The Bioeconomy Blueprint Panel

Bonnie Bassler: Well, thank you for coming It is a delight and an honor to moderate the Bioeconomy Blueprint Panel Discussion I have the pleasure today of speaking with four panelists who will describe the impact of this new federal commitment to biological research in the four big areas of health, energy, food, and environment You all should have panelists bio sheets, so I won’t take time to do a full introduction But we have here today Per-Pinstrup Anderson from Cornell University An expert on food and agricultural Joel Cherry, from Amyris Biotechnologies, A thought leader in new energy solutions Rina Singh from the Biotechnology Industry Association who has led an understanding in environmental issues and approaches to confronting them And finally Keith Yamamoto, from the University of California San Francisco an expert — you are an expert — an expert in novel approaches to health care and also an author of the National Research Council’s Biology In The 21st Century Report which was instrumental in framing the scientific community’s thinking about the grandest challenging, challenges facing the nation and the world really in how to enlist biology, partnered with other scientific and engineering disciplines to solve them I was delighted when I read the bio — Biweek Conway Blueprint the other day The way I see it, it sends a clear signal to basic and applied researchers, private industry, and investment communities that the Obama Administration is committed to investing in biological research with the overarching goal of strengthening America’s bioeconomy I especially like the blueprint’s recognition that solving problems in health, energy, food, and the environment requires integration across scientific disciplines Biologists, collaborating with physicists, chemists, mathematicians, and engineers The report also highlights that we must work to solve these four problems jointly, not one by one We cannot figure out how to feed a hungry world if we do not simultaneously act as responsible stewards of the environment Likewise, we cannot find biological solutions to the energy crisis if we do not simultaneously understand where we will grow the food and how we will deliver it around the world And I like that the blueprint addresses another crucial aspect of cross disciplinarity That neither the government nor the private sector can solve these problems alone We need to do a better job of coordinating policy levers including finding the right level of regulation and business ambitions to achieve the huge potential of the bioeconomy That part is important So I am hoping that our panelists can describe and imagine some of the most promising avenues of research and how they can bring their respective fields to fruition And in so doing, contribute fundamentally not just to knowledge but to the help of the nation’s overall economy Now, unlike the panelists I am not an expert in any of the four areas that lie at the heart of the bio-economy blueprint As you heard, I am a micro biologist I work on bacteria But since I am obviously well known as being a shameless huckster for microbiology and how it holds the answers to many, if not most of our problems, I want to use my remaining few minutes to convince that you microbes are the heart of the bio-economy, the microscopic but powerful federal reserve board of the bio-economy (laughter) The conventional understanding of microbes as causative agents of diseases has led us to consider them our deadly enemies For sure, microbes can kill us And the possibility of epidemic disease is real and increasingly alarming as we witness the rise of antibiotic resistant microbes, the lack of new antibiotic therapies to combat them, and the dramatic increase in earth’s human population Much less appreciated are the central roles that microbes play in shaping the environment and maintaining plant, animal, and human health Microbes have spent billions of years adapting to inhabiting, exploiting, and taming every niche on earth Micro biologists know this and we are now mining microbes for new genes, new molecules, new biochemical pathways, that hold great promise for medical, agricultural, industrial, and technological applications Already microbes serve as work horses for the production of industrial catalysts and pharmaceuticals Ranging from insulin to antibiotics to vaccines to pro-biotics Microbes are the most promising source for the next generation of environmentally and political neutral fuels They provide the part sets for the field of synthetic biology, a new field of science devoted to developing robust, industrial scale, biological machines and processes Microbes keep all higher organisms alive They help humans digest food, they provide our vitamins, they aid in the development of our blood vessels, and they educate our immune systems Learning more about the marvelous roles that microbes play in our health will enable us to harness their powers, to give us longer and healthier lives Microbes are required partners for all plant growth

