Study on Emission Control of Berthing Vessels-Based on Non-Cooperative Game Theory
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The topic of the article is very interesting, but it needs to be improved.
- The current regulations refer to the year 2050 and this article only to 2030.
- Not all current indicators are mentioned..
- We do not have the IMO as our main reference.
- The calculations are not validated.
-The graphs are not clear to be able to analyze the data.
Author Response
Thank you very much for spending your valuable time on reviewing the manuscript entitled "Study on Emission Control of Berthing Vessels - Based on Non-cooperative Game Theory" (sustainability-2405751). We have very carefully revised the manuscript according to your comments and included a point by point response on each comment, and hope that the revised manuscript will meet the publication requirements.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study examines the effects of low-sulfur fuel subsidies on air pollution control in Chinese ports. It uses game models and case studies to analyse port pricing, throughput, and profit. The findings show that the subsidy policy positively influences pollution reduction efforts in port waters. It offers valuable insights and appropriate analysis. The overall structure and language are suitable for readers. However, there are a few suggestions to enhance the quality of this paper.
1. In the 1. Introduction, the author should add the structure of the paper to facilitate reader comprehension and follow-up.
2. The author should review the citation format (For instance, line 79 on page 2...)
3. Where does the port obtain its budget to implement the low sulfur fuel subsidy policy? How does this affect the port's operational and business performance? Subsidies may decrease the port's profitability, thus creating a potential conflict between economic interests and environmental benefits.
4. In line 163 on page 4, what does 'u' refer to?
5. The author can explain the difference between 'CA' and 'CB' in Table 1, even though both indicate a sulfur content 0.5%.
6. Several phrases are not explained upon their first appearance (e.g., IMO in line 35 on page 1, U.S. Law in line 42 on page 1…).
7. What basis did the author use to determine h1=1 and h2=0.75 (line 312 page 9?
8. The author needs to provide citations for the sources of their information to increase the credibility of their research. For example, the handling efficiency of cranes in Shanghai and Ningbo, respectively, is stated as 42 and 30 TEUs/hour. Where is this source from?
9. In the content section "4.1.3 Parameter value," the author does not mention the value of "Service price."
10. In the study, the author calculates based on fixed factors such as container handling cost, fuel subsidy ratio, fuel price, etc. However, in reality, these factors often vary. How does the variability of these factors affect the research outcomes?
11. Authors have included much of the right literature but you need to tell the reader how your paper relates to this work - not just in the literature review, but also in other places in the paper.
12. The managerial implication is relatively weak. The conclusion section should be enriched. The author should enhance their contribution and value for the port managers. Also, the suggestion for future research should be included.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you very much for spending your valuable time on reviewing the manuscript entitled "Study on Emission Control of Berthing Vessels - Based on Non-cooperative Game Theory" (sustainability-2405751). We have very carefully revised the manuscript according to your comments and included a point by point response on each comment, and hope that the revised manuscript will meet the publication requirements. Please refer to the attachment for details.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
see attachment
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you very much for spending your valuable time on reviewing the manuscript entitled "Study on Emission Control of Berthing Vessels - Based on Non-cooperative Game Theory" (sustainability-2405751). We have very carefully revised the manuscript according to your comments and included a point by point response on each comment, and hope that the revised manuscript will meet the publication requirements. Please refer to the attachment for details.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Abstract:
The abstract should provide a concise summary of the study's objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clearly state the focus on studying the air pollution control mechanism in port waters considering low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies. Emphasize the importance of meeting the IMO's emissions reduction targets and the implementation of strict sulfur limitation policies by the Chinese government. Highlight the construction of non-cooperative game models and the analysis of various factors affecting port pricing, throughput, and profit. Mention the case study conducted using AIS data of container ships in Shanghai Port and Ningbo Zhoushan Port. Conclude by emphasizing the positive impact of low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies on the implementation of more stringent pollution reduction policies in port waters. The abstract should be around 150-200 words.
Introduction:
The introduction should provide a clear background on the IMO's emissions reduction targets and the Chinese government's efforts to establish emission control areas and implement strict sulfur limitation policies. Discuss the challenges faced by the shipping industry in meeting these requirements and the implementation of low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies in Hong Kong and Shenzhen. Explain the importance of studying the air pollution control mechanism in port waters considering these subsidy policies. State the objective of the study and introduce the construction of non-cooperative game models to analyze the impact of various factors on port pricing, throughput, and profit. Highlight the significance of the case study conducted using AIS data.
Materials and Methods:
This section should describe the methodology and data sources used in the study. Explain the construction of non-cooperative game models considering low-sulfur fuel subsidies. Provide details on the factors analyzed, such as port pricing, throughput, and profit, and how they are incorporated into the models. Describe the case study conducted using AIS data of container ships in Shanghai Port and Ningbo Zhoushan Port. Explain the analytical techniques and statistical methods used to analyze the data and draw conclusions.
Results and Discussion:
Present the main findings of the study, including the impact of low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies on the air pollution control mechanism in port waters. Discuss the results of the non-cooperative game models, highlighting the influence of port pricing, throughput, and profit on the decision-making of ports. Analyze the case study results based on the AIS data of container ships, emphasizing the response of ports to changes in container service prices and the impact on the leader and follower ports. Discuss the relationship between profit difference and subsidy ratios, both for the port's own subsidy and the competitor's subsidy.
Conclusion:
Summarize the main findings of the study, emphasizing the positive impact of low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies on the step-by-step implementation of more stringent pollution reduction policies in port waters. Discuss the implications of the study for air pollution control and environmental sustainability in the shipping industry. Highlight the importance of considering factors such as port pricing, throughput, and profit in designing effective subsidy policies. Finally, suggest future research directions, such as exploring the long-term effects of low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies and evaluating their economic and environmental outcomes.
The overall language of the paper is clear and understandable. However, there are a few areas where the language can be improved for better clarity and coherence. Here are some specific comments and suggestions:
In the abstract, the phrase "whether the container service price of the leader port increases or decreases, the follower port always take corresponding follow-up measures" can be rephrased for better clarity.
In the introduction, consider providing more context on the challenges faced by the shipping industry in meeting emissions reduction targets and the specific reasons behind the implementation of low-sulfur fuel subsidy policies in Hong Kong and Shenzhen.
Author Response
Thank you very much for spending your valuable time on reviewing the manuscript entitled "Study on Emission Control of Berthing Vessels - Based on Non-cooperative Game Theory" (sustainability-2405751). We have very carefully revised the manuscript according to your comments and included a point by point response on each comment, and hope that the revised manuscript will meet the publication requirements. Please refer to the attachment for details.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The article improved compared to the previous version.
- The graphs are not intuitive.
- For the simulation of the costs we must refer to a case study with more information.
Author Response
Thank you very much for the valuable comments you and the other reviewers provided, we rarely see such conscientious and responsible reviewers. We have responded point by point to each of your comments this round and hope that the revised manuscript will meet the publication requirements. Please see attached for amendments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The author provided clear and comprehensive responses addressing the reviewer's concerns. However, there are still some errors in the text. The author is kindly requested to make corrections.
Author Response
Thank you very much for the valuable comments you and the other reviewers provided, we rarely see such conscientious and responsible reviewers. Please see attached for amendments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Accepted as it is.
NIL
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions and comments, it is very helpful to improve the quality of the manuscript!
