Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on March 31, 2018

Bookmark and Share

Scientists say we’re on the cusp of a carbon dioxide–recycling revolution

Enviroment

 

science mag

 



57 Comments on "Scientists say we’re on the cusp of a carbon dioxide–recycling revolution"

  1. Duncan Idaho on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:25 am 

    “At the end of the day it’s always going to be the market”

    And at the end of the day, we will be screwed.

  2. Cloggie on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:32 am 

    Good, the more (competing) methods the better.

    Here a method from Holland, based on the mineral olivine:

    https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/06/25/prof-olaf-schuiling-has-a-solution-for-the-co2-problem/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olivine

  3. Cloggie on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:45 am 

    To be concrete: the CO2 problem can be solved with a mountain of 7 km3 olivine per year. That would be 1 m3 per earthling (per year). It needs to be pulverized and distributed over the soil, anywhere. You can even plow it in on agricultural land as it enhances fertility. Sufficient mining potential exists.

    https://www.volkskrant.nl/wetenschap/een-paar-kubieke-kilometer-olivijn-om-het-klimaat-in-de-hand-te-houden~a366147/

    My solution would be: first stop emitting CO2 in the first place and transition to renewables as fast as possible (open your wallets now and buy your sexy turnkey offshore windpark in Europe) and AFTERWARDS repair the damage with olivine or the fuel method from the article (or both)

  4. Davy on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:57 am 

    Geo engineering is just more techno folly that allows more of the same. Bad behavior cannot be changed through technology alone. It must be change by changing behavior.

  5. rockman on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 11:03 am 

    Davy – Exactly. None of these methods are. It has always been a question of economics: the value of the products produced was less then the cost to produce them. So far no one has been willing to volunteer doing it at a loss. Not even any of our eco friendly EU cousins.

  6. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 11:14 am 

    They know the oil is going to be running out in a few years worldwide. I hate to be the one to say it but a major nuclear war to depopulate would make a lot of sense..

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2018/03/23/is-the-world-sleepwalking-into-an-oil- crisis/#3dd6e74344cf

  7. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 11:28 am 

    28 million apply for 90,000 jobs with India’s railway company

    http://www.dw.com/en/28-million-apply-for-90000-jobs-with-indias-railway-company/a-43203142

  8. Outcast_Searcher on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 11:59 am 

    Being able to do something in desperation, likely once it’s FAR too late, to stave off the inevitable is better than nothing, I suppose.

    Too bad humanity let the AGW problem continue unabated, even accelerating, for decades, since it was to expensive or inconvenient to deal with.

    But of course, when the time comes, everyone will gladly hold hands, sing, and work together to fix it, no matter what it costs, in the manner of the song at the end of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”. Somehow, I have my doubts.

  9. Anonymouse1 on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 12:52 pm 

    Narrativeman, I would like to see you, or any of your better connected corporate cancermen, produce your ‘products’ without the eye-watering levels of corporate welfare and subsidies you have all enjoyed historically and currently. You’re constantly blabbering on about the magic of the ‘free-market’ and economics, while you worked for, and now shill for, the biggest free-rider queens in history, the uS oil cartel.

    This article is crap btw. Fact-free, context-free filler. No one is ‘recycling’ carbon, and no magical techNOfix for the current system is about to leap off the lab bench and onto the shelves at wall-mart.

  10. Sys1 on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 3:36 pm 

    This article is absolute nonsense.

  11. Cloggie on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 3:38 pm 

    “This article is absolute nonsense.”

    Fine.

    And now the reasons.

  12. rockman on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:06 pm 

    Cloggie – If you haven’t figured it out already I’m a technogeek. Luv any new way of doing the same old thing if it can be done better. BUT is has to make economic sense. I truly was an expert at drilling horizontal wells long before the shale boom. More then 10 years earlier I was designing and geosteering much more expensive efforts in the offshore Gulf of Mexico. And doing it with wells-seasoned hands from the North Sea.

    When horizontal drilling began to kick in I was one of the small number of hands working onshore experienced in such drilling tech. And I worked for a company with a budget availability in the hundreds of $millions. But it was a private company…not a public desperate to hype its stock by any means possible. I had the technical abilities and the monies to be one of the leading shale players early in the game. What was missing was the economic justification my owner required. But still loved the technology.

    As I said in my post the potential tech to get rid of CO2 has been around for a long time. What has been missing has been either a way to make a profit doing so or some organization/govt willing to lose money doing it. I see nothing in the article indicating any advancement to reach either of those two possibilities.

  13. jef on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:15 pm 

    Right Rock – Thats also why 29,000 children die every day around the world mostly due to no running water or sanitation. There is simply no money in it to do otherwise.

  14. onlooker on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:22 pm 

    You see why we are screwed because we cannot even begin to admit that our pie in the sky fantasies are just that and implement realistic actions to deal with our problems

  15. Cloggie on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:25 pm 

    “If you haven’t figured it out already I’m a technogeek.“

    I figured that out a long time ago… and appreciate it 😉

    In terms of knowledge I owe you, as you convinced me 5 years ago that the oil age would have a 2nd lease on life.

    “I see nothing in the article indicating any advancement to reach either of those two possibilities.”

    Me neither. But things could change if runaway climate change would occur. I’m agnostic regarding such a possibility. Actually I have reasonable hope that the transition could occur within limited climate change.

  16. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:38 pm 

    Cloggie

    You listen to a random person on a doomer blog about the oil age but not the IEA and Saudi’s? LOL

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2018/03/23/is-the-world-sleepwalking-into-an-oil- crisis/#3dd6e74344cf

  17. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:39 pm 

    They know the oil is going to be running out in a few years worldwide. I hate to be the one to say it but a major nuclear war to depopulate would make a lot of sense..
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2018/03/23/is-the-world-sleepwalking-into-an-oil-crisis/#3dd6e74344cf

  18. Cloggie on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 4:56 pm 

    They know the oil is going to be running out in a few years worldwide

    Forbes doesn’t say that “oil will run out in a couple of years”. Forbes says that oil prices could increase “bigly” in a couple of years.

    That would be a good thing for the overal energy situation and a huge boost for renewable energy and a reduction of CO2 emissions.

    Forbes claims that it is too late for EV’s to replace fossil fuel cars, which is true. But rigorous consumption management is very well possible, like government regulation for office workers to work from home or community office and again government enforced car pooling, forcing employers to simply distribute employees over the available employee owned car park.

    https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/09/30/hans-josef-fell-accelerating-the-global-transition-to-100-renewable-energy/

    https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/03/24/the-netherlands-fossil-free-in-2030/

    https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/01/03/netherlands-sustainable-by-2030/

  19. Davy on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 5:19 pm 

    “That would be a good thing for the overal energy situation and a huge boost for renewable energy and a reduction of CO2 emissions”

    Come on neder it is not a direct relationship. How much and how long matter. It is just not high low thingy.

  20. Energy investor on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 5:53 pm 

    I find the work of the solar scientists more interesting than the general IPCC mob and hangers on. Anyone who watches the internet will know there are still plenty of well credentialed sceptics. May I suggest that we will soon know whether the AGW theories are right or whether the sceptics rule as solar cycle 24 continues.

    As the sun cycle moves faster into a solar minimum we will hopefully know whether increasing CO2 is cause or effect by the end of SC24.

    Are the Russian and Pakistani government’s policies right or not.

    Will the world cool as in all previous solar minimums or not?

  21. Go Speed Racer on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 5:53 pm 

    Let me get this straight.

    I take some rocks of Okivine,
    grind them up, and then go out to
    my backyard?
    And I got a bunch of garbage.
    old sofas, and tires, and just before
    setting them on fire,I do what
    with the Olivine?

    Sprinkle it all over the garbage and
    old sofas? What’s in it for me? Does
    it colorize the flames? Or do i get
    Clouds of green smoke, like from a
    4th of July smoke bomb?

    I think green olivine smoke, from my
    tire fires would be a great break from
    boring old black smoke. Send me
    over some Olivine.

