Connect with us

Tech

Fermented fibers could tackle both world hunger and fashion waste

Published

on

Fermented fibers could tackle both world hunger and fashion waste


The leftover yeast from brewing beer, wine or even to make some pharmaceuticals can be repurposed to produce high-performance fibers stronger than natural fibers with significantly less environmental impact, according to a new study led by researchers at Penn State. Credit: Penn State

A fermentation byproduct might help to solve two major global challenges: world hunger and the environmental impact of fast fashion. The leftover yeast from brewing beer, wine or even to make some pharmaceuticals can be repurposed to produce high-performance fibers stronger than natural fibers with significantly less environmental impact, according to a new study led by researchers at Penn State and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The yeast biomass—composed of proteins, fatty molecules called lipids and sugars—left over from alcohol and is regarded as waste, but lead author Melik Demirel, Pearce Professor of Engineering and Huck Chair in Biomimetic Materials at Penn State, said his team realized they could repurpose the material to make fibers using a previously developed process.

The researchers successfully achieved pilot-scale production of the fiber—producing more than 1,000 pounds—in a factory in Germany, with continuous and batch production for more than 100 hours per run of fiber spinning.

They also used data collected during this production for a lifecycle assessment, which assessed the needs and impact of the product from obtaining the raw fermentation byproduct through its life to disposal and its cost, and to evaluate the economic viability of the technology. The analysis predicted the cost, , production output, greenhouse gas emissions and more at every stage.

Ultimately, the researchers found that the commercial-scale production of the fermentation-based fiber could compete with wool and other fibers at scale but with considerably fewer resources, including far less land—even when accounting for the land needed to grow the crops used in the fermentation processes that eventually produce the yeast biomass.

“Just as domesticated sheep for wool 11,000 years ago, we’re domesticating yeast for a fiber that could shift the agricultural lens to focus far more resources to ,” said Demirel, who is also affiliated with the Materials Research Institute and the Institute of Energy and the Environment, both at Penn State.

“We successfully demonstrated that this material can be made cheaply—for $6 or less per kilogram, which is about 2.2 pounds, compared to wool’s $10 to $12 per kilogram—with significantly less water and land but improved performance compared to any other natural or processed fibers, while also nearly eliminating greenhouse gas emissions. The saved resources could be applied elsewhere, like repurposing land to grow food crops.”

Waste not, want not

Demirel’s team has spent over a decade developing a process to produce a fiber from proteins. Inspired by nature, the fiber is durable and free of the chemicals other fibers can leave in the environment for years.

“We can pull the proteins as an aggregate—mimicking naturally occurring protein accumulations called amyloids—from the yeast, dissolve the resulting pulp in a solution, and push that through a device called a spinneret that uses tiny spigots to make continuous fibers,” Demirel said, explaining the fibers are then washed, dried and spun into yarn that can then be woven into fabric for clothes.

He also noted that the fibers are biodegradable, meaning they would break down after disposal, unlike the millions of tons of polyester clothing discarded every year that pollutes the planet.

“The key is the solution used to dissolve the pulp. This solvent is the same one used to produce Lyocell, the fiber derived from cellulose, or wood pulp. We can recover 99.6% of the solvent used to reuse it in future production cycles.”

The idea of using proteins to make fiber is not new, according to Demirel, who pointed to Lanital as an example. The material was developed in the 1930s from milk protein, but it fell out of fashion due to low strength with the advent of polyester.

“The issue has always been performance and cost,” Demirel said, noting the mid-20th century also saw the invention of fibers made from peanut proteins and from corn proteins before cheap and stronger polyester ultimately reigned.

Fermentation waste used to make natural fabric
Replacing conventional fabric fibers — like cotton — with the novel material could free up land, water and other resources to grow more food crops and reduce fast fashion waste, according to the project’s lead researcher Penn State Professor Melik Demirel. Credit: Penn State

Freeing land from fiber to produce food

Beyond producing a quality fiber, Demirel said, the study also indicated the fiber’s potential on a commercial scale. The models rolled their pilot-scale findings into simulated scenarios of commercial production. For comparison, about 55,000 pounds of cotton are produced globally every year and just 2.2 pounds—about what it takes to make one T-shirt and one pair of jeans—requires up to 2,642 gallons of water. Raw cotton is relatively cheap, Demirel said, but the environmental cost is staggering.

“Cotton crops also use about 88 million acres, of farmable land around the world—just under 40% of that is in India, which ranks as ‘serious’ on the Global Hunger Index,” Demirel said.

“Imagine if instead of growing cotton, that land, water, resources and energy could be used to produce crops that could feed people. It’s not quite as simple as that, but this analysis demonstrated that biomanufactured fibers require significantly less land, water and other resources to produce, so it’s feasible to picture how shifting from crop-based fibers could free up a significant amount of land for food production.”

In 2024, 733 million people—about one in 12—around the world faced food insecurity, a continued trend that has led the United Nations to declare a goal of Zero Hunger to eliminate this issue by 2030. One potential solution may be to free land currently used to grow fiber crops to produce more food crops, according to Demirel.

Current production methods not only use significant resources, he said, but more than 66% of clothing produced annually in the U.S. alone ends up in landfills. Demirel’s approach offers a solution for both problems, he said.

“By leveraging biomanufacturing, we can produce sustainable, high-performance fibers that do not compete with food crops for land, water or nutrients,” Demirel said. “Adopting biomanufacturing-based protein fibers would mark a significant advancement towards a future where fiber needs are fulfilled without compromising the planet’s capacity to nourish its growing population. We can make significant strides towards achieving the Zero Hunger goal, ensuring everyone can access nutritious food while promoting sustainable development goals.”

Future of fiber

Demirel said the team plans to further investigate the viability of fermentation-based fibers at a commercial scale.

The team includes Benjamin Allen, chief technology officer, and Balijit Ghotra, Tandem Repeat Technologies, Inc., the spin-off company founded by Demirel and Allen based on this fiber production approach. The work has a patent pending, and the Penn State Office of Technology Transfer licensed the technology to Tandem Repeat Technologies. Other co-authors include Birgit Kosan, Philipp Köhler, Marcus Krieg, Christoph Kindler and Michael Sturm, all with the Thüringisches Institut für Textil- und Kunststoff-Forschung (TITK) e. V. in Germany.

“In my lab at Penn State, we demonstrated we could physically make the fiber,” Demirel said. “In this pilot production at the factory, together with Tandem and TITK, we demonstrated we could make the fiber a contender in the global fiber market. Sonachic, an online brand formed by Tandem Repeat, makes this a reality. Next, we will bring it to mass market.”

More information:
Impact of biomanufacturing protein fibers on achieving sustainable development, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2025). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2508931122

Citation:
Fermented fibers could tackle both world hunger and fashion waste (2025, November 3)
retrieved 3 November 2025
from https://techxplore.com/news/2025-10-fermented-fibers-tackle-world-hunger.html

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.





Source link

Tech

The UK government’s AI skills programme betrays UK workers and our digital sovereignty | Computer Weekly

Published

on

The UK government’s AI skills programme betrays UK workers and our digital sovereignty | Computer Weekly


Last month, the UK government announced the AI Skills Boost programme, promising “free AI training for all” and claiming that the courses will give people the skills needed to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools effectively. There are multiple reasons why we don’t agree.

US dependency over UK sovereignty

The “AI Skills Boost” is the free, badged “foundation” element of the government’s AI Skills Hub which was launched with great fanfare. There are 14 courses, exclusively from big US organisations, promoting and training on their platforms. The initiative increases dependency on US big tech – the opposite of the government’s recent conclusion, in its new AI opportunities action plan, to position the UK “to be an AI maker, not an AI taker”. It is also not clear how increasing UK workers’ reliance and usage of US big tech tools and platforms is intended to increase the UK’s homegrown AI talent.

In stark contrast to President Macron’s announcement last week that the French government will phase out dependency on US-based big tech, by using local providers to enhance digital sovereignty and privacy, technology secretary Liz Kendall’s speech was a lesson in contradictions.

Right after affirming that AI is “far too important a technology to depend entirely on other countries, especially in areas like defence, financial services and healthcare”, the secretary of state went on that the country’s strategy is to adopt existing technologies based overseas.

Microsoft, one of the founding partners for this initiative, has already admitted that “US authorities can compel access to data held by American cloud providers, regardless of where that data physically resides”, further acknowledging that the company will honour any data requests from the US state, regardless of where in the world the data is housed. Is this the sovereignty and privacy the UK government is trying to achieve?

Commercial content rather than quality skills provision

The AI Skills Hub indexes hundreds of AI-related courses. That means the hub, which cost £4.1m to build, is simply a bookmark or affiliate list of online courses and resources that are already available, with seemingly no quality control or oversight. The decision to award the contract to a “Big Four” commercial consultancy, PwC, rather than the proven national data, AI and digital skills providers who tendered, needs to be investigated.

The press releases focus on the “free” element of the training, but 60% of the courses are paid, even some of those which are marked as free, providing a deceptive funnel for paid commercial training providers.

We need to have greater national ambition than simply providing skills training. That the only substandard skills provision available is provided by those with commercial interests in controlling how people think about and use AI is a further insult

The package launched includes 595 courses, but only 14 have been benchmarked by Skills England, and there has been a critical outcry over the dangerously poor quality of many courses, some of which are 10 years’ old, don’t exist, or are poor quality AI slop.

An example of why this is so concerning is that many courses are not relevant to the UK. One of the courses promoted has already been shown to misrepresent the UK law on intellectual property, with the course creators later denying they had any contractual arrangement with the site and admitting that they were “not consulted before our materials were posted and linked from there”.

Warnings on the need for public AI literacy provision ignored

Aside from concerns over the standards, safety, sovereignty and cost of the content offered, there is a much bigger issue, which we have been warning about.

Currently, 84% of the UK public feel disenfranchised and excluded from AI decision-making, and mistrust key institutions, and 91% prioritise safe and fair usage of AI over economic gain and adoption speed.

In 2021, the UK’s AI Council provided a roadmap for developing the UK’s National AI Strategy. It advised on programmes of public and educational AI literacy beyond teaching technical or practical skills. This call has been repeated, especially in the wake of greater public exposure to generative AI since 2023, which now requires the public to understand not just how to prompt or code, but to use critical thinking to navigate a number of related implications of the technology.

In July 2025, we represented a number of specialists, education experts and public representatives, and wrote an open letter calling for investment in the UK’s AI capabilities beyond being passive users of US tools. Despite initial agreements to meet and discuss from the Department for Education and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the offer was rescinded.

Without comprehensive public understanding and sustained engagement, developing AI for public good and maintaining public trust will be a significant challenge. By investing in independent AI literacy initiatives that are accessible to all and not just aimed at onboarding uncritical users and consumers, the UK can help to ensure that its AI future is shaped with the UK public’s benefit at the heart.

Wasted opportunity to develop a beneficial UK approach to AI

We need to have greater national ambition than simply providing skills training. That the only substandard skills provision available is provided – at great public cost – by those with commercial interests in controlling how people think about and use AI is a further insult.

Indeed, Kendall’s claim that AI has the potential to add £400bn to the economy by 2030 is lifted from a report built by a sector consultancy that only focuses on the positive impact of Google technologies in the UK. Her announcement leaned heavily on claims such as “AI is now the engine of economic power and of hard power”, which come from a Silicon Valley playbook.

The focus on practical skills undermines the nation’s AI and tech sovereignty, harms the economy, with money leaving the nation to fund big tech. It entrenches political disenfranchisement, with decisions about AI framed as too complex for the general population to meaningfully engage with. It stands on fictitious narratives about inevitable big tech AI futures, in which public voice and public good are irrelevant.

If you wish to sign a second version of the open letter, which we are currently drafting, or to submit a critical AI literacy resource to We and AI’s resource hub, contact us here

This article is co-authored by:

  • Tania Duarte, founder, We and AI
  • Bruna Martins, director at Tecer Digital
  • Dr. Elinor Carmi, senior lecturer in data politics and social justice, City St. George’s University of London
  • Dr. Mark Wong, head of social and urban policy, University of Glasgow
  • Dr Susan Oman, senior Lecturer, data, AI & society, The University of Sheffield
  • Ismael Kherroubi Garcia, founder & CEO, Kairoi
  • Cinzia Pusceddu, senior fellow of the Higher Education Academy, independent researcher
  • Dylan Orchard, postgraduate researcher, King’s College London
  • Tim Davies, director of research & practice, Connected by Data
  • Steph Wright, co-founder & managing director, Our AI Collective



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Epstein Files Reveal Peter Thiel’s Elaborate Dietary Restrictions

Published

on

Epstein Files Reveal Peter Thiel’s Elaborate Dietary Restrictions


Peter Thiel—the billionaire venture capitalist, PayPal and Palantir cofounder, and outspoken commentator on all matters relating to the “Antichrist”—appears at least 2,200 times in the latest batch of files released by the Department of Justice related to convicted sex offender and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.

The tranche of records demonstrate how Epstein managed to cultivate an extensive network of wealthy and influential figures in Silicon Valley. A number of them, including Thiel, continued to interact with Epstein even after his 2008 guilty plea for solicitation of prostitution and of procurement of minors to engage in prostitution.

The new files show that Thiel arranged to meet with Epstein several times between 2014 and 2017. “What are you up to on Friday?” Thiel wrote to Epstein on April 5, 2016. “Should we try for lunch?” The bulk of the communications between the two men in the data dump concern scheduling meals, calls, and meetings with one another. Thiel did not immediately return a request for comment from WIRED.

One piece of correspondence stands out for being particularly bizarre. On February 3, 2016, Thiel’s former chief of staff and senior executive assistant, Alisa Bekins, sent an email with the subject line “Meeting – Feb 4 – 9:30 AM – Peter Thiel dietary restrictions – CONFIDENTIAL.” The initial recipient of the email is redacted, but it was later forwarded directly to Epstein.

The contents of the message are also redacted in at least one version of the email chain uploaded by the Justice Department on Friday. However, two other files from what appears to be the same set of messages have less information redacted.

In one email, Bekins listed some two dozen approved kinds of sushi and animal protein, 14 approved vegetables, and 0 approved fruits for Thiel to eat. “Fresh herbs” and “olive oil” were permitted, however, ketchup, mayonnaise, and soy sauce should be avoided. Only one actual meal was explicitly outlined: “egg whites or greens/salad with some form of protein,” such as steak, which Bekins included “in the event they eat breakfast.” It’s unclear if the February 4 meeting ultimately occurred; other emails indicate Thiel got stuck in traffic on his way to meet Epstein that day.

According to a recording of an undated conversation between Epstein and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak that was also part of the files the DOJ released on Friday, Epstein told Barak that he was hoping to meet Thiel the following week. He added that he was familiar with Thiel’s company Palantir, but proceeded to spell it out loud for Barak as “Pallentier.” Epstein speculated that Thiel may put Barak on the board of Palantir, though there’s no evidence that ever occurred.

“I’ve never met Peter Thiel, and everybody says he sort of jumps around and acts really strange, like he’s on drugs,” Epstein said at one point in the audio recording, referring to Thiel. The former prime minister expressed agreement with Epstein’s assessment.

In 2015 and 2016, Epstein put $40 million in two funds managed by one of Thiel’s investment firms, Valar Ventures, according to The New York Times. Epstein and Thiel continued to communicate and were discussing meeting with one another as recently as January 2019, according to the files released by the DOJ. Epstein committed suicide in his prison cell in August of that year.

