Table 1 Types of biomass and its curing performances.

Firewood

Solid

Higher than coal; 1 kg dried tobacco leaves required 14 kg fuelwood

–

Thermal efficiency of the firewood (53.17%) was higher than that of coal (49.52%)

^3,20

Rice husk and corncob

Solid

–

Low emissions

Meeting the requirement for tobacco-curing

²¹

Biomass briquette fuel

Solid

Lower than coal (curing cost reductions of 18.60%–19.80%); 1 kg of dried tobacco required 1.2 kg biomass fuel

With less CO, NO, NO₂ and SO₂ generated than coal

Precise temperature control (± 0.5 °C deviation); thermal efficiency of the biomass briquette fuel (55.26%) was higher than that of coal (49.52%); energy efficiency for biomass briquettes (39%–42%) was higher than coal (36%)

^{3,22,23,24,25}

Biomass pellet fuel

Solid

Lower than coal (curing cost reductions of 15.90%); Biomass consumption was lower than firewood and sawdust

With less CO₂, SO₂, and NOx generated than coal

Precise temperature control (− 0.04℃ to 0.34 ℃ deviation), outperform coal-fired systems

^25,26,27

Alcoholbased fuel

Liquid

Reduced than coal and biomass briquettes fuel by 19.44% and 45.28%, respectively

The emissions of CO₂ and CO of alcoholbased fuel were 40.82% and 0.19% lower than coal and biomass briquettes fuel, respectively; no emissions of NO_X, SO₂, and H₂S were detected

Meeting the requirement for tobacco-curing; the accuracy of the target dry bulb temperature curve was 93.4%; thermal efficiency was higher than coal and biomass briquettes fuel

²⁸

Biogas (hydrogen, biogas)

Gas

Lower curing cost

Low emissions

Increased thermal efficiency and energy efficiency

¹⁰