Evaluation of the Methane (CH₄) Generation Rate Constant (k Value) of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in Mogadishu City, Somalia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1) 7 days were chosen to collect the MSW. It should be not representative.

2) Line 377 and line 378, there are two Zone 1, please double check;

3) The Figures are of low resolution, please redraw them;

4) The word size in table 3 is not correct, please check;

5) The conclusion should be rewritten with some necessary data.

6) The novelty of this manuscript should be emphasized compared to the similar study.

Author Response

Thank you very much 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This article aims to evaluate the relationship between municipal solid waste (MSW) and methane (CH 4 ) generation rate constant (K value) to achieve the sustainable development goals of solid waste management (SWM). First of all, Mogadishu in Somalia was selected as the research sampling site, divided into three regions, and the total amount of solid waste produced by sample households per day was counted for a total of 7 days. After that, MSW is classified according to the characteristics of waste, and the volume density, moisture content and K value of different types of garbage are measured. The K value is evaluated by first order decay models, and the sample is statistically analyzed. Finally, based on the data results, the following conclusions are drawn:

(1) The average production rate of solid waste is 0.2kg/person/day, the average volume density is 0.269kg/L, and the average moisture content is 61.6%-73%.

(2) The waste components related to the K value are mainly food waste, wood, garden waste, paper/cardboard and textiles. Among them, the K value of food waste is the highest, reaching 0.22776, which is classified as rapid degradation. The other four categories are classified as slow degradation, in which the K value of wood is the lowest, 0.000518.

The experiments and conclusions drawn in this article have played a positive role in SWM, and also provided a certain reference for other researchers who study MSW. However, from the perspective of readers, there are still several problems that need to be improved. They are as follows:

(1) If the purpose of Figure 1 is to indicate the specific location distribution of the sampling area, what is the function of the two small pictures in the upper left corner of the figure? Is it a little superfluous? In addition, the outer frame lines and annotations of Area 1 in the figure are represented in yellow, so would it be better to use one color in Area 2 and Area 3?

(2) The K-value of Food wastes chart and the total K-value chart in Figure 6, why are there blue dotted line? If there is a special meaning, it is better to mark it so that the reader can understand it better.

(3) In the final conclusion, according to a certain logical structure, the main conclusions are listed by points, which will give the reader a clearer and more intuitive feeling. For example, the second paragraph of the conclusion section mentions the most garbage generated on weekends, so would it be better to put the last sentence of paragraph 3 about the food waste data added from weekdays to weekends into paragraph 2?

(4) Some figures don't have reasonable quality to show the results well. Pls. provide vectogram

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Thank you very much

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The title of the submitted manuscript needs correction  “Evaluation on Methane (CH4) Generation Rate Constant (k value) of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) at Mogadishu City, Somalia”. As the authors themselves wrote: “The presented study is designed to investigate the production, accumulation and solid household waste composition ratios over the past three decades in Mogadishu city, Somalia.” Evaluation of the constant rate of methane production (k value) in Mogadishu, Somalia is only one of the subsections of this work and one of the three goals presented by the authors next to: assessing the daily generation of MSW and characterizing MSW.

-        The introduction contains basic information. No new aspects are presented. The authors could better emphasize the novelty of the research carried out.

-        Methodology -  line 135-137 -  Please correct the units, these are definitely not the values ​​given in degrees Celsius  “The daily temperature ranges between 85 °C and 105 °C ? The daily minimum temperature range is 60 °C to 85 °C in this location”?

-        e.g. Line 162 - minor errors, e.g. X – correct the font size. Please check and correct minor errors throughout the manuscript.

-        Template - please correct the template for the journal to which the manuscript was sent, after the header there is the name of the journal “Separations”

-        Table 2 - Sampling Coordinate (Latitude, Longitude) - complete

-        Table 5 - correct the title (remove shows)

-        Figure 3, 4, 5, 6 - please add information what is marked on the charts, are these error bars or standard deviation?

-        The description of the results and discussion is based mainly on comparing the values ​​of the obtained parameters with each other, without deeper explanations. A better discussion would be necessary in order to emphasize the main findings.

-        It is important to check that the writing text clearly expresses and explains each idea and result obtained.

-        The conclusions needs improvement - highlight the most important findings and identify the added value of the main finding.

-        Highlight the main difficulties and challenges and your original achievements in overcoming them.

-        Please check and correct minor errors throughout the manuscript.

Author Response

Thank you very much 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript can be published in this form.

Reviewer 3 Report

The comments are addressed properly and necessary corrections have been done. The manuscript can be accepted.