Feasibility Study of a Novel Open Ocean Aquaculture Ship Integrating with a Wind Turbine and an Internal Turret Mooring System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the reviewed article, the authors presented preliminary studies of the impact of the movement of a moored aquaculture vessel on aerodynamic and elastic phenomena occurring in an integrated wind turbine. The authors also presented the results of their research on the influence of the dynamics of aquaculture ships on energy production from floating wind turbines.
I am aware of the fact that the role of the reviewer is not to correct grammar and language errors. However, due to the fact that many of them significantly influenced my understanding of the text, I allowed myself to correct some of them. However, I believe the article needs to be thoroughly checked regarding linguistic correctness.
On the other hand, I rate the scientific side of the article very highly. The authors raised an interesting and important issue in it. They approached it in many ways and took into account many aspects.
Most of the corrections were made in the attached pdf file via the Comment tool in Adobe Acrobat Reader. Apart from them, I have some minor comments:
· The entry should be systematized: wind turbine or Wind turbine? Tower or turret? The vessel or Vessel?
· The notations used in Figure 3: A, H, D and Lambda are not explained.
· the alpha symbol is not explained in formula (3);
· the phi symbol is not explained in formula (4);
· To correctly explain the symbols used in formula (8), please see the publication https://essay.utwente.nl/69276/1/Report_Internship_Jur_Mourits_final.pdf or https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2003.12.001. I also suggest adding a drawing with the characteristic angles, generated forces and velocity distribution for the blade profile;
· the S symbol is not explained in formula (10);
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your patient reading and meticulous review comments on the paper.
We`ve responded all the comments, and revised the paper accordingly. All the response can be found in the file attached, please see the attachment.
Once again, I sincerely thank you again for your guidance!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors:
The proposal made for the combination of floating energy and aquaculture is very innovative and interesting, in accordance with current solutions towards an ecological transition.
The bibliographical references of the introduction (section 1) as well as the modeling (section 2) and the results (section 3) are correctly described for the scientific community, however, an initial methodological description of the entire modeling would add great quality to the work. In this way the reader previously knows an overview at a glance.
Another important aspect, although it is not the objective of the work but to propose it as future work, is to make the optimal selection of sites (floating wind + aquaculture) and their economic evaluation.
Author Response
Thank you for your patient reading and meticulous review comments on the paper.
We`ve responded all the comments, and revised the paper accordingly. All the response can be found in the file attached, please see the attachment.
Once again, I sincerely thank you again for your guidance!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
