Importance of Urban Green at Reduction of Particulate Matters in Sihwa Industrial Complex, Korea
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Review of the Article - Importance of Urban Green in Reduction of Particulate Matters against the Pollutants of Sihwa Industrial Complex, Korea.
Line 2. I do not understand clearly the title. Particulate Matter against the Pollutants ?
Line 11. In The abstract and the introduction the authors focused on the COVID-19. My question is why? The time period of this experiment is from April to October 2019. The first sick person in Korea was found in January 2020. Correct me if Im mistaken. If not writing about Covid 19 on the beginning is not appropriate.
Line 17. It should be PM10 and PM2.5
Line 26. The same comment about Covid-19.
Line 44. Consider to add some new info about changes in deposition because of weather. From last years a lot of measurement/experiments was made. Eg. Popek et al. 2019. How Much Does Weather Matter? Effects of Rain and Wind on PM Accumulation ….
Line 65. Please add the author names to the Latin species names.
Line 66. Consider three instead 3. Till 10 we are mostly using words not numbers.
Line 91. Is was?
Line 91. Why the authors have chosen this period of time. Why not whole year? Is the special time in this part of the word, country, city?
Line 95. Some mistake in the end – (1)
Line 117. Why in April the amount of PM was so low comparing to the May. If something happened?
Figure 2a – The authors can not show the PM10 and PM2.5 as it was shown on the figure 2a. The PM10 are all PMs smaller than 10µm, so also PM2.5. The authors can not sum them on one Figure.
Table 1. This table is hard to read. Probably it would be better to focus on one p.
Conclusions – The authors in this work focuses mainly on the weather. In my opinion the importance of Urban Green it is described very collaterally. In my opinion the part of Urban Green should be improved mostly in the discussion part.
Author Response
Many thanks for your precious comments, please see the attached files. We prepared and developed the ms according to your each comment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript deals with an important topic, but it needs to be improved and much more focused.
I don't get the mention of Covid-19 since it has nothing to do with the work done, so it must be eliminated from the abstract and the introduction.
There are many English mistakes and the manuscript must be checked by an English peer.
In the M&M there are some major flaws:
1) why you decided to report the density per 400 instead of 100 or 1000?
There is no indication at which height, which distance from the main emission source in the IC or from the green barrier where placed the measuring devices.
I don't get from the text the connection between rush hours and PM concentrations since the main source is IC and not the traffic. The conclusions are then mainly based on this
However the main problem to me is that the Authors don't have a control thesis, meaning that they did not measured the different PM concentrations without the UG (that is not actually a real UG but just a green barrier) so, even intuitive, is not told that the reduction is only due to the UG and the spatial distance has a limited importance. Therefore, the conclusion are a bit speculative and not supported by actual data
Author Response
Many thanks for your comments, here we attached our response on your each comment, and we changed and developed ms based on your precious comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I am accepting the changes and this form of manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Author,
the paper is good enough and, based on my knowledge, it can be published in sustainability after some minor editing for the English form
