Application End Evaluation of Electrostatic Precipitation for Control PM and NOx Emissions from Small-Scale Combustions
, Kamil Krpec, Jiřà Horák, Lenka Kuboňová, František Hopan and Jiřà RyšavýRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript presents a novel approach to simultaneously control PM and NOx emissions from small-scale biomass combustion using a specially designed ESP with corona discharge of positive and negative polarity. But there are still some issues that need to be further supplemented and modified. The paper needs major revisions before it can be reconsidered. The comments are as follows:
1. It is necessary to distinguish the product designed in this study from the general "Electrostatic Preceptor (ESP)", and not just use the term ESP to specifically refer to the improved product of this study. It is recommended to distinguish by adding the suffix "designed" or "improved".
2. A structural diagram needs to be added to help the reader understand the design of "The special honeycomb ESP" in line 20.
3. Please include “EN 303-5:2013” in line 93 as a reference.
4. The format of “H2O Content” and “O2 content” in Table 1 should be the same.
5. The data in Figure 2 is not sufficient to understand the content of lines 133-138 “The current-voltage characteristic of the studied ESP is presented in Figure 2 for both polarities. The minimum current of 0.1 mA was observed at voltages of 5.0 kV and 7.7 kV for negative and positive polarity, respectively. In the positive polarity, the corona discharge was limited by sparks and breakdowns at 11.9 kV and 30 mA. In contrast, the negative corona discharge remained stable up to 12 kV, constrained by the XP Glassman current limit of 40 mA.” clearly. Figure 2 needs to be redrawn.
6. Is this sentence in line 162-164 “This ioni-sation occurs outside the active region and does not affect the NOx decontamination, but leads to an increased corona current and consequently energy consumption NOx removal” unfinished incomplete or missing punctuation at the end?
7. Please specify the meaning represented by the abbreviations of the horizontal and vertical axis titles in Figure 4.
8. Please mark the positions and corresponding regions of 20, 30, 100, and 200nm mentioned in the paper in Figure 4.
9. Lack of quantitative analysis of the data in figures, including analysis of the difference value between data points, especially in Figure 4. The discussion on lines 253-262 needs to be reorganized.
10. What are the specific values of “precipitation efficiency” and “the nucleation size range” in line 266? Is there any quantifiable result? Is there any experiment or literature data that can prove those?
11. How do conclusions obtain in lines 273-276 “The total PN concentration was reduced to approximately 18×103 #/cm3 during operation regimes with a voltage of 12 kV. This value is comparable to the particle concentration in ambient air, which ranged from 14×103to 21×103 #/cm3 during the experimental campaign. In this, PM concentration in cleaned combustion gases was measured at 0 mg/Nm3.”? Is there any experiment data that can prove that? What is the data source?
12. Please carefully check the format of the references and any garbled text present. For example, lines 354, 361, 412, 429, etc.
13. The “CONCLUSIONS” and “Abstract” lacks a description of the research method used in this study. The research significance is written too much in “CONCLUSIONS”. “CONCLUSIONS” needs to reflect more academic results. When reorganizing the “CONCLUSIONS” and “Abstract”, it is necessary to highlight the characteristics of "low energy consumption and high removal efficiency ".
Author Response
please see the attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. In the abstract boiler power is given as 15 kW, and in line 62 it is given as 5 kW.
2. Ultrafine particles are critical, due to their harmful effect on human body.
3. Mechanism of NOx removal with the use of ESP should be more extensively discussed.
4. Line 77: fun - should be fan.
5. Abbreviation PN should be clarified.
6. Comparison with other technologies would be advised.
7. Cost off applying technologie should be estimated.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguagePlease check the spelling.
Author Response
please see the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript scope is dealing with studying using non-thermal plasma generated in a corona discharge to reduce PM and NOx emissions from small-scale combustion. The obtained results of ESP ensured the reduction in PM concentrations from 48 mg/m3 to the magnitude of PM content in the ambient air, while 78-% removal efficiency for NOx was observed. However, there are some comments may improve the quality of the manuscript such as the following:
1. The manuscript title should be revised to present the manuscript main idea
2. Abbreviations and symbols section should be added
3. The abstract section should including the novelty statement and should including some quantitative finding
4. The novelty section in the manuscript should be presented after introduction section
5. The introduction section must be enhanced to present the main concerning of the present study; the authors should look what is the difference between the present and the previous paper, the introduction section should be arranged in two or three paragraphs not in a separate sentences
6. Figure 1 is not clear, it should be enhanced and the system direct photo should be added with parts name
7. Total Uncertainty % value for measurements should added
8. Results and discussion section require more technical treatment
9. All results figures quality should be improved
10. The conclusion section should be revised
Author Response
please see the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe revised manuscript is more comprehensive in its evidence, flows more logically, makes clearer points, and effectively highlights its innovations. It is recommended that this manuscript be accepted in its current form.
