Next Article in Journal
The Impact Mechanism of Environmental Information Disclosure on Corporate Sustainability Performance—Micro-Evidence from China
Next Article in Special Issue
Glycerol-Based Deep Eutectic Solvents for Simultaneous Organosolv Treatment/Extraction: High-Performance Recovery of Antioxidant Polyphenols from Onion Solid Wastes
Previous Article in Journal
Urban Green Space Pattern in Core Cities of the Greater Bay Area Based on Morphological Spatial Pattern Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Μeat Quality Traits as Affected by the Dietary Inclusion of Food Waste in Finishing Pigs
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Autonomous Home Composting Units for Urban Areas in Greece: The Case Study of the Municipality of Rhodes

Sustainability 2022, 14(19), 12362; https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912362
by Angeliki Maragkaki 1,*, Christos Gamvroudis 2, Christina Lountou 2, Pothitos Stamatiadis 2, Ioannis Sampathianakis 1, Akrivi Papadaki 1 and Thrassyvoulos Manios 1
Sustainability 2022, 14(19), 12362; https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912362
Submission received: 9 September 2022 / Revised: 22 September 2022 / Accepted: 26 September 2022 / Published: 28 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue RETASTE: Rethink Food Waste)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this manuscript, the authors present biowaste management by an integrated approach through source separation and urban composting in an Autonomous Composting Unit (ACU). The content is interesting and in line with the theme of the journal. In general, the manuscript is well-written but needs to address some minor issues before it may be accepted. Please find my comments below:

1. Introduction is well-written. However, the literature survey could be a bit more extensive. Also, there are so many small paragraphs that could be rearranged and compressed to better present the information.

2. It is important to analyze the obtained data statistically. However, the authors did not provide any information on this.

3. L 263-265: How were E. coli and Salmonella counts determined?

4. The authors should further take care of results and discussion by comparing key results with those of other contemporary management technologies.

5. Section 3.3: How was economic analysis performed?

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study presented the pilot experience of an integrated biowaste management system that supports source separation and urban composting in an autonomous composting unit (ACU). The results are interesting and in line with the study. The authors have excellent knowledge of the topic. However, some minor revisions are necessary before accepting the article for publication.

 

(1)   I think more discussion should be made or information provided on the influence of pH on the quality of the feedstock and produced compost.

(2)   Overall, the results are only presented and not well compared with the findings of other researchers. I think the discussion section can be improved.

 

(3)   There are some typo errors in the manuscript, the authors should check carefully and correct all the errors to meet the journal standard.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop