Please address remaining suggestions by Reviewer 1. In addition, here my remaining comments after reading the final version of your manuscript:

EDITORIAL REVIEW:

L343: the 4 points in figure 5 fall on a straight line. I am curious why you elect to complicate the fit by using a logarithmic function? If you insist on using logarithmic fit you need to provide a theoretical justification for it. If there is no theoretical reason, and the fit is purely empirical, using the simplest possible function is better.

Table 1: Some digits can be cut from numbers without loss of information. For example, 2.50 +/- 3.064 can be replaced by 2.50 ± 3.06 as there is no reason to specify error in the digit that is not even listed. Same for 1.25 +/- 0.074, 1.51 +/- 0.389, etc.
As I mentioned in the initial review, your EF error for rape straw is unphysically small leading to unnecessarily precise EFs reported here. I am pretty sure that using more conservative measurements uncertainties would increase the reported error, perhaps from 0.002 to more than 0.01 (allowing you to cut one significant digit out). Are you comfortable reporting an emission factor with 4 significant digits when the rest of them have 2-3?

L118: comment: use of alcohol presumably makes MCE higher than it would have been without it. Should it be mentioned?

L206: This is an important practical recommendation from your study, and if this is not widely known it may be worth inserting a sentence about the benefits of biomass briquetting in the abstract.


TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS:

L11: geomean -> geometric mean (also make this change in other places in the text such as Table 1)

L92: Eleven biomass fuels were tested: they were classified into three groups, i.e. crop -> Eleven biomass fuels tested in this work were classified into three groups: crop

L111: 93.86 ± 5.93% -> 93.9 ± 5.9%,


L141: (e.g. Acros -> (Acros

L154: not fully perfect -> not perfect

L221: aids to compare -> compares

L274: are collated and arranged in a scatter plot (Figure 2) -> are collated and arranged in a scatter plot in Figure 2

L327: logarithmical -> linear