Potential and Pathways of Carbon Emission Reduction in China’s Beef Production from the Supply Chain Perspective
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComment for the Manuscript
Tittle: "Potential and Pathways of Carbon Emission Reduction in China's Beef Production from the Whole Supply Chain Perspective"
The paper submitted paper offers a comprehensive account of carbon emissions in the beef industry in China. The stages in the supply chain are identified, and key areas for carbon emission are pointed out while suggesting possible ways to reduce them. However there are writing consistency issues and some typing errors/mistakes, also additional data need to be considered.
Some part need to be update as listed below:
Line 72 CO2e, fix the typo and check in all the manuscript part
Line 74 neither in delta or beta. This need explanation
Line 276 the reason of select 17 beef production province was based on which consideration? In line with this, please also specify the beef cattle production system.
Line 296 Table 2. See CO2, compared with CO2 (2 as under script). Please make the adjustment for the correct one, in the whole manuscript
line 487-516, its would be better and give best insight if the population of the animal per year or year to year can be show as the one of the cause of methane production source
Author Response
Comment 1: Line 72 CO2e, fix the typo and check in all the manuscript part
Reponse 1: thank you for your opion，the entire paper has been modified.
Comment 2:Line 74 neither in delta or beta. This need explanation
Reponse 2:Thank you for your opion, We rephrased it for easier understanding.
Comment 3:Line 276 the reason of select 17 beef production province was based on which consideration? In line with this, please also specify the beef cattle production system.
Reponse 3:Thank you for your opion. The reason has been further elaborated.
Comment 4: Line 296 Table 2. See CO2, compared with CO2 (2 as under script). Please make the adjustment for the correct one, in the whole manuscript
Reponse 4:Thank you for your opion.the entire paper has been modified.
Comment 5: line 487-516, its would be better and give best insight if the population of the animal per year or year to year can be show as the one of the cause of methane production source
Reponse 5:Thank you for your opion. We believe that CH4 is definitely produced during the metabolic process of ruminants, and as the number of animals increases, even with changes in feeding techniques or the addition of other enzymes, they remain one of the sources of CH4. So we didn't make any modifications. Welcome to further explore in depth.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
Animal production is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. One of the major challenges in sustainable management is mitigating climate change's effects by reducing GHG emissions. The research aims to develop differentiated emission reduction paths for the beef industry, which has large greenhouse gas emissions, to formulate effective carbon emission reduction policies. The life cycle assessment method was used in the research. The research material consisted of statistical data.
The article is valuable for scientists and managers but requires some improvements.
Line 20-21: „This research adopts a comprehensive industry-chain perspective…”: I am not convinced by this statement.
Line 22: ”life cycle” should be changed to ”life cycle assessment”.
Line 36: I suggest adding "(GHG)" when using the words greenhouse gas emissions for the first time and continuing to use only "GHG".
Lines 37-38: I suggest the title "Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options" is omitted in the text.
Line 39: ”CO2” should be changed to ”CO2” and explained upon first use.
Line 42-44: Document titles can be added to the reference list. Provide only reference numbers in the text.
Line 50: ”CH4” should be changed to ”CH4”.
Lines 477-661: Discussion: Please add more literature references.
Lines 662-680: Conclusions: Please emphasize, what's new in this paper? What kind of research gap is found in this study? What is the direction for further research?
Author Response
Comment 1: Line 20-21: „This research adopts a comprehensive industry-chain perspective…”: I am not convinced by this statement.
Reponse1: Thank you for your advice .The calculation of carbon emissions from beef cattle in our paper is based on the link of feed grain planting, feed grain transportation and processing, rumen fermentation, manure management system, feeding energy consumption, and product processing. So we think The paper is based on the perspective of the industrial chain.But it was not highlighted in the subsequent analysis，So we removed the “comprensilve” and adjusted the expression. Welcome to provide further advice.
Comment 2: Line 22: ”life cycle” should be changed to ”life cycle assessment”.
Reponse2: Thank you for your advice .We have made modifications.
Comment 3:Line 36: I suggest adding "(GHG)" when using the words greenhouse gas emissions for the first time and continuing to use only "GHG".
Reponse3:Thank you for your advice .We have made modifications.
Comment 4:Lines 37-38: I suggest the title "Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options" is omitted in the text.
Reponse4:Thank you for your advice .We have made modifications.
Comment 5:Line 39: ”CO2” should be changed to ”CO2” and explained upon first use.
Reponse5:Thank you for your advice .We have made modifications.
Comment 6：Line 42-44: Document titles can be added to the reference list. Provide only reference numbers in the text.
Reponse6:Thank you for your advice .We have made modifications.
Comment 7：Line 50: ”CH4” should be changed to ”CH4”.
Reponse7:Thank you for your advice .We have made modifications and check all paper.
Comment 8：Lines 477-661: Discussion: Please add more literature references.
Reponse8: Thank you for your advice .We have added some, but we are not sure if it is possible.
Comment 9：Lines 662-680: Conclusions: Please emphasize, what's new in this paper? What kind of research gap is found in this study? What is the direction for further research?
Reponse9: Thank you for your advice . We have add the focus in the ending.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI appreciate the intention of the research which aims to provide a whole-encompassing analysis of carbon emissions in China's beef industry, advocating for targeted and locally adapted strategies to mitigate environmental impact. The message that to achieve low-carbon animal husbandry, it is crucial to balance efficiency in production with fairness in emissions reduction strategies, is very clear to the reviewer. I also like the usage of maps to illustrate temporal trends in emissions and emission reduction potential.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageVery minimal discrepancies detected. One more round of rereading and edits recommended.
Author Response
Comment 1:Very minimal discrepancies detected. One more round of rereading and edits recommend
reponse1 : thank you for your advice.We have check all the paper ,but we are not sure it is ok.
