Next Article in Journal
The Application of Breakthrough Pressure in the Evaluation of the Sealing Ability of Cement–Casing Interface and Cement Matrix in Underground Gas-Storage Wells
Next Article in Special Issue
Photodegradation of Decabrominated Diphenyl Ether in Soil Suspensions: Kinetics, Mechanisms and Intermediates
Previous Article in Journal
A Comprehensive Review of Layered Double Hydroxide-Based Carbon Composites as an Environmental Multifunctional Material for Wastewater Treatment
Previous Article in Special Issue
Prediction of Heavy Metal Concentrations in Contaminated Sites from Portable X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer Data Using Machine Learning
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/pr10040618
Review Report
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

Printed Edition

A printed edition of this Special Issue is available at MDPI Books....
share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Sorption of Cd2+ on Bone Chars with or without Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment under Various Pyrolysis Temperatures: Comparison of Mechanisms and Performance

Processes 2022, 10(4), 618; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10040618
by Qing Guo 1,2, Hongmei Tang 1,2, Lu Jiang 1,2, Meiqing Chen 1,2, Nengwu Zhu 1,2 and Pingxiao Wu 1,2,3,*
Reviewer 1:
Yingang Gui
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Processes 2022, 10(4), 618; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10040618
Submission received: 8 March 2022 / Revised: 20 March 2022 / Accepted: 21 March 2022 / Published: 22 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Remediation of Contaminated Sites: Volume I)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this manuscript, the authors study the Sorption of Cd2+ on bone chars with or without hydrogen peroxide treatment under various pyrolysis temperatures: Comparison of mechanisms and performance. This work sounds very interesting and meaningful, and the analysis is reasonably clear, but there are still a few concerns regarding this article, therefore, I suggest it for publication in this journal after the following major revisions:

  1. It can be compared with the existing research to highlight the research advantages of this paper.
  2. What is the long-term adsorption performance of the adsorbent in this experiment.
  3. Some grammatical errors are found. A proof-reading of the article will enhance the quality of the paper.
  4. The format of images and notes should be consistent.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear editor,

the following issue have to be corrected in order to be published:

  • graphical abstract should be corrected and improved
  • put also the comparasion values in abstract
  • use subscript and superscript in all manuscript
  • why did you use inert atmosphere ?
  • why use only for 300oC the H2O2?
  • raw 100, why did you wash them again after pyrolysis?
  • why did you heat treated the samples if BCH has good adsorption also without heat treating ?
  • raw 135:   DOC and EDS  please add full name
  • why do you add Ca2+ cations aslo in manuscript? please change title then and complete the results
  • XPS analysis of BCH-300 or BC-300 ? in figure you write BC and in text BCH
  • please check for typos in all manuscript there are a lot of mistakes.
  •  

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors took into consideration the reviewers’ comments, they analyzed simulation result and answered to the questions. They addressed most of reviewers’ comments and took them into account by modifying the manuscript and the supplementary information. They nicely answered the questions by providing data, analysis and discussions. The manuscript has been changed and is now better and clearer. Overall I think this work can now be published in Processes. This is why I recommend accepting this manuscript.

Back to TopTop