Dielectric Barrier Discharge Plasma Coupled with Catalysis for Organic Wastewater Treatment: A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and suggestions:
1. Suggested Title - “Dielectric barrier discharge plasma coupled with catalysis for organic wastewater treatment: A review”.
2. Abstract- correct to, Based on the fact, this review paper focuses on the characteristics and principles….
3. Keywords: “Dielectric barrier discharge; Synergistic catalysis; Organic contaminates; Mechanism; Water treatment "- Use different keywords, which are not used in title.
4. "However, environmental protection and ecological restoration are neglected while developing economy, which makes the water environment of our country polluted in large quantities.” --- The review article lacking plenty of recent literatures which must be discussed. I suggest the author, to discuss a paragraph related to pollution due to the presence of different contaminants. The authors are recommended to check the below related reference, which will improve the supporting information.
Journal of Cleaner Production 244, 2020, 118867
5. "Therefore, it is urgent to develop water pollution treatment technology to solve the problem of water pollution.” – Discuss in brief the applications of different environmentally friendly materials for the water treatment techniques.
Polymers 14 (5), 2022, 914
6. "Figure 2. Structure chart of various DBD reactors: (a) Structure chart of plate- plate DBD system reactor [30]; (b) Structure chart of coaxial DBD system reactor [31]; (c) Structure chart of falling film DBD system reactor [32]; (d) Structure chart of jet DBD system reactor [33].”- Improve the quality of all figures. The author must produce copyright if any figure reproduces from any reported work?
7. The treatment of organic wastewater by adsorption mainly relies on the dense pore structure and huge specific surface area of adsorbent.” – More explanation needed with citation.
Molecular Physics 119 (12), 2021, e1925364
8. At the same time, the regeneration capacity of the activated carbon can also be restored to a certain extent, so as to improve the degradation rate” – Explain with more details.
9. The English quality not up to the mark. All the typos and grammar need to check thoroughly in the manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
see attachment
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript “Review on dielectric barrier discharge plasma coupled with catalysis for organic wastewater treatment” from Guo et al. presents the state of the art on the coupling of catalysis with a configuration of cold atmospheric pressure plasma called dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) for wastewater treatments. The work is well built and could be useful for researchers and scholars working in this field. However I would strongly suggest to revise the English grammar and in general the construction of the sentences since in some points in not easy to understand the meaning of what is written. Here below I reported some suggestions and observations.
-NTP is never explained as an acronym
-Fig.2 resolution is low and the image is too rich and not easy to comprehend
-line 159 is missing a square bracket
-what do the authors mean with “rich pores” in line 182?
-the sentence in lines 191-193 must be better structured
-In Fig.6 caption AC should be explained as an acronym
-the sentence in line 216-218 should be better expressed-in line 288 the number 96 is a citation? The same goes for the numbers in the caption of Fig.10
-In line 434 the sentence is repetitive
-In the conclusions the future developments are listed, but the second point of the list does not describe the future, the authors should refine
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
The provided responses to the reviewer's objections were accepted
