Effect of Fulvic Acid in Landfill Leachate Membrane Concentrate on Evaporation Process
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The study is interesting, presents significant results but the manuscript needs to be improved for publication:
The manuscript is not formatted according to the journal template (guidelines/instructions for authors);
There is no use of statistics to differentiate the results and treatments evaluated;
There is confusion in the order in which the results are presented and the methodology. For example: LLMC characteristics are in results, in the first item of results, but in methodology it is the last item. I suggest reorganizing the order of presentation of results and the methodology. The characterization of the LLMC could also be in the methodology;
items 2.2 and 2.3 (methodology) require references (citations) to be sure that this methodology is adequate and used by scientists and is present in the literature;
change mg/L to mg.L-1, tons/day to tons.day-1, see entire manuscript and adjust other measurement units (scientific notation);
The introduction should present the results (main conclusions) of other studies that evaluated the evaporation technique. This would facilitate the understanding of the manuscript innovation. L56, "there are few studies on the evaporation process of the organics-salt mixed system", which ones? What do they present?;
Standardize graphics formatting, Fig 3. with green background;
Improve the quality of figure 5, it is difficult to assess;
After performing a statistical method, rewrite the conclusions based on the result.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The author provided a systematic study on illustrating FA effect of the LLMC evaporation, as well as methods on how to remove FA in LLMC. This finding could be very helpful for future waste treatment. However, the format of the paper should be improved. Also, the author may consider how to highlight "FA removal" part study, which could be beneficial to future waste treatment.
Format update/improvement:
1. Section 3.1, line 115-119: the font size looks smaller than the rest of the paper, could the author fix it and ensure using the same font size in the paper?
2. Figure 1 and figure 5 resolution looks relatively lower than other figures, could the author improve it?
3. Line 141 has a typo (should be “heat” instead of “feat”)
4. Line 165, should be “figure 2” instead of “figure 1”
5. Line 172, should be “figure 3” instead of “figure 2”
6. In Figure 3, x-axis title should be “FA” instead of “HA”
Content update/improvement:
1. Figure 1, could the author add the fluorescence spectra of the control sample (FA solution and HA solution)?
2. Equation (3) and (4), could the author add the reference for the equations?
3. In equation (1), the dimension of the unit on the right of the equation and the left of the equation seems not aligned (how does “m2” on the right side of the equation get canceled out?). Could the author check it?
4. In equation (3), could the author explains why lg(6200μ) becomes dimensionless in unit?
5. In equation (5) to calculate Renolds number, could the author explained what u (flow speed) represents for in this study?
6. In addition, since equation (1)-(9) were used as qualitative analysis, rather than quantitative calculation (or modeling), the author may consider move this to SI ?
7. Figure 2, showing both BP and BP rising seems a little redundant and could cause confusions to the audience. Could the author remove either, or separate them? Could the author clarify whether BP rise was calculated as “BP of the sample - BP of reference sample”?
8. Line 172, the author said “the viscosity of FA solution increases slowly with the increase of the FA concentration”, this seems cannot be supported by the figure. For instance, in the range of “5000-25000” HA, there is a decrease trend.
9. Section 3.3 describes how to remove FA in softness process, and this great finding is would benefit the future waste treatment study a lot. Could the author highlight this section? (Section 3.1 and 3.2 could be shorten)
10. Line 238, the author said “After adding Ca(OH)2, the removal efficiency of FA reached more than 90%, which 238 was much higher after adding Na2CO3”, however, this seems not aligned with the Table 4 (“after adding Na2CO3” the FA removal is >95%). Could the author add more explanation/clarification for this?
11. In section 4, could the author added some discussion on what could be the challenges for applying this method in actual waste treatment, is there any scale up concerns?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
I can not recommend this paper to be published in Processes in the current state because of too many mistakes and errors. In fact, I wanted to reject it completely, but the topic, in my opinion, is very hot and important. Investigation of garbage disposal process is a seldom explored area. Also, I think this paper has a good chance to become a decent paper, if the authors will make some efforts to improve it, starting from improving English. I've attached a 3 pages review to this letter.
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been significantly improved. However, it still needs to fit the journal model.
"Authors are encouraged to use the Microsoft Word template or LaTeX template to prepare their manuscript. Using the template file will substantially shorten the time to complete copy-editing and publication of accepted manuscripts."
Processes Microsoft Word template file: https://www.mdpi.com/files/word-templates/processes-template.dot
Author Response
The Microsoft Word Template was used in our revised manuscript.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