Making microbes an untapped resource for adapting crops to grow and produce maximally in more places and with fewer inputs such as nitrogen containing fertilizers which are financially and environmentally costly And because microbes are critical drivers of earth’s bio geochemical cycles, they are important players in climate change both as sentinels and potentially as mitigators Indeed, microbes have the ability to consume, sequester, and degrade green house pollutants Finally, I should note that although microbial diversity surpasses everything else on the planet, scientists have studied deeply only a hand-full of microbial species We know there are millions more That means there are thousands of millions of microbial genes that produced molecules in genoas pathways, biological machines and structures that could be discovered and exploited for medical, industrial, and agricultural purposes In terms of the economy, just think about it Microbes are our planet’s only limitless, renewable resource And this cache remains virtually on tact So here is my plan for the bioeconomy We need to conquer the bad microbes, enslave the useful microbes, and reward the good microbes that devote their tiny lives to keeping us alive We need to look to the accumulated smarts of eons of evolution, expertly preserved inside of microbes for timely approaches and solutions to problems of global significance So enough about me and my microbes (laughter) I am now going to invite each of the panelists to take three or four minutes to describe how they see their work fitting into the bioeconomy and how they see the bioeconomy contributing to solutions to grand challenges And then we are going to have a lively discussion and I just want to remind you that we will save time for questions from the audience at the end So one other reminder that none of us wrote or were involved in the blueprint itself We are not the right people to ask specific questions about the blueprint We are here to lay out grand possibilities for solving giant challenges So first, Joel Cherry Joel Cherry: I hope you all can hear me I am going to remain seated I don’t have the stature to stand So thank you very much for the introduction and thank you to President Obama and the secretaries for coming in and supporting I think this very important blueprint for the bioeconomy I am here representing Amyris, an Emoryville, California company that is a living breathing example of the new bioeconomy While our commercial focus is to develop no compromise, renewable fuels and chemicals, the first technical success came in 2005, through a public private partnership between our founders who came from UC Berkeley, UC Berkeley UC Berkeley and the Gates Foundation, to produce an anti malarial, therapeutic called artemisia Malaria is a preventive curable disease that claims the lives of more than a million people a year mostly in Sub Saharan, Africa Artemisia, artemisia in combination therapies or ACT’s are the best treatment currently available However, manufacture of artemisia by extraction from worm wood is both expensive and has a volatile supply chain that induces large shifts in the cost to the sick Many of which are not able to afford it This is where synthetic biology can help Deliver the same product through stable industrial production process at lower cost Successfully completed in 2008, Amyris, entered into an agreement to license our artemisia acid producing yeast strains to Sanofi-Aventis on a royalty free basis for the purpose of producing this anti-malarial drug Amyris remains committed to expanding the reach of ACT’s through it as non profit, Sagia Although Amyris won’t see any profit from it’s work on artemisia, the funding received allowed us to build an innovative technology platform for the creation of new micro organisms capable of producing virtually any molecule found in nature or not in nature Amyris is one of the best examples of American innovation, in the nascent bioeconomy Today with over 350 employees, Amyris is applying the very same industrial synthetic biology that can save malaria patients, to replacing petroleum sourced products used in specialty chemical and transportation fuel markets Quite simply, we engineer microorganisms, primarily yeast and use them as living factories and establish fermentation protocols to convert plants or sugars into potentially thousands of molecules Our platform is general and can be applied to the development of microorganisms for the production of a wide variety of fuels and chemicals For the passion born of our heritage,

developing an accessible and affordable malaria treatment, Amyris is using the same scientific platform to create sustainable products that will reduce our society’s dependence on petroleum Driven not only by market opportunity, but by the principles inherent in our DNA, Amyris, DNA Amyris develops products under the highest standards of responsibility and sustainability in order to preserve the health of our planet and it’s people Today, Amyris is in commercial production of two products with many more to come The first is a renewable diesel product that has been approved by the EPA, it blends up to 35 percent with traditional diesel It has a significantly smaller carbon foot print and virtually no particulate NOx or Sulphur Differentiating it from other bio diesels Already over 150 city buses are running in a Fleet in Brazil and hopefully we’ll get them into a Fleet in the US soon Now, using the same molecule, the same technology, and adding a single chemical step, Amyris also produces a product called Squalene that is one of the best emollients in cosmetic ingredients and can also be used as an adjuvant for vaccine development Other producers make Squalene from deep water sharks by extracting their livers and dumping them back into the water, which is not — which may be renewable but not very sustainable And or from olive oil through extraction process which is also very energy intensive and water consumptive process Replacing these technologies with a yeast based fermentation process, reduces environmental impact, improves sustainability, and produces a higher quality end product We applaud the bioeconomy blueprint and hope it effectively accelerates development and commercialization of products like these Amyris’ experience in bringing these products to market shows that bridging the gap between the lab and the marketplace, requires a highly skilled work force, access to capital, clear regulatory environment, and an educated society necessary for acceptance The benefits of executing the bioeconomy blueprint are great Stronger economy, a cleaner environment, geographical distribution of production and associated rural development which is what Secretary Vilsack said And a future filled with innovative solutions The possibilities are endless from biological productions of fuels and chemicals to closed loop recycling and reuse, new materials with improved performance, medicinal foods, direct conversion of heat or light to chemicals and fuels, designer and environmental remediation microbes for pure water and soils, and biological computers that diagnose diseases All of these things are possible In closing, the bioeconomy requires us to rethink what, what is possible by applying inspired science to solve our biggest problems From fuels to chemicals and beyond, what we are doing is offering no compromised products with a new technology at the same costs That is what the bioeconomy is all about Thank you (applause) Keith Yamamoto: Let me echo Joel’s thanks to the administration, and secretaries who are here, all of you for attending this important announcement of this Of course, Mary Maxim’s fantastic efforts in, in the conceptualizing and putting the whole thing together and making it work I think mid wifing was the term that was used It is tremendously important I would like to spend a few minutes just telling you how the strategic objectives of the bioeconomy blueprint bring together key elements — Audience member: Can you speak up? We can’t hear you Keith Yamamoto: Sorry Sorry (inaudible) These are not amplified (inaudible) So I will try, I will try to speak up So I want to tell you about how this strategic objectives of the bioeconomy blueprint are bringing together key elements of a spectacular opportunity in health and health care And that opportunity is the realization that it is time not only to promote the advances across multiple scientific disciplines, but to begin to merge them and integrate them in new ways across all of these disciplines, across engineering, mathematics, areas that were not traditionally felt to be in the biomedical research arena And link them, link all of those advances together with clinical

observations, clinical data from real patients The outcome of this 21st century synthesis if you will is outlined in a recent report from the National Academy Of Sciences that I was privileged to be a part of And that outcome is called Precision Medicine The capacity to diagnose and treat diseases increasingly tailored to individual patients, rather than decisions based on statistical risk factors across large populations Revolutionary change in the way that medicine is realized in terms of what happens with the actual patient So this report calls for the creation of a dynamic, continuously updated, interactive repository or information commons, that could generate a massive knowledge network linking layers of data in a manner that is reminiscent in some ways to Google Maps that we are all familiar with And in doing so, in creating those linkages and realizing the correlations and connections, would reveal new patterns new relationships that advance our understanding of the mechanisms of disease, and directly inform the treatment and care of patients So this new synthesis then would link technologies, technologists, I should say, engineers, computer scientists, laboratory investigators, and their trainees, social and behavioral researchers, and patients, importantly patients, it would create a continuum that would extend from discovery researchers curiosity driven in their laboratories, to actual patients And by linking all of that information, change the nature of health and health care It would bring together new alliances among academia, industry, we just heard about some with Amyris, foundations, entrepreneurs, and government funding and regulatory agencies So what would it take? Achieving precision medicine? What is needed and what difference would it make? Well, let’s say I will just mention two things that are needed It would demand a diverse, highly skilled work force, with a different, with a sort of a different flavor than what we have now of highly specialized training in fields that are, that are mainly kept separate from each over Not much communication between them and not much of a linkage of the information that emerges from one disciplinary area to another And it is going to require new investments or redistributed investments Investments on the public side from the government Investments on the private side from foundations from companies and industries that would drive increased discovery, innovation, construction of this knowledge network that I just, that I referred to, entrepreneurialism and business formation to lead to the development and delivery of these discoveries into real application What would happen if we were able to do this? It would lead to the creation of new jobs and computing Technology, engineering, and research, and the, and the applications that would lead to new product formation It would lead to better health With increased productivity on the part of our citizens And finally, it would reduce health care costs by deploying only the tests and drugs and treatment plans that are needed for it to be effective for each patient So in terms of the economy, it would grow it by establishing new things to do And it would also improve the economy by reducing costs that are, that everyone is aware that have really been running out of control So — (applause) Per-Pinstrup Anderson: Let me begin by thanking Bonnie for making me like microbes a lot more than I did last time they attacked me (laughter) So now, I know who to call next time they get at me, they come after me Secretary Vilsack already stressed the importance of a strong bioeconomy in order to feed future generations So let me make a few additional comments along the lines of food, agriculture, and the role of the bioeconomy of biological research And it’s application First of all, it is critically important that we not only feed

future generations, but we do it in such a way that we maintain and hopefully strengthen our productive capacity And that means sustainable management of the resources that we have And we should also feed future generations in such a way that they become more healthy There is a very close relationship between the food system, what we do in the food system, whether it is research or application And what happens to human health More than half of all of the health problems that we are confronted with originated in the food system And this interaction is very poorly researched We need a lot more research on that, on that interface But before I go any further in terms of what I think we need to do for the future, let’s just take a quick trip back to the past and see did biological research really have an impact in the past? Or are we just kind of dreaming and postulating? I would argue that biological research and it’s innovative application to food and agriculture, both in the United States, and else where in the world are responsible for this very plentiful food supply and the relatively low food prices that we have today Yes, I know food prices are a little higher than they were ten years ago But guess what? If biological science hadn’t been applied the way it was, we would have been in a totally different place And we can, we can translate that to the future if we start doing research, or if we slow down our biological research, we are going to regret it 20 years from now Maybe I won’t 20 years from now, but my children and grandchildren certainly would We would be in a very different place If we look at the impact of the Green Revolution which was brought about by biological research and application of the research researched, what we find is that millions of Asians were saved from starvation and death The Green Revolution, the biological research contributed to yearly increases not only in Asia and Latin America, but also in the United States and they provided the foundation for future, for future food security That is the good news The bad news, of course, is that the job hasn’t been done The job isn’t done yet We still have many millions of people who suffer from hunger, from malnutrition, and from illnesses that could be cured with a better, a better, let’s say, more and better research and application of the research researched The key word with it is sustainable intensification We need to produce more food And as I mentioned before, we needed to do it in such a way that it results in sustainable management of the resources that we have and hopefully improved health Climate change calls for new scientific endeavors to counter negative effects and to enhance positive ones The effects on the food system and related matters We really do need a strong global bioeconomy Today we are talking about bioeconomy for the United States But we should really be talking about collaboration with the rest of the world We need a strong global bioeconomy in order to make sure that everybody gets enough to eat and very few people get too much And that relates right back to the health question We have got a tremendous problem with overweight obesity, not just in chronic diseases, not just in this country, but in many other places in the world We must invest in — in the bioeconomy with foresight because there is a long lead time between research and it’s application And therefore, we must have the foresight What we don’t do today, as I mentioned, our grandchildren are going to pay for 20, 30, 40 years from now That is the kind of, the kind of lead time, we should be, we should be thinking of As the blueprint correctly points out, the collaboration and coordination should not be limited to the federal agencies It should include US universities Hopefully, Cornell University will be a part of that It should include research centers It should include the private sector, where a tremendous amount of bio, biological research is under taken and it should include civil society We should really be talking about and this is what the blueprint is proposing, talking about a true collaborative, collaborative arrangement We need to apply appropriate scientific message And we must not be held hostage by anti-science sentiments and advocacy groups We must use science where it is most appropriately used to solve the problems that societies are faced with

And my last point is that we need to strengthen the foundation for science by allocating funds to basic frontier science as well as the translation of applied kind of science We must focus on problem solving and we must strengthen the bioeconomy through collaborations across disciplines We must get rid of the disciplinary silos, and we still are operating in silos And there are a number of ways that we can try to get rid of those We must collaborate across sectors and areas of concern including the four we are talking about this afternoon, namely, environment, energy, health, and food They all inter link Thank you (applause) Rina Singh: Thanks Thank you I would first like to thank Dr ary Maxim for her hard work And very appreciative for what we are holding in our hand today and also of course our secretaries for endorsing our United States blueprint So I would also like to thank the Office Of Science Technology and Policy for the, for the opportunity to participate in the roll-out of this very significant National Bioeconomy Blueprint Bio represents more than 1,100 biotechnology companies in the United States and 33 nations that use and develop biotechnology products Biotech Innovation started with health care, applications, then moved to agricultural applications, and now to industrial and environmental applications We call industrial and environmental Biotech the third wave in Biotech Innovation What is industrial Biotech? Industrial biotechnology is the application of life sciences to conventional manufacturing and synthetic processes It uses wild type, or genetically enhanced microbes which result in novel processes and products It lowers the, the production costs, reduces or prevents pollution, and enhances resource conservation The bio, Bioeconomy Blueprint will help unleash biotechnology to bring us cleaner, safer and healthier technology for bio fuels, renewable chemicals, and bio based products Think about when in the 1800’s, petroleum replaced whale oil We are going through a similar time of change now Our bio members have a vision for a future where bio refineries dot the landscape instead of petroleum refineries We see hundreds of new bio refineries or bio manufacturing facilities being built to process renewable feed stocks into bio fuels, chemicals, and bio plastics and other value add products This vision includes cleaner air and water, sustainable farming practices, and less reliance on fossil fuels It con — it suggests a replacement of toxic chemicals with safer bio products These bio refineries will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs And require thousands of highly skilled workers in all regions of the country Manufacturing applications will come out of Biotech Innovation, we cannot even imagine today that will transform how we make and use energy One day we may even use biological computers And biological fuel cells that produce clean fuel for our cars Or our homes where all we have to do is add sugar and water to generate power We will see the advancement of biological pollution clean up technologies, beyond, beyond bio remediation Like an organism that will eat carbon dioxide from power plants And use it to make clean burning hydrogen or natural gas Or possible compossible bio plastics This is not about picking winners and losers With biotechnology, everyone wins These will be permanent solutions that will create not just jobs, but careers Industrial biotechnology is a leading force for innovation in United States And innovation is the key to economic health and prosperity The bio-economy blueprint will help Biotech produce real results and is a game changing results that we are looking for And looking forward to Thank you (applause)

Bonnie Bassler: Well, thank you for — I want to thank Rina especially for getting us in this mode of thinking big And remember, we are scientists So we are not just fantasizing up here We are actually thinking and trying to tell you the future that we envision This is a future in our lifetime or that is pretty close after that And so these are the things we think about These are the reasons that we do science We all think our science contributes to this better health, better life for Americans and also a very different economy for America I am just going to try to ask a few questions that I was thinking about from my colleagues and then see where it goes And so I am going to start with Joel With a hard one So I want you to try to think as we, as we dream these big dreams, what do you see the biggest challenges to actually having these bio-economy happening and happen fast? Joel Cherry: I think like any new technology there is a, there is this valley of death It is easy to come up with things in the lab and to generate new ideas and the difficulty is in transitioning that to the marketplace Having sufficient capital, having the ability on the regulatory side to have influence And eventually using some sort of product bridge to get you to where you