Energy Efficiency as a Foundational Technology Pillar for Industrial Decarbonization

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article raises an important issue of decarbonisation of one of the world's largest economies. This is an important and topical topic. It also corresponds perfectly to the profile of the magazine. It's well written. The review of the literature is very extensive and accurate. The work is enriched by static and useful graphic material. Practical conclusions addressed to individual industries are of great value. However, the authors should introduce a chapter containing discussion and conclusions.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the comments. "Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript presents a very interesting review of the ongoing implementation of energy efficiency measures that aim to promote industrial decarbonization in the United States of America. It is my opinion that the quality of the manuscript and the relevance of the topic justifies its publication.
I have just a few remarks and suggestions.

1. I believe that the manuscript sections do not respect the journal template. Please revise that.

2. Although the manuscript describes the situation in the USA, if published it will be read by people from all over the world. So I suggest that authors use international units and terms as much as possible.

a) The temperature should be indicated in Celsius and not in Fahrenheit.

b) The meaning of MMT, Btu, QBtu and quads should be introduced in the text, and the conversion to international units should also be presented in case they are not international units.

3. On page 8 in the sentence before Figure 5:

"... are responsible for almost 77% of total energy use and 70% of total emissions in the US manufacturing sector"

it should be 60%, not 70%. 

4. On page 9, second paragraph:

"Industrial motors and machine drives accounted for about 17% of total energy use and 28% of carbon emissions in the US manufacturing sector"

Although industrial motors are not explicitly mentioned, I gather they are included in the machine drives parcel. So according to Figure 5, it represents 21.3% of the C02eq emissions, not 28%.

5. The appendix tables A-1 and A-2 are called in the text in the reversed other, first A-2 then A-1, I suggest you exchange their names.

6. On page 14 at the end of subsection 3.2 it is stated:

"However, certain challenges can stem from misconceptions regarding these technologies that hinder their implementation"

Please elaborate on that, and if possible give some examples.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the comments and feedback. "Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper contains relevant and effective technologies and methods to reduce hydrocarbon emissions. The study is useful both for scientists working in the field of energy, ecology, as well as for ordinary readers.

However, there are a number of minor remarks:

1. In the abstract, reference should be made to sustainability. It may be worth pointing out that this study meets at least 7 and 9 SDGs (17 SDGs).

2. It is necessary to change the structure of the article, namely, to rework the ending. There are no conclusions and conclusions sections.

3. Some drawings require hard to read.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the comments and feedback. "Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

1- The introduction starts with a general statement about efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions globally, but it would be beneficial to provide some specific context or statistics to highlight the urgency and significance of the issue. This could include information on the current state of global emissions or the potential consequences of failing to address climate change.

2- The citation format for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) should be revised to ensure consistency and accuracy. Please follow the appropriate citation style guide.

3- When discussing energy-related CO2 emissions and their impact, it would be useful to include specific information about the global warming potential of these emissions. This would help readers understand the relative importance of different greenhouse gases and their implications for climate change.

4- Investigate recent good works like: "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2022.102712"

5- The mention of the Better Buildings, Better Plants program by the DOE is relevant, but it would be helpful to provide a bit more information about the program's objectives and outcomes. This would give readers a better understanding of the scale and impact of the program.

Overall, the quality of English language in this section is good. The ideas are clearly conveyed, and the sentences are generally well-structured. However, there are a few areas where improvements can be made:

1-Sentence structure: In some instances, the sentence structure could be further refined to enhance readability.

2- Terminology: The use of certain technical terms, such as "strategic energy management" and "combined heat and power," could benefit from brief explanations or definitions to ensure clarity for readers who may not be familiar with these terms.

3- Coherence: While the section presents relevant information, there are opportunities to improve the flow and coherence of the ideas.

4- Clarity in objectives: While the section outlines the aim of the study, it would be helpful to provide more specific details on the research questions or objectives that will be addressed. This will give readers a clearer understanding of what to expect in the subsequent sections.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the comments and constructive feedback. "Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf