutations randomly to try and get a given result but it seems like a good idea to me. I mean if this kid had found that the bacteria couldn't eat plastic, I doubt anyone would have given him the funding and stuff to try and alter them so they do. And yes, before anyone posts it, keep the test area damn well sealed too so supergerms don't get out (duh!).

Re:hey I know

[wizardforce (1005805)]

a similar technique to what you describe has already been used to generate a strain of bacteria capable of cleaning coal of various hydrocarbons. the basic idea is that you can breed bacteria and put a selective pressure on them while slowly changing the chemical environment they live in. in the case of coal, you start with oil digesting bacteria and slowly acclimate them to larger quantities of hydrocarbons typically found in the presence of coal while lowering the concentration of the original "oil" hydrocarbons. it is my understanding that the process I am referring to has been patented although I do not believe that radiation/mutagens were used in the breeding process. so in principle your idea, though not new, would/does work and is being used to some extent.

Doubtful

[aepervius (535155)]

The patent would be a patent of evolution. I doubt you can patent a natural process like this. But then again I don't know much on the US patent process, so...

Re:Doubtful

[Ihmhi (1206036)]

Well, the US patent process certainly hasn't stopped anyone from patenting the human genome [nationalgeographic.com].

Re:hey I know

[skirmish666 (1287122)]

This reminds me of that episode of sliders where a bacteria created to eat plastic waste escapes and eats the worlds petrochemical supply.

Re:hey I know

[Pedrito (94783)]

Actually, bacteria mutate fairly quickly as it is. First of all, they don't have nearly the same level of DNA repair ability that eukaryotes (that's all multi-celled creatures and some single-celled) do. Second of all, their sheer numbers are enormous. In a small container, populations many orders of magnitude larger than the human population, can be grown. So out of the huge populations alone, you can expect a much larger overall mutation count.

Finally, different species of bacteria can share genetic material (DNA plasmids) through a type of "mating" called conjugation, allowing species to trade traits with other species.

Any mutations that makes them more efficient reproducers and better able to create energy from their environment is likely to ensure survival and ability to out-reproduce their peers.

Through these various methods, you should get a fairly high rate of mutation. Adding radiation may actually be detrimental to the overall success of the intent. Mutations tend to be detrimental, so if you increase the rate too much, you end up killing them off too fast. You also increase the risk of killing off the small populations with the new positive mutations you want, before they have a chance to spread.

It wouldn't surprise me if you went digging through a bunch of dumps that have been covered up years ago, to find bacteria that have evolved to eat some of that garbage. I suspect that the time required for our garbage to decompose is actually lower than we predict since we don't really factor in the possibility of bacterial mutations which can make them good consumers of the garbage. I suspect these mutations will happen in far less time than the natural decomposition period of the materials in question.

in related news

[circletimessquare (444983)]

a top secret death squad under the auspices of the upper corporate echelon at ikea have been dispatched from stockholm to deal with this potentially profit decimating threat

Re:

[FriendSite.com (1208220)]

I would have thought Ikea would have loved this, to get their furniture to self-destruct after 2 years... 1. Build Plastic Furniture 2. Create Mutant Plastic Eating Bacteria 3. Bacteria Eats Plastic 4. Customer needs new furniture 5. ??? 6. Profit

Re:

[dwater (72834)]

I have several pieces of Ikea furniture, and almost none of it is plastic - it's wood and/or metal, mostly.

Is it different in the USA?

Re:

[dwater (72834)]

..but do you not get the bags because they cost you a few pence, or does the cost remind you of the environmental cost and *that* stops you?

The mishap

[by Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the bacteria was introduced after the teen discovered the cure for cancer in a plastic dish; however, before the cure could be analyzed in order to replicate it, the bacteria ate the dish and the cure. The Associated Press quoted the boy saying "God damnnit!"

Re:

[kitsunewarlock (971818)]

It ate chemotherapy?
I jest, and I know its a horrible, body damaging and many times unsuccessful treatment.
I should have said something along the lines of "It ate whatever was keeping the FDA going?", but that's too much of a stretch.

Absolutely Beautiful

[Walter Wart (181556)]

It was kitchen table science done by himself with no budget, no grant and no assistants. You aren't supposed to be able to do Real Science(tm) like that anymore. So how did the kid do it?

1. He thought a of a simple problem that hadn't been solved
2. He investigated the obvious avenues first
3. He used the resources at his disposal instead of trying
4. He chose something where success and failure would both be easy to demonstrate

This was really good science. If he keeps it up look for his name with the words "Full Professor" in front and a list of patents afterwards some time soon.

Re:Absolutely Beautiful

[v(*_*)vvvv (233078)]

5. Got lucky.

Re:Absolutely Beautiful

[David Gerard (12369)]

"Chance favours the prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur.

Re:Absolutely Beautiful

[h4rm0ny (722443)]

"The harder I work, the luckier I get" - Samuel Goldwyn (apparently).

Re:

[Mahjub Sa'aden (1100387)]

"Thyme flavours the prepared mind." - Hannibal Lecter

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

5. Got lucky.

Damn, and probably with a cute enviro-chick too.

Re:

[urcreepyneighbor (1171755)]

You aren't supposed to be able to do Real Science(tm) like that anymore.

Says who?

It's both of the above

[mangu (126918)]

Granted, decomposing is still far better than burying in a landfill.

The idea is not to have a plastic-decomposing machine. The problem to be solved is how to deal with plastic that gets buried in a landfill. Even though many people today do a conscious effort to recycle, it's still not enough, there will always be some plastic in the garbage.

With this invention, you just spray the surface with water containing the bacteria, it seeps in and decomposes the old buried plastic, and then the landfill place can b

Mutant 59

[Maximum Prophet (716608)]

Shouldn't this be tagged, "Mutant 59"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kit_Pedler [wikipedia.org]

But is it a good thing?

[taniwha (70410)]

right now we're putting more CO2 into the atmosphere that we're taking out - largely by digging it up out of the ground and burning it. Plastic bags are largely made from fossil carbon - surely we're better off sequestering this carbon (by dropping it in a landfill, or down an old oil well, or coal mine) than we are breaking it down presumeably to CO2 which is released into the atmosphere

Re:

[lattyware (934246)]

That presumes that putting CO2 into the atmosphere does something bad. Which it does not. (Rises in temperature CAUSE a rise in CO2. CO2 is dissolved in the oceans. When the temperature rises, water evaporates, and CO2 is released. Graphs show CO2 actually rises directly after an increase in temperature not before.)

Re:

[Maelwryth (982896)]

It doesn't just end up in landfills though, does it [wikipedia.org].

No cigar..

[Joce640k (829181)]

Come back when your "ocean evaporation" theory can explain why Venus is twice as hot as Mercury....

Re:No cigar..

[arodland (127775)]

Come back when your "ocean evaporation" theory can explain why Venus is twice as hot as Mercury....

Dur, because Mercury has no atmosphere to speak of? Half the distance from the sun that Earth is, a twentieth the mass, and tidally locked into three rotations for every two revolutions? Not exactly the ideal candidate for climate study... and Venus? You realize Venus has an atmosphere that not only is more than 95% CO2, compared to 0.04% on Earth, but is also nearly a hundred times denser? To what degree do you think that observing the difference between 95% CO2 @ 90 atm and 0.04% CO2 @ 1 atm, or the difference between 95% CO2 @ 90 atm and 3% CO2 @ ~0 atm will give you insight on the difference between 0.04% CO2 @ 1 atm vs. 0.045% CO2 @ 1 atm?

Re:But is it a good thing?

[v(*_*)vvvv (233078)]

This is global warming myths 101.

The above is true, and rise in temperatures caused from CO2 are ALSO true.

That is why once you start increasing CO2 levels, it gets warmer FASTER because it triggers even more CO2 to be created, and all of it causes more warming.

Get with the program people. This is science not politics.

"Human-aggravated" might be more accurate

[untree (851145)]

I'm not a climate scientist, but I did work in a paleoclimatology lab for awhile in college. I think the main problem I have with the global warming discussion -- like almost any other so-called "controversial" topic -- is that it rapidly becomes an argument among extremists.

NO ONE can deny that C02 is a greenhouse gas. The discussion should therefore be "how much is our CO2 output affecting global climate?" Instead the argument ends up being a battle between people claiming it is a "wildly extrapolated

Re:

[pembo13 (770295)]

Well good or bad, humans can't (yet) breathe CO2... so it can't be all that good.

Re:But is it a good thing?

[Nullav (1053766)]

Graphs show CO2 actually rises directly after an increase in temperature not before.

You know, there's a reason for the term 'runaway greenhouse effect'. Hint: That extra CO2 released by the increased heat doesn't help cool anything.

Re:But is it a good thing?

[RodgerDodger (575834)]

*sigh* It's called a positive feedback loop. Increased temperatures do result in increased CO2 levels. Increased CO2 levels then result in increased temperatures. And thus the cycle continues upwards until something causes it to stop. The real big giveaway is that the temperature increase always accelerates as CO2 concentrations goes up.

This is a simple laboratory experiment that anyone can do. Heck, they did it on MythBusters.

And yes, it's true that natural processes put out a lot more CO2 than humans do. That's not the point. Natural processes are more or less balanced; what nature puts out, nature absorbs. What we are doing is upsetting the balance so that there isn't enough capacity. One of Dicken's characters said "Annual income 20 pounds, annual expenditure 19 six, result happiness. Annual income 20 pounds, annual expenditure 20 pounds ought and six, result misery." - his point was that all you need to do is live just a little beyond your means to cause big problems.

Heck, it doesn't even matter if we _are_ the main cause or not. If we're not the main cause, we're still contributing to the problem at least a bit. Personally, I'd rather be the cause - it would imply that we could fix it.

Re:But is it a good thing?

[TheDugong (701481)]

"Natural processes are more or less balanced"

That is a rather large assumption and probably untrue, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_Age [wikipedia.org], http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#Life_cycle [wikipedia.org] etc etc etc.

Re:

[blind biker (1066130)]

I have been thinking along the same lines for a long time. I came to the conclusion that landfills are, in a weird way, good for the planet in the long run, if filled with carbon-containing trash - this is, as you noted, a carbon-sequestering mechanism of sorts.
But this seems even less politically correct to say, than that nuclear plants are more ecologically sound than coal plants, so I don't expect your post to be modded very high. Slashdot can be extremely PC.

Ah, this story

[Haoie (1277294)]

When I first came across it, I thought that it was an idea that needs some serious development. Plastics take up a huge amount of landfill space worldwide, and this is of use in the future.

That and recycling plastics, obviously.

That's pretty neat, kiddo...

[syd02 (595787)]

"...you came up with an answer to 29 million tons of non-biodegradeable plastic being added to landfills each year, so here's 10 grand. Yep, 10 big ones. Oh, and go get yourself a bit of education."

Re:That's pretty neat, kiddo...

[Ihmhi (1206036)]

But doesn't he own the process? Unless the rules stated that any experiments become the property of the organization running the fair, he is going to make $30K on top of whatever money he will be pulling out of this discovery in the future. If he doesn't squander it away on Xbox games and hookers he's set for life.

Re:

[AaxelB (1034884)]

Quite right. He should invest in games and hookers.

Potential for heating

[concernedadmin (1054160)]

Since the bacteria produce heat as a byproduct in addition to a negligible amount of CO2, perhaps this could be used to replace older trash incinerators to act as a type of greenhouse, with the heat coming not from trapped infrared, but from the microbial waste.

Re:

[timmarhy (659436)]

hows it going to get hot enough without kill the bacteria, duh.

Next up: What he does the next $100,000

[terbo (307578)]

I wonder how hes going to turn that $20k into $100k so he can actually get a college degree.

Unintended consequences

[Starvingboy (964130)]

I can't help but wonder about untindended consequences. Looking around at all the plastics, having them inadventantly eaten by bacteria would be a BAD thing.

Re:

[Z00L00K (682162)]

So the evolution will claim new victims.

But I'm hardly surprised that these bacteria exists - considering that oil-eating bacteria already has been found!

The issue is otherwise at what rate they can consume plastics and which conditions that are required.

Proof of evolution

[by Anonymous Coward]

Like the evidence of Nylonase [wikipedia.org] this shows a new life forming to fill a niche of edible material.

In 1975 a team of Japanese scientists discovered a strain of Flavobacterium living in ponds containing waste water from a factory producing nylon that was capable of digesting certain byproducts of nylon-6 manufacture, such as the linear dimer of 6-aminohexanoate, even though those substances are not known to have existed prior to the invention of nylon in 1935

Yet another hammer in the coffin for the nuts who want to deny reality.

Re:Proof of evolution

[by Anonymous Coward]

Yet another hammer in the coffin for the nuts who want to deny reality.

You are hereby sentence to listen to Simon and Garfunkel's El Condor Pasa [songmeanings.net] while donating your time to Habitat for Humanity [habitat.org] till you learn the difference between a hammer and a nail.

And the code name for this bug is:

[misterhypno (978442)]

The Andromeda Strain.

as if anybody hadn't thought of THAT one yet!

Love those journalists

[MrMr (219533)]

This sounds like an excellent high school project, combined with crappy PR and lazy Journalism.

but as far as Burd and his teacher Mark Menhennet know -- and they've looked
Yeah right, so googling 'biodegradation Sphingomonas polyethene OR polyethylene' doesn't return any hits in Canada.

Re:Love those journalists

[kaos07 (1113443)]

"Yeah right, so googling 'biodegradation Sphingomonas polyethene OR polyethylene' doesn't return any hits in Canada."

Second result is your post! http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=biodegradation+Sphingomonas+polyethene&btnG=Search [google.com]

Doomwatch

[BigBadBus (653823)]

This was the basis for an episode of the BBC drama series Doomwatch in the early 1970s. The bacteria was heralded as a way of disposing with plastic litter ... until it escaped into the wild. Well worth watching IMHO.

Re:

[urcreepyneighbor (1171755)]

Never forget the parable of the Vidiians [wikipedia.org].