  22. Keith McClary on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 6:47 pm 

    Energy investor on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 5:53 pm :
    Your part of the internet doesn’t include the peer reviewed scientific literature. Where do you get this stuff?

  23. Energy investor on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:05 pm 

    There is plenty. The Russians have observations on the subject. NASA has plenty.

    Suggest you Google sunspots and follow the stats.

  24. Energy investor on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:09 pm 

    One book that mentions the different scientific observations from the standpoint of an IPCC sceptic is called “Dark Winter”.

    I read it before tracking down the other articles. My main takeaway was that by 2030 everyone will be singing from the same song sheet.

  25. Kevin Cobley on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:19 pm 

    The energy input required to convert CO2 + H2O back into CO, CH4, C2H6 or any of the other derivatives is identical to the energy expended in the combustion of these products.
    The “recycling” requires energy input, where does this energy come from?

  26. jedrider on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:27 pm 

    How to get rid of the CO2 in the atmosphere is probably EASY! How to afford doing so, well it’s energetically IMPOSSIBLE. That’s why it’s there in the first place. We oxidized something, actually, a LOT of something.

    It would be interesting if the world did one constructive thing for the environment, but I don’t see anything, does anyone? We’re use to just taking, not giving, and that’s probably how it will remain.

  27. Anonymouse1 on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:33 pm 

    GSR, the olivine is to help make you more ‘regular’. Its all-natural, soothing, and easy on the environment.

    And best of all, its cloggen-fraud endorsed, so you know it has all kinds of magical properties as well.

  28. Keith McClary on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:46 pm 

    Energy investor on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 7:09 pm

    http://drrichswier.com/2014/08/24/guess-made-eleven-major-climate-change-predictions-come-true/

    I don’t think so.

  29. Antius on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 9:27 pm 

    I cannot see this being practical. It takes substantially more energy converting CO2 into fuel than is actually released by combusting the fuel. And the CO2 must be stored at substantial expense in the mean time.

    Yet another green-tech fantasy that will never work in the real world. On a related subject…

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-26/tesla-without-any-doubt-verge-bankruptcy

  30. Antius on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 9:39 pm 

    Cloggie wrote: “Forbes doesn’t say that “oil will run out in a couple of years”. Forbes says that oil prices could increase “bigly” in a couple of years.

    That would be a good thing for the overal energy situation and a huge boost for renewable energy and a reduction of CO2 emissions.”

    History does not offer much validation for this point of view. High oil prices lead to recession. Recession tends to obliterate investment into energy infrastructure generally and renewable energy in particular. Global investment in wind and solar power declined for several years after 2008 and has only recently started to increase again.

    “Forbes claims that it is too late for EV’s to replace fossil fuel cars, which is true. But rigorous consumption management is very well possible, like government regulation for office workers to work from home or community office and again government enforced car pooling, forcing employers to simply distribute employees over the available employee owned car park.”

    It is always too late to adopt a bad solution. Consumption management is the last resort of a desperate man. Bottom line is, if people can’t get to work, don’t expect any sort of economic recovery.

  31. dissident on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 9:50 pm 

    The show stopper question about scaling this to terraforming scales was just brushed off as nothing of a big deal. Get f*cking real. You can get fusion energy produced in a lab, but making viable reactors is a whole different ball game. No amount of the rinky dink lab tests support the claim that they could scour 30 billion tons of CO2 from the atmosphere every year.

  32. DerHundistlos on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 9:55 pm 

    ” You’re constantly blabbering on about the magic of the ‘free-market’ and economics, while you worked for, and now shill for, the biggest free-rider queens in history, the uS oil cartel.”

    Yep, that’s Rockman aka Naritveman to a tee. He also believes in the magical benefits of “trickle-down economics” and “greed is good”.

  33. green_achers on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:16 pm 

    Does this take CO2 out of the atmosphere? No, probably because of the concentration. It takes CO2 out of smokestacks.

    Why would CO2 be in smokestacks? Because someone is burning hydrocarbons.

