Mukherjee, AliviaOKOLIE, JUDENiu, CatherineDalai, Ajay K.2023-10-042023-10-042022Mukherjee, A., Okolie, J.A., Niu, C., Dalai, A.K., Techno – Economic analysis of activated carbon production from spent coffee grounds: Comparative evaluation of different production routes, Energy Conversion and Management: X, Volume 14, 2022, 100218,ISSN 2590-1745, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2022.100218.https://hdl.handle.net/10388/151132590-1745/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync-nd/4.0/).Activated carbon (AC) has gained immense popularity owing to its excellent physicochemical properties and its ability to remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from flue gas stream. This study examines the potential of spent coffee grounds (SCG) as a precursor for activated carbon (AC) production via prominent thermochemical conversion technologies. Different production routes, such as slow pyrolysis, activation, and deep eutectic solvent (DES) functionalization were compared in terms of their economic viability. Three scenarios (Scenario 1–3) involving combinations of the technologies and production routes were evaluated. Scenario 1 comprises of slow pyrolysis, CO2 activation and flue gas recycling for activation. Scenario 2 includes flue gas combustion while the third scenario comprise of flue gas combustion and DES impregnation. All processes were simulated with Aspen plus, while a detailed cash flow analysis was used to estimate the profitability parameters. The price of AC was found to be the most crucial determinant of an AC production plant’s viability and feasibility. The minimum selling price (MSP) of AC samples produced from scenarios 1,2 and 3 are U.S $0.15/kg, $0.21/kg, $0.28/kg respectively. The price of pristine AC and DES treated AC were lower than the commercially available activated carbon (U.S $0.45/kg).enAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 Canadaactivated carbonspent coffee groundstechno – economic analysisbiocharpyrolysisArticle10.1016/j.ecmx.2022.100218