Technical Feasibility for the Boosting of Positive Energy Districts (PEDs) in Existing Mediterranean Districts: A Methodology and Case Study in Alcorcón, Spain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this work, the authors proposed a methodology to assess the potential of an existing district to be converted into a Positive Energy District (PED) which can be deployed for Mediterranean cities. The methodology includes 4 stages and is applied to a district of Alcorcón, Spain. Although this methodology still has several limitations, the results of this study are interesting to Reviewer and qualified to be published. However, some points should be addressed in this work:

1.       Please explain why the COP of an aerothermal system is selected as 3 in Stage 4.

 

2.       How is urban ventilation considered in this study?

There is no comment on the Quality of English Language.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents a method to assess the potential of an existing district to be converted into a positive energy districts. The study is interesting. However some clarification/ changes are needed to improve the quality of the paper. 

Commend 1: The authors do not give enough detail about the positive energy district.

Commend 2: Text description should be replaced with symbols in Equations in this paper. And,

Commend 3: A more complete literature review should be carried out. 

Commend 4: The aim and the novelty should be strengthened.

Commend 5: All the parameters used for the case study should be presented and referenced properly.

Commend 6: A more complete analysis of the results should be conducted. Moreover, the results should be compared with those of similar works.

Comment 7: There are also some editing errors in the text. The revised manuscript should be edited by a native English-speaking colleague.

The quality of English language is poor.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The subject matter is appropriate for the journal, but requires a number of changes for publication. The introduction is too long and should be significantly shortened, and the conclusions should be expanded to reflect the most significant developments in the study. The images are too large and are not in keeping with the text. The references should be revised, as should the stated methodology, which is unclear.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Minor editing of English language required.

The authors respected all comments and made a major revision of the manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article has been significantly improved, although a number of modifications still need to be made for publication. The length is inadequate, as it is very long and should be summarised and shortened for better comprehension. The tables and figures need to be improved to improve their quality. The conclusion should be reworked to contain the advances established in the research in a clear and precise manner.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf