Development of LCA-Multidimensional Map (LAMP): A Platform to Support Information Sharing and Formulate CO₂-Level-Reduction Plans toward Zero Emissions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this paper, proposes the development of a platform, “LCA-Multidimensional Map 12 (LAMP),” to support companies and individuals aiming for CO₂ zero emissions (CZE).

Authors have given several suggestions, but cannot see any verifications.  Whatever suggested by authors need to be verified by using strong evidences.

Highlight the novel ideas by authors compared with  the conventional methods available. 

Clearly mention how your suggestions contribute to CZE by using proper comparisons?

Eg. If it is economic feasible show the data for cost reduction 

Author Response

Authors have given several suggestions, but cannot see any verifications.  Whatever suggested by authors need to be verified by using strong evidences.

Highlight the novel ideas by authors compared with the conventional methods available. 

Clearly mention how your suggestions contribute to CZE by using proper comparisons? If it is economic feasible show the data for cost reduction 

Reply: Thank you very much for your valuable comments on our concept article. Our article presents new software concepts as examples of how to use LAMP but does not contain validation data or new findings. However, we have added the content to clarify that our article presents a concept and that this concept needs to be tested and validated in the future, and some references on CO2 emissions from horticulture in the abstract and conclusion.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank the editors and authors for the opportunity to read and review this manuscript. The study introduced an “LCA-Multidimensional Map (LAMP)” to support the development of CO2 zero emissions (CZE) efficiently. The authors also used horticulture as an example to test the LAMP. I think the work is interesting. I expect my comments can be relatively straightforward to address and hope that they help to improve an otherwise intriguing manuscript.

(1)   You should add a figure to describe the whole flow to include every step in horticulture.

(2)   You should add the uncertainty analysis in assessing the characteristic factors using the LCA method.

(3)   You have used a few weird words and confused sentences. I hope you can check the manuscript thoroughly.

(4)   You should add some references about the CO2 emission from horticulture.

Author Response

(1)   You should add a figure to describe the whole flow to include every step in horticulture.

Reply: Thank you very much for your valuable comments on our concept article. LAMP can be used by starting from any kind of material or data on LCA, and any LCA calculation result or system can be improved, so the flow will differ depending on the user. This, it is not possible to present a generalized flow in our article, and we would like to refrain from revising anything in this respect in the manuscript.

 

(2)   You should add the uncertainty analysis in assessing the characteristic factors using the LCA method.

Reply: Our article presents new software concepts as examples of how to use LAMP but does not contain the uncertainty analysis in assessing the characteristic factors. However, we have added the content to clarify that our article presents a concept and that this concept needs to be tested and validated in the future in the abstract and conclusion.

 

(3)   You have used a few weird words and confused sentences. I hope you can check the manuscript thoroughly.

Reply: Thank you very much. We have revised the manuscript for grammar errors and typos throughout.

 

(4)   You should add some references about the CO2 emission from horticulture.

Reply: Thank you for your comment. We have added some references.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Many thanks for sharing an interesting manuscript and proposing a platform to assess components for a better production and reduction of CO2.

May I wonder if you want to make available this platform to anyone? Or this is only a theoretical description?

Sincerely,

Reviewer

 

Author Response

May I wonder if you want to make available this platform to anyone? Or this is only a theoretical description?

Reply: Thank you very much for your valuable comments on our concept article. We present new software concepts as examples of how to use LAMP. After We hope that everyone becomes can use LAMP after further development.

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presents the LCA-Multidimensional Map (LAMP) which helps map the life-cycle carbon emissions from various activities. This paper would be of interest to industry professionals and academics as the importance of level 1,2 and 3 emission reporting are becoming more important.

It is recommended that the article be considered for publication in this journal with major revisions. The content of the manuscript presented is sound. The content of this manuscript is within the scope of the journal. The platform showcased in the manuscript holds great promise as the network (& databases) it encompasses would grow. However, the paper is presented as a low-level explanation of the capabilities of the tool rather than a research paper, more technical details are required in short. Also, the structure of the manuscript needs major work. Numerical examples rather than descriptive examples would also benefit this manuscript greatly.

 

General Comments:

·       The abstract should include a brief compilation (one/few sentence for abstract) of the most important findings from the case study on horticulture.

·       Section2 should include more examples of LCA tools beyond just MiLCA, there are several in existence. A brief compilation of a table of a few prominent ones would serve well (along with probably their strengths and weaknesses).

·       Section 2 and 3 can be combined, as extension of an exiting platform which does similar work but in a different field of study.

·       Section 4 should also include details regarding the potential download of said software along with information of underlying code (if open source). If not open source, a description of the function related to processing various databases and criteria for inclusion of various databases should be discussed. Further, if existing patent (and/or publications) or GitHub repository (open source) for said software should also be included.

·       It is recommended to rename Section 4.2. as the title is misleading. Also, this section should be added towards the end as “Future trends” or “Required Advancements”.

·       Section 5 should be added to section 4. The section is required to describe the technical aspects of the self-propagating nature of LAMP. The description as written in section 5 is insufficient for an academic paper.

·       Section 6 should be added to Section 4. The section is required to describe the technical aspects of the formulation of “CO₂ reduction plan” in LAMP. This section has a bit of a description of the technical aspects, but again focuses more on user-experience.

·       Can section 7 be justified with a numeric example? If so, please include a numeric example.

Author Response

• The abstract should include a brief compilation (one/few sentence for abstract) of the most important findings from the case study on horticulture.

Reply: Thank you very much for your valuable comments on our concept article. We present new software concepts as examples of how to use LAMP but do not include validation data or new findings. We have further added content to clarify that our article presents a concept and that this concept needs to be tested and validated in the future in the abstract and conclusion.

 

• Section2 should include more examples of LCA tools beyond just MiLCA, there are several in existence. A brief compilation of a table of a few prominent ones would serve well (along with probably their strengths and weaknesses).

Reply: L65: We have added information on SimaPro (Pre's) and GaBi (thinkstep's) as the worldwide main LCA tools.

 

• Section 2 and 3 can be combined, as extension of an exiting platform which does similar work but in a different field of study.

Reply: We have combined the sections according to the comment.

 

• Section 4 should also include details regarding the potential download of said software along with information of underlying code (if open source). If not open source, a description of the function related to processing various databases and criteria for inclusion of various databases should be discussed. Further, if existing patent (and/or publications) or GitHub repository (open source) for said software should also be included.

Reply: We have added text on the potential of (open source) software in section 3.3. LAMP development and updates. Each software or database has its own regulations, such as permissions to use, but we have not mentioned details in section 4, as we focus on the concept of LAMP, so that no specific criteria for inclusion of databases or patent information is available.

 

• It is recommended to rename Section 4.2. as the title is misleading. Also, this section should be added towards the end as “Future trends” or “Required Advancements”.

Reply: We have changed the title of section 4.5 (section 3.2 after the revised version) from “Basic software” to “Core software to be installed in LAMP”. In the second half of this section, we have introduced improvement methods and developer possibilities of LAMP. Therefore, according to your advice, we have moved this part to the next section (3.3. LAMP development and updates).

 

• Section 5 should be added to section 4. The section is required to describe the technical aspects of the self-propagating nature of LAMP. The description as written in section 5 is insufficient for an academic paper.

Reply: We have combined and modified the sections according to your comment.

 

• Section 6 should be added to Section 4. The section is required to describe the technical aspects of the formulation of “CO2 reduction plan” in LAMP. This section has a bit of a description of the technical aspects, but again focuses more on user-experience.

Reply: We have considered combining the sections according to the comment. Some sections were added to section 4 according to your comments. Further, adding section 6 to section 4 would make section 4 long, so we left it separate. I hope you understand.

 

• Can section 7 be justified with a numeric example? If so, please include a numeric example.

Reply: We present new software concepts as examples of how to use LAMP but do not involve validation data. This would be the task of future research. We have added content on this issue to the manuscript in the abstract and conclusion.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Paper has improved sufficiently

Author Response

Response to Reviewer Comments

Dear Reviewer,

 

We would like to thank the editor and reviewers for their comments and suggestions. We have revised the manuscript as suggested by the reviewers, and the amendments have been depicted using the "Red font" in the revised manuscript.

Below, we have provided our responses to each of your comments and have made the corresponding revisions in the revised manuscript; in this document, our responses and revisions are indicated using the red font. The line numbers in our responses have been included in the revised manuscript.

 

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. Our manuscript was submitted as an “opinion” on May 30^th, and was changed to “communication” according to the editor’s suggestion. However, this time, we have revised the header to “opinion” again.

 

Reviewer’s comments

This is an interesting "opinion" paper, useful for researchers and companies. In my opinion it is not a communication paper, as I did not find groundbreaking preliminary results or significant findings that are part of a larger study over multiple years. Please change the paper to an "opinion" paper as it was initially submitted and revise according to the following comments.

