Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

Energy, exergy, and techno-economic performance analyses of solar dryers

for agro products: A comprehensive review
A. Ahmadi a, 1, Biplab Das b, *, 1, M.A. Ehyaei c, 1, F. Esmaeilion d, 1, M. El Haj Assad e, 1, D.
H. Jamali f, 1, O. Koohshekan f, 1, R. Kumar g, 1, M.A. Rosen h, 1, S. Negi b, 1, Satya Sekhar Bhogilla i,
S. Safari j, 1
a
School of New Technologies, Iran University of Science & Technology, Islamic Republic of Iran
b
PVT Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Silchar, Asaam 788010, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pardis Branch, Islamic Azad University, Pardis New City, Iran
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 19967-15433, Iran
e
Sustainable & Renewable Energy Engineering Department, University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
f
School of Environment, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
g
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Lovely Professional University, Punjab, India
h
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, Ontario L1G 0C5, Canada
i
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Jammu, India
j
Department of Energy Engineering, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Due to continuous growth in population and sharp increase in energy and food demand, research on alternative
Solar dryer energy sources independent of fossil fuels has increased over the last decade. Moreover, limitations on green­
Energy house gas emissions by developed and developing countries are imposing much pressure on the energy sector
Exergy
worldwide to use renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, biomass, hydro, and geothermal. Food pro­
Economic analysis
Payback period
duction is one of the biggest industries in the world, and it consumes a large amount of energy in the form of heat
CO2 mitigation and electricity. In this work, agro-product drying technologies powered by solar energy are presented and dis­
cussed. Different types of solar dryers based on direct, indirect and mixed modes are described. Moreover, en­
ergy, exergy, economic, and environmental analyses for these technologies are presented to determine the main
parameters affecting the dryer performance. The results indicate that the air mass flow rate, temperature,
moisture content, and drying time are the most important parameters in solar dryer performance. Finally, a
comparative assessment of the performance of different existing solar dryer has been highlighted with a detail
scope of future works.

(Sawicka, 2019; Abdulmalek et al., 2018). By decreasing post-harvest

1. Introduction losses, especially in developing countries, the forecasted demand for
food can be fulfilled without putting extra pressure on natural resources.
The global population of 7.7 billion in 2020 is expanding and is Drying is widely accepted as an important preservation technique for
projected to rise by around 2 billion over the next 30 years (United agricultural products, which increases shelf life, improves quality, and
Nations, 2019). This will bring several challenges around global sus­ reduces losses during storage (Kant et al., 2016; Prasad et al., 2006a,
tainability and, apart from energy and water, food supply and security 2006b). Several drying technologies are commercially available for
will be the major challenges to society. To achieve the proper balance agro-products, and each has its own merits and demerits. In most
between future global food demand and supply, reducing post-harvest developing countries, open sun drying (OSD) is generally used to pre­
losses are necessary. Developing countries suffer significant loss of serve food and grains. Although this method of drying is inexpensive and
food and grains due to improper storage and processing. Note that about freely available, the food material is exposed to an open environment;
1/3 of food produced is wasted or lost in post-harvest processing thus the chances of contamination by pollution and degradation due to

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (B. Das).
1
The contribution of the authors is the same.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.09.060
Received 22 August 2020; Received in revised form 23 August 2021; Accepted 20 September 2021
Available online 1 October 2021
0038-092X/© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Solar Energy Society.
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Nomenclature Z Capital investment (USD)

A Area (m2) Greek symbols

Ag Inlet area (m2) ε Exergy efficiency
Cei Coefficient of exergoenvironmental impact η Energy efficiency
CP Specific heat at constant pressure (J.kg− 1.K− 1) ɵei Effectiveness factor of environmental damage
CF Annual income cash flow (USD/year) ɵeii Exergoenvironmental impact improvement factor
E Emissive power (W/m2) μ Chemical potential (J.kg− 1)
Eev energy utilized for moisture evaporation at solid feed ν Specific volume (m3.kg− 1)
temperature
Eg Emissive power at inlet (W/m2) Subscripts
0 Dead state
ĖD Exergy destruction rate (W)
A Air
E0 to overall energy supplied to dryer
c Chemical
Ex
˙ Exergy rate (W)
da Drying air
F Shape factor dco Drying chamber outlet
Fg Inlet shape factor
dci Drying chamber inlet
f ei Exergoenvironmental factor f Saturated liquid
f es Exergy stability factor
f Final
g Gravitational acceleration (m.s− 2) g Saturated vapor
gc Gravitational constant in Newton’s law
i Initial
H Absolute humidity (kgwater/kgdry) in Inlet
HAS Adiabatic saturation humidity at entry of drying unit
out Outlet
HC Air absolute humidity leaving collector and entering rad Radiation
drying unit
s Sun
HD Air absolute humidity leaving drying unit t Time
I˙ Irreversibility rate (W)
w Work
IP Improvement potential v Vapor
IRR Internal rate of return
J Joule constant (J.kg− 1) Abbreviations
k Specific cost of products (USD/kWh) CD Cabinet dryer
M Molecular mass DACSD Direct active convection solar dryer
N Project lifetime (years) DPCSD Direct passive cabinet solar dryer
Nc Unit number of moles of species c DPSD Double-pass solar dryer
NPV Net present value (USD) DSD Direct solar drying
ṁ Mass flow rate (kg/s) ETC Evacuated tube collector
P Pressure (Pa) FAO Food and agriculture organization
Pg Vapor pressure (Pa) FD Freezing drying
PP Payback period (years) FPC Flat plate solar collector
Q Volumetric airflow rate (m3.h− 1) HSD Hybrid solar drying
Qrad Overall energy received (J) IP Improvement potential
R Universal gas constant (J.mol− 1.K− 1) ISD Indirect solar drying
r Discount factor LPG Liquid petroleum gas
s Specific entropy (J.kg− 1K− 1) MSD Mixed solar dryer
Ṡgen Entropy generation rate (W/K) N-PVT Number of photovoltaic thermal
SI Sustainability index OSD Open-sun dryer
SPP Simple payback period (years) PDC Parabolic dish concentrator
T Temperature (oC or K) PV Photovoltaic
u Specific internal energy (J.kg− 1) PV/T Photovoltaic-thermal
V Velocity (m.s− 1) SGD Solar greenhouse drying
WER Waste energy ratio SSA Sub-Saharan Africa
X Molar ratio STD Solar tunnel drying
X0v Vapor molar ratio USD United States dollar
x Vapor molar ratio TL Transverse-longitudinal
Y Annual capacity of energy parameter (kWh/year) VD Vacuum drying

an overly long drying period under direct sunlight are significantly et al., 2018). By comparison, modern drying methods such as freeze
increased. This can lead to the growth of poisonous fungi, bacteria, and drying (Różyło, 2020), convective drying Chandramohan, 2020),
other microorganisms in sun-dried crops, increasing the chances of dielectric or microwave drying (Gaukel et al., 2017), drum drying (Berk,
foodborne diseases in developing countries (Mustayen et al., 2014; El- 2009), infrared drying (Baeghbali et al., 2020) and spray drying (Lucas
Sebaii and Shalaby, 2012). Moreover, drying parameters like airflow et al., 2020) make use of a controlled environment that can process food
rate, moisture content, temperature, and heat input cannot be moni­ products with superior quality. But their expensive nature and de­
tored in OSD, sometimes leading to an undesirable drying rate (Debnath pendency on non-renewable energy sources make them inaccessible to

350
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

the poor farmers in several developing nations. (Alexandratos and Bruinsma, 2012). Researchers and agronomists have
In the last decade, global energy demand increased rapidly, and most focused on tackling this issue by increasing crop yield with reference to
of this increase was met using fossil fuels. Consequently, large CO2 the practices employed during the green revolution such as high yielding
emissions occurred (approx. 33 Gt in 2019) as shown in Fig. 1. Between nutrient-rich cultivars and various input management techniques (Bur­
2010 and 2019, CO2 emissions increased from 18 Gt to 22 Gt in devel­ ney et al., 2010; Godfray et al., 2010). But, it may be difficult in various
oping countries but dropped from 12.4 Gt to 11.3 Gt in developed geographical locations and climate conditions to increase production to
countries. It is observed that energy consumption for various drying the required amount bearing in mind limited economic and environ­
applications is one of the major components of the total energy con­ mental resources (Lobell et al., 2009).
sumption in developing countries (Bal et al., 2010). Statistics indicate A supportive approach can reduce losses after the post-harvesting of
that the food sector consumes globally approximately 200 EJ per year, of food resources. The amount of losses incurred in the product can vary
which 45% corresponds to processing and distribution activities (Ladha- across different locations and the type of handling systems employed
Sabur et al., 2019). Also, food processing activities contribute in (Parfitt et al., 2010); an average of over one-third of the produce is spoilt
approximately 26% of the total greenhouse gas emissions (Poore and or deemed unfit for human consumption and further usage (Gustavsson
Nemecek, 2018) as displayed in Fig. 2. Meanwhile, the use of fossil fuels et al., 2011; Rockefeller foundation, 2013). The wastage usually occurs
in all stages of the food chain is increasing rapidly to meet the rising in the exchange between the farmer and the consumer in developing
demand for food. The high cost, finite nature, and the pollution asso­ countries and a similar amount of food production is wasted by the end
ciated with such fuels can place constraints on their use. Also, small purchaser in developed countries (Dou et al., 2016). Much of these losses
farmers in developing economies usually cannot afford fossil fuel pow­ are due to rodents, insects, and microorganisms, especially in dry
ered dryers due to their high capital and operating costs (Bal et al., 2010) countries due to poor postharvest management of storage and mainte­
At present, many countries are shifting towards sustainable methods nance of the food produce (Kumar and Kalita, 2017; Lipinski et al., 2013;
of producing energy to reduce their carbon emissions (Negi et al., 2020; Mendoza et al., 2017; Zorya et al., 2011).
Das et al., 2021). Considering environmental concerns, it is important to In recent years, even though many countries have taken several
further decrease the use of fossil fuels in crop drying systems and to counter measures and have emphasized improving food production,
decouple drying/food costs from the dynamic cost of fossil fuels. This population control, and judicious land use as part of their policies to
necessitates efficient use of sustainable energy for drying of agro- tackle food demand, the post-harvest loss has been an important issue
products. that has not received much attention which significantly affects food
Over the past few years, solar dryers (Gupta et al., 2021; Gupta et al., production. Less than 5% of research funding has been allotted to
2020) have become popular in the agriculture sector, due to their cost- improve post-harvest management systems in recent years (Pantenius,
effectiveness and use of a clean source of energy. Solar dryers make use 1988; Kitinoja et al., 2011; Greeley, 1986; Bourne, 1977). Food pro­
of thermal energy storage, which can store energy when sunlight is duced from harvest costing an amount of 1 trillion USD and constituting
available and supply energy during periods when the sun does not shine about one-third of the total production is lost during post-harvesting
(Kumar et al., 2020). The use of solar dryers is feasible and economic for operation (Gustavsson et al., 2011). This type of food goes unused
small farmers of many developing countries for conserving grains such even though it is available for consumption and is referred to as food loss
as rice, wheat, maize and corn, fruits such as mangoes, grapes, beets, (Buzby et al. 2014; Aulakh et al., 2013). The alternative option for
apples, banana, pineapples, dates and grapes, vegetables such as carrots, investing in post-harvesting methods can yield higher returns and can
tomatoes, potatoes and onions, herbs and spices such as chillies, ginger, tackle the problem of meeting food demand more efficiently as
tulsi, neem and garlic, and cash crops such as flowers, tea, and coffee, as compared to increasing the total food production with relatively mod­
well as fish and meat (Lingayat et al., 2020a, 2020b). erate amounts of capital funding.
Pertinent literature reveals that the reduction of post-harvest losses The post-harvest loss is defined as the food lost during the supply
of agro-products remains a major concern for most developing countries. chain management cycle from crop harvesting to its utilization (Buzby
Further, commercialization of solar energy based drying is limited due et al., 2014). Weight decrease caused because of quality loss, spoilage,
to the variation of solar intensity, high initial investment costs, poor nutritional loss, economic loss, and loss due to seed viability are some of
maintenance, and lack of technical know-how by end users like farmers. the categories that can broadly be classified as post-harvest loss (Boxall,
Moreover, the design of most laboratory based drying systems has not 2011). The extent of these losses varies greatly during the food supply
considered their economic viability. In addition, performance compar­ chain depending upon the type of crops, area of production, and econ­
isons of systems tested in different climatic conditions create uncer­ omies of the certain region. However, there is a lower amount of food
tainty. Thus, it is necessary to collect information from many previous loss in developed countries due to better expertise, storage facilities, and
works and compare the performances of solar dryers for agricultural efficient crop handling. It is seen that majority of losses are mainly
applications considering both energetic, exergetic, environmental, and incurred during the final stages of the supply chain. This term is used for
economic viability. This article provides a comprehensive review of referring to the food that is usually discarded, intentionally not used or
recent developments of solar air-drying technologies and discusses the spoiled/expired (Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations,
main parameters that result in better product quality (i.e., colour, 2014). Based on estimates on a weight basis among agricultural com­
nutritional value, and texture). Moreover, performance analyses of solar modities, vegetables and fruits, root crops, cereal crops losses constitute
dryers for drying different agro-products, methods of thermal energy about 44%, 20%, and 19% of losses respectively (Gustavsson et al.,
storage, and thermodynamic and economic analyses of drying processes 2011; Lipinski et al., 2013). The largest share in losses based on calorific
are described in this review. The aim is to improve understanding of content is held by cereal crops (53%).
these technologies and to foster their use where appropriate. Losses related to the physical attributes and quality aspects of the
crop that can reduce the crop price or make it not useful for consumption
2. Drying of agro-products worldwide are accounted for in the postharvest loss, and in severe cases, up to 80%
of the food production can be lost (Fox, 2013). Highly significant losses
To continuously supply food to the rising human population ratio­ ranging between 20% and 40% have been estimated for African coun­
nally and sustainably while taking into account the changes in the eco- tries and these can be very significant and have to be avoided, taking
system and limiting the increase of agricultural land and water resources into consideration the low agricultural yield in many countries in Africa
in the current generation has become a central issue of prime impor­ (Abass et al., 2014). Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) itself loses about 4 billion
tance (United Nations, 2015). It is estimated that the food supply will USD worth food per year (Zorya et al., 2011). Factors such as available
rise by 60% in 2050 relative to 2005 to meet the escalating demand food quantity, economic and social consequences, and exchange values

351
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 1. Global CO2 emissions for 2010–2019 (IEA, 2019).

