Prospective Scenarios for Addressing the Agricultural Plastic Waste Issue: Results of a Territorial Analysis
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I think a very interesting paper. In addition, it is written in a very clear and simple way.
Author Response
No remark.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
Thank you for writing this manuscript. Reducing long-life plastic wastes is of utmost importance nowadays, and the study revealed here could help to achieve this objective. However, there are some comments that may help to enhance the potentiality of the future article:
· Climate, pluviometry and elevation data of the region might be interesting to value the requirement of plastics for agricultural purposes. If known, also the annual UV irradiation parameters could be helpful, since they might vary the plastics’ degradation time.
· Difference between current and 2nd scenarios (that is, “actual” and “sustainable replacements” ones) in terms of the annual quantity of the APW amount needs to be detailed better. Explanation provided between lines 248 and 253 may not be clear enough. Same for Figures 2 and 5.
· It is suggested considering that maybe “sustainable replacements” (2nd scenario) entail shorter lifespan of the materials, hence requiring more frequent replacements. This effect has not been taken into account in this work.
· [115-125] Consider reviewing this paragraph, because it basically repeats the scenarios’ description stated in the introduction. Instead, paragraph may indicate the procedure to determine exactly which regions are prone to scenario 1, scenario 2 or both, what would be interesting for the Materials and Methods (M&M) section.
· [125-126] Why are these different changes proposed for each PAs? Further description explaining the selection shown in Table 1 is needed.
· [132] QGIS description is in 154th line (actually, not even there, since this reference is missing), but term was introduced before. If used to take Figure 1, it is recommended to introduce QGIS description in line 112 and perhaps a short one in Figure 1 caption.
· [134-146] As indicated in MDPI’s templates, inside M&M section: “New methods and protocols should be described in detail”. Hence, it might be convenient to describe much better 3-6 points in the methodology, as well as the source used to obtain the 2nd point.
· [153] Besides a better description in the text of Table 1, a properly detailed Table caption is recommended. Are these proposals based on the authors’ own criteria, or are there any parameter related to achieve them?
· [156] Google satellite images, although well-known, may require a citation as well.
· [162-163] How is this information extracted? Remember that M&M section should describe the procedure in a way that anyone could repeat the experiments described in the manuscript.
· [163] How can Google satellite images help to detect nurseries? By their shape? By their commercial addresses? By any other characteristic detected? Consider that in Table 2 they are even divided between “Vegetables” and “Ornamental”.
· [173-174] A further description of these investigations and calculations is recommended.
· [244] I think it refers to Figure 9 instead of 8.
· Conclusion should show better the main results revealed in the manuscript. More data and final suggestions can be provided, according to the Results and discussion’s section.
· Resolution of all the images must be improved.
· Beware of the references. For instance, 1, 6, 7, 13 and 19 seem to be incomplete.
· Few English typing/grammar errors should be corrected.
Best regards.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
attached
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
Thanks for reviewing the manuscript. However, there are still some few comments remaining.
- There is an inconsistency: if 2nd scenario, as declared in “Pag. 2, from ln 78 to ln 82”, deals with non-plastic wastes, why are they mentioned as “agricultural plastic waste (APW)” throughout the whole manuscript? Indeed, according to this criterion, Figure 5 should be blank, since “total plastic waste per cultivated area” would be null in this case. Same in Figure 9: if “sustainable replacement” implies no plastic, APW should be “0”.
- [134-135, 174 (Table 1)] Why are these different changes proposed for each PAs? Further description explaining the selection shown in Table 1 is needed; and
- [153] Besides a better description in the text of Table 1, a properly detailed Table caption is recommended. Are these proposals based on the authors’ own criteria, or are there any parameter related to achieve them?
This was better explained in Materials and methods (Section 2).
Pag. 4, from ln 132 to ln 139, the following part was modified:
“The 1st scenario considered the extension of the life duration of some plastic materials used in the several PAs and for which that extension is deemed really feasible. Life extension was proposed according to the best performing materials available on the market. The 2nd scenario was oriented towards the replacement of the plastic material into a more nature-based biodegradable one. Biomaterials already on the market were considered. The different changes in the PAs are addressed in the Table 1.”
The caption of Table 1 in Materials and methods (Section 2) was modified.
Pag. 4, from ln 174 to ln 175, the caption is now the following:
“Table 1. Scenarios changes in respect to real-time scenario, based on the best performing materials on the market.”
Explanation has been improved. Nevertheless, it is not clear yet why these particular lifespans were considered. Why these numbers? If determined from information provided by the corresponding companies or from articles, reference/s is/are required. If values were proposed by authors’ criteria based on surveys from farmers, it may be convenient stating that in the manuscript.
Best regards.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
