Cold Chain Energy Analysis for Sustainable Food and Beverage Supply

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

I wouldn't recommend this manuscript for publication since there's no point to point response to my previous comments. There's not much improvement in the current version compared to the previous one.

Author Response

First, we would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort and the time devoted to the review of our manuscript. Comments (reported hereafter in italic), corrections and insights have been constructive and helpful in improving our work. We respond to these comments below. We explain how and were in the paper we make these changes to address the comments. We have highlighted the changes and modifications in YELLOW. We have improved the structure, write-up, and the flow of the paper.

I wouldn't recommend this manuscript for publication since there's no point to point response to my previous comments. There's not much improvement in the current version compared to the previous one.

 

Authors answer: The model developed allows also to evaluate the impact that operational practices can have on the improvement of the cold chain sustainability in terms of specific energy consumption. Hence, the main novelties introduced by this study are:

- Multi stages perspective: a multidisciplinary and integrated view has been considered. For instance, inventory levels have been modelled for each stage of the cold chain since they affect each other and impact on the specific energy consumption.

- Methodology for the assessment of cold chain energy performance: a practical approach is proposed for the evaluation of the cold chain energy performance for supporting decision makers. Specifically, the approach described has also been also used for the development of benchmarking dataset for food and beverage cold chains.

- Methodology for the prioritization of energy efficiency measures: the potential of energy efficiency measures (especially, of the maintenance and operational ones) in reducing the overall specific energy consumption of the cold chain depends on the stage at which they are implemented. The most benefits are obtained if measures are implemented at stages with the poorest energy performance.

- Real case study for the dairy sector: one of the main literature gaps is the absence of practical case studies providing real managerial insights.

 

 

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Congratulation to the authors they have made improvment in the manuscript. this mauscript may be accepted after editors approval.

Author Response

First, we would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort and the time devoted to the review of our manuscript. Comments (reported hereafter in italic), corrections and insights have been constructive and helpful in improving our work. We respond to these comments below. We explain how and were in the paper we make these changes to address the comments. We have highlighted the changes and modifications in YELLOW. We have improved the structure, write-up, and the flow of the paper

Congratulation to the authors they have made improvement in the manuscript. this manuscript may be accepted after editors approval.

Authors answer: Thank you for the positive comment.

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

1. Fig 3, please check if the energy source of transportation is gasoil or diesel. This affects the rate of power consumption per kg

2. Fig 4. how to determine the quality losses, please explain the criteria in more detail

3. Fig 4 and 5 should be combined, like did in Fig 6

4. Line 370-371, please indicate which seasons were selected in this study. the seasons must be indicated as it is critical affect the temperature, a  main criteria to cause the food spoil in this work

5. Conclusion , this study only conducted on the milk and cheese product, so it is not much to represent the cold chain. So please reconsider the tile

6.  Conclusion. Authors should add the cost analysis of this work. For example #2, the energy carrier is electricity for 71% and transportation 29%, however if the price/unit is considered the cost may be inverted proportion becuase diesel is more expensive than electricity

 

Author Response

First, we would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort and the time devoted to the review of our manuscript. Comments (reported hereafter in italic), corrections and insights have been constructive and helpful in improving our work. We respond to these comments below. We explain how and were in the paper we make these changes to address the comments. We have highlighted the changes and modifications in YELLOW. We have improved the structure, write-up, and the flow of the paper.

1. Fig 3, please check if the energy source of transportation is gasoil or diesel. This affects the rate of power consumption per kg

Authors answer: The energy source of transportation activities is diesel. The manuscript has been revised in orther to clarify this aspect.

 

2. Fig 4. how to determine the quality losses, please explain the criteria in more detail

Authors answer: The quality losses are a function of the temperature and the storage time at each stage of the cold chain and are evaluated though the equations defined in section 2.4. This has been clarified also in proximity of figure 4.

 

3. Fig 4 and 5 should be combined, like did in Fig 6

Authors answer: The figures have been kept separately since they appears in this way in the tool developed under the H-2020 project ICCEE, which can be used by the stakeholders. While sequent figures have been developed specifically for the case study presented.

 

4. Line 370-371, please indicate which seasons were selected in this study. the seasons must be indicated as it is critical affect the temperature, a main criteria to cause the food spoil in this work

Authors answer: For the ambient temperature, the average value in the hottest season has been considered, since it represents the most critical scenario for refrigeration requirements. This assumption has been added also in the manuscript.

 

5. Conclusion , this study only conducted on the milk and cheese product, so it is not much to represent the cold chain. So please reconsider the tile

Authors answer: The title is more general since the methodology can be applied to all the cold chains of the food and beverage industry. The study conducted on the milk and cheese product is a specific case study used also to better show the features of the proposed methodology.

 

6. Conclusion. Authors should add the cost analysis of this work. For example #2, the energy carrier is electricity for 71% and transportation 29%, however if the price/unit is considered the cost may be inverted proportion becuase diesel is more expensive than electricity

Authors answer: In the conclusion, the relevance of the cost analysis has been proposed as a future development of the current study. Specifically, it has been underlined that “[...] the economic performance which represents a relevant aspect in the decision-making process of industrial stakeholders. In fact, different energy carriers have different costs which can impact on the prioritization of the energy efficiency measures at the different stages of the cold chain”

Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)

The authors studied the energy efficiency in the cold chain of perishable-foods industry. They considered the trade off between keeping the food degradation to a minimum while still being energy efficient. Based on their dairy cold chain case study the authors offer several managerial insights for optimizing cold chains in the future.

The paper is logically organized and the cited references seem relevant. The writing style is mostly clear, except for the Introduction, where there are extremely long sentences and nearly no paragraphs which make the Introduction really hard to read. Please reorganize the text to make Introduction more appealing to the reader.

 

There are some other minor issues to be addressed:

- There are several yellow highlighted sections in the manuscript, the version I received for peer-review. This is very distracting and should be removed before submitting the final version.

- page 5, lines 196 and 200: both times the units are written as (kg/m3). Number 3 should be in superscript to correctly denote cubic meters.

- Figure 2: on each x-axis the Time unit is "year". But this makes the values on the x-scale illogically small (how much is 0,002 years?). It would make more sense to use "days" instead of "year" on this axis. The same goes for all 4 graphs.

- Figure 4: It would be helpful to put into the figure caption the explanation of "quality losses". With what do you define quality loss? A short sentence, or a reference to a equation or previous definition would be helpful.

- Figures 4 and 5: In both figures the name of the quantity on the y-scale is missing. Now just the units are written (% in Figure 4 and h in Figure 5). "Quality losses" and "Storage time" should be added onto the graphs, not just written in the figure cation.

- Figures 6 and 7: In both graphs the unit for temperature is missing in the x-axis. Is it Kelvin or °C? Please add!

- Reference no. 1: this reference does not seem formatted like all the other cited references. Please check it.

 

My general opinion is that the paper presents an interesting contribution to the optimization of the food supply chain.

Author Response

First, we would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort and the time devoted to the review of our manuscript. Comments (reported hereafter in italic), corrections and insights have been constructive and helpful in improving our work. We respond to these comments below. We explain how and were in the paper we make these changes to address the comments. We have highlighted the changes and modifications in YELLOW. We have improved the structure, write-up, and the flow of the paper

The authors studied the energy efficiency in the cold chain of perishable-foods industry. They considered the trade off between keeping the food degradation to a minimum while still being energy efficient. Based on their dairy cold chain case study the authors offer several managerial insights for optimizing cold chains in the future.

The paper is logically organized and the cited references seem relevant. The writing style is mostly clear, except for the Introduction, where there are extremely long sentences and nearly no paragraphs which make the Introduction really hard to read. Please reorganize the text to make Introduction more appealing to the reader.

Authors answer: Sentences have been reduced and paragraphs introduced in order to make the introduction more readable.

 

There are some other minor issues to be addressed:

- There are several yellow highlighted sections in the manuscript, the version I received for peer-review. This is very distracting and should be removed before submitting the final version.

Authors answer: The text has been highlighted in yellow only to show the changes made respect a previous version.

 

- page 5, lines 196 and 200: both times the units are written as (kg/m3). Number 3 should be in superscript to correctly denote cubic meters.

Authors answer: The unit has been corrected.

 

- Figure 2: on each x-axis the Time unit is "year". But this makes the values on the x-scale illogically small (how much is 0,002 years?). It would make more sense to use "days" instead of "year" on this axis. The same goes for all 4 graphs.

Authors answer: Figure 2 is only illustrative for showing the behavior of the optimal inventory level at the different warehouses. We removed the values since it can distract the focus on the trend, and it is not significative for the sequent case study.

 

- Figure 4: It would be helpful to put into the figure caption the explanation of "quality losses". With what do you define quality loss? A short sentence, or a reference to a equation or previous definition would be helpful.

Authors answer: The quality losses are a function of the temperature and the storage time at each stage of the cold chain and are evaluated though the equations defined in section 2.4. This has been clarified also in the caption of figure 4.

 

- Figures 4 and 5: In both figures the name of the quantity on the y-scale is missing. Now just the units are written (% in Figure 4 and h in Figure 5). "Quality losses" and "Storage time" should be added onto the graphs, not just written in the figure cation.

Authors answer: The name of the y-scale has been added for both the figures.

 

- Figures 6 and 7: In both graphs the unit for temperature is missing in the x-axis. Is it Kelvin or °C? Please add!

Authors answer: The unit of measure for the x-axis has been added for both the figures.

 

- Reference no. 1: this reference does not seem formatted like all the other cited references. Please check it.

Authors answer: The format of the reference has been revised.

 

My general opinion is that the paper presents an interesting contribution to the optimization of the food supply chain.

Authors answer: Thank you for the positive comment.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

I'm satisfied with the authors' response.

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.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

this study proposes a quantitative approach to the cold chain in the food and beverage sector. 

the topic of the paper is the need of the hour. 

some of my comments that may improve the quality of the article:

1) please add some more lines to describe the lacuna in the literature that is your prime objective of this study.

2) please do not mix your notation part in the main text please separate it out.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript proposes a mathematical model to study and optimize the energy and food/beverage quality in a cold chain. The holistic consideration is approached in the whole cold chain to achieve the global optimum. The energy consumed and the food quality loss are considered holistically at the three actors: producer, distribution center and retailer. The specific energy consumption (SEC) is adjusted to include both the energy and food quality loss during the storage and transport activities. A dairy cold chain case is studied with the parameters from European companies. And some managerial insights are proposed to reduce the adjusted SEC. Overall, the quality of the manuscript is good and within the scope of the journal sustainability.

1.     In the manuscript, the cold chain can be optimized according to the adjusted SEC. I suggest the authors to evaluate the capital gain and check whether using capital gain as the optimization target will reach the same optimization point as using the adjusted SEC. The capital gain will largely affect the managerial decision.

2.     The authors also mention that the real case is more complicated since there are a lot of limitations such as limited display area of the retailer. Besides the limitations mentioned in the manuscript, I suggest authors to evaluate the stability of the food supply with some fluctuations of the consumer demand which can affect the optimization strategy.

3.     The figure numbers need to be double checked since there are two Figure 2.

4.     For the first Figure 2, the data needs to be presented in more distinguishable line colors/line styles.

5.     For the second Figure 2, the horizontal axis blocks the data notations.

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is relatively confusingly written, relatively difficult to follow. I do not see added value compared to previously published articles, there is a lack of novelty.

The authors deal with the issue of cold-chain quite extensively, as evidenced by their 9 out of a total of 20 publications. I find this self-citation very problematic, in such numbers.

Chapter 2.2 has no meaning, just a list of variables.

On page 9, the units are not listed correctly.

Results are not clearly described.

What's the main purpose of this article? 

What is the scientific hypothesis to which the article should find an answer?

Where are the differences from previously published articles?

Where is the novelty?