Fig. 2. Global CO2 emissions from food production (Poore and Nemecek, 2018; Ritichie, 2019).

of the produced food crop or commodities are affected considerably in (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2013a,
addition to impacting the environment. As per the United Nations Food 2013b).
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) records, CO2 equivalent emissions Storage losses (Mesterházy et al., 2020) are one of the most vital and
of about 3.3 Gt are estimated to be due to food loss (Food and Agri­ detrimental factors in developing countries even though the collective
culture Organization of the United Nations, 2013a, 2013b). An estimate losses take place from the production stage to the consumer level. In
of 250 km3 of water footprint (required water used for food cultivation) most emerging countries, wheat, maize, and rice are the foremost cereal
resulted from the loss of food globally. The land used for food cultivation grains. Rice is a significant source (about 20%) of the worldwide calorie
is yet one more valuable resource that is not utilized to its full potential supply and it is also one of the high energy calorie foods. Table 1 shows
due to food losses. This has been inferred based on studies on post- the rice post-harvest losses in 9 countries. Rice losses were high in
harvest losses for countries such as Nigeria, where it is estimated that Nigeria of about 25% and low in India, of about 3.5%.
paddy loss accounts for 19% of total food cultivation land (Oguntade For many countries, wheat is the main food. In developing countries,
et al., 2014). In the year 2007, close to an area of 1.4 billion hectares of post-harvest wheat processing also results in losses similar to that for
the cultivated area was wasted by producing food which was lost on a rice. The storage operations account for the greatest losses due to poor
global scale; this represents a land area larger than Canada and China structures, improper drainage, and the presence of rodents as shown in

352
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Table 1 advantage of using this method is the possibility of using this technique
Post-harvest losses in various countries. in remote and local areas. Benefiting from this approach reduces the
Country Year Losses Reference drawbacks associated with transportation, reduction in quality, time,
(%) and costs. (Löf, 1962). Different techniques have been used in this type
Wheat of site, in which there are three widely used types with appropriate
India 2004 4.32 (Bradford et al., 2018; Basavaraja et al., 2007) productivity: natural convection, forced convection (indirect-solar), and
Peru 2012 15–25 (Bradford et al., 2018; Inter-American the greenhouse type (Ong, 1999). Fig. 3 demonstrates the taxonomy of
Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture 2013) solar drying systems.
Bangladesh 2010 3.62 (Bradford et al., 2018; Bala et al., 2010)
A comprehensive review of solar dryers from operational and
Rice financial points of view has been presented by Fudholi et al. (2010). In
Bangladesh 11–13 (Bradford et al., 2018; Kaminski and
–
this research, the quality of dried products was an effective parameter in
Christiaensen, 2014)
China – 14–17 (Bradford et al., 2018; Inter-American yield comparison between subdivided types of solar dryers, i.e. mixed-
Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture 2013) mode, hybrid, direct, and indirect solar dryer types. Sharma et al.
EI Salvador – 6 (Bradford et al., 2018; Kaminski and (2009) studied several types of solar dryers by covering the different
Christiaensen, 2014) configurations and technical settings. Murthy (2009) studied various
India 3–7 (Bradford et al., 2018; Bala et al., 2010)
facets of crop drying processes by solar energy dryers, who revealed that
–
Indonesia – 7 (Bradford et al., 2018; Bala et al., 2010)
Nepal – 16 (Bradford et al., 2018; Bala et al., 2010) most of the small-scale systems were located in Southeast Asia and
Nigeria – 25 (Bradford et al., 2018; Inter-American Oceania. Purohit et al. (2006) provided a framework for the economic
Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture 2013) assessment of solar dryer facilities and carried out a comparison by
Srilanka 12 (Bradford et al., 2018; Inter-American
–
considering the open-sun drying as a criterion.
Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture 2013)
Thailand – 15 (Bradford et al., 2018; Inter-American
Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture 2013)

Maize
3.1. Solar greenhouse drying (SGD) method
Peru 2012 15–25 (Bradford et al., 2018; IICA, 2013)
Ecuador 2012 10–30 (Bradford et al., 2018; IICA, 2013) The greenhouse solar dryer is also known as a solar barn or bulk-
Panama 2012 20 (Bradford et al., 2018; IICA, 2013) curing unit that processes and dries large-scale agricultural products
Bangladesh 2010 4 (Bradford et al., 2018; Bala et al., 2010)
and has a good efficiency by using sunlight. SGD provides a sound
Malawai 2010 1.4 (Bradford et al., 2018; Kaminski and
Christiaensen, 2014) method for the drying process and has the potential to be used in larger
Tanzania 2008 4.4 (Bradford et al., 2018; Kaminski and scales than cabinet dryers (CDs) (Ekechukwu and Norton, 1999). Aymen
Christiaensen, 2014) et al. (2019) compared a solar greenhouse dryer and an open-sun dryer
Uganda 2009 5.9 (Bradford et al., 2018; Kaminski and (OSD) to investigate the technical and fiscal considerations. In SGD, the
Christiaensen, 2014)
energy efficiency of the dryer was 34%, while the collector’s efficiency
changed from 30 to 80%. Furthermore, the payback period was reported
Table 1. to be short of about 1.02 years. In a similar comparative assessment,
For most of the crops, safe moisture content is below 13% for long- phosphate dehumidification by three different methods was carried out
term storage (Baloch, 1999). The moisture for most crops should be by Fadhel et al. (2018). To be more precise, open-air, SGD, and parabolic
less than 15% in the case of storage for less than six months. Mould dish concentrator (PDC) methods were compared in terms of operational
growth and significant losses during grinding and storage occur when features; they attained peak of phosphate temperatures of 50, 59 and
drying of the agricultural product is inadequate. Hence, drying is an 102 ˚C, and moisture removal reached 0.042, 0.022 and 0.006 kg
important process of post-harvest to reduce storage losses and maintain water/kg dry substance, respectively.
high crop quality. Drying of crops is important post-harvest operation. Theoretical analysis and empirical modelling of a hybrid solar dryer
The major advantage of drying is that it decreases the transportation cost consisting of photovoltaic (PV) modules and a ventilated greenhouse
and increases the shelf life of the product. For the achievement and unit were performed by Janjai et al. (2009). A transient investigative
commercialization of any innovation, the driving force mainly depends approach was utilized by Jain, (2005) to calculate the technical con­
on the cost of that technology. Solar drying is a renewable-based drying straints of a bed thermal storage unit devised in a greenhouse solar
technology; this technology produces or emits less harmful gases to the dryer. To achieve a high drying rate through the dehydrating process of
environment compared to fossil-fuel based dryers. agricultural products, a model based on the greenhouse solar dryer was
Many studies have reported that storage is a vital component in the improved by implementing an inclined north wall reflection, with two
supply chain of food, and the greatest losses occur during this process types of convection (natural and forced) (Sethi and Arora, 2009).
(Aulakh et al., 2013; IICA, 2013; Majumder et al., 2016). The reduction The Solar Tunnel Drying (STD) method can be considered as a perfect
in post-harvest losses and the increase in farmer incomes mainly depend example of a solar greenhouse dryer in which it is a convective type of
on technological advancements and improved storage structures. thermal dehumidifying system that uses the greenhouse effect by
incorporating a thin plastic layer as coverage in a tunnel shape (Lin
3. Drying technologies et al., 2017). A special model of solar dryer for a climate in India was
developed by Garg and Kumar (2000). Natarajan et al. (2017) studied
With the development of the agricultural industry, the need to the practicability of using a storage unit in interaction with STD where
introduce novel methods for processing agricultural products has three types of materials were considered for thermal storage (sand, rock
become particularly important. Some agricultural products, e.g. beams and aluminium). Rathore and Panwar (2010) analyzed the drying fea­
of coffee and cocoa, nuts, rice, tea, and fruits, need drying processes to tures of grapes by a natural convection STD which is in Fig. 4.
increase durability, be of better quality, or provide consumption con­ Jairaj et al. (2009) reviewed various techniques for grape drying to
ditions. Reasonable price, more uniformity, availability, and the ability find the optimum performance, finest quality, and the minimum length
to integrate with other energy sources have made solar energy of the process. Based on the results, the performance comparison
(regarding availability) an attractive option in drying agricultural revealed that the forced-convection with obstacles of transverse-
products like grains, fruits, vegetables, and woods (Vijayavenkataraman longitudinal (TL) type, indirect natural-convection with storage, and
et al., 2012; Belessiotis and Delyannis, 2011). Another obvious forced-convection without obstacles have the lowest time durations of
5.8, 8 and 13.3 h, respectively.

353
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 3. Classification of solar drying methods.

Fig. 4. STD in natural convection mode (Rathore and Panwar, 2010).

3.2. Indirect solar drying (ISD) method transfer thermal energy from the collector to the chamber for drying
purposes. By entering the high-temperature water to the chamber,
The present system is composed of a flat-plate collector, chamber, blowers force the thermal energy to be transferred from water to the
and water heating device. The role of the water heating system is to contained air (Téllez et al., 2018). The accompanying demonstration

354
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

shown in Fig. 5 clarifies the schematic of the ISD components. directly on the crops with the aim of moisture removal process A rela­
This type of dryer can operate in rural regions while the capital cost tively high temperature of 80 ◦ C was reported in this type (Sharma et al.,
is considered low. ISD was intended to be utilized in micro plantations 1995). The DPCSD structure consists of single or double hot boxes and
(Sharma et al., 1993). Boughali et al. (2009) introduced a basic model of some holes are facilitated to provide air circulation and ventilation. Air
a hybrid dryer system while solar energy and electric power were the circulation is delivered by the warm moist air leaving through the upper
main contributors. Moreover, the economical evaluation of this hybrid holes under the performance of flexibility forces while supplying fresh-
system revealed that the payback period (about 1.27 years) was much air is drawn from the bottom (Tiwari and Tiwari, 2016). Fig. 6 displays
less than that of the conventional stand-alone indirect solar dryers. the parameters of a typical solar cabinet dryer with natural circulation
The examination of an ISD with the exergy criterion was performed (Ekechukwu and Norton, 1999). Research works on the cabinet dryer
by Celma and Cuadros (2009) where the dryer was designed to dehu­ have a long tradition, and a variety of them are reported in literature
midify olive mill wastewater. An ISD with natural convection composed (Diemuodeke and Momoh, 2011; Sharma et al. 1995; Tiwari and Tiwari,
of biomass heater and storage unit was proposed by Madhlopa and 2016; Chavan et al., 2021; Gbaha et al., 2007).
Ngwalo (2007) and a comprehensive design and evaluation were pro­ Diemuodeke and Momoh. (2011) have modelled a direct passive
vided. The highest daily moisture removal was about 15% for the system solar dryer for drying tapioca in Nigeria. In this research, the minimum
using solar energy and the lowest for the system was about 11% when area required for the solar collector has been investigated and stated that
using biomass. by considering average ambient air temperature of 32 ◦ C, relative hu­
A portable indirect multi-shelf solar dryer was designed to provide midity of 74% and daily global solar radiation rate of 13 MJ/m2 /day, the
thermal energy in drying and mid-grade heating processes (Singh et al., moisture content was diminished from 79% to 10% wet basis (Godfray
2004). One unusual feature of this system was that for achieving a et al., 2010). Another recent work on the DPCSD has been reviewed and
constant value of operational efficiency during the drying days, the reported by Chavan et al. (2021).
loading mode was semi-continuous. Gbaha et al. (2007) have designed, built, and verified a passive direct
type of solar dryer including drying chamber, box, and tray that was
equipped with a chimney. Further, Ezekwe (1981) reported a modified
3.3. Direct solar drying (DSD) method direct cabinet of the solar dryer as shown in Fig. 7 where the modified
type solar dryer was furnished with a wooden plenum to manage the air
The direct dryer can be categorized into two main types of natural inlet as well as an extended chimney to improve natural circulation.
convection solar dryers which are called passive and forced-convection
solar dryers that are called active (Ekechukwu and Norton, 1999). 3.3.2. Direct active convection solar dryer (DACSD)
Amongst all types, the natural convection type is considered as the An active dryer uses solar energy as the heat source and fans or
simplest but an effective form of solar dryers. It is widely recognized as blowers to provide more efficient circulation of drying air. All models of
the most appealing option for use in remote locations since it does not this type are considered as forced convection dryers (Ekechukwu and
employ any auxiliary equipment, a user-friendly operation, and finally Norton, 1999). Fig. 8 indicates a typical active cabinet solar dryer.
yet importantly, uncomplicated construction procedure (Phadke et al., Chauhan and Rathod (2020) have stated a forced convection cabinet
2015). Further, two types of the passive solar dryers system named, dryer that used for drying chilli. The average drying mass flow rate of air
direct passive cabinet solar dryer (DPCSD), and modified direct passive over the chillies was about 62.3 kg/hr, and the temperature drop was
cabinet solar dryer with chimney can be identified as follows. about 3–5 ◦ C. Under the mentioned conditions, 1.5 kg of chillies used for
the moisture removal process. The results have shown that the weight of
3.3.1. Direct passive cabinet solar dryer chilies was reduced to 809 gm, and 232 gm after one and two days of
In direct-type passive solar dryers, which also called integral solar drying, respectively. It was also observed that it had taken 73% of the
dryers (Diemuodeke and Momoh, 2011), transparent walls are time that was taken in open drying for similar drying process and
employed to provide the required basis for solar radiation transmission

Fig. 5. Indirect solar dryer with contained components (Debnath et al., 2018).

355
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 6. Typical passive cabinet solar dryer (Ekechukwu and Norton, 1999).

Fig. 7. Improved natural-circulation DPCSD with chimney (Ekechukwu and Norton, 1999).

moisture elimination. storage device was developed by Jain and Jain (2004). This solar dryer
has been used for cereals and grains with suitable productivity, the
3.4. Multiple pass solar drying method schematic diagram of this dryer is shown in Fig. 9.

One way to improve the thermal productivity of solar collectors is to 3.5. Hybrid solar drying (HSD) method
add more passes, as this can increase the outlet temperature (Sopian
et al., 2009). An integrated system made up of an air heater with several Several feasible combinations are available, and higher technology
passes at an inclined position, a deep bed dryer, and a thermal energy advancement will result in more alternatives with higher efficiency

356
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fudholi et al., 2010; Sagar and Kumarn, 2010; Delgado-Plaza et al.,

2019; Hu et al., 2020; Jain, 2005). Jain and Jain (2004) studied the
performance of multi-tray crop drying employing an inclined multi-pass
solar air heater equipped with an in-built heat storage system. Fig. 10
illustrates a cross-sectional view of a solar-thermal storage hybrid dryer
with a water heater (Fig. 10a) and with rock bed storage (Fig. 10b).

3.7. Solar-auxiliary unit hybrid dryer

In this type of dryer, the solar dryer may be supplied by an auxiliary

heat from other energy sources to decrease the dehydrating period and
advance the moisture removal process (Khalifa et al., 2012). Various
energy sources can be used and three types were identified and explored:
electric heating, liquid petroleum gas (LPG) gas burner and diesel en­
gine. Moreover, Sagar and Kumarn (2010) reported a dryer with a
loading size of 500 kg for drying fresh grapes involving a flat-plate
collector; a centrifugal fan driven by a diesel engine or an electric
motor, and a multiple layer batch dryers. The required power to operate
the fan was 0.8 kW at which the grapes reached desirable moisture
content within 5 to 6 days and the drying period was shortened by 50%
Fig. 8. Typical active solar-energy cabinet dryer (Ekechukwu and Nor­ in comparison with natural sun drying. (Tiris et al., 1995) have designed
ton, 1999). and investigated a multi-rack type solar dryer assisted with electric
heating source, where the dryer consisted of drying chamber, collector,
(Sagar and Kumarn, 2010). In a hybrid solar dryer, the moisture removal fan, rack, and electrical heater. The results revealed that the respective
process of various agricultural products takes place under direct radia­ drying periods of some agriculture products such as green beans, chilies,
tion and another source of energy as reserved energy or stored thermal sweet peppers, and sultana grape, were respectively 2.2, 2.0, 1.9, and
energy in the lack or absence of sunlight. The drying air is pre-heated by 1.8 times shorter than those for the natural sun-dried products. The
employing a secondary source of energy e.g. a PV module, power, diesel, schematic view of a solar-auxiliary unit hybrid dryer system is shown in
geothermal energy, heat pumps, or biomass (Fudholi et al., 2010). Fig. 11.

3.6. Solar-thermal storage hybrid dryer 3.8. Solar-geothermal hybrid dryer

To dry various types of agriculture products, balanced and moderate Ivanova et al. (2003) developed and studied the energy and eco­
temperature to be maintained for short times plays a crucial role. To nomic efficiency of a hybrid dryer. It is observed that employing
maintain supplying hot air to the system, the storage unit stores the heat geothermal water with temperature 68 ◦ C could provide about 32% of
during sunshine hours and discharges it during off-sunshine hours. the required yearly heat during the day, while the combined system with
Numerous researchers have explored the drying process performance solar energy throughout the day and geothermal energy throughout the
and suggested them for drying agriculture products (Bal et al., 2010; night allowed providing 26% of the thermal load. In Fig. 12, a solar-

Fig. 9. Double-pass solar dryer (DPSD) integrated with photovoltaic modules (Banout et al., 2011).

357
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 10. Cross-sectional view of a solar-thermal storage hybrid dryer: (a) with water heater and (b) with rock bed storage (Fudholi et al., 2010).

geothermal hybrid dryer is presented.

3.9. Solar-heat pump hybrid dryer

Sagar and Kumarn (2010) stated in their study that a heat pump
dryer was used for drying a variety of herbs. Further, due to its capability
of providing wide ranges of airflow rates, it was suggested for industrial
and large-scale applications. Hawlader et al. (2008) investigated the
performance of the evaporator-collector and air collector in a solar-
assisted heat pump dryer. Fatouh et al. (2006) fabricated a heat pump
assisted solar dryer to examine the drying features of a variety of herbs.
Fig. 13 shows a schematic diagram of the solar heat pump hybrid dryer
Fig. 11. Schematic view of a solar-auxiliary unit hybrid dryer system (Fudholi system.
et al., 2010).

358
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 12. Solar-geothermal hybrid dryer system (Delgado-Plaza et al., 2019).

3.10. Solar-chemical heat pump dryer such as farms in unindustrialized countries regarding its low investment.
The generated airflow temperature was between 55 and 60 ◦ C. Sar­
In this type of heaters, the heat is provided by using exothermic avanan and Wilson (2015) have considered and fabricated a solar
chemical reactions to heat the drying air, as shown in Fig. 14. Fadhel biomass hybrid dryer for drying cashew, for which the drying process is
et al. (2009) have modelled the solar-assisted chemical heat pump unit highly energy intensive (see Fig. 16).
consisting of a solar collector, cylindrical storage tank, and chemical
heat pump comprised of a reactor, evaporator, and condenser, and dryer 3.11. Photovoltaic-thermal (PV/T) solar drying method
chamber.
The photovoltaic-thermal (PV/T) dryer is one of the most popular
3.10.1. Solar assisted-dehumidification system systems in solar drying field; it enables the conversion of solar energy to
Since some materials are sensitive to heat, the quality of the final thermal and electrical energy (Esmaeilion et al., 2021; Farbod et al.,
products is affected, therefore drying at high temperatures is not rec­ 2020; Sapei et al., 2019).
ommended for such products which include herbs. Yahya et al. (2008) Mortezapour et al. (2012) compared the functional parameters be­
have advanced a solar-dehumidification unit for therapeutic herbs, tween glass to glass and Tedlar to glass photovoltaic-thermal collectors
where the system comprised a solar collector, storage tank, and auxiliary to specify the temperatures of outlet air and cells with calculated ther­
heater, heat exchanger, water pump, drying chamber, and adsorbent. Its mal energy efficiency. To obtain a sustainable approach in the drying
process has three steps including regeneration, dehumidification, and process, Koşan et al. (2020) proposed an innovative integration of the
batch drying. A schematic diagram of solar-assisted dehumidification PV/T drying system in cooperation with a heat pump. Assoa et al. (2017)
system is shown in Fig. 15. investigated the possibility of optimizing the PV/T in building scale by
evaluating the insulated air gap to obtain the highest available value of
3.10.2. Solar-biomass hybrid dryer thermal efficiency. Fterich et al. (2018) designed a novel configuration
Using biomass as an auxiliary heat source in dryers has become of the integrated solar dryer with two detached chambers as shown in
attractive to assist both in saving energy and enhancing drying process Fig. 17.
efficiency. Madhlopa and Ngwalo (2007) designed, built and industri­ Four sorts of auxiliary advanced types of equipment have been
alized a hybrid dryer for a biomass-fuelled system comprising an auto­ established by Othman et al. (2006). These supplementary components
matically controlled gasifier stove, heat exchanger, and solar flat-plate were V-groove collector, double-pass collector, photovoltaic thermal
controller. Prasad et al. (2006a, 2006b) investigated a passive direct collector (PV/T), and solar dehumidification system that they had a
solar dryer combined with an incinerator. The system was designed to wide range of capabilities in processing a variety of agricultural prod­
provide continuous flow of drying hot air for small scale applications ucts with special flexibility.

3.12. Other drying methods

3.12.1. Cabinet solar drying method

Al-Juamily et al. (2007) provided details about a self-made solar
dryer to dehumidify the desired wet material. According to inferred
results, a tiny fraction of the drying process was affected by inlet wind
velocity, and a considerable amount of evaporated water was influenced
by internal temperature. An advanced model consisting of two chambers
was designed for accumulating solar energy and transferring the ob­
tained heat to the harvests, individually (Sreekumar et al., 2008). Eco­
nomic analysis has shown that by using solar energy in this system, the
associated cost in tandem with drying bitter gourd was improved by
57% (compared to electrical power).

3.12.2. Solar chimney drying method

In this type of solar dryer, some specific parameters play vital roles e.
g., air velocity, relative humidity, and temperature difference between
Fig. 13. Solar heat pump hybrid dryer system (Hu et al., 2020). the chamber and ambient (Ferreira et al., 2008). By reconstructing the

359
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 14. Solar-assisted chemical heat pump dryer (Fudholi et al., 2010).

Fig. 15. Solar-assisted dehumidification system (Fudholi et al., 2010).

drying compartment, in the form of a tent, the productivity had an by the sensible heat of the process products at a temperature of 10 to
upstretched trend (Afriyie et al., 2009). 50 ◦ C (Mujumdar, 2014).

3.12.3. Freeze drying (FD) 3.12.4. Vacuum drying (VD)

In this freeze-drying method, the substances are frozen at tempera­ The vacuum drying method is based on the adjustment of the volume
tures below − 10 ◦ C in closed chambers. Then, by lowering the pressure of air that surrounds the material to be dried. In this method, by vac­
(below the ice vapor pressure) at the operating temperature, the con­ uuming the air at ambient temperature, the vapor pressure saturation
vection as a source of thermal energy causes the ice to sublimate. After drops and leads to moisture reduction, while the temperature is in the
complete separation of moisture, the temperature of the material can be range of 35 to 60 ◦ C (Zhang et al., 2006).
increased (Bourdoux et al., 2016). The process can be done in 4–24 h.
Separation of that part of the water that has not been frozen is completed

360
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 16. Solar-biomass hybrid dryer system (Madhlopa and Ngwalo, 2007).

3.12.5. Dielectric drying

Utilizing the electronic effects of microwaves and radio frequencies,
it also dehumidified agricultural products. Oscillations in these waves
can cause water molecules to evaporate. Ions displacement and polari­
zation are the causes of this phenomenon (Chandrasekaran et al., 2013).
Post-harvest processing of raspberries for drying purposes has been
carried out by solar and microwave drying techniques (Rodriguez et al.,
2019). From the authors’ perspectives, the microwave method provided
more functional conditions for drying in the same climate.

3.12.6. Natural convection solar drying method

Forson et al. (2007a) claimed that by developing an air heater by two
ducts in a single pass stream, a mixed type of natural convection solar
dryer would be presented. A glance at the provided results revealed that
system modelling had a desirable accuracy in the operation field (Forson
et al., 2007b). Table 2 provides an overview of the functional details of
different drying methods for a variety of agricultural products.
As expected, each method has its strengths and weaknesses that
determine the optimum drying method of different agricultural products
Fig. 17. Mixed-mode solar dryer (Fterich et al., 2018) (MSD is mixed solar in different climates. Therefore, providing a summary of the functional
dryer, DSD is direct solar dryer and PV/T is photovoltaic-thermal). behaviour of these systems as shown in Table 3 can help in choosing the
best type.

361
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Table 2
Functional details in the methods of drying agricultural products.
S. Agricultural Drying method Performance assessment Productivity Supplementary details Reference
No. product

1 Red pepper SGD Relatively Overall energy efficiency: 34% PP: 1.02 years (Aymen et al.,
humidityEnergy gained 2019)
2 Momordica STD Thermal efficiency Most thermal efficiency: 21.2% and Integrated with thermal storage (Natarajan
charantia & Vitis 15.46% for Vitis vinefera and equipment: efficiency raised by et al., 2017)
vinifera charantia 2–3%
3 Stevia DSD Drying rate Drying rate: up to 0.05 kg water/kg Drying time for ISD: 240 min and (Téllez et al.,
ISD dry matter (min) 270 min 2018)
4 Mango DSD-Cabinet type Moisture content Moisture reduction: 82% On a typical summer day, in 12 (Phadke et al.,
with Natural sunshine hours 2015)
convection
5 Red chili DPSD & CD Drying rate Overall drying efficiency: 24.04% and Drying cost: 0.077 USD/kg for (Jain and Jain,
11.52% (to achieve wetness content DPSD and 0.126 USD/kg for CD 2004)
equaled to 10% (on a wet basis)
6 Cashew Hybrid Biomass Moisture content Moisture content reached 3% Within 7 h using active convection (Sarvanan
solar dryer et al., 2015)
7 Mint leaves PVTAHPD Drying rate and Power electricity efficiency: in Thermal efficiency:56.37%, (Koşan et al.,
coefficient of the average = 12.27%, maximum = Ability to store 36% of generated 2020)
performance (COP) 14.02% energy
8 Tomato PV/T Thermal & electrical Maximum values for thermal & Moisture content: plunged up to (Fterich et al.,
efficiencies electrical efficiencies: 65 and 12.31%, 69.62% 2018)
each
9 Strawberry Microwave Weight reduction Final water content: 21.26% Maximum temperature: 79 ◦ C (Rodriguez
No dependence on climates et al., 2019)
10 Banana ISD Moisture reduction Moisture reduction: 365% (dry basis) Collector and chamber thermal (Lingayat et al.,
efficiencies: 31.5 and 22.38%, 2017)
each
Using advanced collectors with V-
corrugated outline
11 Strawberry ISD Moisture content Moisture reduction: 88.3% Maximum temperature: 47 ◦ C (El-Beltagy
et al., 2007)
12 Chili pepper DSD Moisture ratio – 65 h for complete drying (Tunde-
Akintunde,
2011)
13 Potato ISD Lag factor – Maximum temperature: 62 ◦ C (Nasri and
Belhamri,
2018)
14 Red chili Forced convection Energy and exergy Specific energy consumption: 5.26 Moisture reduction: 70% (Fudholi et al.,
ISD analysis kWh/kg 2014a)
15 Sweet basil Cabinet dryer with Dimensionless moisture Dimensionless moisture ratios: 0.012, Mass reduction: from 0.250 kg to (Gulcimen
solar air collector ratio 0.026 and 0.033 kg/s 0.029 kg et al., 2016)
16 Mint leaves Forced convection Energy and exergy Effectiveness of exergy: from 34.760% Energy utilization ratio: from (Akpinar,
ISD analyses to 87.717% 7.826% to 46.285% 2010)
17 Henna Flat plate solar Performance behaviors Maximum efficiencies for both Moisture reduction: approximately (Labed et al.,
collector (FPC) under different models models: 76.2% and 79.9% 0.024 kg/s 2016)
18 Thin layers of STD Moisture ratio and drying Moisture: dropped from 93.35% to Effective diffusivity: for STD and (Sacilik et al.,
tomato temperature 11.5% in five days OSD equal to 1.31 × 10-9 and 2006)
1.07 × 10− 9 m2/s

3.13. Related information energy balance equation for drying purpose is given as (Sharma et al.,
1986):
Some of the important facts related to improving the solar dryer
xw hfg = (Tout − Tm )xa Cp (1)
performance are the introduction of novel receivers that can improve the
performance of these systems (Wang et al., 2015) and applying the
where
multifunctional solar dryer that can increase the economic benefits and
xw = evaporated water weight
productivity. In this case, the functional flexibility would be raised too
xa = circulated air weight
(Herez et al., 2018) and utilizing the more efficient type of thermal
hfg = latent heat of vaporization
energy storage devices and energy recovery units can lead to more sta­
Cp = air specific heat
bility in performance of the system which can be used in remote areas
Tout , Tm = outlet and inlet temperature, respectively
(Olabi et al., 2017; Lawlor and Olabi, 2015).
The water content can be expressed in terms of initial and final
moisture content as follows (Sharma et al., 1986):
4. Energy analysis of solar dryer
xv = xi (Xi − Xf )/(100 − Xf ) (2)
The increase in the escalation rates of raw materials and environ­
mental safety have caused researchers to work on the energy analysis of where
a system. There are various types of solar dryers in the market for xi = sample initial mass
commercial purposes as well as for residential building use. So, clear Xi , Xf = initial and final moisture content in sample, respectively
energy analyses are important in this competitive environment. In solar Some researchers have focused on performance analyses of various
drying, heat is being utilized through solar radiation to provide the types of solar dryers. A rotary solar dryer for apricot drying was eval­
thermal energy required for drying purposes (Tiris et al., 1996). An uated with energy analysis (Akpinar and Sarsilmaz, 2004; Akpinar et al.,

362
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Table 3
Summary of strengths and weaknesses in agricultural products drying methods.
S. Technique Strengths Weaknesses Reference
No

1 HSD 1. Improved efficiency in hybrid mode 1. More expensive (Bal et al., 2010; Chauhan and Rathod, 2020)
2. relatively high efficiency 2. Complicated structure and operation
3. Providing sound basis for drying 3. Consumption of electrical power in equipment
sensitive materials such as medicinal
herbs
4. high stability rate
2 SGD 1. Large-scale use 1. Requires a certain level of solar energy (Dahel et al., 2018; Sethi and Arora, 2009)
2. Optimal efficiency in the use of solar 2. More expensive than OSD
energy 3. The area of used land is an influential
3. High quality of dried products parameter
4. The energy cost can reach to zero 4. It has different functions depending on
5. Temperature is controllable different regions and climates
6. Crops are protected from
contamination matters (e.g. dust,
insects, etc.)
3 STD 1. Simple structure 1. Requires a certain level of solar energy (Lin et al., 2017; Rathore and Panwar, 2010)
2. Economical performance 2. More expensive than OSD
3. Improved efficiency in mixed mode 3. It has different functions depending on
4. Crops are protected from different regions and climates
contamination matters (e.g. dust,
insects, etc.)
4 ISD 1. Relatively high efficiency 1. Almost only for small-scaled processes (Téllez et al., 2018; Sharma et al., 1993; Celma and Cuadros,
2. Stable drying operation 2. Requires a certain level of solar energy 2009; Madhlopa and Ngwalo, 2007)
3. Low investment cost 3. More expensive than OSD
4. Associated parameters in drying 4. It has different functions depending on
parameters are controllable different regions and climates
5. Capability to control conditions
6. Optimal processing time
5 DACSD 1. Using fans can reduce drying time by 1. Higher operational cost (Tiwari, 2016)
three times 2. Require certain level of maintenance
2. Considerable reduction in the 3. More expensive than OSD
required collector area by 50%. 4. Required utility to run the fan
3. Controlling on temperature,
moisture, and drying airflow
4. Large-scale application
6 DPCSD 1. Useful in domestic scale 1. Due to natural convective airflow
2. Provide desirable product quality the required drying rate is slow (Madhlopa and Ngwalo, 2007; Tiwari, 2016; Delgado-Plaza
3. Low environmental impacts 2. Low efficiency et al., 2019; Hu et al., 2020; Bena and Fuller, 2002;
4. Simple construction and operation 3. Often lower tray is over-dryed Nagwekar et al., 2016)
method 4. Due to evaporation of moisture the
5. Commercial viability i.e. it can be transmissivity of the glass cover will be
made by using locally materials deteriorated by passing time.
6. Low labour costs 5. The very high temperatures that might over
7. low maintenance costs heating the products
6. Small capacity of the crop
7 PV/T 1. Relatively high efficiency 1. The cost of investment is almost high (Sapei et al., 2019; Assoa et al., 2017)
2. Ability to co-generate electrical and 2. Requires a certain level of solar energy
thermal energy 3. More expensive than OSD
3. Integrable with other types of 4. It has different functions depending on
equipment different regions and climates
4. Associated parameters in drying
parameters are controllable
8 FD 1. Short drying time 1. Ability to remove volatile materials (Bourdoux et al., 2016; Majumdar, 2014)
2. Sublimation is the main process 2. High investment cost
3. Uniforms stay unchanged 3. Low rate of stability
4. The level of contamination is small
9 VD 1. Evaporation temperature is lower 1. Consumption of electrical power in equipment (Bourdoux et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2006)
than evaporation at ambient pressure 2. Low-pressure is the main setting
2. The drying process takes almost 24 h 3. Shrinkage in materials is minor
3. Suitable for products with solvents
10 Dielectric 1. High efficiency in dehumidification 1. The uneven distribution between water (Chandrasekaran et al., 2013; Pangavhane et al., 2002)
drying 2. Can be used on a large scale molecules
3. High temperatures are available 2. Possibility of material destruction in terms of
4. The possibility of damage to the shape and structure
construction of the material is small 3. Low penetration in some materials
11 DSD 1. Low investment cost and 1. Requires a certain level of solar energy (Bena and Fuller, 2002; Pangavhane et al., 2002; Nagwekar
maintenance 2. More expensive than OSD et al., 2016; Schiffmann, 2014; Sharma et al., 1986)
2. Applicable in rural and remote areas 3. It has different functions depending on
3. Usable in small scale processing different regions and climates
4. Integratable with other energy
systems
5. the shortened drying process
compared with open sun drying

363
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

2004). An energy analysis of solar dryer used for potato slices was
Eev
evaluated and concluded that, for fast moisture removal, cylinders were ηdrying = (4)
Eo
preferable to slices (Tripathy and Kumar, 2009). An energy analysis of
drying mulberry and mint leaves using a forced solar dryer was also
5. Exergy analysis of solar dryer
performed (Akpinar, 2010; Akbulut and Durmuş (2010)). Different types
of solar dryers were analysed for drying grapes (Jairaj et al., 2009).
Exergy has sufficient flexibilities to meet the needs to identify
Ndukwu et al. (2020a, 2020b) proposed thermal performance analysis
desirable parameters such as losses and productivity of these systems
of a hybrid biomass-solar dryer, where the results revealed that using
(Ahmadi et al., 2020). This balance includes thermal, mechanical, and
biomass energy in the solar dryer technologies could significantly
chemical aspects. Furthermore, exergy can be split into four sections
contribute to the specific energy consumption. It was also concluded
which are physical, chemical, kinetic, and potential exergy. Physical and
that for drying purpose the total energy consumption range was in be­
chemical exergy parameters are used to estimate the exergy value for
tween 5.52 and 35.47 MJ. In another study, a thermodynamic com­
each state. The physical exergy is the highest amount of work obtained
parison of moisture reduction of banana chips was done between
while the pressure and temperature of the system vary according to the
conventional heat pump dryer and a solar-driven heat pump dryer
pressure and temperature of the surroundings without any changes in
(Singh et al., 2020). It was concluded that a solar-driven heat pump
concentration. Besides, the chemical exergy is the maximum work
dryer was more efficient than a conventional heat pump dryer. Solar and
gained while the concentration of each substance in the system varies (at
biomass energy were utilized for the thermal performance analysis for
the dead state’s pressure and temperature).
rice drying using a fluidized bed dryer (Yahya et al., 2018). It was also
For steady-state conditions for the surroundings of the dryer, a form
concluded that, for indoor testing, the energy efficiency of the solar
of the exergy balance is expressed as (Atalay, 2019a, 2019b):
collector was in the range of 30–79% (Fudholi and Sopian, 2019). The

P0 V2 g ∑ ( )
ex = (u − u0 )-T0 (s − s0 ) + (ν − ν0 ) + + (z − z0 ) + (μc − μ0 )Nc + Eg Ag Fg 3T 4 − T04 − 4T0 T 3 (5)
J 2gJ gc J c

role of collector, drying, and pick-up efficiencies is important in the where u is the specific internal energy (J.kg− 1), P0 is the atmospheric
energy analysis of solar collectors. Table 4 depicts different kinds of pressure (Pa), J is the Joule constant, ν is the specific volume (m3.kg− 1),
solar dryer efficiencies utilized in various drying applications. However, V is the velocity (m.s− 1), g is the gravitational acceleration (ms− 2), gc is
it was concluded that the ranges of the drying efficiency for natural and gravitational constant in Newton’s law, Nc is the unit number of moles of
forced convection dryers were 10–15% and 20–30%, respectively species c, E is the emissive power, F is the shape factor, and μ is the
(Purohit et al., 2006). chemical potential (J.kg− 1). For simplicity, gravitational and mo­
The parameter that defines the efficiency of heated air capacity used mentum terms are ignored, and the velocity is considered to be equal to
to evaporate moisture is known as pick-up efficiency (Brenndorfer et al., the ambient value (V = V0) (Holman, 2001). Then,
1987) and can be expressed as: [ ( )]
˙ = ṁda .Cp,da . (T − T0 ) − T0 ln T
Ex (6)
HD − HC T0
ηpick− up = (3)
HAS − HC
where ṁda is the mass flow rate of drying air (kg. s− 1) and Cp,da is the
here, HD is the air absolute humidity leaving the drying unit, HC is air
specific heat of drying air (J.kg− 1.K− 1).
absolute humidity leaving the collector and entering the drying unit, and
During the drying process, the evaporation process is not steady, and
HAS is the adiabatic saturation humidity at the entry of the drying unit.
the quality and quantity of energy consumption play a vital role in this
Dryer efficiency is the ratio of the energy utilized for moisture
regard and the value of exergy exchange through the product is a key
evaporation at the solid feed temperature (Eev) to the overall energy
parameter (Hatami et al., 2020). Solar energy heats the air and the
supplied to the dryer (E0) (Strumiłło et al., 2014) and can be written as

Table 4
Efficiency analysis of different types of solar air flat plate collector for various drying applications.
Sl no Solar collector Efficiency (%) Drying application used for Reference

Collector Drying Pick-up

1 Biomass hybrid type – 15.59 – Ginger (Prasad et al., 2006a, 2006b)

2 With double duct – 36 – Cassava (Forson et al., 2007)
3 Double-pass with fins 28 13 45 Chili (Fudholi et al., 2014; Fudholi et al., 2013)
4 Fins integrated with fluidized bed 56 – – Paddy (Yahya et al., 2016)
5 Conventional 33 48 – Jackfruit leather (Chowdhury et al., 2011)
6 Fins integrated and biomass furnace 54 26 – Curcuma (Yahya et al., 2017)
7 Conventional 34 52 – Mushroom (Bala et al., 2009)
8 Fins integrated with heat pump – 38 – Cocoa (Yahya, 2013)
9 Double-pass 56 23 61 Bamboo (Banout and Ehl, 2010)
10 Conventional – 30 – Fish sardines (Basunia et al., 2011)
11 Fins integrated with fluidized bed and biomass furnace 16 – – Paddy (Yahya et al., 2017)
12 Double-pass with fins 35 27 95 Seaweed (Fudholi et al., 2014a, 2014b)
13 Conventional – 20 – Mackerel (Chavan et al., 2011)
14 Integrated with desiccant – – 42 Green peas (Shanmugam and Natarajan, 2006)
15 LPG hybrid type 42.37 37.09 – Shrimps (Murali et al., 2020)
Flat plate double pass – 10.8 – Black ginger (Ekka et al., 2020)

364
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

heated air reduces the moisture content to approach a high rate of ∑ ∑ ∑

drying. The exergy value of solar radiation (Exrad), airflow exergy con­
˙l=
Ex ˙ dci −
Ex ˙ dco
Ex (13)
tent (Exa) and the exergy of moisture in the product (Exw) are obtained ( )
respectively, as (Sami et al., 2011; Niksiar and Rahimi, 2009; Dincer and ˙ dci
Ex = ṁda .Cp.da (Tdci − T0 ) − T0 .ln
Tdci
(14)
Sahin, 2004): T0
( ) ( )
˙ rad = I˙t τg αP AC 1 − Ta
Ex (7) ˙ dco = ṁda .Cp.da (Tdco − T0 ) − T0 .ln Tdco
Ex (15)
TS T0

where Tdci, Tdco, and T0 denote the inlet, outlet, and ambient tempera­

⎧ ⎡ ⎤⎫
⎪
⎨ ( ) ( ) ma ⎪
⎬
T ⎢ m 1 + H m H ⎥
(8)
a mν 0 a
˙ a = ṁa CP.a T − T0 − T0 ln
Ex + Ra T0 × ⎣ 1 + H ln ma + 1 + Hln ⎦
⎪
⎩ T 0 m ν 1 + mν
H m ν H0 ⎪
⎭

[ ( ( ))]
( ) ( ) Pg (T0 )
˙ w = ṁw
Ex hf (T) − hf (T0 ) + νf P − Pg (T) − T0 sf (T) − sg (T0 ) + T0 Rw ln 0
(9)
xν P0

tures, respectively.
where Ts denotes the sun temperature which is equal to 5778 K, Ma and The general form of exergy efficiency is expressed as follows:
Mν represent the molecular mass of air and water vapor, respectively. H
˙ dco
Ex ˙ loss
Ex
denotes the absolute humidity of air (kgwater/kgdry air), h stands for the ε= = 1− (16)
specific enthalpy (J.kg− 1), and s represents the specific entropy (J.kg− 1
˙ dci
Ex ˙ dci
Ex
K− 1). Also, 0, a, ν, f, and g stand for the dead state, air, vapor, saturated Additional considerations show the economic, environmental, and
liquid, and saturated vapor, respectively. R is the gas constant which is energy impacts of solar dryers in a sustained approach. The improve­
equal to 0.278 kJ.kg− 1K− 1 and 0.446 kJ.kg− 1.K− 1 for air and water, ment potential (IP), waste energy ratio (WER), and sustainability index
respectively. x0ν denotes the vapor molar ratio through the air and P is (SI) are practical sustainability factors in the exergy field. Without any
the internal pressure of water for the products (Bejan et al., 1981; Yan doubt, some other parameters like mass flow rate of drying air or its
et al., 2008). temperature are the influential parameters that affect these indicators
The effectiveness of exergy of the solar drying process is the ratio of (Caliskan, 2017; Atalay, 2019a, 2019b). Eqs. (15)–(17) express the
the exergy of moisture reduction to the exergy of initial moisture con­ sustainability indicators in the exergy analysis.
tent. This correlation is free of material parameters like product quality The improvement potential, sustainability index and waste energy
or shape. The exergy efficiency of the drying process ε can be expressed ration are given, respectively, as
as:
˙ = (1 − ε)Ex
IP ˙ loss (17)
Ex˙ − Ex˙w2
ε = w1 (10)
Ex˙w1 ˙ loss
Ex
WER = (18)
˙ dci
Another important parameter in the system evaluation is the irre­ Ex
versibilities caused by heat transfer and friction. Reducing the value of
1
irreversibilities through the system components can improve the asso­ SI = (19)
1− ∊
ciated performance and exergy utilization. Irreversibilities can be
related to entropy generation rate through the following relationship Various factors can affect exergy parameters. In this case, the exergy
(Sonntag et al., 1998): efficiency of the solar dryer is affected by operational conditions (Ehyaei
et al., 2019). Time of the day, air mass flow rate, moisture content,
I˙ = T0 Ṡgen (11) drying time, ambient temperature, temperatures of inlet or outlet of
drying chamber, number of air collectors, and dryer configurations are
where the entropy generation rate Ṡgen is expressed as: some of the main factors that influence the exergy analysis (Akbulut and
Durmuş, 2010; Atalay, 2019a, 2019b; Lingayat et al., 2020a, 2020b;
Q̇rad
Ṡgen = (Sdco − Sdci )ṁ − (12) Lakshmi et al., 2019).
Ts
Zohrabi et al., 2020 studied the exergy analysis in a convective dryer
by modifying drain air recirculation. Fig. 18 illustrates the effect of
where Q̇rad is the overall energy received through the collector, s is the
drying time on the exergy efficiency of the process. Vijayan et al., 2020
specific entropy, and dco and dci represent the drying chamber outlet
studied the exergoenvironmental examination of an ISD. Based on the
and drying chamber inlet, respectively.
results, growing the air mass flow rate increased the dryer exergy effi­
The solar dryer exergy is influenced by the air inflow and outflow
ciency, which by increasing the mass flow rate from 0.0141 to 0.0872
temperatures. Therefore, the exergy loss can be calculated as the dif­
kg/s, the exergy efficiency increased from 28.74% to 40.67% (Fig. 19).
ference between the inflows and outflows of the solar dryer (Kant et al.,
Tiwari and Tiwari (2017) used the exergy criterion for a greenhouse
2016):
solar dryer, combined with several photovoltaic thermal (N-PVT) air

365
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 18. Exergy efficiency of drying process under various investigational conditions. Q is the volumetric airflow rate (m3.h− 1) (Zohrabi et al., 2020).

collectors. In this research, the effect of variation of PVT air collector

numbers on exergy efficiency exposed that the augmentation in the
number of PVT air collectors could lead to exergy efficiency reduction
over time as shown in Fig. 20.
In another similar study, Amjad et al. (2020) accomplished the en­
ergy and exergy study of an inline-airflow type of solar hybrid dryers.
Based on the calculated results, over the dying time, the exergy losses in
the chamber fell steadily (for all modes of heating sources including
evacuated tube collector (ETC), gas, and gas-ETC). Kumar et al. (2020)
analysed a natural convection dryer by considering sensible heat storage
(and without its presence). In a study by Ndukwu et al. (2020a, 2020b)
the exergy efficiency of solar-wind dryer behaved in an unsteady
manner over the sunshine hours. Karthikeyan and Murugavelh (2018)
reported that the exergy input, exergy loss, and exergy outflow for a
mixed-mode forced convection solar tunnel dryer reached their
maximum value between 12:00P.M. and 1:00P.M. The stability analysis
for a dryer combined with a sodium sulfate decahydrate has been per­
Fig. 19. Exergy efficiency and exergy loss variations versus mass flow rate of formed by Ndukwu et al. (2017), as presented in Fig. 21.
air (Vijayan et al., 2020).
6. Economic analysis

Economic analysis is a complementary analysis that helps in under­

standing the system behaviour and improving the economic perfor­

Fig. 20. Exergy efficiency variations with respect to time and number of PVT air collector (Tiwari and Tiwari, 2017).

366
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Fig. 21. Sustainability parameters performance for the solar dryers (between 28th August and 4th September) (Ndukwu et al., 2017).

Table 5
Payback period and capital costs of different types dryers.
S. Technique Payback period Cost of dryer Reference
No. (years) (USD)

1 Open solar greenhouse dryer 1.02 – (Aymen et al., 2019)

2 Indirect active hybrid solar - electrical dryer 1.27 2574.12 (Boughali et al., 2009)
3 Double-pass indirect solar drier 3.26 2700 (Banout et al., 2011)
4 Batch-type solar-assisted heat pump dryer 3 892.94 (Singh et al., 2020)
5 Biomass/solar-assisted heat pump fluidized bed dryer 1.6 2550 (Yahya et al., 2018)
6 Mixed mode forced convection solar dryer 0.65 736.16 (Lakshmi et al., 2019)
7 Indirect forced convection solar dryer 2.1 145.81 (Vijayan et al., 2020)
8 Mixed-mode solar greenhouse dryer 1.6 1250 (ELkhadraoui et al., 2015)
9 Mixed-mode indirect solar greenhouse dryer 1.6 – (ELkhadraoui et al., 2015)
10 Roof-integrated solar air heater 0.54 7281 (Sreekumar, 2010; Strumiłło et al.,
2014)
11 Roof-integrated indirect solar air heating system 0.54 7361.55 (Sreekumar, 2010)
12 Solar dryer coupled with PVT collector and ETC 2.4 174.74 (Daghigh et al., 2020)
13 PVT mixed mode greenhouse solar dryer 1.23 – (Tiwari and Tiwari, 2016)
14 Indirect through pass natural convective solar dryer with phase change thermal 1.57 1338.46 (Jain and Tewari, 2015)
energy storage
15 Indirect through pass natural convective solar 1.57 1338.46 (Jain and Tewari, 2015)
16 Indirect solar water heater with water storage tank 1.37 7870 Nabnean et al., 2016)
17 Water type indirect solar collector 1.37 5370 Nabnean et al., 2016)
18 Multi-pass indirect solar air heating collector 2.14 – (Kareem et al., 2017)
19 Indirect solar air collectors 1.08 – (Condorí, et al., 2017)

mance and efficiency (Ahmadi et al., 2020; Jamali and Noorpoor, 2019). and the payback period (PP) factor for a system can be expressed as
The annual cash flow rate of a system is expressed as follows (Bellos follows (Ahmadi et al., 2020; Jamali and Noorpoor, 2019):
et al., 2019; Tzivanidis et al., 2016):
ln(CF−CFr.Z )
∑ PP = (23)
CF = Yi ki (20) ln(1 + r)

where CF is the cash flow, and Yi and ki represent the annual production where r is the discount factor.
capacity of the system, and the specific cost of the product, respectively. The net present value (NPV) for a system is given as (Ahmadi et al.,
In the economic analysis, one of the most significant parameters is 2020; Jamali and Noorpoor, 2019):
the internal rate of return (IRR) which can be written as (Ahmadi et al.,
(1 + r)N − 1
2020; Jamali and Noorpoor, 2019): NPV = CF − Z (24)
[ ] r(1 + r)N
CF 1
IRR = 1− N (21) Regarding the economic assessment of a solar dryer system, several
Z (1 + IRR)
studies have been conducted. A comparison of different articles is pre­
sented in Table 5.
where Z is the total capital investment of the system and N is the lifetime
Ndukwu et al. (2020a, 2020b) performed energy, exergy, and eco­
of the system.
nomic analyses on a hybrid biomass-solar dryer, where the system also
The simple payback period (SPP) is given as (Ahmadi et al., 2020;
included a copper tubing heat exchanger. The location of the experiment
Jamali and Noorpoor, 2019):
was in southeastern Nigeria in a period during which there were low
SPP =
Z
(22) sunshine hours and high humidity, and the initial mass was considered
CF as 0.8 kg. The results revealed that using biomass energy in the solar
dryer technologies could significantly contribute to economic savings

367
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

which depend on the rate of usage per year. For 100% rate of usage per A program was developed with MATLAB to perform calculations, and
year, a stand-alone solar dryer could have 20.5 USD annual economic different climate conditions in India with a maximum solar irradiation of
saving, and biomass-solar dryer could save 205 USD per year. In another 900 W/m2 were taken into consideration. For this system, energy,
study, a heat pump dryer was compared to a solar-driven heat pump exergy, and exergoeconomic analyses were conducted. Regarding the
dryer from thermodynamic and economic points of view (Singh et al., total thermal energy, the payback period for the proposed system was
2020). Moreover, Varanasi in India is the location of the experiment in calculated as 1.23 years, and regarding the exergy performance of the
which the average solar intensity was 540 W/m2 in September with a configuration, the payback period was estimated as 10 years.
capacity of 10 kg. Both configurations were designed and experimented Phase change energy storage was integrated with natural convective
for moisture reduction of banana chips. The payback period of the solar- solar crop dryer in experimental research conducted in Jodhpur, India
driven heat pump dryer over the stand-alone heat pump dryer was with maximum solar irradiation of 950 W/m2 (Jain and Tewari, 2015).
proved to be 46 months. Moreover, the total initial cost of a solar-driven Note that the maximum capacity for a cycle of drying is 12 kg. The ef­
heat pump dryer was calculated as 893 USD, and its total running cost of ficiency of the configuration was assessed from energy and economic
was 5.8 USD/day. Elkhadraoui et al. (2015) conducted an experimental perspectives. Considering the best materials and product costs, the
study on a solar greenhouse dryer using a flat plate solar collector with outcomes revealed that the payback period estimated as 1.57 years, and
forced convection heat transfer. Note that the north of Tunisia, Borj the return on capital ratio was calculated 0.65. In Nakhon Pathom
Cedria was the location of the experiment with maximum solar irradi­ province, Thailand, a water-type heat storage and solar collector were
ation of 1000 W/m2 and the maximum capacity of the drier was 210 kg. designed and combined for drying cherry tomatoes with 100 kg capacity
In addition to significantly reducing the drying process time of red for the drying cycle of 4 days (Nabnean et al., 2016). The results showed
pepper and grape, the payback period was estimated to be 1.6 years. that the drying time was significantly decreasing compared to the con­
Moreover, the capital cost of the dryer was estimated as 1250 USD. ventional natural sun drying, and the payback period was estimated as
Another study utilized mixed type forced convection heat transfer for a 1.37 years.
solar dryer in an experimental study with average solar radiation of 570
W/m2 in Guwahati, India (Lakshmi et al., 2019). The study performed 7. Environmental analysis
exergy and economic assessments of the proposed system for 10 kg ca­
pacity of stevia leaves. The payback period of the proposed system was To assess the environmental effect of a configuration, several pro­
estimated as 1.02 years. The experimental and mathematical studies cedures can be employed such as life cycle assessment, calculation of
were carried out for a solar greenhouse dryer using a forced convection CO2 or pollutant reduction by proposing a novel system, and exer­
method in the north of Tunisia with annual global solar irradiation of goenvironmental analysis (Jamali and Noorpoor, 2019). Environment
2600 kWh/m2 (Aymen et al., 2019). Moreover, the same condition was analysis plays a pivotal role in understanding the sustainability and ef­
applied to an open sun drying experiment for comparison, and it should ficiency of a configuration (Kareem et al., 2017; Condorí et al., 2017). A
be mentioned that the dryer capacity was 80 kg. The economic evalu­ study suggested that solar dryers had a high potential of CO2 mitigation
ation estimated that the payback period would be 1.02 years. Sreeku­ of up to 6.4 tons per month, which was dependent on the used tech­
mar, (2010) proposed a solar air heater for drying purposes with the nology (Li et al., 2020).
drying capacity of 200 kg and examined the system from a Exergoenvironmental analysis is based on the environmental and
techno-economic perspective. The site location in India had a maximum thermodynamic analyses. The factor of exergoenvironment is given as
solar irradiation of 1000 W/m2. The capital investment of the system (Ahmadi et al., 2020):
was obtained as 7281 USD. For this roof-integrated configuration, the
Ėxtot.des
payback period was 0.54 year which was very low compared to the fei = ∑ (25)
lifetime of the system of 20 years. Ėxin
In an experimental study in West Sumatra, Indonesia with average
solar irradiation of 850 W/m2, solar and biomass energy were utilized where Ėxin and Ėxtot.des are respectively the input exergy and total exergy
for rice drying using fluidized bed dryer (Yahya et al., 2018). The ca­ destruction rate of the system.
pacity of the dryer was 11 kg. For this system, energy, exergy, and The exergoenvironmental impact index can be calculated as follows
exergoeconomic analyses were conducted. The payback period was (Ahmadi et al., 2020):
estimated as 1.6 years. Ndukwu et al. (2020a, 2020b) developed cost- Cei = 1/ηex (26)
effective solar dryer using wind energy in Umudike, Nigeria with
average solar irradiation of 571 W/m2. It should be mentioned that the where ηex refers to the system exergy efficiency.
dryer capacity was 2 kg per batch. The authors integrated the system The exergy stability factor for the system can be presented as
with heat storage using glycerol and they revealed that at a usage rate of (Ahmadi et al., 2020):
100% of the system, 290.4 USD could be saved annually.
In Yazgat, Turkey, two different dryers using solar and heat pumps fes =
Ėxtot.des
(27)
with a maximum capacity of 7 kg were compared from thermodynamic Ėxtot.out + Ėxtot.des + 1
and exergoeconomic aspects (Atalay, 2019a, 2019b). The results
revealed that the fan and condensers had a significant impact on the where Ėxtot.out represents the system output exergy.
economic efficiency of the system, and the performance of the solar The exergoenvironmental enhancement impact is expressed as
dryer was found to be higher than that of the heat pump dryer. Another (Ahmadi et al., 2020; Noorpoor et al., 2017; El Hage et al., 2018):
study in Sanandaj, Iran which has the maximum solar radiation of 1000 1
W/m2, compared two different evacuated tubes and photovoltaic ther­ ɵeii = (28)
ɵei
mal collectors as solar dryers using life cycle cost analysis (Daghigh
et al., 2020). The maximum capacity for a month cycle for the evacuated where ɵei denotes the effectiveness factor of environmental damage of
tubes dryer and photovoltaic thermal dryer were respectively 10 and 15 a system which is given as (Ahmadi et al., 2020; Noorpoor et al., 2017; El
kg, respectively. The outcomes showed that the payback periods were Hage et al., 2018)
2.3 and 2.5 years for evacuated tube collector solar dryer and photo­
voltaic thermal collector solar dryer, respectively. For a greenhouse ɵei = fei .Cei (29)
solar dryer with a capacity of 10 kg under forced convection mode, In Coimbatore, India, with a maximum solar irradiation of 1000 W/
photovoltaic-thermal panels were exploited (Tiwari and Tiwari, 2016).

368
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Table 6 calculated and compared for these configurations. One of the most sig­
Annual CO2 mitigation, coal saved, electricity saved by a mixed mode solar dryer nificant results was that using solar energy-based dryers could reduce
(Ratlamwala et al., 2013). the highest CO2 emissions when it was replaced by coal-based dryer.
Process variable Annual electricity Annual coal Annual CO2 Table 5 lists the annual CO2 mitigation, coal saved, and electricity saved.
saved (kWh) saved (kg) mitigation (kg) Moreover, the effect of different variables such as sample thickness,
Sample loading density, air mass flow rate, and absorbed energy on the
thickness mentioned parameters is also presented in Table 6. Table 7 presents the
(mm) carbon credits earned by using the proposed solar dryer in comparison to
18 157.42 91.542 591.36
fossil fuel-based configurations, which also gives the impact of various
11 140.62 81.66 524.77
8 178.43 103.62 674.64 parameters on carbon credits earned.
5 157.64 91.55 592.24 Novel heat storage comprised of sodium chloride and sulfate deca­
hydrate was combined with solar dryer by Ndukwu et al. (2020a, 2020b)
Loading density
(kg/m2) in Umudike, Nigeria with a solar radiation of 795 W/m2. They per­
4.33 141.47 82.16 528.15 formed energy and exergy analyses on this system that was used for crop
3.24 171.37 99.52 646.65 drying with a capacity of 1 kg red chili. Compared to diesel-driven
2.16 178.43 103.62 674.64
dryers, this system could mitigate the CO2 emission of about 602 tons
1.08 171.54 99.61 647.32
annually. For drying 0.3 kg of red chili in South-Eastern Nigeria, with a
Air mass flow maximum solar irradiation of 800 W/m2, a flat solar collector and
rate (kg/s)
thermal storage unit were modelled and validated by Simo-Tagne et al.
0.022 205.8 119.51 783.15
0.017 116.47 67.64 429.03 (2020). For this mix-mode solar dryer natural convection was consid­
0.011 178.43 103.62 674.64 ered for a condition that the sunshine duration was short. The results
0.009 288.45 167.51 1110.75 demonstrated that this system was apable to reduce about 1,280,000
Absorbed energy tons gross coal CO2 in Africa. On combined biomass-solar dryer exergy,
(W/m2) economic and environmental analyses were conducted by Ndukwu et al.
750 178.43 103.62 674.64 (2020a, 2020b). The location of the experiment was in southeastern
550 106.45 61.82 389.33
Nigeria in a period during which there were low sunshine hours and
350 58.50 33.97 199.25
150 27.51 15.97 76.40 high humidity, and the initial mass considered was 0.8 kg. It was found
that, for a 100% rate of usage per year, the stand-alone solar dryer
reducesCO2 emissions by 440 tons, and the biomass-solar dryer reduc­
esCO2 emissions by 3074 tons. A solar dryer using a photovoltaic-
Table 7
Carbon credits earned (€) by using a mixed mode solar dryer (Ratlamwala et al.,
thermal collector was developed for a rural area of a developing coun­
2013). try, and was evaluated from different thermodynamic, economic and
environmental aspects (Tiwari and Tiwari, 2016) for 10 kg capacity and
Process variable Coal Diesel LPG Natural gas
maximum solar irradiation of 900 W/m2. The results of environmental
Sample thickness (mm) assessment found that for the system with a lifetime of 25 years CO2
18 5360.71 2061.49 1310.43 885.28
emissions were170 kg per year, however, the system could achieve 82
11 4753.77 1806.65 1135.74 755.96
8 6119.69 2380.18 1528.88 1046.99 tons CO2 mitigation during its lifetime. The carbon credit earn from the
5 5368.68 2064.84 1312.73 886.98 system was calculated 817.50USD.
Loading density (kg/m2)
In al Ahsa, Saudi Arabia, Eltawil et al. (2018) performed energy and
4.33 7108.64 2795.42 1813.53 1257.71 environmental analyses for photovoltaic system combined with solar
3.24 3881.21 1440.27 884.60 570.04 tunnel dryer for drying mint. They compared the results with the open
2.16 6119.69 2380.18 1528.88 1046.99
1.08 10094.40 4049.09 2672.89 1893.87
Table 8
Air mass flow rate (kg/s)
Annual CO2 emission of different types of dryers.
0.022 4784.56 1928.40 1144.60 762.52
0.017 5864.63 2381.91 1455.47 992.65 S. Technique Annual CO2 Reference
0.011 6119.69 2489.00 1528.88 1046.99 No. emission (tons)
0.009 5870.65 2384.44 1457.21 993.93
1 Stand-alone air type solar dryer 440 (Ndukwu et al.,
Absorbed energy (W/m2) 2020a, 2020b)
750 6119.69 2380.18 1528.88 1046.99 2 Hybrid air type solar solar-biomass 3074 (Ndukwu et al.,
550 3519.37 1288.34 780.45 492.95 dryer 2020a, 2020b)
350 1787.00 560.94 281.83 123.83 3 Indirect forced convection solar 0.96 (Vijayan et al.,
150 667.33 90.81 – – dryer 2020)
4 Solar dryer integrated with sodium 602 (Ndukwu et al.,
sulfate decahydrate and sodium 2017)
m2, an exergo environmental assessment was conducted by Vijayan et al. chloride as thermal storage medium
5 Photovoltaic-thermal mixed mode 3.27 (Tiwari and
(2020) for a solar dryer of agro-products for the input mass flow rate of
greenhouse solar dryer Tiwari, 2016)
0.0636 kg/s. The indirect forced convection method was exploited in 6 A natural convection mix-mode solar 1,280,148 (Simo-Tagne
that study. The conclusions revealed that for the lifetime of the system dryer et al., 2020)
was considered to be 35 years, the CO2 mitigation that could be achieved 7 Hybrid solar tunnel dryer with PV 1.27 (Eltawil et al.,
using this system was calculated as 33.52 tons, and the value of earned system 2018)
8 North wall insulated greenhouse 0.021 (Chauhan et al.,
carbon credit was estimated as 144 USD up to 576 USD. dryer including solar air heating 2018)
In a study in India, a mixed-mode solar dryer was compared with collector under forced convection
fossil fuel-based dryers including LPG, natural gas, diesel, and coal- mode
based systems with solar irradiation of 750 W/m2 (Ratlamwala et al., 9 North wall insulated greenhouse 0.015 (Chauhan et al.,
dryer including solar air heating 2018)
2013). For this study, the loading capacity was considered to be 2.16 kg/
collector under natural convection
m2. The carbon credits earned and CO2 emission reduction were mode

369
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

sun drying method with a capacity of 5.5 kg. The net CO2 reduction was References
calculated to be 32 tons. In Sari, Iran, a hybrid solar dryer and various
fossil fuel-based dryers were analysed and compared from environment Abass, A.B., Ndunguru, G., Mamiro, P., Alenkhe, B., Mlingi, N., Bekunda, M., 2014. Post-
harvest food losses in a maize-based farming system of semi-arid savannah area of
perspective (Sreekumar, 2010; Simo-Tagne et al., 2020) where NOx, Tanzania. J. Stored Prod. Res. 57, 49–57.
CO2, and SO2 emissions were taken into account for this assessment, and Husham Abdulmalek, S., Khalaji Assadi, M., Al-Kayiem, H.H., Gitan, A.A., 2018.
heavy oil, gas oil and natural gas were the fossil fuels. The capacity for A comparative analysis on the uniformity enhancement methods of solar thermal
drying. Energy. 148, 1103–1115.
one cycle of this study was 1 kg dog rose. One of the most significant Afriyie, J.K., Nazha, M.A.A., Rajakaruna, H., Forson, F.K., 2009. Experimental
findings of the study about the fossil fuel-driven dryers was that investigations of a chimney-dependent solar crop dryer. Renew. Energy 34 (1),
increasing the velocity and temperature of the airflow in the dryer could 217–222.
Ahmadi, A., Jamali, D.H., Ehyaei, M.A., Assad, M.E.H., 2020. Energy, exergy, economic
increase greenhouse gas emissions. They also found that solar dryers and exergoenvironmental analyses of gas and air bottoming cycles for production of
could decrease the emission of greenhouse gas in comparison to other electricity and hydrogen with gas reformer. J. Cleaner Prod. 259, 120915. https://
configurations. In another study, life cycle assessment was performed for doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120915.
Akbulut, A., Durmuş, A., 2010. Energy and exergy analyses of thin layer drying of
various scenarios including renewable and fossil energy sources for
mulberry in a forced solar dryer. Energy 35 (4), 1754–1763.
drying purposes (Eltawil et al., 2018). The results revealed that the Akpinar, E.K., 2010. Drying of mint leaves in a solar dryer and under open sun:
lowest global warming potential GWP was exhibited by a solar energy- modelling, performance analyses. Energy Convers. Manage. 51 (12), 2407–2418.
based cycle of about 34 kg CO2 equivalent, and a liquefied petroleum Akpinar, E.K., Sarsilmaz, C., 2004. Energy and exergy analyses of drying of apricots in a
rotary solar dryer. Int. J. Exergy 1 (4), 457–474.
gas-based system had the highest GWP of about 89 kg CO2 equivalent. A Akpinar, E.K., Sarsılmaz, C., Yildiz, C., 2004. Mathematical modelling of a thin layer
comparison of different articles is presented in Table 8. drying of apricots in a solar energized rotary dryer. Int. J. Energy Res. 28 (8),
739–752.
Alexandratos, N., Bruinsma, J., 2012. World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012
8. Conclusions revision. ESA Working paper No. 12-03. Rome, FAO.
Al-Juamily, K.E.J., Khalifa, A.J.N., Yassen, T.A., 2007. Testing of the performance of a
A comprehensive review is presented of the major operating pa­ fruit and vegetable solar drying system in Iraq. Desalination 209 (1-3), 163–170.
Amjad, W., Ali Gilani, G., Munir, A., Asghar, F., Ali, A., Waseem, M., 2020. Energetic and
rameters as well as the dryer designs that affect solar dyer performance exergetic thermal analysis of an inline-airflow solar hybrid dryer. Appl. Therm. Eng.
in producing high quality dried products. The performance of solar 166, 114632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114632.
drying technologies was examined taking into account the mass flow Assoa, Y.B., Sauzedde, F., Boillot, B., Boddaert, S., 2017. Development of a building
integrated solar photovoltaic/thermal hybrid drying system. Energy 128, 755–767.
rate of the hot air entering the dryer chamber and its temperature, and Atalay, H., 2019. Performance analysis of a solar dryer integrated with the packed bed
the moisture content of the product. Energy and exergy analyses, as well thermal energy storage (TES) system. Energy 172, 1037–1052.
as economic and environmental analyses, were presented in detail for Atalay, H., 2019b. Comparative assessment of solar and heat pump dryers with regards
to exergy and exergoeconomic performance. Energy 189, 116180.
the drying process. This review shows that a safe moisture content en­
Aulakh, J., Regmi, A., Fulton, J.R., Alexander, C., 2013. Estimating post-harvest food
sures minimum energy storage losses, high product quality, and product losses: Developing a consistent global estimation framework. In: Proceedings of the
durability improvement. The main challenge encountered in solar en­ Agricultural & Applied Economics Association’s 2013 AAEA & CAES Joint Annual
ergy drying technology is the discontinuity of solar energy in providing Meeting, Washington, DC, USA.
Aymen, E., Hamdi, I., Kooli, S., Guizani, A., 2019. Drying of red pepper slices in a solar
enough energy during periods of solar radiation unavailability. To greenhouse dryer and under open sun: Experimental and mathematical
overcome this challenge a phase change material as storage media can investigations. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 52, 262–270.
be used to provide the needed energy. The study shows that parabolic Baeghbali, V., Ngadi, M., Niakousari, M., 2020. Effects of ultrasound and infrared
assisted conductive hydro-drying, freeze-drying and oven drying on physicochemical
reflectors are the best fit in solar drying technology resulting in short properties of okra slices. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 63, 102313. https://doi.
drying process time and improvement of dryer performance. It can be org/10.1016/j.ifset.2020.102313.
concluded from this work that solar energy is a good option for drying Bal, L.M., Satya, S., Naik, S.N., 2010. Solar dryer with thermal energy storage systems for
drying agricultural food products: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14 (8),
processes due to its effective cost, uniform distribution, abundancy and 2298–2314.
ability to be combined with other energy resources such as geothermal, Bala, B., Morshed, M., Rahman, M., 2009. Solar drying of mushroom using solar tunnel
biomass, or wind energy. dryer. Proceedings of International Solar Food Processing Conference 2009.
Bala, B.K., Haque, M.A., Hossain, M.A., Majumdar, S., 2010. Post Harvest Loss and
Technical Efficiency of Rice, Wheat and Maize Production System: Assessment and
9. Future recommendations Measures for Strengthening Food Security. Bangladesh Agricultural University,
Mymensingh, Bangladesh.
Baloch, U.K., 1999. Wheat: Post-Harvest Operations. Pakistan Agricultural Research
The following items for solar drying technology are recommended
Council, Islamabad, Pakistan, pp. 1–21.
based on this review work: Banout, J., Ehl, P., 2010. Using a Double-pass solar drier for drying of bamboo shoots.
J. Agric. Rur. Devel. Trop. Subtrop. (JARTS) 111 (2), 119–127.
• Improvement of drying process quality could be achieved by Banout, J., Ehl, P., Havlik, J., Lojka, B., Polesny, Z., Verner, V., 2011. Design and
performance evaluation of a Double-pass solar drier for drying of red chilli
increasing the solar collector efficiency. (Capsicum annum L.). Sol. Energy 85 (3), 506–515.
• Improvement of the economic benefits and productivity could be Basavaraja, H., Mahajanashetti, S., Udagatti, N.C., 2007. Economic analysis of post-
obtained by applying a multifunctional solar dryer. harvest losses in food grains in India: A case study of Karnataka. Agric. Econ. Res.
Rev. 20, 117–126.
• An efficient method for energy storage and energy recovery units Basunia, M., et al., 2011. Drying of fish sardines in Oman using solar tunnel dryers.
should be implemented for stable dryer performance. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. B 1, 108–114.
• Use of aluminum made absorber plate to improve the absorber ab­ Bejan, A., Kearney, D., Kreith, F., 1981. Second law analysis and synthesis of solar
collector systems. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 103 (1), 23–28.
sorptivity in hybrid solar dryers. Belessiotis, V., Delyannis, E., 2011. Solar drying. Sol. Energy 85 (8), 1665–1691.
• Use latent and sensible heat storage materials to maintain continuous Bellos, E., Pavlovic, S., Stefanovic, V., Tzivanidis, C., Nakomcic-Smaradgakis, B.B., 2019.
dryer performance during nights or cloudy days. Parametric analysis and yearly performance of a trigeneration system driven by
solar-dish collectors. Int. J. Energy Res. 43 (4), 1534–1546.
Bena, B., Fuller, R.J., 2002. Natural convection solar dryer with biomass back-up heater.
Declaration of Competing Interest Sol. Energy 72 (1), 75–83.
Berk, Z., 2009. Chapter 22 – Dehydration. In: Berk, Zeki (Ed.), Food Science and
Technology. Food Process Engineering and Technology. Academic Press,
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
pp. 459–510.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence Boughali, S., Benmoussa, H., Bouchekima, B., Mennouche, D., Bouguettaia, H.,
the work reported in this paper. Bechki, D., 2009. Crop drying by indirect active hybrid solar–Electrical dryer in the
eastern Algerian Septentrional Sahara. Sol. Energy 83 (12), 2223–2232.
Bourdoux, S., Li, D., Rajkovic, A., Devlieghere, F., Uyttendaele, M., 2016. Performance of
drying technologies to ensure microbial safety of dried fruits and vegetables. Compr.
Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 15 (6), 1056–1066.

370
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Bourne, M., 1977. Post Harvest Food Losses-the Neglected Dimension in Increasing the Fadhel, A., Charfi, K., Balghouthi, M., Kooli, S., 2018. Experimental investigation of the
World Food Supply. Department of Food Science and Technology, Cornell solar drying of Tunisian phosphate under different conditions. Renew. Energy 116,
University, Ithaca, NY, USA. 762–774.
Boxall, R.A., 2011. Post-harvest losses to insects-A world review. Int. Biodeterior. Fadhel, M.I., Sopian, K., Daud, W., Wan, A.M., Yahya, M., Zaharim, A., 2009. Solar
Biodegrad. 48, 137–152. chemical heat pump drying system for tropical region. WSEAS. Trans. Environ. Dev
Bradford, K.J., Dahal, P., Van Asbrouck, J., Kunusoth, K., Bello, P., Thompson, J., Wu, F., 5, 404–413.
2018. The dry chain: Reducing postharvest losses and improving food safety in Esmaeilion, F., Ahmadi, A., Esmaeilion, A., Ehyaei, M.A., 2021. The performance
humid climates. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 71, 84–93. analysis and monitoring of grid-connected photovoltaic power plant. Curr. Chin.
Brenndorfer, B., Kennedy, L., Mrema, G., 1987. Solar Dryers: Their Role in Post-Harvest Comput. Sci. 1 (1), 77–96.
Processing. Commonwealth Secretariat. Farbod, E., Abolfazl, A., Aryan, E., Ehyaei, E.A., 2020. The performance analysis and
Burney, J.A., Davis, S.J., Lobell, D.B., 2010. Greenhouse gas mitigation by agricultural monitoring of grid-connected photovoltaic power plant. Curr. Chin. Comput. Sci.
intensification. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 107 (26), 12052–12057. 1–20. https://doi.org/10.2174/2665997201999200511083228.
Buzby, J.C., Wells, H.F., Hyman, J., 2014. The Estimated Amount, Value, and Calories of Fatouh, M., Metwally, M.N., Helali, A.B., Shedid, M.H., 2006. Herbs drying using a heat
Postharvest Food Losses at the Retail and Consumer Levels in the United States, EIB- pump dryer. Energy Convers. Manage. 47 (15-16), 2629–2643.
121, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Availale online: Ferreira, A.G., Maia, C.B., Cortez, M.F.B., Valle, R.M., 2008. Technical feasibility
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2501659 (accessed on 02 assessment of a solar chimney for food drying. Sol. Energy 82 (3), 198–205.
July 2020). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2013a. Food Wastage
Caliskan, H., 2017. Energy, exergy, environmental, enviroeconomic, Footprint-Impacts on Natural Resources. Rome, Italy, FAO.
exergoenvironmental (EXEN) and exergoenviroeconomic (EXENEC) analyses of solar Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2013b. Toolkit:
collectors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 69, 488–492. Reducing the Food Wastage Footprint. Rome, Italy, FAO.
Celma, A.R., Cuadros, F., 2009. Energy and exergy analyses of OMW solar drying Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations (FAO), 2014. Global Initiative on
process. Renew. Energy 34 (3), 660–666. Food Losses and Waste Reduction. Rome, Italy, FAO.
Chandramohan, V.P., 2020. Convective drying of food materials: An overview with Forson, F.K., Nazha, M.A.A., Rajakaruna, H., 2007a. Modelling and experimental studies
fundamental aspect, recent developments, and summary. Heat Transf. - Asian Res. on a mixed-mode natural convection solar crop-dryer. Sol. Energy 81 (3), 346–357.
Chandrasekaran, S., Ramanathan, S., Basak, T., 2013. Microwave food processing—A Forson, F.K., Nazha, M.A.A., Akuffo, F.O., Rajakaruna, H., 2007b. Design of mixed-mode
review. Food Res. Int. 52 (1), 243–261. natural convection solar crop dryers: Application of principles and rules of thumb.
Chauhan, Y.B., Rathod, P.P., 2020. A comprehensive review of the solar dryer. Int. J. Renew. Energy 32 (14), 2306–2319.
Ambient Energy 41 (3), 348–367. Fox, T., 2013. Global Food: Waste Not, Want Not. Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Chauhan, P.S., Kumar, A., Nuntadusit, C., 2018. Thermo-environomical and drying Westminster, London, UK.
kinetics of bitter gourd flakes drying under north wall insulated greenhouse dryer. Fterich, M., Chouikhi, H., Bentaher, H., Maalej, A., 2018. Experimental parametric study
Sol. Energy 162, 205–216. of a mixed-mode forced convection solar dryer equipped with a PV/T air collector.
Chavan, A., Vitankar, V., Mujumdar, A., Thorat, B., 2021. Natural convection and direct Sol. Energy 171, 751–760.
type (NCDT) solar dryers: a review. Drying Technol. 39 (13), 1969–1990. Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., 2019. A review of solar air flat plate collector for drying
Chavan, B., Yakupitiyage, A., Kumar, S., 2011. Drying performance, quality application. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 102, 333–345.
characteristics, and financial evaluation of Indian Mackerel (Rastrilligerkangurta) Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., Ruslan, M.H., Alghoul, M.A., Sulaiman, M.Y., 2010. Review of
dried by a solar tunnel dryer. Science & Technology Asia 2011, 11–25. solar dryers for agricultural and marine products. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14
Chowdhury, M.M.I., Bala, B.K., Haque, M.A., 2011. Energy and exergy analysis of the (1), 1–30.
solar drying of jackfruit leather. Biosyst. Eng. 110 (2), 222–229. Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., Yazdi, M.H., Ruslan, M.H., Gabbasa, M., Kazem, H.A., 2014a.
Condorí, M., Duran, G., Echazú, R., Altobelli, F., 2017. Semi-industrial drying of Performance analysis of solar drying system for red chili. Sol. Energy 99, 47–54.
vegetables using an array of large solar air collectors. Energy for Sustain. Devel. 37, Fudholi, A., Othman, M.Y., Ruslan, M.H., Sopian, K., 2013. Drying of Malaysian
1–9. Capsicum annuumL. (Red Chili) Dried by Open and Solar Drying. Int. J. Photoenergy
Daghigh, R., Shahidian, R., Oramipoor, H., 2020. A multistate investigation of a solar 2013, 1–9.
dryer coupled with photovoltaic thermal collector and evacuated tube collector. Sol. Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., Othman, M.Y., Ruslan, M.H., 2014b. Energy and exergy analyses
Energy 199, 694–703. of solar drying system of red seaweed. Energy Build. 68, 121–129.
Das, B., Mondol, J.D., Negi, S., Pugsley, A., Smyth, M., 2021. Experimental performance Garg, H.P., Kumar, R., 2000. Studies on semi-cylindrical solar tunnel dryers: thermal
analysis of a novel sand coated and sand filled polycarbonate sheet based solar air performance of collector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 20 (2), 115–131.
collector. Renew. Energy 164, 990–1004. Gaukel, V., Siebert, T., Erle, U., 2017. Microwave-assisted drying, second ed. Elsevier.
Debnath, S., Das, B., Randive, P.R., Pandey, K.M., 2018. Performance analysis of solar air Gbaha, P., Yobouet Andoh, H., Kouassi Saraka, J., Kaménan Koua, B., Touré, S., 2007.
collector in the climatic condition of North Eastern India. Energy. 165, 281–298. Experimental investigation of a solar dryer with natural convective heat flow.
Delgado-Plaza, E., Peralta-Jaramillo, J., Quilambaqui, M., Gonzalez, O., Reinoso- Renew. Energy 32 (11), 1817–1829.
Tigre, J., Arevalo, A., Arancibia, M., Paucar, M., Velázquez-Martí, B., 2019. Thermal Godfray, H.C.J., Beddington, J.R., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F.,
Evaluation of a Hybrid Dryer with Solar and Geothermal Energy for Agroindustry Toulmin, C., 2010. Food security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science
Application. Applied Sciences 9 (19), 4079. 327 (5967), 812–818.
Diemuodeke, O., Momoh, Y., 2011. Design and Fabrication of a Direct Natural Greeley, M., 1986. Food, Technology and employment: The farm-level post-harvest
Convection Solar Dryer for Tapioca. Leonardo Electron. J. Pract. Technol. 10, system in developing countries. J. Agric. Econ. 37, 333–347.
95–104. Gulcimen, F., Karakaya, H., Durmus, A., 2016. Drying of sweet basil with solar air
Dincer, I., Sahin, A.Z., 2004. A new model for thermodynamic analysis of a drying collectors. Renew. Energy 93, 77–86.
process. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 47 (4), 645–652. Gupta, A., Das, B., Biswas, A., 2021. Performance analysis of stand-alone solar
Dou, Z., Ferguson, J.D., Galligan, D.T., Kelly, A.M., Finn, S.M., Giegengack, R., 2016. photovoltaic thermal dryer for drying of green chili in hot-humid weather conditions
Food waste across the supply chain. A U.S. Perspective on a global problem. Council of North-East India. J Food Process Engineering.
for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa. Gupta, A., Das, B., Mondol, J.D., 2020. Experimental and theoretical performance
Ehyaei, M.A., Ahmadi, A., El Haj Assad, M., Salameh, T., 2019. Optimization of parabolic analysis of a hybrid photovoltaic-thermal (PVT) solar air dryer for green chillies. Int
through collector (PTC) with multi objective swarm optimization (MOPSO) and Journal of Ambient. Energy.
energy, exergy and economic analyses. J. Cleaner Prod. 234, 285–296. Gustavsson, J., Cederberg, C., Sonesson, U., Otterdijk, R., Van, M.A., 2011. Global food
Ekechukwu, O.V., Norton, B., 1999. Review of solar-energy drying systems II: an losses and food waste. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,
overview of solar drying technology. Energy Convers. Manage. 40 (6), 615–655. Rome.
Ekka, J.P., Bala, K., Muthukumar, P., Kanaujiya, D.K., 2020. Performance analysis of a Hatami, S., Payganeh, G., Mehrpanahi, A., 2020. Energy and exergy analysis of an
forced convection mixed mode horizontal solar cabinet dryer for drying of black indirect solar dryer based on a dynamic model. J. Cleaner Prod. 244, 118809.
ginger (Kaempferia parviflora) using two successive air mass flow rates. Renew. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118809.
Energy 152, 55–66. Hawlader, M.N.A., Rahman, S.M.A., Jahangeer, K.A., 2008. Performance of evaporator-
El Hage, H., Herez, A., Ramadan, M., Bazzi, H., Khaled, M., 2018. An investigation on collector and air collector in solar assisted heat pump dryer. Energy Convers.
solar drying: A review with economic and environmental assessment. Energy 157, Manage. 49 (6), 1612–1619.
815–829. Herez, A., Ramadan, M., Khaled, M., 2018. Review on solar cooker systems: Economic
El-Beltagy, A., Gamea, G.R., Essa, A.H.A., 2007. Solar drying characteristics of and environmental study for different Lebanese scenarios. Renew. Sustain. Energy
strawberry. J. Food Eng. 78 (2), 456–464. Rev. 81, 421–432.
ELkhadraoui, A., Kooli, S., Hamdi, I., Farhat, A., 2015. Experimental investigation and Holman, J.P., 2001. Experimental methods for engineers, 7th Ed. McGraw-Hill.
economic evaluation of a new mixed-mode solar greenhouse dryer for drying of red Hu, Z., Zhang, S., Chu, W., He, W., Yu, C., Yu, H., 2020. Numerical analysis and
pepper and grape. Renew. Energy 77, 1–8. preliminary experiment of a solar assisted heat pump drying system for Chinese
El-Sebaii, A.A., Shalaby, S.M., 2012. Solar drying of agricultural products: A review. wolfberry. Energies 13, 4306.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (1), 37–43. International Energy Agency (IEA), 2019. Global CO2 emissions in 2019. https://www.
Eltawil, M.A., Azam, M.M., Alghannam, A.O., 2018. Energy analysis of hybrid solar iea.org/articles/global-co2-emissions-in-2019 (accessed on 01 July 2020).
tunnel dryer with PV system and solar collector for drying mint (MenthaViridis). Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), 2013. Post-Harvest
J. Cleaner Prod. 181, 352–364. Losses in Latin America and the Caribbean: Challenges and Opportunities for
Ezekwe, C.I., 1981. Crop drying with solar air heaters in tropical Nigeria, presented at Collaboration. IICA, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.seminarioconesul2015.com
the ISES. Solar World Forum, Brighton, UK. /wp-content/uploads/2015/08/IICA.-2013.-Post-Harvest-Losses-in-Latin-America-
and-the-Caribbean.pdf (accessed on 01 July 2020).

371
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Ivanova, D., Enimanev, K., Andonov, K., 2003. Energy and economic effectiveness of a Mortezapour, H., Ghobadian, B., Khoshtaghaza, M., Minaei, S., 2012. Performance
fruit and vegetable dryer. Energy Convers. Manage. - Energ Conv Manage 44, analysis of a two-way hybrid photovoltaic/thermal solar collector. J. Agric. Sci.
763–769. Technol. 14 (4), 767–780.
Jain, D., 2005. Modeling the system performance of multi-tray crop drying using an Mujumdar, A., 2014. Handbook of Industrial Drying, 3rd Ed: CRC Press.
inclined multi-pass solar air heater with in-built thermal storage. J. Food Eng. 71, Murali, S., Amulya, P., Alfiya, P., Delfiya, D.A., Samuel, M.P., 2020. Design and
44–54. performance evaluation of solar - LPG hybrid dryer for drying of shrimps. Renew.
Jain, D., Jain, R.K., 2004. Performance evaluation of an inclined multi-pass solar air Energy 147, 2417–2428.
heater with in-built thermal storage on deep-bed drying application. J. Food Eng. 65, Murthy, M.R., 2009. A review of new technologies, models and experimental
497–509. investigations of solar driers. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 835–844.
Jain, D., Tewari, P., 2015. Performance of indirect through pass natural convective solar Mustayen, A.G.M.B., Mekhilef, S., Saidur, R., 2014. Performance study of different solar
crop dryer with phase change thermal energy storage. Renew. Energy 80, 244–250. dryers: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 34, 463–470.
Jairaj, K., Singh, S., Srikant, K., 2009. A review of solar dryers developed for grape Nabnean, S., Janjai, S., Thepa, S., Sudaprasert, K., Songprakorp, R., Bala, B., 2016.
drying. Sol. Energy 83, 1698–1712. Experimental performance of a new design of solar dryer for drying osmotically
Jamali, D.H., Noorpoor, A., 2019. Optimization of a novel solar-based multi-generation dehydrated cherry tomatoes. Renew. Energy 94, 147–156.
system for waste heat recovery in a cement plant. J. Cleaner Prod. 240, 117825. Nagwekar, N., Tidke, V., Thorat, B., 2016. Microbial and Biochemical Analysis of Dried
Janjai, S., Lamlert, N., Intawee, P., Mahayothee, B., Bala, B., Nagle, M., 2009. Fish and Comparative Study Using Different Drying Methods. Drying Technol. 35,
Experimental and simulated performance of a PV-ventilated solar greenhouse dryer 12/29.
for drying of peeled longan and banana. Sol. Energy 83, 1550–1565. Nasri, M.Y., Belhamri, A., 2018. Effects of the climatic conditions and the shape on the
Kaminski, J., Christiaensen, L., 2014. Post-harvest loss in sub-Saharan Africa-What do drying kinetics, Application to solar drying of potato-case of Maghreb’s region.
farmers say? Glob. Food Secur. 3, 149–158. J. Cleaner Prod. 183, 1241–1251.
Kant, K., Shukla, A., Sharma, A., Kumar, A., Jain, A., 2016. Thermal energy storage based Natarajan, K., Thokchom, S.S., Verma, T.N., Nashine, P., 2017. Convective solar drying
solar drying systems: A review. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 34, 86–99. of Vitis vinifera & Momordica charantia using thermal storage materials. Renew.
Kareem, M., Habib, K., Ruslan, M., Saha, B.B., 2017. Thermal performance study of a Energy 113, 1193–1200.
multi-pass solar air heating collector system for drying of Roselle (Hibiscus Ndukwu, M., Bennamoun, L., Abam, F., Eke, A., Ukoha, D., 2017. Energy and exergy
sabdariffa). Renew. Energy 113, 281–292. analysis of a solar dryer integrated with sodium sulfate decahydrate and sodium
Karthikeyan, A., Murugavelh, S., 2018. Thin layer drying kinetics and exergy analysis of chloride as thermal storage medium. Renew. Energy 113, 1182–1192.
turmeric (Curcuma longa) in a mixed mode forced convection solar tunnel dryer. Ndukwu, M., Onyenwigwe, D., Abam, F., Eke, A., Dirioha, C., 2020a. Development of a
Renew. Energy 128, 305–312. low-cost wind-powered active solar dryer integrated with glycerol as thermal
Khalifa, A.J.N., Al-Dabagh, A.M., Al-Mehemdi, W.M., 2012. An Experimental Study of storage. Renew. Energy 154, 553–568.
Vegetable Solar Drying Systems with and without Auxiliary Heat. ISRN Renew. Ndukwu, M., Simo-Tagne, M., Abam, F., Onwuka, O., Prince, S., Bennamoun, L., 2020b.
Energy 2012, 1–8. Exergetic sustainability and economic analysis of hybrid solar-biomass dryer
Kitinoja, L., Saran, S., Roy, S.K., Kader, A.A., 2011. Postharvest technology for integrated with copper tubing as heat exchanger. Heliyon 6 (2).
developing countries: Challenges and opportunities in research, outreach and Negi, S., Jaswal, G., Dass, K., Mazumder, K., Elumalai, S., Roy, J.K., 2020. Torrefaction: a
advocacy. J. Sci. Food Agric. 91, 597–603. sustainable method for transforming of agri-wastes to high energy density solids
Koşan, M., Demirtaş, M., Aktaş, M., Dişli, E., 2020. Performance analyses of sustainable (biocoal). Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 19, 463–488.
PV/T assisted heat pump drying system. Sol. Energy 199, 657–672. Niksiar, A., Rahimi, A., 2009. Energy and exergy analysis for cocurrent gas spray cooling
Kumar, D., Mahanta, P., Kalita, P., 2020. Energy and exergy analysis of a natural systems based on the results of mathematical modeling and simulation. Energy 34,
convection dryer with and without sensible heat storage medium. J. Energy Storage. 14–21.
29, 101481. Noorpoor, A., Hamedi, D., Hashemian, N., 2017. Optimization of parabolic trough solar
Kumar, D., Kalita, P., 2017. Reducing Postharvest Losses during Storage of Grain Crops to collectors integrated with two stage Rankine cycle. Journal of Solar Energy Research
Strengthen Food Security in Developing Countries. Foods 6 (1), 1–22. 2 (2), 61–66.
Labed, A., Moummi, N., Aoues, K., Benchabane, A., 2016. Solar drying of henna Oguntade, A.E., Thylmann, D., Deimling, S., 2014. Post-Harvest Losses of Rice in Nigeria
(Lawsoniainermis) using different models of solar flat plate collectors: an and Their Ecological Footprint. Available on https://wocatpedia.net/images/6/63/
experimental investigation in the region of Biskra (Algeria). J. Cleaner Prod. 112, PostHarvest_Losses_of_Rice_in_Nigeria_and_their_Ecological_Footprint.pdf (accessed
2545–2552. on 08.08.2020).
Ladha-Sabur, A., Bakalis, S., Fryer, P.J., Lopez-Quiroga, E., 2019. Mapping energy Olabi, A., Akansu, S.O., Kahraman, N., 2017. Fuel cell and energy storage systems: A
consumption in food manufacturing, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 86, 270–280. special issue section on The 9th International Conference on Sustainable Energy and
Lakshmi, D., Muthukumar, P., Layek, A., Nayak, P.K., 2019. Performance analyses of Environmental Protection (SEEP 2016). Kayseri, Turkey, Elsevier.
mixed mode forced convection solar dryer for drying of stevia leaves. Sol. Energy Ong, K., 1999. Solar dryers in the Asia-Pacific region. Renew. Energy 16, 779–784.
188, 507–518. Othman, M., Sopian, K., Yatim, B., Daud, W.R.W., 2006. Development of advanced solar
Lawlor, V., Olabi, A., 2015. Review of scientific research regarding PPO, tallow and RVO assisted drying systems. Renew. Energy 31, 703–709.
as diesel engine fuel. Fuel 145, 25–38. Pangavhane, D.R., Sawhney, R., Sarsavadia, P., 2002. Design, Development and
Li, Z., Ehyaei, M., Ahmadi, A., Jamali, D., Kumar, R., Abanades, S., 2020. Energy, exergy performance testing of a new natural convection solar dryer. Energy 27, 579–590.
and economic analyses of new coal-fired cogeneration hybrid plant with wind Pantenius, C., 1988. Storage losses in traditional maize granaries in Togo. Int. J. Trop.
energy resource. J. Cleaner Prod. 269, 122331. Insect Sci. 9, 725–735.
Lin, J., Lin, B., Sun, J., Chen, Y., 2017. Numerical model simulation of island-headland Parfitt, J., Barthel, M., Macnaughton, S., 2010. Food waste within food supply chains:
induced eddies in a site for tidal current energy extraction. Renew. Energy 101, Quantification and potential for change to 2050. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol.
204–213. Sci. 365 (1554), 3065–3081.
Lingayat, A.B., Chandramohan, V., Raju, V., Meda, V., 2020a. A review on indirect type Phadke, P., Walke, P., Kriplani, V.M., 2015. Direct Type Natural Convection Solar Dryer:
solar dryers for agricultural crops–Dryer setup, its performance, energy storage and A Review, International Journal of Advance Research In Science And. Engineering 4,
important highlights. Appl. Energy 258, 114005. 256.
Lingayat, A., Chandramohan, V., Raju, V., 2017. Design, development and performance Poore, J., Nemecek, T., 2018. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers
of indirect type solar dryer for banana drying. Energy Procedia 109, 409–416. and consumers. Science 360, 987–992.
Lingayat, A.B., Chandramohan, V.P., Raju, V.R.K., Meda, V., 2020b. A review on indirect Prasad, J., Akhilesh, P., Vijay, V.K., 2006a. Studies on the Drying Characteristics of
type solar dryers for agricultural crops – Dryer setup, its performance, energy storage Zingiber Officinale Under Open Sun and Solar Biomass (Hybrid) Drying. Int. J. Green
and important highlights. Appl. Energy. 258, 114005. Energy. 3 (1), 79–89.
Lipinski, B., Hanson, C., Lomax, J., Kitinoja, L., Waite, R., Searchinger, T., 2013. Prasad, J., Vijay, V.K., Tiwari, G.N., Sorayan, V.P.S., 2006b. Study on performance
Reducing food loss and Waste: Working paper, installment 2 of creating a sustainable evaluation of hybrid drier for turmeric (Curcuma longa L.) drying at village scale.
food future. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. J. Food Eng. 75, 497–502.
Lobell, D.B., Cassman, K.G., Field, C.B., 2009. Crop yield gaps: Their importance, Purohit, P., Kumar, A., Kandpal, T.C., 2006. Solar drying vs. open sun drying: A
magnitudes, and causes. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 34, 179–204. framework for financial evaluation. Sol. Energy 80, 1568–1579.
Löf, G.O., 1962. Recent investigations in the use of solar energy for the drying of solids. Rathore, N., Panwar, N., 2010. Experimental studies on hemi cylindrical walk-in type
Sol. Energy 6, 122–128. solar tunnel dryer for grape drying. Appl. Energy 87, 2764–2767.
Lucas, J., Ralaivao, M., Estevinho, B.N., Rocha, F., 2020. A new approach for the Ratlamwala, T.A.H., Dincer, I., Gadalla, M.A., 2013. Comparative Environmental Impact
microencapsulation of curcumin by a spray drying method, in order to value food and Sustainability Assessments of Hydrogen and Cooling Production Systems. In
products. Powder Technol. 362, 428–435. Causes, Impacts and Solutions to Global Warming. Springer, 389–408.
Madhlopa, A., Ngwalo, G., 2007. Solar dryer with thermal storage and biomass-backup Ritichie, H., 2019, Food production is responsible for one-quarter of the world’s
heater. Sol. Energy 81, 449–462. greenhouse gas emissions. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/food-gh
Majumder, S., Bala, B., Arshad, F.M., Haque, M., Hossain, M., 2016. Food security g-emissions# (accessed on 08 August 2020).
through increasing technical efficiency and reducing postharvest losses of rice Rockefeller Foundation, 2013. Waste and spoilage in the food chain. Decision
production systems in Bangladesh. Food Secur. 8, 361–374. intelligence document. Available on https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/app
Mendoza, J.R., Kok, C.R., Stratton, J., Bianchini, A., Hallen-Adams, H.E., 2017. /uploads/Waste-and-Spoilage-in-the-Food-Chain.pdf (accessed on 01 July, 2020).
Understanding the mycobiota of maize from the highlands of Guatemala, and Rodriguez, A., Bruno, E., Paola, C., Campañone, L., Mascheroni, H.R., 2019.
implications for maize quality and safety. Crop Prot. 101, 5–11. Experimental study of dehydration processes of raspberries (Rubus Idaeus) with
Mesterházy, K., Oláh, J., Popp, J., 2020. Losses in the Grain Supply Chain: Causes and microwave and solar drying, Food Sci. Technol. 39, 336–343.
Solutions. Sustainability 12 (6), 2342.

372
A. Ahmadi et al. Solar Energy 228 (2021) 349–373

Różyło, R., 2020. Recent trends in methods used to obtain natural food colorants by Tiris, C., Tiris, M., Dincer, I., 1996. Energy efficiency of a solar drying system. Int. J.
freeze-drying. Trends Food Sci Technol. 102, 39–50. Energy Res. 20 (9), 767–770.
Sacilik, K., Keskin, R., Elicin, A.K., 2006. 2006. Mathematical modelling of solar tunnel Tiwari, A., 2016. A Review on Solar Drying of Agricultural Produce. Journal of Food
drying of thin layer organic tomato. J. Food Eng. 73, 231–238. Processing & Technology 7.
Sagar, V.R., Kumarn, S., 2010. Recent advances in drying and dehydration of fruits and Tiwari, S., Tiwari, G.N., 2017. Energy and exergy analysis of a mixed-mode greenhouse-
vegetables: A review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 47, 15–26. type solar dryer, integrated with partially covered N-PVT air collector. Energy 128,
Sami, S., Etesami, N., Rahimi, A., 2011. Energy and exergy analysis of an indirect solar 183–195.
cabinet dryer based on mathematical modeling results. Energy 36, 2847–2855. Tiwari, S., Tiwari, G., 2016. Exergoeconomic analysis of photovoltaic-thermal (PVT)
Sapei, L., Tarigan, E., Sugiarto, D., Gianluca, D., 2019. Drying of celery leaves (Apium mixed mode greenhouse solar dryer. Energy 114, 155–164.
graveolens L.) using a PV/T solar dryer. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science Tripathy, P., Kumar, S., 2009. Modeling of heat transfer and energy analysis of potato
and Engineering. slices and cylinders during solar drying. Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (5–6), 884–891.
Saravanan, D., Wilson, V., 2015. Simulation of solar biomass hybrid dryer for drying Tunde-Akintunde, T., 2011. Mathematical modeling of sun and solar drying of chilli
cashew kernel. Advances in Applied Science Research 6 (8), 148–154. pepper. Renew. Energy 36, 2139–2145.
Sawicka, B., 2019. Post-harvest Losses of Agricultural Produce. In: Leal, Filho W., Tzivanidis, C., Bellos, E., Antonopoulos, K.A., 2016. Energetic and financial investigation
Azul, A., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P., Wall, T. (Eds.), Zero Hunger. Encyclopedia of the of a stand-alone solar-thermal Organic Rankine Cycle power plant. Energy Convers.
UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer. Manage. 126, 421–433.
Schiffmann, R.F., 2014. 12 Microwave and Dielectric Drying. Handbook of Industrial United Nations, 2015. World population Prospects: The 2015 revision, key findings and
Drying, pp. 283. advance tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP.241. Available online: http://esa.un.
Sethi, V., Arora, S., 2009. Improvement in greenhouse solar drying using inclined north org/unpd/wpp/publications/files/key_findings_wpp_2015.pdf (accessed on 01 July
wall reflection. Sol. Energy 83, 1472–1484. 2020).
Shanmugam, V., Natarajan, E., 2006. Experimental investigation of forced convection United Nations, 2019. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division.
and desiccant integrated solar dryer. Renew. Energy 31 (8), 1239–1251. World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights (ST/ESA/SER.A/423).
Sharma, A., Chen, C., Lan, N.V., 2009. Solar-energy drying systems: A review. Renew. Vijayan, S., Arjunan, T., Kumar, A., 2020. Exergo-environmental analysis of an indirect
Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 1185–1210. forced convection solar dryer for drying bitter gourd slices. Renew. Energy 146,
Sharma, V.K., Colangelo, A., Spagna, G., 1995. Experimental investigation of different 2210–2223.
solar dryers suitable for fruit and vegetable drying. Renew. Energy 6, 413–424. Vijayavenkataraman, S., Iniyan, S., Goic, R., 2012. A review of solar drying technologies.
Sharma, V., Colangelo, A., Spagna, G., 1993. Experimental performance of an indirect Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16, 2652–2670.
type solar fruit and vegetable dryer. Energy Convers. Manage. 34, 293–308. Wang, K., Wu, H., Wang, D., Wang, Y., Tong, Z., Lin, F., 2015. Experimental study on a
Sharma, V., Sharma, S., Ray, R., Garg, H., 1986. Design and performance studies of a coiled tube solar receiver under variable solar radiation condition. Sol. Energy 122,
solar dryer suitable for rural applications. Energy Convers. Manage. 26, 111–119. 1080–1090.
Simo-Tagne, M., Ndukwu, M.C., Zoulalian, A., Bennamoun, L., Kifani-Sahban, F., Yahya, M., 2013. Uji
Rogaume, Y., 2020. Numerical analysis and validation of a natural convection mix- kinerjaalatpengeringlorongberbantuanpompakaloruntukmengeringkanbijikakao.
mode solar dryer for drying red chilli under variable conditions. Renew. Energy 151, Journal of Mechanical Engineering (JTM) 3 (1).
659–673. Yahya, M., Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., 2016. Design and performance of solar-assisted
Singh, A., Sarkar, J., Sahoo, R.R., 2020. Experimental energy, exergy, economic and fluidized bed drying of paddy. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 12 (4), 420–426.
exergoeconomic analyses of batch-type solar-assisted heat pump dryer. Renew. Yahya, M., Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., 2017. Energy and exergy analyses of solar-assisted
Energy 156, 1107–1116. fluidized bed drying integrated with biomass furnace. Renew. Energy 105, 22–29.
Singh, S., Singh, P.P., Dhaliwal, S., 2004. Multi-shelf portable solar dryer. Renew. Energy Yahya, M., Sopian, K., Theeran, M., Othman, M., Alghoul, M., Ruslan, M.H., 2008.
29, 753–765. Experimental and theoretical thermal performance of double pass solar air heater
Sonntag, R.E., Borgnakke, C., Wylen, G.J. Van, Wyk, S. Van, 1998. Fundamentals of with porous media. In: Proceedings of the 7th WSEAS international conference on
thermodynamics, vol. 6. Wiley, New York. System science and simulation in engineering (ICOSSSE 08), pp. 335–340.
Sopian, K., Alghoul, M., Alfegi, E.M., Sulaiman, M., Musa, E., 2009. Evaluation of Yahya, M., Fahmi, H., Fudholi, A., Sopian, K., 2018. Performance and economic analyses
thermal efficiency of double-pass solar collector with porous–nonporous media. on solar-assisted heat pump fluidised bed dryer integrated with biomass furnace for
Renew. Energy 34, 640–645. rice drying. Sol. Energy 174, 1058–1067.
Sreekumar, A., Manikantan, P., Vijayakumar, K., 2008. Performance of indirect solar Yan, Z., Sousa-Gallagher, M.J., Oliveira, F.A., 2008. Shrinkage and porosity of banana,
cabinet dryer. Energy Convers. Manage. 49, 1388–1395. pineapple and mango slices during air-drying. J. Food Eng. 84, 430–440.
Sreekumar, A., 2010. Techno-economic analysis of a roof-integrated solar air heating Zhang, M., Tang, J., Mujumdar, A., Wang, S., 2006. Trends in microwave-related drying
system for drying fruit and vegetables. Energy Convers. Manage. 51 (11), of fruits and vegetables. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 17, 524–534.
2230–2238. Zohrabi, S., Aghbashlo, M., Seiiedlou, S.S., Scaar, H., Mellmann, J., 2020. Energy saving
Strumiłło, C., Jones, P.L., Zylla, R., 2014. Energy aspects in drying. Handbook of in a convective dryer by using novel real-time exergy-based control schemes
Industrial Drying. CRC Press, pp. 1–27. adjusting exhaust air recirculation. J. Clean. Prod., 257, 120394.
Téllez, M.C., Figueroa, I.P., Téllez, B.C., Vidaña, E.C.L., Ortiz, A.L., 2018. Solar drying of Zorya, S., Morgan, N., Diaz-Rios, L., Hodges, R., Bennett, B., Stathers, T., Mwebaze, P.,
Stevia (RebaudianaBertoni) leaves using direct and indirect technologies. Sol. Lamb, J., 2011. Missing Food: The Case of Postharvest Grain Losses in Sub-Saharan
Energy 159, 898–907. Africa. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World
Tiris, C., Ozbalta, N., Tiris, M., Dincer, I., 1995. Thermal performance of a new solar air Bank, Washington, DC, USA.
heater. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 22, 411–423.

373