Analysis on Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction Efficiency and Influencing Factors for Ports around Bohai in China under the Low Carbon Target
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors
1) if authors citing article then it must appear XXXX et al.
2) In the reference section remove et al. and write full author names
3) Eq.1 is authors derived or taken from other studies. If taken from other studies need to cite
4) line 176 r1 and r2 must be suffix
5) font must be same as through out article
6) How carbon emission calculated in results is still questionable
7) line 291 not understable
8) Fig.2. Y-axis merging with figures
9) Equation numbers should be recited
10) conclusions should be re-write
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This study analyzed the energy conservation and emission reduction efficiency and influencing factors of China's Bohai Rim ports. The structure of the paper is reasonable, the analysis method is selected properly and applied accurately, and the conclusion is clear. However, it has some contents that need to be modified:
1. There are few relevant documents. It is recommended to supplement relevant documents from the perspective of DEA model considering unexpected output, STIRPAT model(whether any scholars have added other factors except population, wealth and technology) and other analysis tools to improve the reference value of the article. It also lays the foundation of advanced methods for later analysis.
2. The Super-efficient SBM model is wrong. The description of model parameters is obviously incorrect, some have subscripts, some have no subscripts, and the expression mode is messy, so the author must make changes.
3. “port carbon emissions = standard coal consumption for the year * cargo throughput for the year * carbon emission factor (2.4589)”. Why the carbon emission factor is 2.4589? Why not use the default carbon emission coefficient of coal? What is the standard coal consumption for the year meaning?
4. In line 317, “The main reason is that the scale of Qingdao Portand Tianjin Port is relatively large, the management of ports is more scientific and the investment structure of port energy saving and emission reduction is more reasonable.” The author explained the Tianjin Port. What is the specific reason for Qingdao Port?
5. The authors’ explanation of the formula (6) is not clear. What year does the initial time refer to, or is it always changing?
6. “This paper draws on the research ideas of Li Qigeng et al. [ 5 ] and takes the investment of enterprises in environmental protection as an indicator to measure environmental regulation.” What indicators have other scholars adopted? Why is this best? The author has no reason, so it is suggested to give an explanation by comparing multiple literatures.
7. “3.1. Subse”? Below formula (7), “ln is a constant term” ?
8. Why not choose partial least squares regression to eliminate multiple correlations between factors? The authors should explained the reason by comparing the these methods or multiple literatures.
9. There are big language and grammar problems in the paper. It is suggested to find professionals or institutions to revise it.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors made a lot of corrections according to suggestions. It is suggested to accept the paper after correcting the following problems:
1.The formula in reference [19] is actually wrong. In formula (2), the subscript of the left end term of the first constraint should be ih; The second constraint inequality symbol should be "<=".
2.The reference number in 3.4.2 repeats [30], and the latter [30] shall be numbered accordingly. Reference [31] should be:
Song Jiekun. Prediction of carbon emission from energy consumption in Shandong Province. Technology Economics, 2012,31 (01): 760 82-85+94.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
