Line 4Line 4 Copyic/close/grey600play_circle_outline - material
Answers

Question

OK, Im doing an inquiry in class and Id like to know, why does Monsanto think that life can be patented? Or even thoughts and ideas from postsecondary students? Life and ideas should be available to everyone. And how does Monsanto manage to grow crops that can actually emit greenhouse gases. Their soy beans are green for Petes sake!

Submitted by: Jakob-M


Answer

Expert response from Community Manager

Moderator for GMOAnswers.com

Monday, 23/11/2015 17:21

You have asked several different questions. We will first address your questions regarding patents, and then please review the answer below from Chelsey Robinson, Global Preparedness Content Manager at Monsanto, regarding your second question referring to greenhouse gas emissions.

 

Can life be patented?

Drew Kershen from the University of Oklahoma, explainsThe Supreme Court of the United States, and patent courts and bodies around the world, have ruled repeatedly that “living matter” is a patentable subject.” Drew goes on to explain this topic in more detail here.

 

It is important to call out several nuances regarding patents of “living organisms,” which are explained by Hans Sauer, Deputy General Counsel for Intellectual Property for the Biotechnology Industry Organization, he explains “the USPTO [United States Patent and Trademark Office] does not award patents on living organisms (and other things) that were merely discovered in nature. The Supreme Court has said that if a new plant were discovered in the wild it would not be patentable, even if it had never before been known by man.”

 

Sauer goes on to explain, “On the other hand, a bacterium that was engineered by man to do something it cannot naturally do ­like digest crude oil ­is patentable under the same conditions that apply to any other kind of invention. And, of course, the USPTO does not award patents on living organisms ­even if they were engineered by man­ unless they are really new, unobvious, and practically useful just like any other invention.”

 

You may also be interested to know that the first case related to patenting “life”  occurred in the 1980’s which predates ag biotechnology. In 1980, U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Diamond (GE) v. Chakrabarty (Patent Office) that genetically engineered microorganisms can be patented, which was related to a microbe for eating oil.

 

Why are patents used in agriculture?

Following is an excerpt from an answer provided by Drew Kershen from the University of Oklahoma which discusses why patents are used in agriculture and the Supreme Court ruling that affirms that an organism produced through modern biotechnology can be protected under general patent law:

 

“In 1980, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that an organism produced through modern biotechnology can be protected under general patent law―via a utility patent. In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States reaffirmed that plant breeders can obtain a utility patent in biotech organisms, including seeds and plants. (Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., # 12-398, decided June 13, 2013).

 

Therefore, in the United States, plant breeders can own intellectual property in seeds and plants through each of the legally protected property rights ­ plant patents, trade secrets, trademarks, plant variety certificates, and utility patents. Farmers purchase seeds from local seed dealers and farmers then own the seeds for the purposes of producing a harvest. But the farmer does not own the intellectual property in the seed or growing crop...

 

This is no different than a person who purchases a movie CD. The person owns the movie CD but the person does not own the intellectual property in the CD. Consequently, the person cannot legally make a copy of the movie CD.


After reading this far, a person might ask, ‘Why does the United States law recognize these various forms of intellectual property?’ US law creates and supports intellectual property because intellectual property provides the incentive for innovation by allowing the inventor an IPR (legally protected property right). Using the IPR, the inventor can recover the research and development costs that went into inventing the new, useful innovation. Seed companies spend years (average of about 13 years) and millions of dollars per new seed variety to produce a new, useful seed variety.”

 

Are GMOs the only seeds that can be patented?

No, non-GMO seeds are also patented. Dr. Kevin Folta, professor and chairman of the University of Florida horticultural sciences department, discusses how plants can be and are patented, even if they are not GM varieties in this article:  

 

"GM seeds are not the only type of seeds that can be patented. For example, see this patent for the Goose Creek Tomato. Patents protect the technology, breeders' rights and the process, while labels describe the qualities of the product. GM seeds are the only seeds to go through rigorous safety testing, unlike conventional or organic seeds, and seeds developed through radiation treatments and mutation breeding -- even though all can be patented."

 

A final note regarding patents from Greg Conko, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, “Whatever one’s view of patents, or of intellectual property more generally, the fact is, many thousands of plant varieties developed with both conventional and genetic engineering techniques have been patented.  So, intellectual property protection for biotech plants makes them no different from any other varieties.”

 

Please continue reading for a response to the second half of your question.

Answer

Expert response from Chelsey Robinson

Former Global Preparedness Content Manager, Monsanto Company

Monday, 23/11/2015 17:17

Crops, grown from Monsanto seed or otherwise, do not themselves emit greenhouse gases (GHG). In fact, plants have a remarkable ability to absorb carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. However, agricultural activities do contribute to emissions in other ways. 

 

Agriculture as a whole, including the cultivation of crops and livestock for food, contributes to about 9 percent of total U.S. GHG. This number is similar globally and takes into account both direct and indirect emissions. Direct emissions come from things like burning crop residues or microbial fermentation of residues. Indirect emissions include things like the electricity and fossil fuel inputs that are required for equipment as well as the post-production storage and transport of crops and food products.

 

When specifically talking about cropping systems only the emissions from agricultural soil management would apply. Various agricultural practices that contribute to GHG include things like fertilizer applications, methods of irrigation, and land tillage (resulting in the release of nitrous oxide (N2O) from the soil). 

 

The implementation of sustainable farming practices such as fertilizing crops with just the right amount of nitrogen required (since less efficient nitrogen application can lead to higher N2O emissions), practicing conservation tillage, and draining water from wetland soils during the growing seasons all can significantly help reduce and mitigate emissions. In fact, conservation tillage can have a multi-faceted impact; reducing soil erosion and conserving soil moisture, improving water quality, reducing soil compaction and fuel use and emissions by eliminating tilling, increasing soil organic matter and the number of beneficial soil organisms and beneficial insects, providing habitat for wildlife, and ultimately increasing the number of birds and other wildlife in and around the field.  

 

Additionally, GMO crops specifically have helped to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the reduced use of fossil fuels on farms and additional soil carbon storage from reduced tillage, which was equivalent to removing 28 billion kg of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or equal to removing 12.4 million cars from the road in one year (2013). In fact, since the first glyphosate-tolerant GMO crops were introduced in 1996, no-till or reduced tillage systems have increased by about 50 percent in the U.S. and more than 300 percent globally, due in large part by growth in North America and South America (77 percent of global total) where glyphosate-tolerant GMO crops are cultivated. 

 

The fact that agriculture does contribute to greenhouse gases, is one of the many reasons, in addition to ensuring global food security, that we believe farmers across the globe will need to intensify their focus on sustainable practices and climate-hardy crops. Agriculture, and ultimately food security, depends on sustaining the environment. At Monsanto we have made a commitment to focus on and to advance precision management tools and smarter seeds (drought resistance, better nitrogen efficiency etc), to enable farmers to use nutrients more efficiently and eliminate greenhouse gas emissions on 1 million acres in the United States by 2020. This effort complements other joint projects in soil health and water quality including our partnership with the National Corn Growers Association and the Walton Family Foundation, cover crop trials with agronomic organizations and a multi-year commitment to a USDA program on sustainable farming systems. 

 

My colleague Keith Reding answered a question regarding our soybeans being green. Here is what he said: “When Monsanto grows soybeans for seed, they look just like the soybeans grown by farmers. The soybean plants are green, and the harvested seed is light tan. This is true regardless of who grows the soybean or the brand of seed planted.”  

Answer

Expert response from Community Manager

Moderator for GMOAnswers.com

Monday, 23/11/2015 17:21

You have asked several different questions. We will first address your questions regarding patents, and then please review the answer below from Chelsey Robinson, Global Preparedness Content Manager at Monsanto, regarding your second question referring to greenhouse gas emissions.

 

Can life be patented?

Drew Kershen from the University of Oklahoma, explainsThe Supreme Court of the United States, and patent courts and bodies around the world, have ruled repeatedly that “living matter” is a patentable subject.” Drew goes on to explain this topic in more detail here.

 

It is important to call out several nuances regarding patents of “living organisms,” which are explained by Hans Sauer, Deputy General Counsel for Intellectual Property for the Biotechnology Industry Organization, he explains “the USPTO [United States Patent and Trademark Office] does not award patents on living organisms (and other things) that were merely discovered in nature. The Supreme Court has said that if a new plant were discovered in the wild it would not be patentable, even if it had never before been known by man.”

 

Sauer goes on to explain, “On the other hand, a bacterium that was engineered by man to do something it cannot naturally do ­like digest crude oil ­is patentable under the same conditions that apply to any other kind of invention. And, of course, the USPTO does not award patents on living organisms ­even if they were engineered by man­ unless they are really new, unobvious, and practically useful just like any other invention.”

 

You may also be interested to know that the first case related to patenting “life”  occurred in the 1980’s which predates ag biotechnology. In 1980, U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Diamond (GE) v. Chakrabarty (Patent Office) that genetically engineered microorganisms can be patented, which was related to a microbe for eating oil.

 

Why are patents used in agriculture?

Following is an excerpt from an answer provided by Drew Kershen from the University of Oklahoma which discusses why patents are used in agriculture and the Supreme Court ruling that affirms that an organism produced through modern biotechnology can be protected under general patent law:

 

“In 1980, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that an organism produced through modern biotechnology can be protected under general patent law―via a utility patent. In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States reaffirmed that plant breeders can obtain a utility patent in biotech organisms, including seeds and plants. (Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., # 12-398, decided June 13, 2013).

 

Therefore, in the United States, plant breeders can own intellectual property in seeds and plants through each of the legally protected property rights ­ plant patents, trade secrets, trademarks, plant variety certificates, and utility patents. Farmers purchase seeds from local seed dealers and farmers then own the seeds for the purposes of producing a harvest. But the farmer does not own the intellectual property in the seed or growing crop...

 

This is no different than a person who purchases a movie CD. The person owns the movie CD but the person does not own the intellectual property in the CD. Consequently, the person cannot legally make a copy of the movie CD.


After reading this far, a person might ask, ‘Why does the United States law recognize these various forms of intellectual property?’ US law creates and supports intellectual property because intellectual property provides the incentive for innovation by allowing the inventor an IPR (legally protected property right). Using the IPR, the inventor can recover the research and development costs that went into inventing the new, useful innovation. Seed companies spend years (average of about 13 years) and millions of dollars per new seed variety to produce a new, useful seed variety.”

 

Are GMOs the only seeds that can be patented?

No, non-GMO seeds are also patented. Dr. Kevin Folta, professor and chairman of the University of Florida horticultural sciences department, discusses how plants can be and are patented, even if they are not GM varieties in this article:  

 

"GM seeds are not the only type of seeds that can be patented. For example, see this patent for the Goose Creek Tomato. Patents protect the technology, breeders' rights and the process, while labels describe the qualities of the product. GM seeds are the only seeds to go through rigorous safety testing, unlike conventional or organic seeds, and seeds developed through radiation treatments and mutation breeding -- even though all can be patented."

 

A final note regarding patents from Greg Conko, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, “Whatever one’s view of patents, or of intellectual property more generally, the fact is, many thousands of plant varieties developed with both conventional and genetic engineering techniques have been patented.  So, intellectual property protection for biotech plants makes them no different from any other varieties.”

 

Please continue reading for a response to the second half of your question.

Answer

Expert response from Chelsey Robinson

Former Global Preparedness Content Manager, Monsanto Company

Monday, 23/11/2015 17:17

Crops, grown from Monsanto seed or otherwise, do not themselves emit greenhouse gases (GHG). In fact, plants have a remarkable ability to absorb carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. However, agricultural activities do contribute to emissions in other ways. 

 

Agriculture as a whole, including the cultivation of crops and livestock for food, contributes to about 9 percent of total U.S. GHG. This number is similar globally and takes into account both direct and indirect emissions. Direct emissions come from things like burning crop residues or microbial fermentation of residues. Indirect emissions include things like the electricity and fossil fuel inputs that are required for equipment as well as the post-production storage and transport of crops and food products.

 

When specifically talking about cropping systems only the emissions from agricultural soil management would apply. Various agricultural practices that contribute to GHG include things like fertilizer applications, methods of irrigation, and land tillage (resulting in the release of nitrous oxide (N2O) from the soil). 

 

The implementation of sustainable farming practices such as fertilizing crops with just the right amount of nitrogen required (since less efficient nitrogen application can lead to higher N2O emissions), practicing conservation tillage, and draining water from wetland soils during the growing seasons all can significantly help reduce and mitigate emissions. In fact, conservation tillage can have a multi-faceted impact; reducing soil erosion and conserving soil moisture, improving water quality, reducing soil compaction and fuel use and emissions by eliminating tilling, increasing soil organic matter and the number of beneficial soil organisms and beneficial insects, providing habitat for wildlife, and ultimately increasing the number of birds and other wildlife in and around the field.  

 

Additionally, GMO crops specifically have helped to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the reduced use of fossil fuels on farms and additional soil carbon storage from reduced tillage, which was equivalent to removing 28 billion kg of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or equal to removing 12.4 million cars from the road in one year (2013). In fact, since the first glyphosate-tolerant GMO crops were introduced in 1996, no-till or reduced tillage systems have increased by about 50 percent in the U.S. and more than 300 percent globally, due in large part by growth in North America and South America (77 percent of global total) where glyphosate-tolerant GMO crops are cultivated. 

 

The fact that agriculture does contribute to greenhouse gases, is one of the many reasons, in addition to ensuring global food security, that we believe farmers across the globe will need to intensify their focus on sustainable practices and climate-hardy crops. Agriculture, and ultimately food security, depends on sustaining the environment. At Monsanto we have made a commitment to focus on and to advance precision management tools and smarter seeds (drought resistance, better nitrogen efficiency etc), to enable farmers to use nutrients more efficiently and eliminate greenhouse gas emissions on 1 million acres in the United States by 2020. This effort complements other joint projects in soil health and water quality including our partnership with the National Corn Growers Association and the Walton Family Foundation, cover crop trials with agronomic organizations and a multi-year commitment to a USDA program on sustainable farming systems. 

 

My colleague Keith Reding answered a question regarding our soybeans being green. Here is what he said: “When Monsanto grows soybeans for seed, they look just like the soybeans grown by farmers. The soybean plants are green, and the harvested seed is light tan. This is true regardless of who grows the soybean or the brand of seed planted.”