Comparison of Dynamic Response Characteristics of Typical Energy Storage Technologies for Suppressing Wind Power Fluctuation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. There are many symbols in the diagram of grid side converter control model (Figure 3). The meanings of them should be explained in the paper.
2. The authors simulate the application effects of different energy storage technologies under two wind speed fluctuation scenarios. It is necessary to further explain the reason why only these two scenarios are considered.
3. The authors compare the output power of the three energy storage systems with the reference output power of the energy storage system in Figure 11(b), while these output power under another wind speed fluctuation scenario is compared with the output power without energy storage system in Figure 12(b). This should be explained. Also, the source of the reference output power should be given.
4.When the authors discuss the dynamic response characteristics of the three energy storage technologies and their effects on suppressing wind power fluctuation on page 8, Fig. 12 and Fig. 13 appear many times; should them be Fig. 11 and Fig. 12? PS. Figure 13 is not available in the paper.
5. In the conclusions, the authors mention that three energy storage systems can respond well to the power command curve. It is necessary to explain in more detail how long the output power of the current energy storage system will respond.
Author Response
We would like to thank the respectable reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions. Those suggestions and comments improved the quality of our paper significantly. We have modified the manuscript to follow the reviewers’ recommendations, and several additions/modifications were also done to answer the reviewers’ questions. Please check the attached. Thank you very much!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This article can be accepted for publication after taking into account the following points:
1- All keywords must begin with a capital letter and the number of keywords must be increased.2- The abstract should be short to include only the aim, the research idea and the main results.
2- The references from which the equations were taken should be indicated.
3- The research lacks comparison with previous similar research.
4- The conclusion should be reformulated to include a better documentation of the results.
5- On page 8 figure 13 is mentioned but this figure seems to be missing!
6- The speeds and times listed on page 7 do not represent known mean values, so results must be re-evaluated by using additional values.
7- The response times that are derived from Figures 11 and 12 are inaccurate and should be revised.
Author Response
We would like to thank the respectable reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions. Those suggestions and comments improved the quality of our paper significantly. We have modified the manuscript to follow the reviewers’ recommendations, and several additions/modifications were also done to answer the reviewers’ questions. Please check the attached！Thank you very much!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Editor,
The authors have completed the required revisions, so I suggest accepting the article for publication.