    Why are people burning hydrocarbons? To get energy.

    Great. So, what are we going to use the hydrocarbons we make by this process? Burn them for energy.

    So, the system depends on people burning hydrocarbons for energy in order to produce hydrocarbons for energy. Got it. Anything else? Yes, the process takes energy.

  34. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:35 pm 

    How to spot Putins Fake news

    China can succeed with petro-yuan where Gaddafi failed – killing the US dollar in oil trade
    https://www.rt.com/business/422838-petro-yuan-dollar-gaddafi/

    Here is what the IMF holds in their reserves..see that little sliver that is China’s yuan..
    https://imgur.com/a/Pb6uZ#IFfzvGM

    HAHAA And idiots like Clog and Greg and Madkat eat it fucking up!

  35. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:39 pm 

    Clogg

    Did you even read the article from Forbes? Obviously not,

    From the article

    In January 2017, Saudi Arabia’s energy minister Khalid A. Al-Falih warned CNBC that he foresaw a risk of oil shortages by 2020:

    In March 2017, the International Energy Agency published its market analysis and forecast report, Oil 2017. In the report, the IEA warned that the global investment slump of 2015 and 2016 already poses a risk to future oil supplies and that 2017 global spending didn’t look encouraging. Oil supplies are growing in the U.S., Canada, and a few other places around the world, but the IEA report concluded that this growth could stall by 2020 if spending doesn’t pick up.

    Halliburton, the world’s largest hydraulic fracturing service provider, reiterated the IEA’s forecast last summer at the World Petroleum Congress in Istanbul. Mark Richard, a Senior Vice President with the company, said that the $2 trillion in spending cuts in the global oil industry over the past few years would impact the price of oil around 2020. Richard added, ” Sooner or later, the market is going to catch up. You’ll see some kind of spike in the price of oil. Maybe somewhere around 2020-2021, but it’s got to catch up sooner or later.”

    The British multinational bank HSBC gave similar warnings in its Peak Oil Report 2017.
    The HSBC report further noted that global oil discoveries have been declining and that 81% of the world liquid production is already in decline.

    Former Energy Information Administration (EIA) head Adam Sieminski warned of a decade of disorder:

    “Maybe we are going to be less volatile now because shale can feed into rising demand. I’m thinking that the decade of the ‘20s is going to be one of difficulties. That’s why I call it the decade of disorder. We’re not getting enough capital investment now, I don’t know that shale is going to be able to do it all.”

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2018/03/23/is-the-world-sleepwalking-into-an-oil-crisis/2/#767fcfe2c7e0

    So yeah…

  36. dissident on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 10:42 pm 

    Putting these devices in smoke stacks would be too little, too late. Then we have the problem of global biomass burning and heat wave induced CO2 release from plants, and the release of CH4 and CO2 from cryosphere reservoirs.

    Another little detail that uneducated cornucopians may fail to catch is that trying to put these devices on cars would only work if they can process the CO2 as fast or faster than it is produced. This article does not make this point clear at all. In fact, it is highly dubious that it would be possible since the are trying to go against entropy and engage in reverse combustion chemistry. By definition such processing would take longer than forward combustion chemistry which slides down the entropy hill.

  37. dissident on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 11:11 pm 

    https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/980271401138520064

    Putin. Putin. Putin. The fake stream media chorus.

  38. MASTERMIND on Sat, 31st Mar 2018 11:12 pm 

    dissident

    How to spot Putin’s Fake news

    China can succeed with petro-yuan where Gaddafi failed – killing the US dollar in oil trade
    https://www.rt.com/business/422838-petro-yuan-dollar-gaddafi/

    Here is what the IMF holds in their reserves..see that little sliver that is China’s yuan..
    https://imgur.com/a/Pb6uZ#IFfzvGM

  39. energy investor on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 12:21 am 

    Keith McLary,

    So you can look up a skeptic’s book on Google…whooppee! I referred to the listing of scientific research in that book, not the book itself.

    You obviously don’t know what proportion of the Northern Hemisphere’s spring plantings are not happening on time?

    No? It is most of the spring plantings in Northern Asia, North America and Europe that are now seriously delayed.

    After being bamboozled by conflicting claims and seeing fraud after fraud exposed in IPCC sponsored figures, I have studied climate science over the last 14 years to try to figure out, not what is happening, but why the IPCC peer reviewed folk are trying to force the data to fit their (and Al Gore’s) theories.

    Either they still know something that I don’t or they have some other agenda?

    Until recently I thought the answer would not appear until sometime after my lifetime.

    But thank goodness for the advent of solar cycle 24 which could make fools of those folk on the IPCC money wagon… or even vindicate them if their AGW warming frustrates a cooling from natural cycles.

    The current cooling cycle in the Northern Hemisphere is consistent with the developing solar minimum 24 setting in and the current warming in the Southern Hemisphere is simply because we here are still affected by the continuing ocean heat (being surrounded by ocean) rather than the current solar cooling.

    Already IPCC funded scientists are bailing out on the latest temperature figures and explaining the effects of SC24 as being of a temporary nature. NASA is also saying that the cooling cycle of the sun will be totally offset by AGW. Yet they accept the Russian position that SC24 and SC25 will BOTH be strong cooling cycles.

    If the solar scientists are proven wrong, it will happen during my lifetime and I can change my position. If the cooling expected by 2030 happens as per the solar scientists and the geologists, then countries that are currently covered by spring snow (preventing planting) will go into deep freeze and many (perhaps many millions of) folk could die during the next 25 years of cooling.

    As the cooling trend deepens (sometime between 2019 and 2030) I can see the IPCC being either disbanded in disgrace or changing their tune to say that at the end of the mini ice age, now slowly unfolding, AGW will continue to warm the earth.

    The problem will be by then that no-one will believe them. Yet they will still control the flow of news into the mainstream media as they do now.

    So… IMHO the whole AGW drama will either be looked on merely as another over-hyped Y2K (i.e. BS designed to enrich certain sectors of society), or the solar minimum will fail to counteract human warming influences.

    Either way we will have a measure of certainty.

    I for one hope the IPCC mob are right and the solar scientists and IPCC sceptics are wrong. Gradual heating and more CO2 during the period to 2100 will be far more preferable to the onset of either a Maunder Minimum or Dalton Minimum.

    Try Googling those mini ice age impacts from the end of the Vikings on Greenland to 1880 and you will understand why I hope my research of the last 14 years has been a waste of time.

    Right now I fear the sceptics are right. I presume that Russia, China, India and Pakistan who have no intention of reducing CO2 emissions before 2030 have studied the real stats. After all, the Russian and Chinese are leading the way on analysis of the solar cycles.

    India and China are focused only on reducing atmospheric pollution in their push for renewable energy sources. But they are ramping up their use of fossil fuels and will account for 70%+ of increases in global demand for those in the years ahead.

    Why do you think that is?

    Don’t you find that strange?

  40. JH Wyoming on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 4:45 am 

    “It would be interesting if the world did one constructive thing for the environment, but I don’t see anything, does anyone? We’re use to just taking, not giving, and that’s probably how it will remain.”

    No, I don’t see anything constructive for the environment either. Our species is predisposed to ‘take’ whatever is available and ignore the results. To alter that way of thinking would probably require a change to consciousness, which could only happen ‘after’ being humbled to our collective knees, which would require things to get so bad our world would be crashing down around us and be way too late to do any geo-engineering to potentially make a difference.

  41. Sys1 on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 4:52 am 

    Cloggie : Here is why it’s absolute nonsense.

    Because it’s impossible to grab an epsilon of CO2 in the atmosphere to concentrate it back to what you find in oil/coal/gaz.
    It’s so impossible that it’s perhabs easier to pump gaz on Jupiter and bring it back on Earth. Ask the techno guru Elon Musk, he will probably say that with AI, it’s just around the corner.

    Now back to reality.

  42. Cloggie on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 5:09 am 

    Cloggie : Here is why it’s absolute nonsense.

    Because it’s impossible to grab an epsilon of CO2 in the atmosphere to concentrate it back to what you find in oil/coal/gaz.

    Summary: “nonsense”, “impossible”.

    Now the why. You’re almost there.

  43. makati1 on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 6:20 am 

    It is ALWAYS about money. No profit. No go.

  44. Davy on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 7:00 am 

    “Because it’s impossible to grab an epsilon of CO2 in the atmosphere to concentrate it back to what you find in oil/coal/gaz. Summary: “nonsense”, “impossible”. Now the why. You’re almost there.”

    Neder, it is called scale and affordability and this is the reason most of your cheerleading is half baked and destine to fail your lofty goals.

  45. dissident on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 10:07 am 

    If you look up the combustion chemistry rate constants, you will see a clear asymmetry. The forward rates are much larger than the reverse rates. For some stages of the chemical cascade, the reverse reactions are for all intents and purposes absent. Thus you will never have any device trying to make fuel from CO2 work fast enough to be fitted to smoke stacks and car exhaust pipes. It would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics if you could.

    As noted above, extracting CO2, a trace gas (410 ppmv), from the air is a massive challenge all by itself. So this article is utter rubbish and has no relevance for any practical solutions.

  46. Cloggie on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 10:26 am 

    Only once in my life did I experience de-icing of the wings of an airplane, namely at Christmas in Reykjavik, Iceland, while flying from Luxemburg to New York.

    Apparently you need to do that with wind rotor blades as well. Invention from Estonia:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP5LZYpFggM

  47. Keith McClary on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 11:20 am 

    energy investor on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 12:21 am
    “So you can look up a skeptic’s book on Google…whooppee!”
    ???
    The link was to a 2014 article about Casey’s ” ‘Eleven Major Climate Change Predictions’ that have Come True”
    The atmosphere and oceans are cooling. Sea ice is growing, sea levels are declining.
    I don’t think so.
    As for your “delayed spring plantings”, you can add the fact that it’s -15C and snowing where I am. We sure ain’t doing any spring planting here! Obviously this disproves GW.

    Also it is true that Missouri and a patch of the North Atlantic are cooling over decades. Do you have those on your list?

  48. Keith McClary on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 11:24 am 

    energy investor:
    Do you invest your money guided by these predictions?

  49. rockman on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 11:46 am 

    jef – “Thats also why 29,000 children die every day around the world mostly due to no running water or sanitation.” Actually according to the WHO it’s more like 15,000/day for those under 5 yo. Or more like 5.6 million per year. A variety of causes but essentially poverty is at the root of the problem. Improving stats ut still very sad:

    “The risk of a child dying before completing five years of age is still highest in the WHO African Region (76.5 per 1000 live births), almost 8 times higher than that in the WHO European Region (9.6 per 1000 live births). Many countries still have very high under-five mortality – particularly those in WHO African Region, home to 5 of the 6 countries with an under-five mortality rate above 100 deaths per 1000 live births. In addition, inequities in child mortality between high-income and low-income countries remain large. In 2016, the under-five mortality rate in low-income countries was 73.1 deaths per 1000 live births – almost 14 times the average rate in high-income countries (5.3 deaths per 1000 live births). Reducing these inequities across countries and saving more children’s lives by ending preventable child deaths are important priorities.

    Trends – Globally, under-five mortality rate has decreased by 56%, from an estimated rate of 93 deaths per 1000 live births in 1990 to 41 deaths per 1000 live births in 2016. About 20 000 fewer children died every day in 2016 than in 1990.

    With the end of the MDG era, the international community agreed on a new framework – the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) where the target is to end preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age. The goal is for all countries aiming reduce under-five mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1000 live births. Currently, 79 countries have an under-five mortality rate above 25.”

  50. rockman on Sun, 1st Apr 2018 11:51 am 

    mak – “It is ALWAYS about money. No profit. No go.” So true as I said way up top. Even if a govt decides to give it a try it will take a lot of monies. IOW tax $’s. And that would take a huge amount of public support. Another commodity sadly lacking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *