Carbon Nanomaterials from Polyolefin Waste: Effective Catalysts for Quinoline Degradation through Catalytic Wet Peroxide Oxidation
, Larissa De Grande Piccinin 1,2,5, Adriano Santos Silva 1,2,3,4, Jose L. Diaz de Tuesta 6, Isabella V. K. Freitas 1,2,7, Admilson Vieira 5, Giane Gonçalves Lenzi 7, Adrián Manuel Tavares Silva 3,4, Joaquim LuÃs Faria 3,4 and Helder Teixeira Gomes 1,2,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This work prepared carbon-based nanomaterials using plastic solid waste in CVD reactor for catalytic wet peroxide oxidation quinoline removal. The characterization and experimental result were reasonable and reliable. I suggest a major revision before publication. My special comments are as follows:
1. Abstract: The full name of QN should be given.
2. Introduction, the novelty proposition of this work was unclearly from scientific perspective, which should be revised, and the authors could learn from this article: 10.1016/j.cclet.2021.11.096
3. Figure 2 and 4, why there was no CNT-C picture?
4. The reason for best performance of CNT-MIX-800 should be discussed.
5. The catalytic reaction mechanism should be investigated for these CNMs.
Author Response
The response for the reviewer is attached.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript describes the CVD synthesis of Carbon NanoTubes from a mixture of polyolefins imitating polymer packaging waste.
The scientific significance of the topic is beyond doubt. The composition of the synthesized hematite catalyst on alumina support is discussed in detail.
The morphology, composition and properties of the obtained CNTs were thoroughly investigated using TEM, TGA, BET, and FTIR.
The oxidative degradation of quinoline was monitored using HPLC and UVvis techniques.
The obtained CNTs proved to be good catalysts for the wet oxidation of quinoline and the decomposition of H2O2.
In my opinion, there are a few minor grammatical errors
In my opinion, there are a few minor grammatical errors
Author Response
The response for the reviewer is attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors of the manuscript Carbon nanomaterials from polyolefin Waste: effective catalysts for the degradation of quinoline through the catalytic oxidation of wet peroxide, I want to mention that you have an excellent work with many results that are analyzed in depth, for which I consider that the manuscript can be be accepted with some minor considerations that I mention below:
1. In the abstract, it must be defined what QN is; although it is defined in the introduction when reading the abstract, it is not known what compound it is
2. In the parro between lines 76 to 84, only the study's objective must be detailed, leaving the results in other sections such as discussion, conclusion, etc.
3. In the results, can you mention the particle size of the synthesized samples?
4. Why were the samples not tested for DTA?
5. Is the pore diameter of the particles not essential to analyze?
Author Response
The response for the reviewer is attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
In this manuscript, the authors synthesized a series of graphitic carbon samples from representative fractions of PSW at 600 and 800 °C. Higher amounts of ashes were observed compared to a commercial sample. All samples were active in the abatement of QN by CWPO, resulting in complete QN degradation in 30 min under the best scenario and in 120 min under the worst scenario. On the whole, the experimental process is performed well, and the quality of the experimental results and discussion is adequate and reasonable. So I suggest the acceptance to this work for publication on Catalysts after minor revision. Some other concerns which should be addressed in the revised work are as follows:
(1) Why choose FeCl2 and FeCl3 as iron sources? Instead of choosing one of them? Do Fe2+ and Fe3+ ions have special effects? The authors need to provide reasonable explanations.
(2) For carbon nanotubes (Figure 2), what are the reasons for the formation of hollow structures? The reviewer suggests that the authors provide corresponding explanations
(3) What is the product of QN degradation in this reaction system? The authors need to provide corresponding analysis results.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
The response for the reviewer is attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
accept
