Determining the Contributions in a Denim Fabric Production for Sustainable Development Goals: Life Cycle Assessment and Material Input Approaches
, Muhammed Alhasan 3, Hakan Güney 1, Selman Türkeş 1, Serdal Sırlıbaş 4, Deniz Civan Yiğit 4, Güray Kılınççeker 2, Beşir Şahin 5 and Olcayto Keskinkan 1
Mortaza Aghbashlo
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Life cycle assessment is a necessary part of social production and product processing under the current low-carbon background. This study has certain innovative significance. Suggestions: 1. Please specify the LCA data source (Gabbi); 2. Please supplement the data and research of LCA data reliability and risk assessment.
Author Response
The corrections requested by reviewer 1 were achieved and the responses were uploaded to the system in the form of a word file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study is of importance and results are presented in depth. The authors should add the limitations and future scope of this study.
Author Response
The corrections requested by reviewer 2 were achieved and the responses were uploaded to the system in the form of a word file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper is important especially because of the chosen topic.
In the article's abstract, it is mentioned " As a result of the evaluations made within the scope of 22 this study, it emerged as a more dominant opinion that the contribution of the factory to the SDGs 23 should be evaluated according to the total production capacity. It has been determined that the 24 factory has achieved economic and environmental gains within the scope of SDG 12, 13, 14 and 15 25 and increased its sustainable production potential during the period considered.." but the paper itself does not show off very clear this aspect. Tthe overall conclusions should be more detailed. The way in which the paper's results affect the analysed century, to whom they are addressed and which are limitations of the research are some topics that should be presented.
Author Response
The corrections requested by reviewer 3 were achieved and the responses were uploaded to the system in the form of a word file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
This paper needs major revision before publication in “Sustainability”. 1) To improve the quality of both language and organization, it is highly recommended that a native English speaker or a proofreading service be hired.
2) The abstract should be extended by including the main numerical conclusions.
3) All abbreviations, symbols, and notations should be tabulated before the introduction section.
4) Please avoid reference lumping.
5) To demonstrate the paper’s originality, it is necessary to add a table to the end of the "Introduction" section.
6) Avoid using abbreviations and acronyms in the title, abstract, keywords, highlights, and headings.
7) Uncertainty should be carried out.
8) The recent pandemic impacted the pattern of global sustainability as explained in (Three pillars of sustainability in the wake of COVID-19: A systematic review and future research agenda for sustainable development). Such works could be included to enhance the timeliness of the work. 9) Figure 1 is too simple. 10) “Results and discussions” should be “2. Results and discussion”.
11) Please reduce the significant figures of the data reported in the paper and figures (Maximum four). Here is an example of significant figures (sig figs):
- 10082 (5 sig figs)
- 70,000 (1 sig fig)
- 0.0025 (2 sig figs)
- 0.000309 (3 sig figs)
- 50010.000 (8 sig figs)
12) Please present all figures in color. 13) Labels and units are missing in some figures. 14) Please do not repeat units. For example, +13.5%, +10.7%; +1.97% and +13.8%. 15) Check punctuation. For example, +13.5%, +10.7%; +1.97% and +13.8%. 16) Please check all units. For example, Kg/kg should be kg/kg.
17) All heading and subheadings should be renumbered.
18) Please carry out sensitivity analysis.
19) The obtained results have not been sufficiently compared with the published data. Please add a Table in the "Results and discussion" section to address this issue.
20) The combination of LCA analysis with other sustainability assessment tools like exergy (i.e., exergoenvironmental analysis) could provide more comprehensive insights into such a system. This issue has been highlighted in the published papers [The role of sustainability assessment tools in realizing bioenergy and bioproduct systems] and [Exergoenvironmental analysis of bioenergy systems: a comprehensive review]. Please discuss this issue by referring to the mentioned article.
21) Add practical implications of the study. 22) Limitations of the study should be included and discussed.
23) Please change "Conclusion" to "Conclusions and prospects". Accordingly, please elaborate on the future research needs in this domain. This part simply presents the results obtained throughout the study.
Author Response
The corrections requested by reviewer 4 were achieved and the responses were uploaded to the system in the form of a word file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
This paper has been thoroughly revised according to the comments given by the reviwers and can be published in its present form.