 

Point 1:

1. 59-60: Please clarify how exactly, collecting and formulating will take place when writing “collecting information necessary for CZE”, and “formulating CO2 reduction plans”.

 

Response 1:

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. According to the comment, we have added the number of the section where we have mentioned the information as follows:

L59-60 …collecting information necessary for CZE (see 3.1), and formulating CO₂ reduction plans (see 3.4).

 

Point 2:

1. 119-120: Which software do the authors refer to? Has it not yet been developed? Please clarify.

 

Response 2:

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. LAMP must include three main software for collecting data, LCA analysis, and CZE plans by alternative methods or materials. These have not been developed yet, so we have added some explanation as follows:

L118-121 LAMP is a multidimensional platform that implements, 1) information collection, 2) LCA analysis, and 3) listing of the candidate of CO₂ reduction plans by targeting the CZE in cyberspace (Figures 3 and 4). Therefore, LAMP is constructed with the several core software (see 3.2).

 

Point 3:

1. 124-125: What simulations do the authors refer to? The simulations will pe performed within LAMP platform or not? Please be more specific.

 

Response 3:

Following your comment, we have modified and added the sentences in the revised manuscript, as follows:

L125-127 CO₂ reduction plans can be formulated (extraction of alternatives), and their effectiveness can be confirmed through the re-analysis of LCA with/without the simulations of the environment, products and performances changed by alternatives.

 

Point 4:

1. 144: Here the authors write “developing a platform equipped with easy-to-use software that can set conditions…is necessary”. Will the software be a part of the platform? If not, who is going to develop it?

 

Response 4:

Thank you very much. We have added the content required to clarify the software development according to your comment as below.

L149-159 in Figure 4 and L173-176: When new software is required, it is expected that users may outsource development to a vendor or may cooperate with each other. Regardless of the development method of the software, it is expected that it will be included as part of LAMP and shared by many more users.

 

Point 5:

1. 242-243: Please support this statement by references from heated greenhouses, there are plenty.

 

Response 5:

Thank you very much. According to the comment, we have added the references regarding the heated greenhouses as [17–22].

 

Point 6:

4. 273: The authors propose examples of alternatives for greenhouse specifically in section 4.2, but I could not find references of already published papers with renewable energy applications and reduced carbon footprint. Please check the literature, include these works, if possible.

 

Response 6:

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. We have added the references about the renewable energy applications and reduced carbon footprint as follows according to your comment.

L293-302 To date, there have been many studies in which greenhouses in specific regions were evaluated by LCA using different types of covering materials and energy sources for greenhouse heating [17–22]. Furthermore, by introducing LAMP, it is possible to find many options more easily and in a shorter time, and it is thought that more diverse LCA can be realized.

 

Point 7:

1. 285: The authors write renewable energy, but in the figures is written natural energy. I do not think that “natural energy” is proper phrase. Please check and change to “renewable energy".

Response 7:

Thank you very much. According to the comment, we have revised this part to “natural energy”.

 

 

Point 8:

1. 393-395: The authors write “In addition, a significant reduction in CO2 emissions related to resources, energy, and labor is expected.” Please justify this conclusion.

 

Response 8:

Thank you very much and sorry for the incomplete explanation. We have added content to clarify this part as follows:

L402-404 In addition, by consolidating some cultivation experiments and analyses that require a lot of materials and labor, it is possible to save resources and achieve a significant reduction in CO₂ emissions related to the resources, energy, and labor.

 

Point 9:

1. 432-433: How can tomatoes be cultivated in plant factories? Please explain.

 

Response 9:

Thank you very much for your comments. It is technically possible to produce tomatoes in plant factories, so it is expected that they will be commercialized soon, just like lettuce.

 

https://www.lighting.philips.com/application-areas/specialist-applications/horticulture/hortiblog/vertical-farming/growing-top-quality-tomatoes-in-a-vertical-farm

https://www.signify.com/global/our-company/news/press-releases/2020/20200430-signify-and-riat-pioneer-growing-tomatoes-and-cucumbers-in-vertical-farm-without-daylight

 

However, it is still not common at present. Therefore, we have added greenhouses as a location to grow tomatoes.

L457 in greenhouses and plant factories.

 

Thank you for taking the time to read our responses.

Sincerely yours,

Authors

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx