Systematic Quantification of Waste Compositions: A Case Study for Waste of Electric and Electronic Equipment Plastics in the European Union

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

REVIEWER COMMENTS

for

Systematic Quantification of Waste Compositions: A case study for waste of electric and electronic equipment plastics in the European Union

 

Paper is under consideration for publication, however, in the present form there is a requirement for many improvements

 

 

a.        It is better to follow the template and spacing. It is found at the line 95 with wrong space.

 

b.       it seems that this manuscript is likely a research report instead of research article.

 

c.        Check thoroughly your English language; there are many syntax and grammatical errors in addition to several awkward sentences.

 

d.       Use present tense when describing something.

 

e.        A lot of detail about things in the abstract.

 

f.         The Abstract should contain answers to the following questions: What problem was studied and why is it important? What methods were used? What are the important results? What conclusions can be drawn from the results? What is the novelty of the work and where does it go beyond previous efforts in the literature? Please include specific and quantitative results in your Abstract, while ensuring that it is suitable for a broad audience.

 

g.       The paper structure is not well organized. There is no coordination between sections and subsection and a lot of repetitions. Also, there are short and fragmented sentences without coordinates. There is a need for literature improvement for recent years.

 

·         Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 52, 102218

·         Journal of Energy Storage 51, 104448

·         International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 188, 122591

·         Energy 246, 123441

Author Response

It is better to follow the template and spacing. It is found at the line 95 with wrong space.

We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We adhered strictly to the journal's LaTeX guidelines. It is our understanding that the journal will compile the .tex file to fit their customary format.

it seems that this manuscript is likely a research report instead of research article.

We consider the methodology, empirical and theoretical results and conclusions to be of considerable scientific merit.

Check thoroughly your English language; there are many syntax and grammatical errors in addition to several awkward sentences (c). Use present tense when describing something (d).

We thank the reviewer for this comment and have carefully inspected the paper and improved the language use.

 

The Abstract should contain answers to the following questions: What problem was studied and why is it important? What methods were used? What are the important results? What conclusions can be drawn from the results? What is the novelty of the work and where does it go beyond previous efforts in the literature? Please include specific and quantitative results in your Abstract, while ensuring that it is suitable for a broad audience (e + f).

We have rewritten the article to make the answers to these questions more concrete. This includes stressing the problem clearly, mentioning methods and results explicitly and indicating conclusions and the novelty of the work.

 

The paper structure is not well organized. There is no coordination between sections and subsection and a lot of repetitions. Also, there are short and fragmented sentences without coordinates. 

We thank the author for pointing this out and recognize the structural shortcomings. We have therefore rewritten and/or reorganized sections of the paper (most notable in Sections 1 and 2). We also removed repetitive statements.

 

There is a need for literature improvement for recent years.

• Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 52, 102218
• Journal of Energy Storage 51, 104448
• International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 188, 122591
• Energy 246, 123441

We again thank the reviewer for this assessment. We have included more recent references. However, we considered the suggested articles outside of the scope of our presented work.

Reviewer 2 Report

It is a well-written paper and novel. 

Author Response

It is a well-written paper and novel. 

We thank the reviewer for this assessment.

Reviewer 3 Report

Please add updated the references and minor spell and typo error.

Author Response

Please add updated the references and minor spell and typo error.

We thank the reviewer for evaluating the paper. We have included more recent references and improved the language use.

Reviewer 4 Report

Suggestions:

1. Table 1 is not necessary, the content should be included in the text
2. Since the journal has no limitation on the number of figures or tables, I think supplementary information should be included in the text and also discussed properly

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for evaluating the paper.

Table 1 is not necessary, the content should be included in the text

We thank the reviewer for pointing this out and have indeed included the content in text-form.

Since the journal has no limitation on the number of figures or tables, I think supplementary information should be included in the text and also discussed properly

We again thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We have included and briefly discussed the tables in Section 5.2.

 

Reviewer 5 Report

The manuscript "Systematic Quantification of Waste Compositions: A case study for waste of electric and electronic equipment plastics in the European Union" represents a significant contribution in the field of adequate management of waste streams, specifically more precisely plastic waste from electrical and electronic equipment, both from the point of view of recyclers and from the point of view of waste management policy makers.

The proposed method, which includes the integration of the results of previous studies with empirical experiments, provides a systematic quantitative insight into the amount and characteristics of plastics in WEEE collected in the European Union, which is a support for separate collection and treatment of specific waste streams in order to recycle plastic in the most technically and economically viable way.

The special significance of the proposed method is reflected in the possibility of its application to other types of waste streams.

 

With this in mind, the manuscript "Systematic Quantification of Waste Compositions: A case study for waste of electric and electronic equipment plastics in the European Union" by authors Alexander Boudewijn, Jef R. Peeters, Dirk Cattrysse, Wim Dewulf, Luca Campadello, Alessia Accili, and Joost R. Duflou is well written.

 

Author Response

The manuscript "Systematic Quantification of Waste Compositions: A case study for waste of electric and electronic equipment plastics in the European Union" represents a significant contribution in the field of adequate management of waste streams, specifically more precisely plastic waste from electrical and electronic equipment, both from the point of view of recyclers and from the point of view of waste management policy makers.

The proposed method, which includes the integration of the results of previous studies with empirical experiments, provides a systematic quantitative insight into the amount and characteristics of plastics in WEEE collected in the European Union, which is a support for separate collection and treatment of specific waste streams in order to recycle plastic in the most technically and economically viable way.

The special significance of the proposed method is reflected in the possibility of its application to other types of waste streams.

With this in mind, the manuscript "Systematic Quantification of Waste Compositions: A case study for waste of electric and electronic equipment plastics in the European Union" by authors Alexander Boudewijn, Jef R. Peeters, Dirk Cattrysse, Wim Dewulf, Luca Campadello, Alessia Accili, and Joost R. Duflou is well written.

We thank the reviewer for this evaluation.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accepted.