Processes Coupled to Electrocoagulation for the Treatment of Distillery Wastewaters
, Marisol Ayllon Ormeño, Caroline Julca Meza, Gonzalo Moreyra Cuadros, Luis Américo Carrasco Venegas, Carlos Alejandro Ancieta Dextre, Oscar Juan RodrÃguez Taranco, Carmen Avelino Carhuaricra, Pablo Diaz Bravo and Jorge Alberto Montaño PisfilRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorssee attached report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Good evening Mr. reviewer, the observations made have been lifted, the manuscript is sent for revision.
Best regards
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript provides a general review of the electrocoagulation (EC) process, including its principles, reaction mechanisms, and operating parameters, while also analyzing its coupling with other processes and their combined efficiency in stillage contaminant removal. This manuscript might be considered for potential publication after a revision.
1. There are numerous instances where molecular formulas and units lack proper subscript and superscript formatting. Please review and correct these formatting issues to ensure accuracy.
2. The manuscript contains instances of Spanish text (Lines 101-102, Lines 365-366). Please thoroughly check the entire document and ensure that it is consistently written in English.
3. The content on lines 129-130 appears to be unrelated to the main topic of the paper.
4. There is an error in reaction (8). Please review and correct this reaction.
5. It would be beneficial to provide a detailed description of the content depicted in Figure 3 within the main text of the article.
6. Some abbreviations, such as “CD” and “TSS,” are used without providing their full terms upon first mention. Please ensure that all abbreviations are defined when they first appear.
7. It is recommended to include a section discussing the challenges and future prospects of the electrocoagulation process coupled with other treatments.
8. The formatting of references is inconsistent. For example, some journal names are abbreviated while others are not, and the placement of page numbers varies. Please standardize the reference format throughout the manuscript.
9. Polymer adsorbents (Surfaces and Interfaces, 2024, 49: 104371; Journal of Molecular Liquids,2021, 329: 115541) is important for wastewater treatment which should be reviewed and cited in the introduction.
Author Response
Good evening Mr. reviewer, the observations made have been lifted, the manuscript is sent for revision.
Best regards
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe topic of review is distillery wastewater treated by Electrocoagulation, however, main operating parameters are part of distillery wastewater treatment research.
There’s no discussion of Table 4.
There’s insufficient conclusion basis.
Author Response
Good evening Mr. reviewer, the observations made have been lifted, the manuscript is sent for revision.
Best regards
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAlthough this article only summarizes articles about distillery wastewater treatment, it is found that the hybrid electrocoagulation method is superior to the traditional electrocoagulation system in removing pollutants, and each working parameter is explained, and a variety of hybrid electrocoagulation methods are summarized. It provides effective guidance for the next step of industrial processing and has important practical significance. However, there are still issues that small authors need to address.
1． In lines 363-372, the author adds a large paragraph of Spanish to English. It is advisable to check the use of language throughout the article.
2． In lines 190-194, the authors express that different electrocoagulators are effective in removing pollutants from wastewater from other industries, but this is not reflected in Table 2. It is suggested that more information on contaminants and removal effects should be added to Table 2.
Author Response
Good evening Mr. reviewer, the observations made have been lifted, the manuscript is sent for revision.
Best regards
Juan Medina
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsreference 12 and 13 are same, please correct them according to the comment.
Author Response
Thank you for taking the time to review this manuscript. Below you will find the detailed responses and highlighted corrections and changes made to the article.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAccept.
Author Response
Thank you for taking the time to review this manuscript. Below you will find the detailed responses and highlighted corrections and changes made to the article.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
