Talk:Salt water battery

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)

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)

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


 * Agreed. Deleted most parts of the article. Carinatowhead (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * There is not much left, replacing with a redirect. Викидим (talk) 22:15, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The redirect makes sense to me. Carinatowhead (talk) 22:26, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

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. Peaceray (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)


 * 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)

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

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)

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