Towards Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable Cement Manufacturing: A Systematic Review of AI Applications in Electrical Energy Consumption Optimization
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is a systematic review of the applications of AI in optimizing electrical energy consumption in cement manufacturing. It highlights the significance of reducing energy consumption in the cement industry for sustainability and explores the potential of AI, data analytic, and the Industrial Internet of Things for EEC optimization. The review analyzes existing scholarly works, industry reports, and research studies to identify gaps and opportunities for future research in this area. The topic is innovative and meets journal requirements.
The following comments can be considered:
1. Fig. 1: Why choose 7 years as the time interval? It is better to use a line chart with a time interval of one year to represent. The trends are more intuitive.
2.Lin 251: “2” should be subscript.
3.Table 3, Third column: the unit “kgCO2/t”?
4.The reviewer suggests providing a simple summary or conclusion at the end of each section in 3section.
5. Section 4: Although the author has listed some promising development directions, most of them are currently recognized mainstream development directions. More in-depth future development directions should be further considered. It can further improve the depth and quality of the article.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Following your recommendations has greatly helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.
Please find the detailed responses below and the revisions highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted file.
Comment 1: Fig. 1: Why choose 7 years as the time interval? It is better to use a line chart with a time interval of one year to represent. The trends are more intuitive.
Response 1: Thank you for highlighting alternative visualizations for Figure 2. The choice of a 7-year bin highlights the author's finding that there's a recent increase in awareness of the importance of electrical energy conservation and its resultant effect on environmental protection. Showing the period covered in the research in such time bounds highlights the significant increase in the number of relevant publications in the last bucket of the 5-period groups compared to the other.
Comment 2. Line 251: “2” should be subscript.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. This has been corrected.
Comment 3. Table 3, Third column: the unit “kgCO2/t”?
Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. The unit has been corrected to kg/t of CO2 emission.
Comment 4. The reviewer suggests providing a simple summary or conclusion at the end of each section in 3 section.
Response 4: Thank you for the recommendation. Conclusion or summary paragraphs have been added to the subsections in the attached revision.
Comment 5: Section 4: Although the author has listed some promising development directions, most of them are currently recognized mainstream development directions. More in-depth future development directions should be further considered. It can further improve the depth and quality of the article.
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment and this is why we are doing ongoing research on this subject to further discover more in-depth development in furtherance to this initial literature review.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSummary:
This paper reviews the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in optimizing electrical energy consumption (EEC) in cement manufacturing. It analyzes literature from 1993 to 2023, highlighting the potential of AI, combined with digitalization and data analytics, to significantly reduce EEC and carbon footprints in the industry. The study identifies automation, process control, and energy-efficient equipment as key themes for future research.
Weaknesses:
- Since the full form of EEC is provided earlier in the text, it is recommended to consistently use the abbreviation in the subsequent sections.
- In the Methods section, the explanations for “keyword selection, relevant database search, criteria-based shortlisting of articles, and selection of articles for in-depth review” are not sufficiently clear. I recommend that you explain each of these four parts individually and organize them into separate paragraphs for better clarity and logical flow.
- In the Results section, the first paragraph mentions “power-saving opportunities”, while later “energy-saving opportunities” is used. I suggest maintaining consistency by using the same terminology throughout.
- More details could be provided in the explanation of Figure 2, such as the reasons behind the decrease in quantity from 2007 to 2017.
- Why doesn't the title of section 3.2.2 correspond to "Pyro-processing, grinding, and milling opportunities" in Table 2?
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Further revisions are needed for the quality of English language in this paper.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Following your recommendations has greatly helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.
Please find the detailed responses below and the revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
Comment 1: Since the full form of EEC is provided earlier in the text, it is recommended to consistently use the abbreviation in the subsequent sections.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. The EEC abbreviation has been adopted for subsequent sections.
-Comment 2: In the Methods section, the explanations for “keyword selection, relevant database search, criteria-based shortlisting of articles, and selection of articles for in-depth review” are not sufficiently clear. I recommend that you explain each of these four parts individually and organize them into separate paragraphs for better clarity and logical flow.
Response 2: Agreed. We have included further explanations for "keyword selection, relevant database search, criteria-based shortlisting of articles, and selection of articles for in-depth review" in the Methods section. We have organized them into separate paragraphs as recommended.
Comment 3: In the Results section, the first paragraph mentions “power-saving opportunities”, while later “energy-saving opportunities” is used. I suggest maintaining consistency by using the same terminology throughout.
Response 3; Thank you for pointing this out. The phrase "energy-saving opportunities" has been adopted throughout.
Comment 4: More details could be provided in the explanation of Figure 2, such as the reasons behind the decrease in quantity from 2007 to 2017.
Response 4: Agreed, thank you for the recommendation. However, the author could not conclusively ascertain the reason for the decline in relevant academic publications on the research topic within the limited time allowed for revision.
Comment 5: Why doesn't the title of section 3.2.2 correspond to "Pyro-processing, grinding, and milling opportunities" in Table 2?
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. The title of section 3.2.2 has been corrected to match the item in Table 2.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper presents a Systematic Review of AI Applications in Electrical Energy Consumption Optimization for Sustainable Cement Manufacturing. The scientific quality is high. I would like to suggest its acceptance after minor revisions. Some comments are as follows:
1) The conclusion needs be reorganized to be clearer.
2) The format of reference should be consistent, see Ref 22, 27 and 50.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageIt is Ok to me.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Following your recommendations has greatly helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.
Please find the detailed responses below and the revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted file.
Comment 1: The conclusion needs be reorganized to be clearer.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore the conclusion has been edited and re-arranged for clarity.
Comment 2: The format of reference should be consistent, see Ref 22, 27 and 50.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out as well. We have accordingly corrected this and also removed the duplicated reference.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsGeneral comments
The work is devoted to the analysis of existing scientific works and industry reports describing the optimization of energy consumption in cement manufacturing, characterized by significant consumption of both electrical and thermal energy and environmental impact.
The research topic is relevant. Any energy savings in the context of a large number of similar energy-intensive production facilities in a developed industrial sector can provide a huge economic effect.
However, the work is not yet ready for publication and requires extensive revision:
1) The title of the work, including “Leveraging Artificial Intelligence,” is very beautiful and attracts attention, but does not correspond to the actual stated goals and work done. This, in particular, is evidenced by the authors’ proposal from section 3.3. Leveraging AI for EEC optimization in other manufacturing industries (строка 486-488):
No literature work was found during this work which shows that AI has been adopted by the cement industry to help optimize electrical consumption as other industries have done.
We would advise adding the word “Towards” to the title of the manuscript.
2) The authors have done a lot of work on studying cement manufacturing, the results of which are embodied in the writing of three articles (two of which have already been published):
Oguntola, O.; Simske, S. Continuous Assessment of the Environmental Impact and Economic Viability of Decarbonization Improvements in Cement Production. Resources 2023, 12, 95. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources12080095
Boakye, K.; Fenton, K.; Simske, S. Machine Learning Algorithm to Predict CO2 Using a Cement Manufacturing Historic Production Variables Dataset: A Case Study at Union Bridge Plant, Heidelberg Materials, Maryland. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2023, 7, 199. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp7060199
Oguntola, O.; Boakye, K.; Simske, S. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable Cement Manufacturing: A Systematic Review of AI Applications in Electrical Energy Consumption Optimization – the manuscript under consideration.
The natural reluctance to repeat ourselves was expressed in a one-sided approach to considering electrical energy consumption without taking into account the environmental component of cement production. However, readers of Sustainability need a balanced approach to the issue at hand. Accordingly, the environmental side of the issue should be worked out together with energy-saving and economic ones.
3) The manuscript contains little illustrative material. In our opinion, it is necessary to add at least two illustrations containing: a) a block scheme of a typical cement manufacturing; b) a layout containing the main components in which electrical energy is consumed.
4) In essence, only Tables 3 and 4 are informative from the illustrative material. Table 3 summarizes the facts reported by Madlool et al. [20]). Table 4 lists articles analyzing methods applied to power optimization in cement manufacturing. It would be desirable to associate these data with the added figure b), showing the nodes in which electrical energy is consumed and indicating the stated possibilities of their minimization.
5) An article billed as an A Systematic Review should contain many more references to previously published work. Moreover, the authors stated that
The most relevant 120 from a sample of peer–reviewed publications matched on Google Scholar (each with at least 100 citations) were assessed.
Thus, there are high-quality, highly cited articles on the research topic. Taking them into account would make Table 2 more informative.
Specific comments
6) In line 168 it is necessary to add an indication of the literary sources mentioned in Table 2, namely [16-38]: Table 2 groups the literature [16-38]… Without this, reference [39] appears immediately after [17] in the text.
7) Sentence on lines 211-213:
“This decline brought a rise in the sector's electricity intensity, estimated to have reached 100kWh/t cement in 2022”
should be redone taking into account the current year 2024.
8) Reference 50 duplicates reference 22 with all the errors: surnames were written in capital letters; in addition, JAN ADRIAAN SWANEPOEL should be replaced with Swanepoel J.A.
9) In reference 27, surnames are also written in capital letters.
10) It is necessary to check the compliance of references with MDPI standards.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Following your recommendations has greatly helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.
Please find the detailed responses below and the revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted file.
Comment 1:
The title of the work, including “Leveraging Artificial Intelligence,” is very beautiful and attracts attention, but does not correspond to the actual stated goals and work done. This, in particular, is evidenced by the authors’ proposal from section 3.3. Leveraging AI for EEC optimization in other manufacturing industries (строка 486-488):
No literature work was found during this work which shows that AI has been adopted by the cement industry to help optimize electrical consumption as other industries have done.
We would advise adding the word “Towards” to the title of the manuscript.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. The title has been amended accordingly.
Comment 2:
2) The authors have done a lot of work on studying cement manufacturing, the results of which are embodied in the writing of three articles (two of which have already been published):
Oguntola, O.; Simske, S. Continuous Assessment of the Environmental Impact and Economic Viability of Decarbonization Improvements in Cement Production. Resources 2023, 12, 95. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources12080095
Boakye, K.; Fenton, K.; Simske, S. Machine Learning Algorithm to Predict CO2 Using a Cement Manufacturing Historic Production Variables Dataset: A Case Study at Union Bridge Plant, Heidelberg Materials, Maryland. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2023, 7, 199. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp7060199
Oguntola, O.; Boakye, K.; Simske, S. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable Cement Manufacturing: A Systematic Review of AI Applications in Electrical Energy Consumption Optimization – the manuscript under consideration.
The natural reluctance to repeat ourselves was expressed in a one-sided approach to considering electrical energy consumption without taking into account the environmental component of cement production. However, readers of Sustainability need a balanced approach to the issue at hand. Accordingly, the environmental side of the issue should be worked out together with energy-saving and economic ones.
Response 2: Thank you for the observations. Your recommendations have been implemented by emphasizing the environmental side of the issues in the additions to the introduction section in the revision. In addition, we emphasize that the production of the electrical energy used in cement manufacturing means environmental impact from the emissions of the fossil and gas power plants generating the electricity.
Comments 3 & 4:
The manuscript contains little illustrative material. In our opinion, it is necessary to add at least two illustrations containing: a) a block scheme of a typical cement manufacturing; b) a layout containing the main components in which electrical energy is consumed.
4) In essence, only Tables 3 and 4 are informative from the illustrative material. Table 3 summarizes the facts reported by Madlool et al. [20]). Table 4 lists articles analyzing methods applied to power optimization in cement manufacturing. It would be desirable to associate these data with the added figure b), showing the nodes in which electrical energy is consumed and indicating the stated possibilities of their minimization.
Responses 3 & 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with the comments and have included Figure 3 in the revision. Figure 3 is a schematic representation of the cement manufacturing process highlighting the electrical energy-intensive processes.
Comment 5:
An article billed as an A Systematic Review should contain many more references to previously published work. Moreover, the authors stated that
The most relevant 120 from a sample of peer–reviewed publications matched on Google Scholar (each with at least 100 citations) were assessed.
Thus, there are high-quality, highly cited articles on the research topic. Taking them into account would make Table 2 more informative.
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. In the literature review, we discovered that many of the peer-reviewed publications that initially matched our Google Scholar search focused on thermal energy. Many were also focused on other types of power optimization outside of cement manufacturing. As we pointed out in the Methods section, the selection criteria filtered out some of these papers.
Comment 6: In line 168 it is necessary to add an indication of the literary sources mentioned in Table 2, namely [16-38]: Table 2 groups the literature [16-38]… Without this, reference [39] appears immediately after [17] in the text.
Response 6: We agree. In the revision, we have included this indication of the literary sources mentioned in Table 2 as recommended.
Comment 7:
7) Sentence on lines 211-213:
“This decline brought a rise in the sector's electricity intensity, estimated to have reached 100kWh/t cement in 2022”
should be redone taking into account the current year 2024.
Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out. The wording has been amended to show that the sector's electricity intensity has not changed since 2022.
Comments 8 - 10:
Reference 50 duplicates reference 22 with all the errors: surnames were written in capital letters; in addition, JAN ADRIAAN SWANEPOEL should be replaced with Swanepoel J.A.
9) In reference 27, surnames are also written in capital letters.
10) It is necessary to check the compliance of references with MDPI standards.
Response 8 - 10: Thank you for pointing this out. In the revision, the references have been amended to comply with MDPI standards.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsNo further comments.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe necessary changes have been made. The work can be published.
