Energy Management of Microgrids for Smart Cities: A Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The content of the paper has been improved. The use of language has been improved but requires further review.

Author Response

First of all, we would like to thank the editor for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript and resubmit it. We would like also to thank the reviewers for their thorough work in assessing our manuscript, and their detailed comments that contribute significantly to its improvement. We explain, in the following sections, how the comments were addressed in the revised paper. More specifically, in this note, we summarize the revisions made to the paper as requested, whereas minor errors, omissions, typos, etc., are fixed in place. Taking these comments into account, we have tried our best to revise the manuscript. The revision has clearly improved both the results and the presentation of the manuscript, and we hope that the reviewers will now find our manuscript ready for publication. All changes made in the manuscript are highlighted in BLUE color.

 

Response to Reviewer 1:

The content of the paper has been improved. The use of language has been improved but requires further review.

Response: English language improved and  typos are fixed  as mentioned by the respected reviewer.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

A paper present a review of energy management of micro grids for smart city application. The work is presented very well and it is explained the idea of the problem. The references are enough for review paper. 

Author Response

First of all, we would like to thank the editor for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript and resubmit it. We would like also to thank the reviewers for their thorough work in assessing our manuscript, and their detailed comments that contribute significantly to its improvement. We explain, in the following sections, how the comments were addressed in the revised paper. More specifically, in this note, we summarize the revisions made to the paper as requested, whereas minor errors, omissions, typos, etc., are fixed in place. Taking these comments into account, we have tried our best to revise the manuscript. The revision has clearly improved both the results and the presentation of the manuscript, and we hope that the reviewers will now find our manuscript ready for publication.

Response to Reviewer 2:

A paper presents a review of energy management of micro grids for smart city application. The work is presented very well, and it is explained the idea of the problem. The references are enough for review paper. 

Response: Authors want to thank respected reviewer.  

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Smart cities depend on energy reliability. It has an impact on social and economic factors. This is due to the creation of a microgrid that maintains the continuity of energy supply. An energy management system (EMS) is used for this purpose. This allows you to minimize the cost of operating the system and temporary energy shortages. The Authors see the use of renewable energy sources as a solution to system reliability and a positive environmental impact. This helps to mitigate climate change.

According to The Authors, they presented classical methods of energy management through linear and non-linear management as well as rule-based programming and dynamic programming. They analyzed the research of various researchers over the past 13 years. Thanks to heuristics, they undertake the task of determining the correct path to the optimal EMS system using various methods, e.g. based on a genetic algorithm, based on neural networks or Fuzzy Logic. They analyzed five elaborate methods for optimizing microgrid performance. The Authors note that there are still many factors to explain when it comes to the efficiency of microgrid work. These are the analysis of the reliability of communication systems, energy management, and the estimation of the life cycle of lithium batteries.

Detailed comments

The text is prepared contrary to the format of the journal. No Author Contributions.

Author's Name Abrar or Abra?

Fig. 1 Superviosary - should it be? Supervisory

The figure does not show the classification of microgrids. Rather, these are the ways the network works. This is reflected in point 2.

Author Response

First of all, we would like to thank the editor for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript and resubmit it. We would like also to thank the reviewers for their thorough work in assessing our manuscript, and their detailed comments that contribute significantly to its improvement. We explain, in the following sections, how the comments were addressed in the revised paper. More specifically, in this note, we summarize the revisions made to the paper as requested, whereas minor errors, omissions, typos, etc., are fixed in place. Taking these comments into account, we have tried our best to revise the manuscript. The revision has clearly improved both the results and the presentation of the manuscript, and we hope that the reviewers will now find our manuscript ready for publication. All changes made in the manuscript are highlighted in BLUE color.

 

Response to Reviewer 3:

The text is prepared contrary to the format of the journal. No Author Contributions.

Response:  Text fixed as per journal format. Author contribution added.

Author's Name Abrar or Abra?

Response:  Author name Abrar

Fig. 1 Superviosary - should it be? Supervisory

Response:  typos are fixed 

The figure does not show the classification of microgrids. Rather, these are the ways the network works. This is reflected in point 2.

Response: Figure 1, updated/changed as per respected reviewer recommendation.    

Author Response File: Author Response.docx