Talk:Battery (electricity)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is a current candidate for the Article Creation and Improvement Drive. Please see the project page to find this article's entry to support or comment on the nomination.

	This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

WikiProject Echo has identified Battery (electricity) as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Icelandic language Wikipedia.

	To-do list for Battery (electricity):	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Restructure according to guidelines in Wikipedia:WikiProject Science, ie. : start with a 2- or 3-paragraph summary for the general public, including a brief history of batteries (max 2 names) move some material to a new "Applications" section: explain the type of batteries (electrostatic vs electrochemical, ...; rechargeable, ...), and where each is useful; discuss the economics of storage (loss by heat, ...) then, explain how it works and its components finish with the detailed history is this article severely vandalised since [1]? I think it was vandalized, but (given how long it's been since I'd looked at it) there were also improvements. Thanks for the link, which I used to reinsert some of the vandalized material. On the plus side, the "vandalized" version moved excessive history to another entry (yes!), some relevant equations were added, and it seems to have a more unified voice. On the minus side, it deleted some relevant circuit theory (my thanks to whomever provided the figure), some of the essential history of batteries (my own contribution), and some of how they work (my own), all of which I just replaced. WMSwiki 02:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Priority 2

Not sure how to edit this template to show what I've done! Astaroth5 22:16, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Add done to the item, after press the link : Add done to the item, after pressing edit in /to_do.

Contents 1 Environmental considerations 2 Cell vs. Battery 3 Batteries in antiquity 4 Stubblefield 5 Eclectic Links 6 A battery 7 "gravity cell" 8 Etymology 9 Power Paper 10 Fuel cells 11 Why do they break down? 12 Amps? 13 Disambiguation link 14 The business of batteries 15 Square prism 16 merge? 17 energy cost of batteries 17.1 Cost of electricity from disposable batteries 18 Flow Battery 19 Reorganization as per todo list 20 Ideal battery and EMF 21 Article removed from Wikipedia:Good articles 22 Ozone batteries? 23 Proposed move 24 Late votes 25 high voltage capacitors just hanging there 26 Questions from the article 27 Homemade batteries 28 History 29 NiMH vs. NiCd text removed 30 A battery, B battery Problem 31 Atomic Battery 32 Batteries produce direct current? 33 Water-activated batteries? 34 Moved low quality text from end of article where it doesn't belong in the first place to this talk page 35 Invention probably in 1799, announcement definitely in 1800 36 Vandalism 37 Discharge 38 What's that stuff?

[edit] Environmental considerations

This section sure could use more information. The NiCad article too. I'd write it but I don't know anything about it and need some information right now (I have six 80 lb NiCad batteries left by a neighbor that died and no one will take them  :-( ). 71.226.121.41 21:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC) JCP

Actually, a cell is a single "Battery" like an AA, but a Baterry is just a plural word for cell i.e. a battery is made up from lots od cells. I don't think this is made clear in the article.

[edit] Cell vs. Battery

Why not have some chemical equations? There is an equivalent circuit of a battery here, but not much information on how electrochemical cells actually work. Does anyone who contributes to wikipedia know any chemistry?

Can the battery versus cell distinction be based on the fact that the cell voltage is fixed by electrochemistry while battery voltage can be any sum of cell voltages?

[edit] Batteries in antiquity

Hmm.. perhaps some more info on real batteries maybe? I dislike how you use the word battery vs. cell. Now that I'm thinking once more, I would like to see information about depolarizers on here, there is no article for it. You have jack information about that. Info on how hydrogen bubbles ruin batteries/cells through polarization during the discharge of a cell would help.--Cyberman 01:23, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Did they really use it for electric power (which to me implies an understanding of electric power to some degree), or did they use it for the side effects of electric power (which implies no understanding of electric power)? I think it is the latter. - UtherSRG 15:56, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

"Did they really use it for electric power"? Yes they did ... to accomplish various activities ...

"implies an understanding of electric power to some degree"? yes they did ... not akin to modern understanding ... it was an understand to thier culture (and thier own particular association and terms [ie., different than ours today, most likely])...

"use it for the side effects of electric power"? they did ...

"implies no understanding of electric power"? They understood if they constructed the device ... it would have functioned as described ... explain it how you like, but it is a "understanding" of similar principles (just called another way) ...

the latter? I would go for the prior ...

Sincerely, JDR

Reddi, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; start showing any evidence for these claims. --Jerzy 22:59, 2004 Jan 22 (UTC)

"extraordinary claims"? What exact claim is sooo extraordinary? That ancient people had devices that emitted electrical power? ... see the Ark of the Covenant article [analysis section].

"evidence"? what evidence do you need? There is Baghdad Battery (main one), the Ark [see above], and a primative CRT [found on egyptian walls] . Others probably could be cited, but those are a few to start (and right off the top o' my head) ...

"claims"? These are not my claims ... but claims from other ppl ...

Sincerely, JDR

[edit] Stubblefield

Removed for 2nd time, since every indication is that it is the height of insignificance:

In 1898, Nathan Stubblefield recieves receives approval of a battery patent (US600457; this electrolytic coil patent is referred to as an "earth battery").

--Jerzy(t) 08:49, 2004 Mar 5 (UTC)

I've put in it for the 3rd time. Of electrical batteries, it an earth battery. JDR

Added some info on its construction. There are several web sites which discuss it, showing that it is of greater general interest than some other 19th century batteries which did not achieve common use. I suggest that the interest in the Stubblefield earth cell justifies its inclusion in Wiki.Edison 14:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eclectic Links

What is the point of that list of tenuous links at the end of this article? Game Boy, for instance? Does anybody think they are useful? -- Heron 14:58, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• If you're referring to Things and Other, no. They're useless, totally irrelevent and add to the clutter. There are probably too many links above those also, but at least they seem to have some relevence. While we're on the topic of links, I think that primary cells doesn't warrant a link its own (non-existent) page; it could be explained inline. RatOmeter

• It looks like someone took a copy of "What links here" and linked back to every single one. Here's a list of things which don't really have to do with batteries (apart from the fact that some of them use batteries, which isn't really noteworthy), and which we might be able safely discard. Any objections?

Electronics: Accumulator | Transducer | Transistor | Vacuum tube | Telephone switchboard | Diode | Diode bridge | Arc lamp | Flash | Flashlight | Light bulb | Light meter | Lighting | Magneto | Remote control | Fan | Superconductivity | Clockwork | Round-the-pole flying | Static Random Access Memory | Explosively pumped flux compression generator

Chemicals and elements: Adenosine triphosphate (at least...)

Automotive: Hybrid electric vehicle (redirects to Hybrid car) | IBM Convertible | Diesel cycle

Other: Viking program | BASF | Motorola | Operation Bojinka (??) | Philippine Airlines Flight 434 | Raytheon Corporation | Game Boy | Insulin pump | Naval mine | Steadicam | Cellophane (?????) | Mars Pathfinder | Segway HT

Starsong 19:49, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• I'm all for it. Let's cut the clutter. Consensus?

• OK, I cut out a lot of the junk, but there's still a lot of stuff left. I also made the formatting easier to read. People should feel free to cut more if they want. Starsong 01:33, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] A battery

Is there such a thing as an A battery? The article on A doesn't mention it. Should it be removed from the list? Rmhermen 00:42, Mar 30, 2004 (UTC)

I found a reference to the A cell, with dimensions, but I don't know who makes it. I added it to the table. However, the list seems redundant anyway, because the types are listed in the table above it. -- Heron 08:58, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Awright. If we want to list every type, it can be done but we've missed a few. Example: F type is 4/3 of a D type (so I guess there is an E as well?). A B cell exists also, though I don't know the dimensions. There are many odd sizes which are incorporated into battery packs for all applications. Certainly there is a standard (ISO?) somewhere that specifies it. Shall we attempt to be thoroughly inclusive or list only the most commonly used (as individual cells) types? RatOmeter 03:12, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I say we list all of them, but mark them as "common" or "rare" etc, and say where they are used. Otherwise we will just invite arguments about which ones belong on the list. -- Heron 08:33, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

An "A" battery was used on battery powered vacuum tube radios from the 1920's onward. The "A" battery was typically a rechargeable lead acid battery or for portable sets a dry cell battery composed of several cells could be used. The current draw was usually over .5 ampere. It had to produce this fairly large current to power the tube filaments. Powering a tube radio from dry cells was very expensive due to their rapid exhaustion, even when hooked up in a series-parallel arrangement. The "B" battery was a low current, high voltage dry cell battery(one or more 45 volt batteries in series) used to power the plate circuit. A substitute today might be a number of 9 volt batteries in series. A "C" battery was a low voltage dry cell, 1.5 to 4.5 volts, used to provide grid bias for the circuit, and the terminology did not mean any equivalence with today's C cells. Today's equivalent might be 1 to 3 AA batteries in series. Except for rural users who had no electric utility and portable sets, the battery sets were largely obsolete by the late 1920's, when sets powered by 120 volt alternating current or direct current came along, eliminating the cost of buying batteries or paying to have the A battery recharged at a radio shop. Would a referenced historical section on these batteries be appropriate for inclusion?Edison 15:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, just found Wiki articles on "A" "B" and "C" batteries which provide a similar explanation to the above. It seems odd to have individual encyclopedia articles on each size of battery. Edison 18:40, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "gravity cell"

Some researchers called the battery a gravity cell because gravity kept the two sulfates separated.

