Talk:Salt water battery

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Salt water battery redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Environment: Sustainability Mid‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related redirect is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by the Sustainability task force.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Untitled

This page is just puffery for the aquion company. It should be deleted.

23/05/2017, Grabenhouit : Yes, I agree, or at least mention other designs, or water desalinisation by asymetric membranes. But this is already mentionned in the Na-Ion battery article. Besides, Aquion filled bankrupcy in march 2017. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grabenhouit (talk • contribs) 09:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/bankrupt-aquions-salt-water-battery-assets-sold-to-austrias-bluesky-energ • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:28, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, this is not an article this is an add.190.20.250.171 (talk) 02:53, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Deleted most parts of the article. Carinatowhead (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is not much left, replacing with a redirect. Викидим (talk) 22:15, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect makes sense to me. Carinatowhead (talk) 22:26, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additional developments

Since the 2017 posts, there have been additional developments between research projects and other companies.This is not my area of expertise, but creating citations is. I am adding the following links in the hopes that someone will separate the wheat from the chaff and weave the relevant citations into the article.

Zhang, Bin‐Wei; Cao, Liuyue; Tang, Cheng; Tan, Chunhui; Cheng, Ningyan; Lai, Wei‐Hong; Wang, Yun‐Xiao; Cheng, Zhen‐Xiang; Dong, Juncai; Kong, Yuan; Dou, Shi‐Xue; Zhao, Shenlong (2022-11-29). "Atomically Dispersed Dual‐Site Cathode with a Record High Sulfur Mass Loading for High‐Performance Room‐Temperature Sodium–Sulfur Batteries". Advanced Materials. Wiley: 2206828. doi:10.1002/adma.202206828. ISSN 0935-9648.
Crownhart, Casey (2022-11-17). "Super-hot salt could be coming to a battery near you". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 2023-01-02.
Rae, Marion (2022-12-07). "Sodium battery 'significant breakthrough'". The West Australian. Retrieved 2023-01-02.
Hill, Joshua S (2022-12-07). "Sydney Uni hails low cost, long life sodium-sulphur battery with "super-high capacity"". RenewEconomy. Retrieved 2023-01-02.
"Salt Water Flow Battery Frequently Asked Questions". Salgenx. The Salt Water Flow Battery. 2022-12-31. Retrieved 2023-01-02.
"CFB Technology". Salgenx. The Salt Water Flow Battery. 2023-01-01. Retrieved 2023-01-02.

Peaceray (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there is are generic Sodium-ion battery and Flow battery articles. This article seems to be about Aquion product and a clever marketing name (see my proposal to merge below). Викидим (talk) 20:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move page

Move page to Saltwater battery. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

University of Central Florida saltwater battery

Should this new development be mentioned in the article? Original paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20334-6 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To rewrite or to merge?

An aqueous battery in general is not new: invented in 1860 and now comprises half of the rechargeable market. Yes, all of these are non-flammable (water does not burn) and safer to dispose of than the lithium-ion ones. The article needs to be rewritten to reduce the claims and show the merits of particular design, not the generic water-solution-based advantages. The water-based batteries generally have two issues: low energy density and poor cycle life. The first is discussed already in some detail, the second should be explicitly addressed. Note that a modern review (see the source in aqueous battery) mentions Whitacre's work only tangentially and does not note Aquion at all. Викидим (talk) 21:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative might be a merge into Sodium-ion battery and/or Aquion Energy. --Викидим (talk) 20:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]