Regional Energy–Economy–Environment Coupling Coordinated Development System Driven by Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutralization over 13 Cities in Jiangsu Province

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments

1. Section 1 and Section 2 can be merged.

2. Please better explain what does this research add to the subject area compared with other published material?

3. Please improve the quality of the figures (Especially Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6).

4. The literature format listed under "References" does not follow the Energies guidelines.

5. Please explain what criteria the authors used to select the cities for the study.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall, the manuscript is written well. However, there are some points in the manuscript that needs to be incorporated. The paper needs the below-mentioned editing and revision before it is considered for publication in the Journal.

1.      Title could be ‘Regional Energy-Economy-Environment Coupling Coordinated Development System Driven by Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutralization over 13 Cities in Jiangsu Province’.

2.      The abstract, overall clear, but some more aspects need to be added. It is suggested to add some quantitative estimation of your key results here.

3.      Please add your study region name, as well as Energy-Economy-Environment Coupling in the keyword.

4.      In the Materials and Methods section, to make a clear sense of the study area to the global readers, a study area description ensuring basic information related to this study with a spatial map (indicating the position of the study area)  such as overall climate status, the socioeconomic-demographic change is imperative.

 

5.      Why did the author choose 2010 to 2020 as the studied period? Is there any specific reason that needs more clear explanation?

 

 

6.      Section-5; please rename it as ‘Conclusion and Discussion’. This section is too in-general here, the justification of the result is highly missing, and needs more strong clarification comparing previous studies (considering local, regional, and global aspects). Moreover, it does not allocate enough space and depth when it comes to the Energy-Economy-Environment Coupling /association and the reasoning behind the changes. I would suggest to revise discussions critically focusing on the interaction of 3E change, the reasoning behind the changes as well as their causes and consequences on socio-economic and environmental aspects.

7.      Please mention some shortcomings in this research; uncertainties involved with models, data, and methods.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

It is acceptable in the present form.

Reviewer 2 Report

The Author satisfactorily revised the manuscript considering all of my suggested comments which certainly improved the quality of the paper. I would suggest to accept this paper to publish in the journal.