Talk:Flow battery

message: Can an author incorporate this new announcement into the article - could be a game-changer.
https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2019/Q1/refillable-technology-could-provide-enough-energy-to-drive-an-electric-car-up-to-3,000-miles.html
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1120397_purdue-scientists-test-flow-battery-for-evs-claim-300-mile-rangeSedimentary (talk) 14:34, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Developments 

message: 1. What is the overall efficiency of these batteries, including
*Amount of energy discharged divided by amount of energy stored?
*1 - (Amount of energy required to construct one of these batteries divided by the energy storage lifetime capacity)?
2. What are the natural resources required as raw materials and what is the world supply of these resources? Any of the supplies in volatile regions?
3. What are the costs of these batteries on a kWh of storage basis?
4. What are the non-linear considerations for the answers to the above? 
Thanks,
Skyemoor 13:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EROEI for storage 

message: I added a link to vrbpower.com a manufacturer of these types of batteries. It was removed as spam. I disagree with that. This is not exactly a well known topic and a link to one of the few big names in the field would help give some context. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.99.63.218 (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is NOT a business directory. The article is not about that company. A link to their website does not add to the enclopedic content and is not appropriate per the external links guidelines. VRB Power Systems Inc. spammed before, and their links were removed, not only by me. Interesting that only 6 days after, a corporate performance training company, also Canadian, inserts the same links again. Femto 13:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very well I accept your argument, I hadn't read the external link guidelines. But please don't start with the conspiracy theories. I'm not affiliated with them, I read about them in the Clean Break clean tech blog.--149.99.63.218 19:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: After reading both this article and the external links, I can't detect any difference between a “flow battery” and a fuel cell. Can somebody either rewrite the article to clarify this point, or merge it into the fuel cell article? 72.235.10.142 (talk) 23:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Somebody please specify the meaning of "WKPD" as used above? Sure isn't the one given in the main namespace, and the WP namespace has no such entry. --217.81.189.242 (talk) 19:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

text: There is no chemical, material, or operational difference between a redox flow battery and a fuel cell.  A non-rechargeable electrochemical device is termed a primary cell while a rechargeable device is a secondary cell (see Linden & Reddy, Handbook of Batteries).  A redox flow battery is better termed a secondary fuel cell or rechargeable fuel cell, just as NiCd and Li-ion are termed rechargeable batteries.  Historically, all fuel cells were primary cells, and it was probably not envisioned that energetically practical, rechargeable fuel cells would come into existence.  When they did, people probably deemed them more similar to batteries, resulting in the misnomer "flow battery," even though the operational mechanism was more akin to that of a fuel cell.  Those who work with flow batteries or wish to understand how they work need to know that the terminology betrays the underlying physical processes. 192.222.129.81 (talk) 22:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distinction from fuel cells 

message: Some gang of gurus please check whether this box can be removed now ;-))
TIA, HTH, --217.81.189.242 (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too technical still? (Intro for general audience just added.) 

message: one section is tagged as such. Can't seem to spot any list though. Tag outdated? Remove?
--217.81.189.242 (talk) 20:59, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  pro and con list, where? 

message: I understand this is still quite experimental and all applications here mentioned are only potential future applications, but maybe for a few limited applications yet. For example "Storing energy from renewable sources such as wind or solar for discharge during periods of peak demand", with a reference, looks like "wow, that bloody problem of wind is now solved". You have to read the reference to find this a second hand reference, where the journalist establishes a link between experiments at Harvard with the need of storage in California. Looks nearly dishonest now. Would be perfectly honest it was made clear that "one may dream of storing, in some future, energy from renewables…" Dominique Meeùs (talk) 07:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subtitle applications misleading 

message: This recent news article may provide a useful example and additional reference. See:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterdetwiler/2014/05/30/enervault-unveils-first-of-its-kind-iron-chromium-megawatt-scale-flow-battery/#comment_reply  Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 11:55, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  EnerVault Unveils First Of Its Kind Iron-Chromium Megawatt-Scale Flow Battery 

message: The added text, and the reference, specify the energy density of the Quant/nanoFLOWCELL flow battery to be a nonsensical 600W per kg and/or liter.  It literally does not mean anything in this context.  600W is a measure of power, not energy, a correct specification would be in watt-hours or joules or a similar unit.  Rwessel (talk) 21:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Energy density of Quant/nanoFLOWCELL 

message: The section "with Aqueous Multielectron Oxidants", was recently added.  Other than being horribly formatted and filled with utterly impenetrable jargon, is there any evidence at all that this is real?  A couple of patent applications are not sufficient evidence (per WP:PATENT are not generally reliable sources), the purported company doesn't appear to have a web site, and no news seems to be mentioning this.  Rwessel (talk) 11:10, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "with Aqueous Multielectron Oxidants" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Flow battery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100209050109/http://redflow.com.au:80/DNSP.htm to http://www.redflow.com.au/DNSP.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The phrase "mega flow battery" has been used in coverage of the "rhubarb battery" but what does it mean?  It would be helpful to define in this article.  Is it just a flow battery capable of handling megawatts of power? -- Beland (talk) 00:32, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mega flow batteries 

message: Lockheed Martin now appears to be offering a coordination chemistry flow battery (CCFB). Patent freepatentsonline. Product page Lockheed Martin. It looks like LM has dropped their lithium ion BESS systems which they were previously selling, and are just offering these in their "Energy Storage". David Woodward ☮ ♡♢☞☽ 02:39, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Still in development by the looks of their web page. David Woodward (talk) 05:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordination chemistry flow battery (CCFB), appears to be commercially available 

message: Looks interesting at current lab scale, has won a few awards. Open loop design can use gaseous CO2 and outputs carbonates or bicarbonates, cheap and common catalyst. I can’t see it in the current list of chemistries, but will park here for more knowledgeable wikipedians. CleanTechnica article (author has commercial connection to company). ‘’Journal of Power Sources’’ paper. David Woodward (talk) 05:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  CO2 redox open loop 

message: These batteries are being commercialized and are receiving much attention. I think think they need a paragraph explaining why.
e.g. https://www.energy-storage.news/ess-inc-signs-2gwh-iron-flow-battery-deal-with-softbanks-sb-energy/
Burressd (talk) 21:33, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iron flow batteries 

message: These term should be better defined, possibly with a separate wiki article. The terms anode and cathode should be avoided because they are ambiguous. The posode is anode while charging and cathode while discharging. Agnerf (talk) 16:24, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  negode posode negolyte posolyte