Efficacies of Carbon-Based Adsorbents for Carbon Dioxide Capture
, Muhammad Sarwar Hossain 1,2, Palash Kumar Dhar 2, Md. Saifur Rahman 3, Md. Ashraf Hossain 4,* and Mohammad Boshir Ahmed 3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I prepared the manuscript review Efficacies of Carbon Based Adsorbents for Carbon Dioxide Capture Authors: Tasmina Khandaker, Muhammad Sarwar Hossain, Palash Kumar Dhar, Md. Saifur Rahman, Md Ashraf Hossain, Mohammad Boshir Ahmed* Submitted to
section: Green Processes,
The review is clear and adequately described and will be interest to some readers, which are interested in adsorption CO2. In my opinion this manuscript is acceptable for publication.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Review report
The manuscript entitled “Efficacies of Carbon Based Adsorbents for Carbon Dioxide Capture” reviewed the carbon materials that could be employed for CO2 capture using physical adsorption. Although CO2 capture of high interest, this review fails to address the key points this research front. There is no distinction on what and which carbon materials are suited for either post or pre-combustion CO2 capture. There is not much discussion of detailed critical analysis and recent developments on carbon materials for CO2 capture. At the moment, it is just a summary of the literature and the contents are too restricted without a proper explanation of CO2 capture processes. The paper is written poorly and requires an overhaul for English check. The manuscript is not authoritative enough for publication in this journal. It may be suitable for some other journal after proper assessment of the areas mentioned above.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
attachment
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript submitted for review is interesting. It contains a good literature review. However, I am asking for minor cosmetic corrections. My comments are as follows:1) In tables 1-3 in the last column, replace "source" with "reference"
2) page 5, line 143, subchapter 2.2 ......... expand the abbreviation: Carbon nanotubes (CNTs)
3) page 5, line 157, SWCNT- expand the abbreviation
4) table 3, three consecutive rows in the first column are given in general AC. Make up from which AC was obtained. There may be an annotation under the table.
5) Table 2, the values presented in the penultimate column in four lines are not clear to me. Please complete. I guess these are the measuring temperatures.
A similar remark applies to Table 3, it also shows the value in brackets which requires explanation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors say about addressing the ambient air basis Co2 capture but the underlying scientific discussion is not sound. The CO2 capture at 273 K has been given attention at several places in the manuscript. Is it really ambient air based CO2 capture? I am sorry to say but much of the revised manuscript is still the same as original and does not reflect changes (Science and English) recommended previously except a minor improvement in English.
Author Response
Please see the attacment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have addressed my concerns.
Please check the reference again and their numbers. And I didn't see the paper "Shi, H. Xiao, X. Liao, M. Armstrong, X. Chen, K. S. Lackner, J. Chem. Phys.2018, 149, 164708." has been cited as the authors claimed in their reply.
I don't have more questions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
