Advances in Catalytic Decomposition of N2O by Noble Metal Catalysts
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper describes mainly catalytic activity results for the N2O decomposition process. It is not clear the value of this contribution. Some recent reviews have addressed this issue and are not included as a basis. The main problem is that the work shows no effort to try to rationalize the detailed aspects of the catalysis for this process. There are already several reviews available collecting loosely the results of the catalytic activity of the different noble metals for this process and what is not clear is what novelty this work brings.
Moderate editing of English language
Author Response
See the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The present work describes the current state of knowledge regarding the use of Noble metals catalysts in the process of nitrous oxide decomposition.
The problem of nitrous oxide is still a topical issue, and this work is evidently interesting. Reviews of this type are needed and provide a valuable knowledge base for other scientists, so it seems to interest the readership of Catalysts. Therefore, the manuscript should be published in this Journal.
Based on a literature review (73 items - mainly scientific articles) excluding patent literature and commercial offers, the authors describe and highlight the crucial role of supports, preparation methods, particle size, additives, and impurity gases in catalytic activity.
However, some important issues require broader discussion and/or clarification before publication. Referring to more recent data is necessary because 60 % of the cited literature is older than ten years. Take into account that the last five years have been a period of increased research and scientific publications in the area of low-temperature N2O decomposition.
The authors should better justify the advantages of the Noble metals catalysts and also indicate their disadvantages in the N2O decomposition process. It should be remembered that the purpose of the research is the practical application of "catalysts" and their implementation in industry. Therefore, reference should be made to this aspect’s current state of knowledge.
Moreover, a summary is not enough. The last paragraph, "Conclusion", should indicate the review’s conclusions, exactly what you want to communicate to the reader.
All suggestions and tips are included in the comments in the attached manuscript.
Author Response
See the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This manuscript reviewed recent advances in the field of catalytic N2O decomposition, especially focusing on the catalytic materials including noble metals. This topic is interesting and of great importance, and falls into the scope of Catalysts. However, a review paper should synthesize the results from several primary literature papers to produce a coherent argument about a topic or a focused description of a field. Therefore, there are several points needed to be addressed before the paper can be accepted for publication.
1. The introduction is lack sufficient background information, which is unable to give the reader detailed background knowledge and possible wide application of this study. The introduction needs to be more emphasized the research work more with a detailed explanation of the whole process considering past, present, and future scope. The conventional methods are to be explained well to indicate the relevance of the research work. It needs to be strengthened in terms of recent research and updated literature review in this area with possible research gaps. Research gaps should be highlighted more clearly and future applications of this study should be added.
2. The authors should add an explanation to which industries the catalytic decomposition of N2O can be applied as an aftertreatment technique. Please elaborate.
3. With the recent attention to ammonia combustion, there have been issues raised about the large emission of N2O. Therefore, the authors are suggested to add these concerns from the following paper by citing it: Chemical Engineering Journal, 2023, 461, 141958 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2023.141958).
4. The internal mechanism of catalytic decomposition of N2O over each noble metal should be emphasized. Also, it needs to be discussed how impurity gases affect the reaction mechanism.
5. The authors listed the research achievements for each catalyst material, but additional discussions are needed to identify if there are special weaknesses or problems to be solved by each material. Also, the future perspectives should be discussed deeper and more extensive.
6. The typo and grammar errors should be avoided (e.g. “the hydrogen thermal of zeolite” in line 45).
It is recommended to refine English before submission.
Author Response
See the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper appears enhanced in the sense requested.
n/a
Author Response
See the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
After taking into account and following the suggestions of the reviewers, the manuscript is much more readable.
I think it will be valuable to "Catalyst" and readers in this form.
However, before publishing, please:
- In section 5 (Industrial applications of noble metal catalyst) also include the price factor, which significantly limits and will limit the practical applications of catalysts
- graphic unification of charts (Fig. 8 vs. Fig. and Fig. 14)
Author Response
See the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Native English grammar editing is recommended for the entire manuscript.
Native English grammar editing is recommended for the entire manuscript.
Author Response
See the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
