Geothermal Exploration Using Remote Sensing, Surface Temperature, and Geophysical Data in Lunayyir Volcanic Field, Saudi Arabia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have reviewed carefully the manuscript “Geothermal exploration using remote sensing, surface temperature, and geophysical data in Lunayyir volcanic field, Saudi Arabia”. From the point of view of the content of the paper, it seems to accord with the scope of the Sustainability Journal, but from the point of view of the writing and expression of the article, there are some problems. Here are my comments and suggestions:

1.    Introduction only talks about the advantages of geothermal energy but nothing is mentioned about its disadvantages such as gases being released into the atmosphere during digging, the risk of triggering earthquakes, expensive resource to tap into, to mention a few.

2.    What do you want to say with “Several types of renewable energy sources, including geothermal energy, which is the subject of this research, as well as tidal, hydro, wind, ocean currents, waves, and solar energy.”? (Lines 57, 58, and 59). I think this phrase is incomplete.

3.    Review carefully the wording and spelling.

4.    Pay attention to the layout of the article. For example, tables and figures must go after being mentioned in the text, and some titles such as “4. Results and Discussions”, and "5. Conclusions", are separated from the corresponding text.

5.    Table 1 is confusing and it is not explained in the text.

6.    It would be convenient to define the nomenclature and units; for example, what are the units in equations 1 and 2?

Other comments are in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. the attached file has reply to your comments and revision.

 

regards

Essam

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor,

I have reviewed the manuscript entitled "Geothermal exploration using remote sensing, surface temperature, and geophysical data in Lunayyir volcanic field, Saudi Arabia" submitted to Sustainability journal. Overall, I found the study interesting and informative, and I believe it makes a valuable contribution to the field of geothermal energy exploration.

The authors have used a combination of geospatial and geophysical data to investigate the potential of the Lunayyir volcanic field for geothermal energy production. The analysis of gravity and magnetic data shows evidence of subsurface geologic structures such as faults, fractures, and intrusions that indicate the presence of shallow heat sources. The land surface temperature (LST) data also suggests the occurrence of volcanic activity in the subsurface, which may provide conduits for hot fluids.

The manuscript provides a comprehensive discussion of the various datasets and their interpretation, highlighting the importance of combining different geophysical methods to obtain a better understanding of underground geology and geothermal systems. The conclusion of the study emphasizes the potential benefits of geothermal energy as a reliable baseload technology for densely populated urban areas in Saudi Arabia.

However, there are some issues that need to be addressed before the manuscript can be recommended for publication.

Firstly, the abstract could be improved by providing more details on the methodology used and the specific results obtained.

Secondly, the authors should consider revising the writing style for clarity, particularly in the introduction and conclusion sections.

Additionally, it would be helpful if the figures and tables were labeled and referenced consistently throughout the manuscript.

Furthermore, we recommend validating the results presented in the paper to ensure their accuracy and reliability.

 

Overall, I recommend this manuscript for publication after the authors address the above-mentioned issues. With these revisions, the manuscript will make a valuable contribution to the growing body of research on geothermal energy exploration.

Sincerely,

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. the attached fiel has reply to your commenst and questions.

 

regards

 

Essam Aboud

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper discussed on identifying and characterizing geothermal system in Lunayyir volcanic field. The result is meaningful. But there have some minor suggestions to be revised to improve the quality of this paper. (1) There have some abbreviations in both the text and figures which cannot find the source, which make the reading harder. (2) Figure 1 is hard to understand which field the author would study. (3) The gravity data, the magnetic data, and land surface temperature data are employed, the reviewer wants to know does there have relationship among the three indicators? (4) For Fig. 11d, it is no meaning and it should be removed to Fig. 11(a)-(c). Same question for Fig. 13. (5) More in-depth analysis should be conducted for the results section. (6) The language needs to be improved.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thansk for your comments. the attached file has all answers for your questions and comments.

regards

Essam Aboud

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

¾ The authors have not made any discussion about the difference between their works and current Frontier research. The authors are advised to explain this issue in their manuscript.

 

¾ line 196, 197, the sequence number format of the formula is incorrect.  They should be (1), (2)

 

¾ the motivation for the present work are not very clear.

 

¾ the authors should reorganize what is the main contribution of the work in Part 1

 

 Introduction.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer

thank you for yoru vaulble comments. I followed your commenst point by point and you can fidn my reply within the attached file.

 

regards

Essam

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

All my concerns are well done!