Next Article in Journal
Quantification of Soil Deep Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Dynamics according to Land Use and Land Cover in the Basement Zone of Burkina Faso in West Africa
Next Article in Special Issue
Strategies to Strengthen Integrated Solid Waste Management in Small Municipalities
Previous Article in Journal
Moisture-Related Risks in Wood-Based Retrofit Solutions in a Mediterranean Climate: Design Recommendations
Previous Article in Special Issue
Municipal Solid Waste Management Policies, Practices, and Challenges in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Finite Difference Modeling of the Temperature Profile during the Biodrying of Organic Solid Waste

Sustainability 2022, 14(22), 14705; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214705
by Carlos Orozco-Álvarez 1, Javier Díaz-Megchún 1, Anselmo Osorio-Mirón 2, Sergio García-Salas 1, Enrique Hernández-Sánchez 1, Gisela Palma-Orozco 1 and Fabián Robles-Martínez 1,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Sustainability 2022, 14(22), 14705; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214705
Submission received: 20 September 2022 / Revised: 14 October 2022 / Accepted: 1 November 2022 / Published: 8 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Solid Waste Management: An International Outlook)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

9: Add information in the Abstract for an introduction to the topic.

9: What is the purpose of the first paragraph in Abstract?

18: "50 ° C" - Remove spaces. Please apply throughout the work.

27: I suggest to add more keywords.

86: I suggest to not include Figures in the Introduction.

93: At the end of the Introduction, please indicate the aim of the article.

94: "2. Materials and Methods ”- The chapter is not prepared properly.

Please divide it into smaller elements and describe it precisely.

Please provide more information about organic solid waste and biodrying.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank for the opportunity to improve the quality of the article. Reviewer #1 presented several important recommendations and suggestions that helped to remove errors and improve the level of the article.

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments:

  1. Add information in the Abstract for an introduction to the topic

Information was added in the Abstract as an introduction to the topic (see text colored in yellow)

  1. What is the purpose of the first paragraph in Abstract?

The Abstract was changed to a single paragraph, as indicated in the authors' guide

  1.  "50 ° C" - Remove spaces. Please apply throughout the work

Spaces were removed as requested

  1. I suggest to add more keywords

In the keywords we added "three-dimensional modeling"

  1. I suggest to not include Figures in the Introduction

Figures 1 and 2 were changed to Materials and Methods

  1. At the end of the Introduction, please indicate the aim of the article

Now the aim of the article is presented at the end of Introduction.

  1. " Materials and Methods ”- The chapter is not prepared properly. Please divide it into smaller elements and describe it precisely

Materials and Methods was divided into smaller elements.

  1. Please provide more information about organic solid waste and biodrying.

Information about organic solid waste and biodrying was provided in the first paragraph of Introduction

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. cite the figure and tables which are related to another work

2. make graphs and plots a little wider so they can be readable such as fig 1, 2, 3 and 4, and table 1

3. very lengthy literature review, be focused on the research scope

4. don't  mix results and literature review together 

5. appendix should be at the end of the manuscript or after the reference section 

6. conclusion of the research results is missing 

7. the latest of 2019 paper cited, should find research and development on this topic from 2020 to 2022 and cite them in this manuscript. 

 

Author Response

The authors would like to thank for the opportunity to improve the quality of the article. Reviewer #2 presented several important recommendations and suggestions that helped to remove errors and improve the level of this article.

  1. Cite the figure and tables which are related to another work

Citations were incorporated in Figures 1 and 2

  1. Make graphs and plots a little wider so they can be readable such as fig 1, 2, 3 and 4, and table 1

Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4, and table 1 were made wider

  1. Very lengthy literature review, be focused on the research scope

A more extensive literature review was conducted in order to focus the research scope. Two fragments have been added to the text of the introduction, which are colored in yellow

  1. Don't mix results and literature review together

The authors believe that presenting the results and at the same time discussing and comparing them with those reported by other researchers makes the analysis more complete. The authors expect that Reviewer #2 can accept this point of view.

  1. . Appendix should be at the end of the manuscript or after the reference section

Appendix was changed, now is at the end of the manuscript

  1. Conclusion of the research results is missing

Conclusion was modified, information about microbial activity was added (colored text).

  1. The latest of 2019 paper cited, should find research and development on this topic from 2020 to 2022 and cite them in this manuscript

The literature search was expanded and now authors cite some papers published in 2021 and 2022

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

No additional comments

Reviewer 2 Report

OK IMPROVED AND INCORPORATED COMMENTS 

Back to TopTop