Issues and Potential Solutions to the Clean Heating Project in Rural Gansu

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article “Issues and potential solutions to the clean heating project in rural Gansu” makes an exhaustive analysis of the problems related to clean heating in the rural region of Gansu, China. Possible solutions are also presented, with their advantages and disadvantages.

Although the article is interesting and topical nowadays, it is not clear to me:

- how the information in table 1 was processed.

- how the estimated results from Table 7 were obtained.

I have these questions because the article does not present any mathematical model or equations.

I am convinced that this additional information will not create difficulties for the authors, and I am also convinced that the article will gain in clarity.

Author Response

The authors appreciate the reviewer’s positive comments and suggestions. As the present paper is aimed to clarify issues and potential solutions to the clean heating project in rural Gansu, we cite the national statistic data rather than calculate by ourselves. Thus, we do not list any mathematical model or equations in this article. In terms of Table 1 to 8, the raw data have been noted or emphasised in the manuscript no exception.

Reviewer 2 Report

See attached,

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The authors appreciate your positive comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

The article focuses on the issue of the rural clean heating project in the providence of Gansu and possible modifications to improve it. The author did an outstanding job introducing the problem through the abstract and introduction section with clear distinct and clear labeling of each section. The literature review seems outdated and needs to be expanded to include recent publications such as (doi.org/10.1002/er.5924, doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.227821, doi.org/10.1149/06127.0043ecst, doi.org/10.1149/07711.0257ecst, doi.org/10.1149%2F08901.0101ecst, and doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114648, doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2019.100921, doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.06.066). Here are some suggestions:

1) Although the figures and tables itself are quite good, it would be nice to have the figures and tables to be near the point where it is first referenced, maybe at the end of its paragraph. Especially in a long paper, having the reader scroll to the very bottom to see the figure that was mentioned in the early section of the paper could disrupt the flow of reading for them.

2) In section 2, it would be good if, alongside the challenges of the area, the author would also mention how the rural clean heating project is not adequate to address those issues. For example, the author could point out if the project has conflicting policies that worsen that particular issue, has not done enough to address it, or has neglected it all together. The author did attempt to summarize the problem with the policies in section 2.1 point 5, but some of its ideas were too generic, like (3) or (5).

3) In the policy implications section, there are some points that should be evaluated more. For example, the line “Refine the implementation plan and encourage peasant farmers to participate actively”, or “We should make clear economic incentive policies and ensure subsidy security.” is clearly have not been analyzed in-depth. I would like to see how it could be evaluated a bit more, as well as the effect of said solution could affect other policies and other factors.

4) Some of the references are suffering from the effect of the justify alignment, making it has unusably large gaps between words.

Author Response

The authors appreciate your suggestions. Firstly, we have renewed the references in the section of Introduction. Given the national statistic data is by 2020, the authors have employed the latest data in this article.

 

1) The authors have adjusted the locations of all the figures and tables, which is now near the point where it is first referenced as the reviewer suggested.

 

2) Given the present paper is aimed to clarify issues and potential solutions to the clean heating project in rural Gansu, the authors focus on the feasibility and sustainability of a series of technology portfolio, and glance the corresponding policies and their sustainability. In order to make the report clear, the authors have supplemented some explanations in Lines 149-151, Page 5; and we have revised some statements in the Section 2.1 (Lines 185-189, Page 6), and in the Section 6.2 (Lines 788-791, Lines 801-803, Page 21).

 

3) In the Section 6.2, the authors have added some explanations after some individuals such as Lines 788-791, and Lines 801-803, Page 21. Given the limitations of the authors’ knowledge about policies, we just supplement some explanations from the technical angle rather than add more information of policies making or interacting.

 

4) The authors have corrected the format of the Section References.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Good job.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.