I think the comparisons against lithium ion are a bit pie in the sky, however they’ve apparently solved a number of issues that face lead acid batteries, eg dendrite formation and charge cycles (they did 500-700 with a reduction to 80% capacity, whereas lead acid typically can only do about 350 cycles). Zinc is typically much worse than lead acid for dendrites, but their bismuth oxide layer might make it perform better than lead acid.

Even so, I’m skeptical that such a process could be commercialised and compete with lead acid on cost. The way they seem to target their comparisons towards lithium batteries further suggests this.

Maybe there is some niche where lithium is overkill and this could be viable, though, who knows. BESS on the electrical network is massively growing, so there’s probably some scope for people to try this there also - especially with regards to fire risk, which some people (particularly planning authorities) are getting nervous about.

The full paper can be found for free here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.202400237. It has smiley faces in the diagrams.

That’s alright, fusion is only ten years away!

You should quadruple your skeptism if it has anything to do with battery technology.

Bite into an Aquafina!

but nothing really about how well they work

There was a brief mention in the article about how they used a bismuth oxide layer to prevent dendrites from forming, that’s novel and cool. However I think the bigger issue is material cost - bismuth costs much more than lead acid.

The full article is freely available here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.202400237

You’re right, the current sulfuric acid and potassium hydroxide we use right now are just flowers are roses compared to… water

I prefer water than other terrible stuff inside it… Specially if it reduces the possibility of a fire. Water damages just that device… fire can burn the whole building if not detected early.