A Conceptual Framework to Establish and Operate a Global Logistics Energy Hub

#

Reviewer’s Comments and Suggestions

Responses and Modifications

1.

The main problem is the choice of counties and the research sources. Please explain why you chose these countries; there is no information about other continents like the Americas, so the title is incompatible. So you have to explain why this issue the region. It is the WoS and Scopus research information, but it is just that kind of research, nothing more? You must explain this and change the title. There are no organizations that checked want about EU and American Governmental organizations? Turkey, Greece and Kazakhstan fit correctly; the rest not. So please explain it or change the title use it for these countries.

-        Section 3.1 has been updated, where the title of the section was modified and the examples also were removed since they were for guidance only and did not necessarily mean that these countries are the only players in the global energy supply chain.

-        Please check Section 3.1 on page 16 from lines 218 to 254.

2.

It is also hard to understand the exclusion reasons - page 4.

-        A new paragraph has been added that includes more explanations regarding the exclusion reasons. Also, some modifications in Table 1 were done to make it more understandable.

-        Please check page 4 from lines 159 to 172 in including the table.

#

Reviewer’s Comments and Suggestions

Responses and Modifications

1.

The research background should be rewritten to avoid simplify citing reference. The inherence logicality and history of previous studies should be clearly presented.

-        The introduction or background section was revised and updated to be more clear and meaningful, where new recent research especially in the years 2019 to 2021 has been cited in the field of the study in order to reflect and present the contribution of the paper.

-        Please check the introduction section from lines 80 to 102 on pages 2 and 3.

2.

The literature reviewed in the Introduction part should be updated. The papers published in last three years should be focused to show the recent research progress.

3.

The quantitative results are suggested especially in conclusions.

-        More quantitative analysis and results have been added and explained in the Results and Discussion section on pages 15, 16 and 17 (please check lines from 198 to 213, and from lines 242 to 256 including the figures).

-        In addition to making some modifications and provide more results in the Conclusions section, please check lines from 558 to 590 on pages 26 and 27.

4.

English language and style.

-        The English language has been revised and improved by a language specialist.

#

Reviewer’s Comments and Suggestions

Responses and Modifications

a)

The abstract can be rewritten to be more meaningful. The authors should add more details about their final results in the abstract. The abstract should clarify what is exactly proposed (the technical contribution) and how the proposed approach is validated.

-        The authors revised and rewrite the abstract again to be more meaningful, where more details about the methodology and results were included. Moreover, the theoretical and practical contributions of the paper were clearly presented.

-        Please check the abstract part on page 1 from lines 9 to 23.

b)

The authors should consider more recent research done in the field of their study (especially in the years 2019 and 2021 onwards).

-        More recent papers published in the last three years in the field of the study have been cited in the introduction section in order to show the current research progress and present the contribution of the paper.

-        Please check the introduction section from lines 85 to 94 on page 2.

c)

Apply VOSviewer software to present the interconnection of different publications and global results.

-        VOSviewer software has been used in another paper prior to this paper, as this paper is a part of a series of research that complements each other, and therefore each paper uses a systematic review according to its needs.

d)

Literature review techniques have to be strengthened by including the issues in the current system and how the author proposes to overcome the same.

-        The introduction section has been rewritten to illustrate the existing research gap in this area to be more clear and show the originality and contribution of this research.

-        Please check the introduction section from lines 80 to 102 on pages 2 and 3.

e)

I suggest that you add some more results.

-        More quantitative analysis and results have been added and explained in the Results and Discussion section on pages 15, 16 and 17 (please check lines from 198 to 213, and from lines 242 to 256 including the figures).

-        In addition to making some modifications and provide more results in the Conclusions section, please check lines from 558 to 590 on pages 26 and 27.

f)

English language and style.

-        The English language has been revised and improved by a language specialist.

#

Reviewer’s Comments and Suggestions

Responses and Modifications

1.

In fact, there are some aspects to consider. In other words, the robustness of the actual energy hub grid layout, the physical connection of the energy hub composition, and the optimization for dynamic planning of the energy hub, etc.

-        This paper tackled the framework from the strategic perspective while further research can build upon it to disaggregate the technical aspects. This point was highlighted in the Conclusions part.

-        Please check the Conclusions section from lines 584 to 590 on page 27.

2.

The problem statement presented in this paper is not clear. Therefore, it is not clear what the contribution of this paper is. The authors should find and present the noble contribution that only this paper can present.

-        The problem statement in the introduction section was revised and updated to be more clear and meaningful, where more recent papers published in the last three years in the field of the study have been cited in order to reflect and present the contribution of the paper.

-        Please check the introduction section from lines 80 to 102 on pages 2 and 3.

3.

English language and style.

-        The English language has been revised and improved by a language specialist.