want to go From Amyris’ perspective, we want to be in the fuel’s business eventually The bridge is specialty chemical products that we can make money at before we can make money at a product like that So I think from an execution stand point, that is the most difficult piece Bonnie Bassler: Anybody wants to pipe in Okay. Good Rina, I am going to go to you So you told us we are going to add sugar and water and heat our houses and run our cars, and so would that be, that would be amazing And if that is far out in the future So tell us more specifically in the near future, what are the break through that you in the field of you know the environment and industry, what are, what is it that you really see on our horizons that we can count on? Rina Singh: Okay So today, government policies and private sectors have contributed to — from research and development, they have contributed innovations which have resulted in some very good technologies that are at the forefront of not only have they been commercial, but are on their way to getting commercialized So let me just walk you through a couple of those And I will, and I will have to also say something about universities One of the daunting tasks we today have with universities is we do need to recognize that there is a lot of good research that happens there But it is, it is a little bit challenging to get them out into the marketing manufacturing commercial arena So we need to do a little bit harder work there Some very good research going on And so we have at this point, with a lot of advance bio fuel technologies, we have got new molecules on the horizon We have got Bioisobutanol Biobutanol They can be produced from cheap sustainable sugars And these cheap sustainable sugars come from cellulosics or cellulose that are not, that are not food based So basically we have got enzymatic technologies available to us that can convert a lot of these cellulose to these cheap sugars sources And so some of the other molecules that are out there today are BioIsoprene, okay, which is basically petrochemically Isoprene that now we now we know how to make biologically and we call it BioIsoprene which can be polarized to PolyIsoprene which gets into rubbers And get where that goes? Into your tires So we are actually able to be self, be self sufficient, sustainably produce these and from home grown technology in the United States Other chemicals that are out there, other chemicals, renewable chemicals and plastics are also forming platforms similarly Bonnie Bassler: Keith, I think I will accuse you of the same thing, Which is for this transformation health care which would be fantastic for each American to get his or her personalized absolutely specific health care But can you point to like how we step our way there to a specific example to how these different scientists and engineers are going to collaborate, you know, and then tell us what the real social and economic impacts would be? Keith Yamamoto: How come we don’t get to ask you questions about your microbes? (laughter)

Yeah, let me give you an example from my own institution Dr. Shuvo Roy at UCSF is a bio engineer And he is leading a team, coordinating a team of clinicians, and scientists and engineers to develop an artificial kidney An implantable organ That filters toxins from the blood as kidneys do, but also does other important physiological kidney functions This has actually long been a goal, but he is far enough along, he and his team, are far enough long in this development working together in remarkable ways that this device has been recently selected as a pilot accelerated review project by the FDA I think there are a couple of friends here from the FDA And it is expected to dramatically improve the quality of life and the survival for patients with end stage renal disease Let me in terms of thinking about quality of life and economic impact, Tell you little bit about end stage renal disease or chronic kidney failure it is also called This is a disease that effects 570,000 people in the United States for whom treatment is primarily covered by Medicare So this is one percent of the Medicare population But this disease is consuming roughly 7 percent, about $40 billion of the Medicare budget The only effective therapy for this disease right now is the kidney transplant So of that 570,000 people afflicted with these diseases, a hundred thousand are waiting They are on a list hoping for availability of a, of a kidney transplant Last year, about less than 17,000 kidney transplants took place So the rest are waiting Of the 570,000, what is their alternative right now? Dialysis In clinic dialysis, enormously expensive procedure Five year life expectancy, about 35 percent And so for those who do live, the quality of life is severely compromised and only 35 percent live beyond that five years So here is a collaboration of engineers, scientists, clinicians that really come together to focus their expertise on, on creating this device It is moving through the regulatory process quickly and we are hoping that it can, can impact with the interest that we have with it right now Bonnie Bassler: Okay I will stick with this business there as a big point of this blueprint is that we — Keith, you are already talking about it This is that these scientists have to work across disciplines which has not been traditionally the way science has been carved out So Per, like when you think in the food and agricultural sector, you know, how do you even see that, that the government, the agencies, that the scientists, that we can foster these kind of inner disciplinarian associations and collaborations? Per-Pinstrup Anderson: Let me talk about research at the universities, academia, if you like And the question is really incentives The incentive to me as a researcher is to dig deeper into a very narrow area, so I can publish every journal articles in those journals that are very discipline specific And if I wanted promotion, if I wanted a salary increase, I would stick within my silo The way to, to change that it seems to me is to apply incentives of various kinds to university researchers, to spread out, not to become generalists We still have to have an in depth understanding in one discipline, in one area But enough appreciation of the other areas so we can work in teams I am not suggesting we generate inter disciplinary individuals at the universities, but inter disciplinary teams where the individual team member has the incentive to work on problems, on a problem focused research project I am not sure where to, where to start with this It is kind of the egg and the chicken in a way Because we can start with the researchers, and hope that that is translated into training, or we can start with training in the hope that somehow we will change the researchers At Cornell we are doing both We are trying very hard to have all of our PHD students in the department that I am responsible, that I am associated with, have multi-disciplinary PHD committees We have funds from the National Science Foundation to do

inter-disciplinary training for PHD students, so we do a number of things like that But if you compare that to what is going on in the rest of the universities, it is still a very, very small part So the answer it seems to me, Bonnie, really is the right kind of incentives And it is not just money It is not just promotion It is also where can you get your things published Where, where, which conferences can you go to where you can be applauded for doing, saying all of the right things that cut across these various disciplines? So those would be some of these things And coming back I think to what you were saying, Rina, the problem focus is extremely important And I think that is why translational research is now kind of becoming a widespread concept certainly in the health and nutrition area Where the idea is that even if you do very basic frontier research, there should be a way of somehow having that filtering all the way through the system so it will have an impact either on people or on societies in general Bonnie Bassler: Okay. Thanks, Per So I am going to follow up on that, that if these, we scientists who sit at these institutions could actually do this and get our work out there So then the problem is the way we trained people They have been trained the way we are Keith, you alluded in your opening comments to a new kind of a work force So what, you know, what is it we have to change in the way that we train people so that this work force actually appears in time to make this bio-economy flourish? Keith Yamamoto: Really important question So let me, let me try three quick, quick changes that I think could have a real impact One is that I think in — it would be, this is really the time in such a dynamic endeavor for us in academia to step back and reassess, reexamine what it is that we are delivering to our students in terms of what they leave our institutions in this case with a PHD degree So this is graduate education And I will bet you if we do that, we would put a sharper definition on the elements of training The basic concepts of training That would be change the way that we, we do our teaching, the way that the research projects are envisioned and executed in a way that would result in the right kind of expertise And I will address that in a moment on my second point, the right kind of expertise But maybe more importantly for this point, would deliver that training more rapidly And why’s that important? We are, we are now at a stage where that the data shows an alarming trend And that is that the age of investigators in achieving their, in getting their first independent position, is risen to 38 years for PHD’s, and getting their first independent research grant 42 years And that is, that is just really scary numbers It says that we are burning up critical years of people’s bold creativity by keeping them in training I think if we re-examine them, that could change a lot Point two, is to and this is really relevant to what Per said And this is to create some integrative training programs that bring together disciplines that — such as engineering, computation, with more traditional biological foresight, not with the goal of making renaissance men and women who are experts across all of this But rather those that have, have the kind of literacy that are needed, cross disciplines that is needed in order to allow them to carry out their specialized interests in, in ways that can really move them forward effectively So integrated training programs that really incorporate these different disciplines And then, and then I think the other place where we are falling short is, is really presenting to our students, what the range of opportunities, career opportunities now exist When I was training and I realize that was back you know when wheels and fire were coming into — (laughter) When I was training, it was a linear pipe line You know, when you started in a graduate school, you knew you were going to come out as an assistant professor And now there is a wonderful range of careers that really need to be filled by people with this kind of training If our whole endeavor is to move forward So this is not — this call for introducing the diversity of career opportunities is not merely a favor for the students But I think it is necessity if our, if our whole endeavor is to move forward To have people in communication, policy, law, and education, so forth Train people in these areas So that is a second point And then finally, let me pull back from graduate school Let’s all realize that it is not just PHD’s that are needed

to be able to carry out this bioeconomy And that we need to be pulling all the way back to what happens in science education at earlier stages? And not, and not shooting only at the PHD as the end point for that kind of product, that academia needs to be turning out, and looking for training programs at the undergraduate level, at the community college level that really bring to, bring to the for the kind of attention, the range of opportunities And these will be the people that will be able to carry out the range of technical and scientific opportunities and challenges that the bioeconomy presents Bonnie Bassler: So I have about 20 more questions, but don’t worry Because I am not going to ask any of them And I want to thank, thank the panel, for giving a few sort of highlights And I just want to remind everyone here in the audience that the things that the panelists are talking about, they are in much more depth They are in the report Like this idea of a new work force training regime, the idea of the products that are here now These private public partnerships that have really been successful and that, that are also imagined And then also how food effects health, effects the environment And so I encourage you of course to read it and hopefully we give you a flavor of the kinds of big challenges that are there And then also the marching towards solutions And so I want to give, whoever wants to ask these four some questions, there is a microphone right there We have a few minutes left if you want to quiz them They are here (inaudible) Bonnie Bassler: What? Two Go up there Audience member: First of all, I commend the report in it’s comprehensiveness and particularly addressing graduate education The graduate students are the ones that work at the frontiers of technology and they have no idea what their future careers are They think they are going to become an assistant professor They don’t, just as a professor, Keith Yamamoto said So in terms of training these graduate students, the institution culture has to change to say that if you do not become an assistant professor, it is not a failure If you become an entrepreneur, it is a success So what kinds of incentives that funding agencies can provide to change the culture that will facilitate these new PHD’s into new careers? Thank you Keith Yamamoto: So it is a really important question, it is changing incentives and rewards And, and having academics realize that there is more out than creating clones of ourselves And, and I would love to see the federal programs such as the training grants that the NIH offers create a mandate that, this kind of a breadth, exposing students to the breadth of opportunities out there is a part of the training regime that, that is included in any training grant And I think doing that will, is really a standard here that says the federal government and the institutions that are awarded these grants regard, regard that whole range of career opportunities as being valid and important Joel Cherry: Just to, just to follow-up on that Amyris is hosting two students from Delta University as interns over the summer and part of their education in the PHD programs is a required internship outside of their home country And then I think the US adopting something like that will have great value and we are looking forward to getting some free hams (laughter) Rina Singh: I have one comment Public awareness and educating the public as to the benefits that this, this technology provides is extremely important and that needs to happen really quickly Per-Pinstrup Anderson: We have an entrepreneurship program at Cornell that is very well attended by students The students are very, very interested They, they are interested to attend the courses and to the activities, so I think we are trying very much to instill entrepreneurship into our students whether they are under graduates or graduates Bonnie Bassler: I think the culture really is changing We all get, we are scientists, we get the numbers You know, they all have to wait for us to die to get our jobs, right? And so I think that awareness slowly is seeping into academics and this idea that is littering this country with scientific thinkers in all walks of life is fabulous for the country and there is more than one way to be a scientist And so I think what you are imagining is totally happening at the university level One more question I love to always disobey the government Come on, you guys, help me (laughter) Per-Pinstrup Anderson: Nobody else wants to disobey They are all listening (laughter) (applause)