Hydrogen Production Possibilities in Slovak Republic
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article presents the current situation of the energy market in Slovakia and intends to raise the possible development for the future generation of hydrogen. The text is well written and the topic could be interesting but it lacks a more technical part that raises the ways in which hydrogen could be generated. The bibliographic references are scarce and scientific developments that could achieve the objective of the work (hydrogen) are lacking.
The cited references are not current and the manuscript scientifically does not sound and is not the experimental design appropriate to test the hypothesis about hydrogen production.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer # 1’s Comments:
We are very thankful to the reviewer for the careful reading of this manuscript and also all comments. Thank you very much for taking the time and energy to help us improve the paper.
This article presents the current situation of the energy market in Slovakia and intends to raise the possible development for the future generation of hydrogen. The text is well written and the topic could be interesting but it lacks a more technical part that raises the ways in which hydrogen could be generated.
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
The bibliographic references are scarce and scientific developments that could achieve the objective of the work (hydrogen) are lacking.
The cited references are not current and the manuscript scientifically does not sound and is not the experimental design appropriate to test the hypothesis about hydrogen production.
Answer: References were added.
We would like to thank the reviewer for the comments and constructive suggestions to our manuscript. The reviewer’s thoughtful comments and suggestions have helped to improve the quality of this manuscript to a considerable degree. We do hope that these revisions improve the paper such that the Editor and all the reviewers now deem it worthy of publication in “Applied Sciences” Journal.
Sincerely yours,
Peter Durcansky, Radovan Nosek, Richard Lenhard, Branislav Zvada
Reviewer 2 Report
Upon reading the title of the manuscript: "Hydrogen production possibilities in Slovak Republic", as a reader, I would expect to find out the current state of the Hydrogen technology and infrastructure in Slovak Republic as well as any sound proposal of technical strategies to address the challenges and to realize the production of H2. However the manuscript does not provide an adequate analysis and solutions to the problem, apart from identifying the the potential output of the hydropower plant that is presented in Figure 6.
Overall, I find that the manuscript is lacking greatly in providing the systematic methodology and sound strategies to technically tackle the problem statement of how to make green hydrogen production possible in Slovak Republic. Please find below my detailed comments:
Section 1:
The extensive use of forest woods as biomass resources may not be sustainable as it may promote deforestation. Even clearing the forest for the plantation of energy crops may be deemed unsustainable as well.
Only the use of the residual biomass wastes can be considered sustainable and green. The question is How much of this residual biomass wastes can contribute to the renewable energy resources? How about the continuity of the supply of this biomass wastes? Based on Table 1 where it presents the difference between the potential and the present usage of biomass, how much of it are based on the residual biomass wastes? Some strategies to increase the utilisation of biomass also needs to addressed.
Page 2: Lines 66-71 can be removed.
Page 3: Line 86 "More than 22% of all generated electricity is from fossil fuels", Is it referring to the Thermal conventional in Table 3? It is better to rename it as fossil fuel for better clarity.
Section 2:
This section only presents theoretical introduction about H2 properties and the common production method of H2. How about the relevance of H2 as energy source in Slovakia? This section should have addressed the current conditions for H2 technology and infrastructure in Slovakia and to give readers more insights about the feasibility, challenges and the bottleneck of the development of green H2 technology.
Page 3 Lines 107-119 can be removed as these have little relevance.
Page 4 Lines 133-135 can be removed as this paragraph is being repeated in the following one.
Section 3:
Since at the beginning of the manuscript biomass was mentioned to be one of the important renewable sources in Slovakia, its feasibility to produce H2 should have also been addressed in this section besides the hydropower. In addition, in this section, the authors should have laid out detailed proposal and technical strategies how the country can realize the production of Hydrogen by using the current hydropower energies.
Page 4 Lines 150-152: From this amount of energy produced, how much surplus can be used to run the electrolyser to generate hydrogen?
Page 4 Line 168: As mentioned earlier that large hydropower dams can be detrimental to the natural environment and ecosystem. What alternatives or other strategies can be proposed here?
Page 5 Lines 183-185: From this amount of energy produced, how much surplus can be used to run the electrolyser to generate hydrogen?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer # 2’s Comments:
We are very thankful to the reviewer for the careful reading of this manuscript and also all comments. Thank you very much for taking the time and energy to help us improve the paper.
Section 1:
The extensive use of forest woods as biomass resources may not be sustainable as it may promote deforestation. Even clearing the forest for the plantation of energy crops may be deemed unsustainable as well.
Only the use of the residual biomass wastes can be considered sustainable and green. The question is How much of this residual biomass wastes can contribute to the renewable energy resources? How about the continuity of the supply of this biomass wastes? Based on Table 1 where it presents the difference between the potential and the present usage of biomass, how much of it are based on the residual biomass wastes? Some strategies to increase the utilisation of biomass also needs to addressed.
Page 2: Lines 66-71 can be removed.
Page 3: Line 86 "More than 22% of all generated electricity is from fossil fuels", Is it referring to the Thermal conventional in Table 3? It is better to rename it as fossil fuel for better clarity.
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
Section 2:
This section only presents theoretical introduction about H2 properties and the common production method of H2. How about the relevance of H2 as energy source in Slovakia? This section should have addressed the current conditions for H2 technology and infrastructure in Slovakia and to give readers more insights about the feasibility, challenges and the bottleneck of the development of green H2 technology.
Page 3 Lines 107-119 can be removed as these have little relevance.
Page 4 Lines 133-135 can be removed as this paragraph is being repeated in the following one.
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
Section 3:
Since at the beginning of the manuscript biomass was mentioned to be one of the important renewable sources in Slovakia, its feasibility to produce H2 should have also been addressed in this section besides the hydropower. In addition, in this section, the authors should have laid out detailed proposal and technical strategies how the country can realize the production of Hydrogen by using the current hydropower energies.
Page 4 Lines 150-152: From this amount of energy produced, how much surplus can be used to run the electrolyser to generate hydrogen?
Page 4 Line 168: As mentioned earlier that large hydropower dams can be detrimental to the natural environment and ecosystem. What alternatives or other strategies can be proposed here?
Page 5 Lines 183-185: From this amount of energy produced, how much surplus can be used to run the electrolyser to generate hydrogen?
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
We would like to thank the reviewer for the comments and constructive suggestions to our manuscript. The reviewer’s thoughtful comments and suggestions have helped to improve the quality of this manuscript to a considerable degree. We do hope that these revisions improve the paper such that the Editor and all the reviewers now deem it worthy of publication in “Applied Sciences” Journal.
Sincerely yours,
Peter Durcansky, Radovan Nosek, Richard Lenhard, Branislav Zvada
Reviewer 3 Report
In this paper, the authors reported the current situation of the energy market in Slovakia and possible development for future hydrogen generation. This work is interesting due to hydrogen production is one of the most important ways to store energy from renewable energy. And this study could be helpful for the researchers to understand situation and possibility of hydrogen production in Slovak Republic. I will recommend publishing this paper if the following comments are addressed.
- The authors focused on the energy from hydropower to produce hydrogen. It is believed that hydropower is the largest share of renewable electricity generation. The authors also mentioned that new large hydropower also has negative effects on the environment and local ecosystems. The policy needs to shift to SHPP (small hydroelectric power plants) with 159.87MW (in Table 6) of planned total power output. Comparing to the large hydropower plant with 2543MW (in Table 2) in Slovak Republic, this represents an increase in electricity production of about 2%. On the other hands, the solar energy only 531MW (6.9%) (in Table 2). Can authors mention more possibility about hydrogen production from solar energy?
- For energy production, technology is one of the factors and cost is usually another key factor in determining the success of hydrogen production. Can authors give more analysis for cost?
- By the way, where there is demand, there is supply. Can the authors describe the market overview of the domestic demand or export market potential of hydrogen energy in Slovakia?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer # 3’s Comments:
We are very thankful to the reviewer for the careful reading of this manuscript and also all comments. Thank you very much for taking the time and energy to help us improve the paper.
The authors focused on the energy from hydropower to produce hydrogen. It is believed that hydropower is the largest share of renewable electricity generation. The authors also mentioned that new large hydropower also has negative effects on the environment and local ecosystems. The policy needs to shift to SHPP (small hydroelectric power plants) with 159.87MW (in Table 6) of planned total power output. Comparing to the large hydropower plant with 2543MW (in Table 2) in Slovak Republic, this represents an increase in electricity production of about 2%. On the other hands, the solar energy only 531MW (6.9%) (in Table 2) Can authors mention more possibility about hydrogen production from solar energy?
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
For energy production, technology is one of the factors and cost is usually another key factor in determining the success of hydrogen production. Can authors give more analysis for cost?
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
By the way, where there is demand, there is supply. Can the authors describe the market overview of the domestic demand or export market potential of hydrogen energy in Slovakia?
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
We would like to thank the reviewer for the comments and constructive suggestions to our manuscript. The reviewer’s thoughtful comments and suggestions have helped to improve the quality of this manuscript to a considerable degree. We do hope that these revisions improve the paper such that the Editor and all the reviewers now deem it worthy of publication in “Applied Sciences” Journal.
Sincerely yours,
Peter Durcansky, Radovan Nosek, Richard Lenhard, Branislav Zvada
Reviewer 4 Report
The article title seems to interested about hydrogen technology, however the authors just described general thing well known in hydrogen production. They did not provide insight about the current hydrogen technology worldwide. In my opinion, this review article is not worth to be published in Applied Science.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer # 4’s Comments:
We are very thankful to the reviewer for the careful reading of this manuscript and also all comments. Thank you very much for taking the time and energy to help us improve the paper.
The article title seems to interested about hydrogen technology, however the authors just described general thing well known in hydrogen production. They did not provide insight about the current hydrogen technology worldwide. In my opinion, this review article is not worth to be published in Applied Science.
Answer: The article was corrected; new data was added.
We would like to thank the reviewer for the comments and constructive suggestions to our manuscript. The reviewer’s thoughtful comments and suggestions have helped to improve the quality of this manuscript to a considerable degree. We do hope that these revisions improve the paper such that the Editor and all the reviewers now deem it worthy of publication in “Applied Sciences” Journal.
Sincerely yours,
Peter Durcansky, Radovan Nosek, Richard Lenhard, Branislav Zvada
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors enhance the paper. The topic is very interesting and the analysis methodology is right, with sufficient techical details.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have addressed the concerns and questions raised and the manuscript has been significantly improved.
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript has been considerably improved!
