Er doesn't baking soda work by releasing carbon dioxide in the oven when it gets hot... that's why cakes rise. I don't see how moving the carbon dioxide from the smokestack to the nation's ovens (generating more carbon dioxide emissions as its trucked across the nation)will help cut carbon dioxide emissions. This looks like a bad idea to me.

There are other uses for baking soda. The fact that it is inert unless acted on by an acid makes it ideal for sequestering co2. Salt domes would be the perfect place for putting it because they are dry. Where the soda is stored would have to stay dry otherwise it would make the groundwater alkaline. We may even be able to use it to balance ground water that we have made acidic by our industrial processes. I wonder if using a non-polluting energy source tied to baking soda production would be a viable way to reduce total CO2 in the atmosphere. How much would it cost/what would be the carbon footprint of gathering the other materials needed for the process?

The conversion of the carbon dioxide to baking soda is creative, but when used in cakes, etc. it secretes carbon dioxide. This conversion is not to fully eliminate carbon dioxide emissions but to diminish the emissions. It is a step toward a greener world. If some places tend to have acid rain, we might somehow be able to place the soda in the air to neutralize the rain.

Even if we use the baking soda to offset acid rain or acidic rivers, we'd still be releasing CO2 in the air. Remember what happens when baking soda and vinagar are mixed? The final product is water, salt, and CO2.

We currently make cakes and other baked goods using baking soda derived from other sources. If we are replacing any non-renewable resource with a renewable one, we are significantly reducing the amount of NEW CO2 released into the atmosphere.

Also, in terms of sequestration, it much better to sequester a solid or a liquid than a gas. Even if we just start pumping molasses or other carbon dense by-products into dry oil wells or coal mines, we will start going a long way towards removing carbon from the biosphere and the atmosphere.

Well, here's another problem: Where do you get the millions billions?) of tons of Na for the NaHC03? From NaCl? Then you have
NaCl + H20 + energy -> NaOH + HCl, and
NaOH + CO2 = NaHCO3.
Industry uses a lot of HCl, but to sequester enough CO2 to make a difference, you'd get a whole lot more HCl than that. Just don't dump the excess in the same hole an the NAHCO3! So, this might be an improvement over the existing process, but that's a different point.

A home remedy that a lot of people use to relieve heartburn is Baking soda. Could baking soda actually be harming or helping you.

Seems to me that fossil fuel carbon sequestering in baking soda has less problems to it than putting carbon in bags at the bottom of the ocean that would eventually deteriorate or compressing it into mine shafts/salt domes. But I've yet to see a Pop-Sci article on agrichar (creating charcoal from biomass, that not only enhances soil fertility but produces fuel as a byproduct. The net affect is enhancing land, sequestering carbon , and producing a green alternative fuel). Perhaps its because most of the research appear to be international and not appearing on most AP feeds. In any case I'd like to see a more detailed description of how agrichar is produced and how "carbon" credits" would help agriculture adopt it . I only ran on to this topic indirectly on a Google search this morning.

finally!

someonecame up with a carbon seqestation idea that can MAKE MONEY! instead of costing billions of dollars.

and, above all it's an idea that only uses waste products and could only make product prices fall!