Below are Thiel’s dietary restrictions as outlined in the February 2016 email. (The following list has been reformatted slightly for clarity.)

APPROVED SUSHI + APPROVED PROTEIN

  • Kaki Oysters
  • Bass
  • Nigiri
  • Beef
  • Octopus
  • Catfish
  • Sashimi
  • Chicken
  • Scallops
  • Eggs
  • Sea Urchin
  • Lamb
  • Seabass
  • Perch
  • Spicy Tuna w Avocado
  • Squid
  • Turkey
  • Sweet Shrimps
  • Whitefish
  • Tobiko
  • Tuna
  • Yellowtail
  • Trout

APPROVED VEGETABLES

  • Artichoke
  • Avocado
  • Beets
  • Broccoli
  • Brussels sprouts
  • Cabbage
  • Carrots
  • Cucumber
  • Garlic
  • Olives
  • Onions
  • Peppers
  • Salad greens
  • Spinach

APPROVED NUTS

  • Anything unsalted and unroasted
  • Peanuts
  • Pecans
  • Pistachios

CONDIMENTS

  • Most fresh herbs, and olive oil

AVOID

  • Dairy
  • Fruits
  • Gluten
  • Grains
  • Ketchup
  • Mayo
  • Mushroom
  • Processed foods
  • Soy Sauce
  • Sugar
  • Tomato
  • Vinegar

MEAL SUGGESTIONS

  • Breakfast Egg whites or greens/salad with some form of protein (Steak etc)



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Elon Musk Is Rolling xAI Into SpaceX—Creating the World’s Most Valuable Private Company

Published

on

Elon Musk Is Rolling xAI Into SpaceX—Creating the World’s Most Valuable Private Company


Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite company SpaceX is acquiring his AI startup xAI, the centibillionaire announced on Monday. In a blog post, Musk said the acquisition was warranted because global electricity demand for AI cannot be met with “terrestrial solutions,” and Silicon Valley will soon need to build data centers in space to power its AI ambitions.

“In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale,” Musk wrote. “The only logical solution therefore is to transport these resource-intensive efforts to a location with vast power and space. I mean, space is called ‘space’ for a reason.”

The deal, which pulls together two of Musk’s largest private ventures, values the combined entity at $1.25 trillion, making it the most valuable private company in the world, according to a report from Bloomberg.

SpaceX was in the process of preparing to go public later this year before the xAI acquisition was announced. The space firm’s plans for an initial public offering are still on, according to Bloomberg.

In December, SpaceX told employees that it would buy insider shares in a deal that would value the rocket company at $800 billion, according to The New York Times. Last month, xAI announced that it had raised $20 billion from investors, bringing the company’s valuation to roughly $230 billion.

This isn’t the first time Musk has sought to consolidate parts of his vast business empire, which is largely privately owned and includes xAI, SpaceX, the brain interface company Neuralink, and the tunnel transportation firm the Boring Company.

Last year, xAI acquired Musk’s social media platform, X, formerly known as Twitter, in a deal that valued the combined entity at more than $110 billion. Since then, xAI’s core product, Grok, has become further integrated into the social media platform. Grok is featured prominently in various X features, and Musk has claimed the app’s content-recommendation algorithm is powered by xAI’s technology.

A decade ago, Musk also used shares of his electric car company Tesla to purchase SolarCity, a renewable energy firm that was run at the time by cousin Lyndon Rive.

The xAI acquisition demonstrates how Musk can use his expansive network of companies to help power his own often grandiose visions of the future. Elon Musk said in the blog post that SpaceX will immediately focus on launching satellites into space to power AI development on Earth, but eventually, the space-based data centers he envisions building could power civilizations on other planets, such as Mars.

“This marks not just the next chapter, but the next book in SpaceX and xAI’s mission: scaling to make a sentient sun to understand the Universe and extend the light of consciousness to the stars,” Musk said in the blog post.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending