Comments on: Can baking soda curb global warming?

A start-up in Texas says it can turn the carbon dioxide emitted by power plants into baking soda.
Photos: Fumes turned baking soda

[justguess]

skyionic

My initial understanding of this subject was less than that; I am even more perplexed after having read this article!
Sad to say, I truly thought that this was a revolutionizing environmentally-safe breakthrough. Boy, was I out of my league. I didn't even know that baking soda today must be mined out of a mountain!
I wanted to believe in this so bad, I guess, that I only heard what I wanted to hear: took CO2, made household brand baking soda.
I think that the bigger picture is blindsighting a great many more than just myself, though.
Chlorine as a byproduct; not good, definetly not good. Sure everybody loves to bleach the hel out of everything but what good has it done for the health of our oceans? As if this was not bad enough, though, now the hip trend that is revolutionizing pollution's possibilities and taking it to another level of deadly with carbon sequestration? Are you serious? This is really the best that you guys can come up with? I have absolutely no credentials when it comes to such topics but even I can see the downside to this one. Always prepare for the worst. In this case, there is no precautionary measures to take. Hence, what the hel are you guys thinking trying to inject CO2 underneath any part of the planet!! Come on! Quit kickin' a dead horse; it's already dead! You guys can do much better, I am sure. And when you do, I will be there to put my money where my mouth is.

[hariaparajith]

It wont work

I am chemical engineer and I did some calculations based on their reactions. Here are the results

To treat carbon emission from a 500 MW plant, you need roughly 3.2 million tons of sodium hydroxide. For producing each ton of sodium hydroxide you need 2.4 MWh of electricity (Diaphragm process).Total electricity needed to produce sodium hydroxide is much more than the power plant produce. (Trust me...i checked my calculations million times) Then you have to transport and handle 6.7 million tons of baking soda. (150,000 truck loads)

it took me 10 min to do these calculations. I cant believe this guy started a company without considering any of these. The worst thing is he even found a sponsor who gave him millions of dollars to try this out.

[srvevh1]

Is the Solvay Porcess any better?

NH3(g) + H2O(l) + CO2(g) + NaCl(aq) ---> NaHCO3(aq) + NH4Cl(aq)

[Brad Hansen]

I'm just repeating the prior comment, but testing HTML tags (since cnet doesn't seem to publish which ones work).

I am chemical engineer and I did some calculations based on their reactions. Here are the results:

• To treat carbon emission from a 500 MW plant, you need roughly 3.2 million tons of sodium hydroxide.


• For producing each ton of sodium hydroxide you need 2.4 MWh of electricity (Diaphragm process).Total electricity needed to produce sodium hydroxide is much more than the power plant produce. (Trust me...i checked my calculations million times).


• Then you have to transport and handle 6.7 million tons of baking soda. (150,000 truck loads).

[draka_eng]

This is a little late, but my 2c on this issue is given below:
@hariaparajith,
I agree. sing your 2.4 MWh/T NaOH number, I estimate 2.4 T CO2/T NaOH.
1 T NaOH fixes 1.1 T CO2.
Overall, this process will emit 2.2 T CO2 for every T of CO2 fixed.

[Sgt-Dan]

Greetings,

Is it a "coincidence" that these 1980's "theories" are all being "recycled?" Maybe it's just to get their grubby little hands on uneducated "investor money?"

Turning a "1800" technology ( invented by Thomas Edison), which all these coal fired power plants use, into a complex chemical plant is absurd. Now, in addition to "waste ash," all the amateur "experts" want to create "multiple waste streams."

There is a very simple, efficient, quick way to do this, and, we have it NOW. Stay tuned.

Dan

Having spent 22 years looking at all these "scams," it's hard to believe that anyone would put $1 dollar into carbon sequestration! Just imagine what that would do to siesmic activity? Dr. Hansen is correct when he says, "We not only have to STOP polluting here, but we have to "reverse" what we've already done! China, India, etc.

[Sgt-Dan]

Dear "Genius Scammers,"

Well, now we have two waste streams. That's intelligent. No?

How much does it cost to mine the baking soda? In dollars and cents? And, how much energy and Co2 emissions, and dust, does the mining and pulverizing of the "Baking Soda" cost and create? And, how much is the transportation cost of both the "Baking Soda" to the site and what happens to the "Baking Soda" after it absorbs the flue gas pollution? It's something you CANNOT eat. You'll have to "landfill" it. No?

This is NOT very well thought out. Besides, it was tried in 1985. Get off it.

"It's not the 'fuel,' stupid!" It's "The Emissions!"

Figure that out, and everything will be OK! We already have the solution to this....

[Sgt-Dan]

I meant Sodium Hydroxide.

Where does that come from? Like, how far away from every power plant in the U.S.?

And, how much will it cost to get it to the Plant? And, how much will it cost to retrofit the Plant? And, who's going to buy this tremendous amount of "Baking Soda" after the EPA "certifies" it as fit for human consumption?

Once again, it was tried in 1985. What makes this new?

Dan