Table 3.

Comparison of energy storage performance of soybean-based activated carbons.

Preparation Process	Electrolyte	Potential Window	Energy Density	Cycling Stability	Reference
Thermal-treatment of KOH-soaked soybean	1 M Na2SO4 aqueous solution	1.8 V	14.3 Wh kg−1	-	[33]
Hydrothermal treatment, KOH activation and then carbonization	1 M Li2SO4 aqueous solution	1.7 V	18 Wh kg−1 (at 0.2 Ag−1)	10,000 cycles: 90–95% retention	[34]
Hydrothermal treatment, KOH activation and then carbonization	1 M Na2SO4 aqueous solution	2.0 V	22.28 Wh kg−1 (at 0.5 Ag−1)	10,000 cycles: 91.1% retention at 5 Ag−1	[35]
Hydrothermal and then carbonization	1 M Na2SO4 aqueous solution	1.9 V	35 Wh kg−1 (at 0.1 Ag−1)	2000 cycles: 81.4% retention at 0.5 Ag−1	[36]
Hydrothermal treatment, carbonization and then KOH activation	6 M KOH aqueous solution	1.0 V	36.11 Wh kg−1 (at 0.5 Ag−1)	10,000 cycles: 87.5% retention at 10 Ag−1	[37]
Hydrothermal treatment, KOH activation and then carbonization	CMC–LiNO3 gel electrolyte	2.0 V	68.19 Wh kg−1 (at 1.0 Ag−1)	5000 cycles: 89.9% retention at 2 Ag−1	This work