What sulfates? The context is missing, making this sentence rather unintelligible.

The cell (also called the Daniell cell) refered to here used copper sulfate and zinc sulfate on opposite sides of a porous membrain. The cell used copper and zinc electrodes each of which had to be in a solution of its own sulfate, or to keep the cell functioning. A diagram of a typical cell appears here:

• • The Telegraph Line: Batteries

-- 205.175.225.5 02:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology

Our article claims:

[Benjamin Franklin]... adapted the word from its earlier sense meaning a beating, which is what an electric shock from the apparatus felt like.

Is there any evidence for this claim? My dictionary claims that by analogy with a battery of artillery, battery had come to mean a group of things joined together to give an enhanced effect; and that an electric battery is just such a battery of galvanic cells. Securiger 07:14, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

When Volta (from whose name the unit of measure volt) invented the battery, it was made of a raw of many diffferent disks (of two type, disposed alternatevely). The term battery (also in Italian and maybe in Latin) originally mean a group of similar thing that are kept together. I have found this meanig also in my little (modern) English dictionary. In my humbly opinion the link between battery and beat are quite not evident. In Italian the term 'batteria' nowdays means also a musical instrument: the drums (I mean the set of drums, cymbals and so on). Even if many persons not correctlly belive the term came from to beat (in Italian 'battere'), it cames from the fact that it a set of instrument. The name 'piles' comes from the Volta's bactery. It was a vertical coloum with many disk disposed in a pile. Often many batteries are used connected in series or paraller. Even if you see just one battery sometimes inside there are some battery connected among them. This is the case of the battery of 4.5 V (that by the way is not in the table) that is made by 3 real batteries of 1.5 V (but do not open it if do not know how to do it safely, be careful) AnyFile 11:26, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Volta invented the electrochemical battery in 1799, but Franklin invented the electrostatic battery before that. It was Franklin who first used the word battery in the electrical sense, referring to an array of eleven capacitors, in a letter to Peter Collinson of the Royal Society in London on the 29th of April 1749. (There is a transcript of the letter here). You are probably right that Franklin was using the word in the sense of "an array of objects", not as in "a beating", but he probably chose that word (instead of the more obvious alternatives such as "array" or "whole bunch") because of its association with violence. --Heron 14:58, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The OED also gives the derivation for "battery" in the electrical sense from its meaning of "a number of pieces of artillery placed in juxtaposition for combined action" as opposed to the whacking-about-the-body-with-a-stick meaning. Even if Franklin was influenced by the word's association with violence, it would seem the current etymology given in this article is incorrect. Any objections to changing it? Moosenose 05:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Power Paper

http://www.howstuffworks.com/power-paper.htm/printable may be a good resource. Brianjd 08:11, 2004 Nov 16 (UTC)

[edit] Fuel cells

In science and technology, a battery is a device that stores energy and makes it available in an electrical form.

...batteries usually consist of electrochemical devices such as one or more galvanic cells or more recently fuel cells...

I don't think a fuel cell "stores" energy. Brianjd 08:16, 2004 Nov 16 (UTC)

Batteries come with a store of chemical reactants built-in whereas in fuel cells, the reactants are supplied by and from mechanisms and storage tanks external to the cell (so they're something like a battery that is continuously being recharged by replacing the reactant chemicals as they are exhausted).

Atlant 16:31, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In a broader sense batteries and fuel cells convert chemical energy to electrical energy. A flow battery also has (some or all) of its energy store outside of the converter/ reactor. Therefore, a fuel cell could be considered as a type of battery. Also metal-air batteries (also known as consumable anode fuel cells) take air as one of their reactive components - battery or not?

ahw001 12 Mar 2006

[edit] Why do they break down?

A friend of mine asked why batteries go bad -- you know, they just start pushing crap out their ends if they're not used for a while. Tried to find the info here, couldn't. Maybe someone should add it? Or am I just looking at the wrong article? Anyway, it should probably be pointed out better if it is in a different article. Cheers. CryptoDerk 17:33, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

That is an excellent question. I suspect that there are several different failure modes for batteries. Let me try adding my best guess to the article. Does anyone know any better? --DavidCary 05:12, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

The material is electrolyte paste and corroded metal. In the original carbon-zinc dry cell this happened very frequently becaused the "consumed" zinc electrode was the outer can of the cell and almost always developed holes through which electrolyte leaked just before it died. Modern batteries invert this construction, putting the "consumed" electrode on the inside and enclosing the cell in a steel jacket. However there are still a few small paths through which electrolyte can occasionally leak even in these cells (however it is usually limited to the ends by the steel jacket – the old cells could leak anywhere... wherever the zinc was eaten through first).

But as DavidCary stated, batteries have many failure modes, this leakage of electrolyte paste is only the external symptom of any of several internal failures. -- 205.175.225.5 02:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Yep, old batteries could broke of their own. Today, some batteries "become older" and don't give as much power than before. But the main origin of their poor lifetime is from the manufacturer. They install a small system which lets some of the respective electrodes slowly melt with the other one, definitly damaging the cell. Of course, they wouldn't want to sell batteries which can be used during 10 years ( if they can be charged ), they usually break down after one year ... So that you go to buy an other one ;-). So the battery can deplete even if it has never been used. This can't be much used in generic batteries, but in specific batteries, as in electronic products, you can find this system --Totophe64 18:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, batteries "self discharge" at predictable rates based on the chemistry used and the storage temperature.[2]. Nothing mysterious about this. --John Nagle 04:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Amps?

How many amperes are in AA, AAA, C and D batteries?

You need to ask a "more specific" question. :-)

What you're probably asking is "How many Ampere-Hours" in each size of battery. The answer to that varies depending on the exact battery technology and vendor, but roughly speaking, an AAA alkaline battery is about 800 mAH, an AA battery is about 2000 mAH, and a D cell is probably 8 or 10 AH. By comparison, in NiMH, an AA battery rated 1800 mAH is about as good as it gets today (2004).

You might also be asking the question "How much current can a battery comfortably deliver?". In this case, NiCd and NiMH batteries are probably the winner (which is why NiCd batteries are still used in portable tools). Again, for a specific answer, you'll need to specify which type of battery (Carbon/Zinc, Alkaline, NiCd, NiMH, Lithium, etc.)

Atlant 20:54, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Or in other words, "How much energy is stored in this battery?" and "How quickly can I get all that energy out?".

[edit] Disambiguation link

We probably don't need the link to the battery disambiguation page, though it isn't very intrusive and doesn't hurt to have it either.

Someone put it there in response to my request when I reverted someone else's deletion of a link to one other specific meaning. At the time, I was under the mistaken impression that this Battery (electricity) article remained the default article rather than the disambiguation page. But that isn't the case, and existing links appear to have been changed (except talk pages which we don't need to worry about), so most anyone who ends up at Battery (electricity) should be where they belong. But then, maybe the discussion here will lead someone to wonder about similar meanings, and the link to the disambiguation page would be helpful.

In summary, I don't really care whether it is kept or deleted, just pointing out in case someone else cares one way or another, so that they aren't misled by what I did in my edits. Gene Nygaard 16:38, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I put it there, and I recognized that it's not really needed. But on the other hand, it's not very harmful either, and you did seem to want it. :-) Feel free to delete it or leave it as you wish.

Atlant 19:18, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The business of batteries

The article currently contains the statement:

Businesswise, the battery industry is worth 2.8 billion dollars annually

Aside from the fact that we could write that better, and attribute the currency (which I assume is US$), does anyone have a citation to back up the basic fact being asserted here? And what portion of "the battery business" does this represent? Disposable primary cells? ALL batteries, whether primary and secondary? Radioisotope Thermal Generators? I think we need more details, otherwise, we should remove this.

Atlant 10:58, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Square prism

what's a square prism. it's an oxymoron. Is there any reason why we cant use cube instead? tommylommykins 16:05, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Nope, not an oxymoron. A prism is simply a multi-sided plane object projected into the third dimension, so there are equilateral prisms, isosceles prisms, square prisms, pentaprisms, and the like. And for some reason, the battery industry routinely uses the term "prismatic" to refer to cells that you or I might call boxes or right-angled Parallelepipeds. And cube, of course, would be wrong as not all sides of the batteries in question are equal.

Atlant 17:05, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Cuboid would be correct, but only mathematicians would understand it. --Heron 20:44, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] merge?

Should we merge Battery pack into the Battery (electricity) article ? Technically, a battery pack is a collection of individual cells, the very definition of a battery. (Although some battery packs have a thermistor or other stuff to help the battery charger). --DavidCary 13:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Merge. - Omegatron 13:28, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

I created Battery pack in the hope to flesh it out as an sub-section for Battery Electric vehicles similar to motors, controllers, regulators, battery management systems, chargers, etc. There are many unique issues which arrise when utilizing a battery in a vehicle for motive power. BEV Packs range from small 10Ah@24v(0.25kWh) to rather large 200Ah@300v(60kWh), will the unique aspects of such batteries fit within the scope of this article? Actually, technically speaking battery (electricity) would more appropriately be named Cell (electricity), a battery being a collection of cells manufactured into a single unit such as a 9v battery or 12v auto battery. So a Battery pack is a collection of multiple batteries, sometimes cells, but the majority are a collection of multiple PbA automotive 12v(6 cell) or 6v(3 cell) batteries. battery (electricity) should focus primarily on Cells, chemestries, characteristics and end with multi-cell batteries perhaps mentioning interconnect built into such products. A Battery pack is more of a specific application than the how and why of electro-chemecal cells. No Merge, link to from Application section --D0li0 18:01, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Don't merge. There is enough material that is significantly different. Rmhermen 18:06, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] energy cost of batteries

Some people claim that hybrid-electric vehicles and BEVs ultimately consume more fossil fuel than internal combustion engines. They claim that constructing the batteries themselves requires lots of grid electricity (and it occurs in countries where most electrical power comes from fossil fuels). This large amout of fossil fuel consumed is never quite paid back by the better efficiency of the electric vehicles in operation.

A very rough estimate is made by j.pickens. It seems to support such claims. Does anyone know a more accurate estimate?

The argument sounds very similar to the Talk:Solar cell and Net energy gain.

--DavidCary 05:12, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunently j.pickens has a few figures wrong, the $6000 Prius battery is more like $3000 MSRP plus $3000 core exchange, which might be where the $6K figure came from. In all reality the battery cost Toyota about $500 as the going high production volume rate is in the $500-$1000/kWh range for NiMH. Just for further referance Li-ion is at about $400/kWh. Now re-running his figures from the point of this error leaves us with 50% energy input or $250 worth of energy to create the battery pack. At $0.09/kWh we get 22.5kWh and not 33,000kWh to produce the battery, that's about the energy content of 1 gallon of gas vs 1000 gallons. Anyway, all of this is moot and I may have even misplaced a decimal. There really must be better referances out there. Can we get Sony or Panasonic to tell us what it actually costs them to run a factory for a year which produces X quantity of such and such battery? This would include to materials, labor, energy, etc, etc for a much clearer picture... --D0li0 13:24, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Another approach would be to estimate the dollar value of the motor fuel savings over the life of the Prius battery. Presumably the hybrid powerplant has to yield a net monetary savings to the consumer, or it would not make sense to buy. Suppose the battery lasts for six years and saves $1000 in fuel per year. Then it would just break even at a $6000 replacement cost if we ignore the time value of money. If the consumer just breaks even, there must be a net energy savings, because the savings is all energy (fuel) cost, whereas the battery cost includes other non-energy costs such as labor and so on to manufacture. The hybrid powerplant might provide other advantages, such as less vulnerability to temporary shortages of fuel. If terrorists blow up Saudi Arabia or there is some other fuel emergency and governments have to impose rationing, hybrid drivers will probably fare better than Hummer drivers. Even if the hybrid vehicle yields no net energy savings, it will already have been manufactured and thus is not as dependent on the momentary supply of fuel. Of course a bicycle is even less dependent on the momentary supply of fuel, and thus confers even more energy security. --Teratornis 20:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cost of electricity from disposable batteries

The article mentions the high cost of energy from batteries but gives no details. I gave a rough estimate of the electricity cost from disposable batteries in #Questions from the article below. It would be interesting if someone could work out some more accurate examples and add them to the article proper. It would be interesting to calculate the cost, weight, and bulk of the disposable batteries necessary to meet the electricity needs of a typical modern residence. --Teratornis 20:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flow Battery

i think an interesting thing to add would be the flow battery. i couldnt find it in wiki, but i think it is absolutely worth to add here. there is a link that explains to some extend the function and feasibility of a flow battery: http://www.memagazine.org/contents/current/features/rerere/rerere.html

I've just updated the entry on vanadium redox (flow) batteries, any objections if I link to it from this article? sections History, Summery(rechargable) and Chemicals used in constuction? Astaroth5 21:25 (UTC) 9th November 2005

[edit] Reorganization as per todo list

I've taken a shot at doing the reorganization mentioned, but this is my first attempt at a major edit of a popular article, so if I've screwed it up, I'm Sorry! I've not removed any material at all, just reorganized it and added a little on flow batteries. Praise, comment, criticism, correction, or even just plain reversion ( if I have seriously messed up ) are all welcome! Astaroth5 22:16, 14 November 2005 (UTC) -Nice work. Thanks for being bold. Cheers, -Willmcw 00:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ideal battery and EMF

I think some explanation of an ideal battery should be on this page. I might add the model of a battery having an EMF and an internal resistance. Fresheneesz 02:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The electrical component section already does mention that, although the term EMF isn't used. Astaroth5 09:03, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Article removed from Wikipedia:Good articles

This article was formerly listed as a good article, but was removed from the listing because unfortunately it has no references. Otherwise it's a great article, though I think the see also section is unnecessarily huge and most of the topics should be mentioned in the main text in any case, so there's no need to relink them. Worldtraveller 00:36, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ozone batteries?

Out of curiousity, I googled for ozone batteries and I found the following: http://www.nuenergy.org/theory/ioncell.htm "The energy density of the aluminum/ozone cell is excellent, even better than the lithium cell. There are no side reactions that take place between the electrolyte and the aluminum..."

Can anyone verify or perhaps add to the current current article.

Thanks :)

I certainly wouldn't invest in this technology. This appears to be a fairly standard Al-air battery where they use ozone in place of air. This supposedly gives a slight increase in the cell voltage. Although it is clear where air comes from, how is the ozone produced? They mention using high voltages. This would entail an energy input to make the battery operate. So where does the initial energy come from? I wouldn't take this idea to seriously until they have published some peer-reviewed experimental results. Ahw001 06:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Late votes

• Support few people would search for the other batteries without a qualifier of some sort, because of the dominance of the primary term.--Technicaltechy 21:26, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] high voltage capacitors just hanging there

Some text was recently added about high voltage capacitors that is not very informative. And it is not obvious what the substance of it is from going to the capacitors wikilink. I think there should be a more specific link or reference which fleshes this out.--Technicaltechy 12:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if this recent text is actually a mistake? I've read about supercapacitors being used as stand-ins for batteries (and some of them are "big" enough that they're rated in mAH: 3500 mAH!), but I haven't yet hear about any "ultra-high-voltage capacitors being used.

Then again, the Supercaps article contains this text:

As of spring 2006, EEStor Inc. claims to have a supercapacitor with a barium titanate dielectric nearing production. The company claims a unit with 37 farads capacitance and an operating voltage of 3.5 kV, capable of storing up to 52kWh. The technology is scheduled for third-party verification during the summer of 2006.

so maybe by supercap standards 3.5KV is "ultra-high voltage"? It's certainly about 1400 times more than your typical low-voltage supercap.

Perhaps the original editor will check-in and tell us what was really on their minds?

Atlant 19:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Questions from the article

68.169.187.216 asked in the article (now moved here):

NEED:

How much energy(Kilowatts)is required to manufacture various types of batteries?

What are the toxic materials?

What type of battery is the most/least environmental?

Atlant 23:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Rough answer: the energy cost to manufacture any product is unlikely to exceed the normal selling price to the consumer, assuming the vendor is trying to make a profit (this is just common sense). Because the retail price has to pay for other costs (materials, labor, amortization on equipment, taxes), the energy cost will generally be some fraction of the ordinary final selling price, perhaps in the range of 10%-25%. Even when products are discounted during clearance sales, they rarely get discounted below the net cost of the energy required to make them and get them to the consumer. Most of the energy will have been purchased at industrial rates, but these are probably similar to what the individual pays for electricity and fuel, because the energy market is efficient and highly commoditized. Thus if a disposable battery retails for, say, US$1, you can look at your electric bill and see how much electric energy you can purchase for US$0.25, and that's probably an upper bound on the energy consumed to make that product and present it for sale to you. Note that for a disposable battery, the cost of the electricity it yields is many times higher than what the local power company charges. Residential consumers might pay from US$0.05 to US$0.10 per kW·h. Suppose a disposable battery retails for US$1 and yields 1 W·h. This is on the order of US$1000 per kW·h delivered, which in turn is on the order of ten thousand times the cost for residential electricity. Another way to look at it is that the disposable battery probably required around a thousand times as much energy to manufacture and distribute to the consumer as it will yield when the consumer uses it. Rechargeable batteries obviously can have much better economics, and correspondingly lower environmental impact, when they take hundreds or thousands of recharges. But since the consumer has to pay for the electricity to recharge them, rechargeable batteries still end up costing more than electricity at the wall outlet, but not by nearly as large a multiple as disposable batteries, of course. Here is a site which purports to be about batteries and the environment. --Teratornis 20:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Homemade batteries

The article talks about replacing the fruit in the homemade batteries because it gets used up. I don't think it is the fruit that wears down the battery. Maybe the fruit gets old & moldy & doesn't conduct as wel, but it is not the cause of the battery not working. The energy comes from the chemical transformation of the metal electrodes into their oxides or their chlorides or whatever the transformation is. The fruit is merely the path that the electricity takes, like the wires in a circuit.

[edit] History

Is there any source for Franklin connecting capacitors in series and in parallel? I can well believe he connected them in parallel, because that is basically the same as having a larger Leyden jar. But the concept of series and parallel electrical connection were cutting edge in the 1830s, when Joseph Henry distinguished "intensity" (series) from ""quantity" (parallel ) connections of cells and of windings. Morse, for instance, in the 1830s had no concept that a low resistance electromagnet and a single cell could not operate a telegraph over an appreciable distance through the high resistance of the wires. To connect several Leyden jars in series to increase the voltage, Franklin would have needed to charge them individually with his friction machine, and place the jars on a thick clean glass surface to avoid the table they sat on from draining off the voltage between the outer foils of the jars. Absent a verifiable source, this claim should be removed.Edison 18:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NiMH vs. NiCd text removed

I removed this section:

Most Ni-MH batteries can be recharged 500-1000 times whereas Ni-Cd batteries can only be recharged about 400 times. (I am afraid, but other sources states that it is possible to recharge Ni-MH twice as less times as Ni-Cd. That is: nickel-cadmium provides over 1000 charge/discharge cycles; nickel-metal-hydride the performance starts to deteriorate after 200-300 cycles if repeatedly deeply cycled. [3])

because of the two contradicting viewpoints. We need more authoritative sources if we're going to say which type lasts longer, if such a judgement can be made at all. --Heron 17:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A battery, B battery Problem

There is a Wikipedia article for the B battery, used in tube radios. Now there is no link to it from here, and no link to it from the article on battery sizes. There used to be an article on the "A battery" used in tude radios, but now if you go to "A battery" you are misdirected to "AA battery," which has nothing whatever to do with the big old battery used to provide filament current for vacuum tubes. See my discussion above from June 7. I own a couple of radios from the 1920's which use A batteries, B batteries, and C batteries. I guess I will re-link this article to "B battery" and add a link from battery sizes to "B battery." How does one find an article which has been deleted, like "A battery"???Edison 14:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC) Found the batteries under A battery (vacuum tubes) etc and added links where appropriate. Also added historical info on the use of lead-acid batteries for electric cars in the early 20th century, radio batteries in the 1920's, and local batteries for early 20th century phone. These were probably a very big portion of the sales of batteries in the early 20th century. There should also be info on battery-powered flashlights. Edison 15:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Atomic Battery

Did you know that in the 50s or the 60s, modern science has invented the nuclear battery ? I've seen depictions in old science books, one saying that one of these can put out 250,000 volts, but the amps are low. It was the size of a "D" cell, was either a Kr-85 or a Cerium -150 unit. Martial Law 21:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

What on Earth do you need 250 kV's for? High voltage is good for long distance transmission, but for everyday use, locally, it doesn't make much sense. Dry air has about 30kV/cm breakdown voltage limit before it sparks through, meaning your 250 kV terminals would have to be separated by at least 10 cm, and even then they'd pretty much short circuit through air at the slightest instability in ionization, such as extra moisture, or just take the surface resistivity path and dance along the battery surface and short circuit. What's good about these batteries (functioning at reasonable, low voltages) is that they can last very long, and function even in places with no sunshine, or limited sunshine, such as deep space probes flying by Pluto, where the Sun is so distant that solar panels don't produce enough energy. As far as efficiency in energy conversion goes, these batteries aren't stellar, but neither is anything else nuclear (current power plants near 35%, your battery is probably much less.) Their capacity is still pretty good on a volume/weight basis, because nuclear fuel is so dense in energy, though their use in everyday terrestrial applications would probably never happen because of terrorism issues - any kind of nuclear battery is pretty much limited to heavily supervised space/military type applications. So why bother thinking about it? If you can come up with a tamperproof containment method, where you can give it to the public, and the container is so resistant that it cannot be melted at least to 3000C electric arc or acetylene torch, or punctured/crushed by dropping a 1 ton block of steel on it, and it can survive inside an explosion conventionally detonated TNT mixture at high pressures/temperatures with sudden shock, without anything happening to the container and its contents, then we can talk. Can you come up with such a tamperproof container? Otherwise forget about it.Sillybilly 06:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Batteries produce direct current?

I've fixed the description a bit. Batteries don't produce DC, since the current depends on the load. Look at the load current in any electronic device any you'll usually see lots of rapid changes (lots of AC.) Instead, batteries produce constant or DC voltage. The term "DC" means "unvarying" when used in this way. (Engineers use AC/DC to mean varying/unvarying, rather than their more obvious meaning as direct current and alternating current. Hence "DC voltage" means "constant voltage" and not "direct current voltage.") For this reason batteries are known as "DC devices."

Also, the idea that batteries produce a constant direct current is a very common misconception. L. McDermott just described this misconception as common among grade school science teachers (article in American Journal of Physics, Sept 2006 issue.) For this reason we should avoid saying that a battery can "produce current." It's more accurate to say that a battery produces voltage. A load can draw a current, but this current depends on the load, and if the value of load should vary, the current will also vary. Indeed, if the load is a changing capacitance, then the battery will "produce AC." --Wjbeaty 20:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Water-activated batteries?

I was surprised to not find any information on this page about water-activated batteries. They are quite neat devices and are in common use in certain areas such as weather balloons. [This] page has some basic information about these batteries. I recently took several photos of a water-activated battery that I'm putting on the Commons shortly in case someone wants to use them. I will add the links to this page when I do. JLamb 11:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

By all means, please be bold and add your information and photos as you see fit!

Atlant 13:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Started new page for water-activated batteries. Mainly wanted to start it to post my photos on. I'm sure someone will enjoy expanding it. JLamb 17:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved low quality text from end of article where it doesn't belong in the first place to this talk page

My Battery Summary!! By : Farasat Siddiqui (c)

Batteries

A battery can be thought up as a medium that stores energy or a can full of chemicals that produces electrons. Batteries come in all types of different shapes, sizes and prices. They range from small circular batteries used in watches costing only a few dollars to batteries for car engines costing $30,000.

Primary and Secondary batteries are the 2 categories of batteries. Primary batteries are the “cheaper” and most often used batteries but they can be "wasteful” they have to be thrown away because they are not rechargeable. Usually these are AA, AAA, D, C; etc.These can cause toxic waste problems. On the other hand Secondary Batteries are the rechargeable type. These are usually car batteries, computer batteries etc. Secondary batteries or rechargeable batteries are made up of 2 components, wet cells and dry cells. Wet cells are used to start up things and dry cells are used up to make batteries able to be recharged.

There are many battery types like, conventional lead acid at 35 watts per kilogram, sealed lead acid at 39 watts per kilogram, bi-polar acid at 50 watts per kilogram, nickel cadium at 55 watts per kilogram, nickel iron of 55 watts per kilogram, nickel-metal hydrate at 90 watts per kilogram, sodium sulphur at 110 watts per kilogram, and at the most lithium at 155 watts per kilogram.

Batteries operate from electrolytes. An electrolyte comes in liquids and it is a combination of chemicals. Batteries have two terminals. These are Positive and Negative. What is usually found at the top of a standard everyday battery is the positive terminal, the “thing” that comes out. It connects the battery to another object to make it work. A battery also needs a voltaic cell. A voltaic cell works by using a strip or rod of copper and sulfuric acid mixed with water. More cells create higher voltage.

From this you can see batteries have different forms, different types, different prices, and complex structures. Batteries are used in everyday life and people would be amazed by how many things would go wrong if batteries did not exist.

Moved to this talk page by Sillybilly 05:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Invention probably in 1799, announcement definitely in 1800

Most sources associate Volta's pile with the year 1800. Many phrase this in wording like "Volta announced his development of the pile in 1800." 1800 was the year when Volta sent a description of the pile to the Royal Society (in April), which was read before the Society in June, and according to one source "caused a sensation."

Some sources describe Volta as having invented the battery in 1799. This seems very likely, but quick searches didn't turn up anything really definitive as to when he actually did the work that he wrote about in April, 1800. The actual 1800 published paper does not address this.

Many sources do actually say that Volta first constructed the pile in 1800, e.g. "In 1800, Volta constructed the first galvanic cell,"[4]." Others say that Volta anounced it in 1800.

I suspect the sources that say he first invented or constructed it in 1800 are likely mistaken and careless, but in any case, it seems that it was the pile's announcement which "caused a sensation" and was really the significant event.

I think the safest thing to do is to stick to the statement that Volta announced the pile in 1800, while noting in a footnote that some sources say he invented it in 1799. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Why is this page so consistently vandalized?? --Thenickdude 02:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discharge

Can anybody include information about battery discharging ?. Regards. --Mac 07:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

What (specifically) would you like to know that isn't already covered in the article?

Atlant 15:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's that stuff?

let's talk about the processes behind the white precipitate which appears on AA batteries' terminals after a while. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.67.94.245 (talk • contribs).