Long life batteries

[MK14]

One more factor to consider:

The innovating companies often are the small individually-owned or family-owned businesses.  Both Ever Ready and Duracell have a history tied to the P.R. Mallory company which was started by an individual name Mallory.  P.R. Mallory company made batteries for Ever Ready in the early 1900's and then later created their own.  Duracell was a registered trademark of P.R. Mallory Company¹.

Individual/Family owned businesses are affected by one more factor - inheritance laws.

As you say, that is another factor as well. The fuller pictures of why/how various companies and industries, became the successful and powerful, size they are today, is probably very interesting.
Thanks for the links, they made interesting reading.

Sadly, your first link, seems to say that it is uneconomic to recycle one use batteries, really. But they went along with it, because of European initiatives. That is also disappointing. Things should only really be recycled, when it is truly beneficial and economically/resource wise useful to do so.
If NOT, the recycling shouldn't be taking place, as it would be just a further waste of resources. instead, other solutions should be considered, researched and acted up, as necessary. In the case of batteries, that solution, might be the promotion of muli-use (rechargeable) batteries. Assuming that the materials and other costs of such rechargeable batteries, doesn't in itself, also harm the environment.
E.g. NiCad batteries, introduce more Cadmium, which is potentially toxic and harmful to the environment, so better/safer rechargeable battery types should have been invented/promoted, such as NiHM/Lithium-types and others.
Hopefully one day, some kind of very safe, fusion technology or something, can be invented. For truly long life, safe and not environmentally harmful battery/power sources.
At least Mercury batteries are mostly/fully gone now, and NiCads are getting increasingly rare as well (but there does seem to be NiCads in existence, possibly for some high current drain applications or other reasons ?).

[IanB]

At least Mercury batteries are mostly/fully gone now

This is slightly ironic, considering that mercury was the component of alkaline batteries used to prevent them from leaking, which in turn helped to prevent damaged electronics being thrown away.

[MK14]

This is slightly ironic, considering that mercury was the component of alkaline batteries used to prevent them from leaking, which in turn helped to prevent damaged electronics being thrown away.

Very good point. Pity they couldn't replace the functionality of the Mercury, another way. To keep the functionality of Alkaline (and other battery types). I suppose it is sounding a bit like the leaded/unleaded solder debates. Leaded solder is arguably better, for solder joint quality and product longevity, as regards solder joint failures. But lead is a potentially toxic environmental hazard. So it makes sense to want to remove it from electronics products. Hopefully, one day better alternatives to Lead and Mercury, will be found. Which might be Chemical substances or construction techniques, and other solutions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_battery

I'm now worried, because the wiki article seems to hint/imply/say (it is not that clear), that zinc (non-alkaline) batteries, older than 1996, may have used Mercury, to preserve their shelf-life. Which puts a possible twist on the OPs batteries. If their amazing life, is because they have Mercury coating the Carbon section. Then I'd be worried about possibly toxic Mercury, and its possible effects on the environment.

[coppice]

This is slightly ironic, considering that mercury was the component of alkaline batteries used to prevent them from leaking, which in turn helped to prevent damaged electronics being thrown away.

Very good point. Pity they couldn't replace the functionality of the Mercury, another way. To keep the functionality of Alkaline (and other battery types). I suppose it is sounding a bit like the leaded/unleaded solder debates. Leaded solder is arguably better, for solder joint quality and product longevity, as regards solder joint failures. But lead is a potentially toxic environmental hazard. So it makes sense to want to remove it from electronics products. Hopefully, one day better alternatives to Lead and Mercury, will be found. Which might be Chemical substances or construction techniques, and other solutions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_battery

I'm now worried, because the wiki article seems to hint/imply/say (it is not that clear), that zinc (non-alkaline) batteries, older than 1996, may have used Mercury, to preserve their shelf-life. Which puts a possible twist on the OPs batteries. If their amazing life, is because they have Mercury coating the Carbon section. Then I'd be worried about possibly toxic Mercury, and its possible effects on the environment.

If they added mercury to zinc-carbon batteries to prevent leaking, I guess they didn't add it to many. Zinc-carbon batteries made the leakage issues we see with alkaline batteries look pretty minor.... except for the PP3. I don't remember those being a problem, and we used them in a number of things where they sat for a very long time.

[MK14]

If they added mercury to zinc-carbon batteries to prevent leaking, I guess they didn't add it to many. Zinc-carbon batteries made the leakage issues we see with alkaline batteries look pretty minor.... except for the PP3. I don't remember those being a problem, and we used them in a number of things where they sat for a very long time.

That's true. They (zinc-carbon batteries) were rather bad at leaking, at times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_battery

The wiki article seems to say:

When introduced in the late 1960s, the zinc electrode of alkaline batteries (in common with the then ubiquitous carbon-zinc cells) had a surface film of mercury amalgam. Its purpose was to control electrolytic action at impurity sites, which would reduce shelf life and promote leakage. With reductions in mercury content being mandated by various legislatures, it became necessary to greatly improve the purity and consistency of the zinc.[10]

Which seems to imply that carbon-zinc cells (I.e. non-alkaline AA/AAA/PP3/C/D etc), had a small amount of mercury, to help control battery leakage and preserve shelf life. But I don't find the text especially clear. I've tried the sources, but the mains source seems to be a book. Which needs a login (possibly free), to access and read, so I haven't seen it.

[IanB]

I'm now worried, because the wiki article seems to hint/imply/say (it is not that clear), that zinc (non-alkaline) batteries, older than 1996, may have used Mercury, to preserve their shelf-life. Which puts a possible twist on the OPs batteries. If their amazing life, is because they have Mercury coating the Carbon section. Then I'd be worried about possibly toxic Mercury, and its possible effects on the environment.

Actually, the danger to individuals from mercury is rather overstated, unless you ingest it. I took apart countless zinc carbon batteries in the 70's to get the carbon rods out of them, and quite freely got the black electrolyte paste and other contents all over my hands. I also played with liquid mercury and dipped my hands in a bath of the stuff to see how it felt (weird, in case you are wondering).

So I would not consider a zinc carbon battery from before 1996 to be a hazardous items. After all, they were manufactured by the million.