Operation of Power-to-X-Related Processes Based on Advanced Data-Driven Methods: A Comprehensive Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study proposes a review on the data driven operation of Power to X cogeneration plant. Even thought the paper is well written and organized, it does not seem complete. Especially, the focus on Power to X plant seems limited. No mention has been made to the cogeneration aspects of a Power to X plant. The examples reported in the study are mostly related to power to gas/fuel process with no direct reference to cogeneration aspects (use of thermal energy). How is the thermal energy managed on the basis of a data driven operation? A revision of the title is suggested. The result examples reported in Figure 6 and 7 seem out of context with a limited explanation. The review on machine learning and data driven operation seems appropriate, even though a greater detail would improve paper significance.
Author Response
I would like to express our gratitude for the important comments brought by the reviewer. Below, we answer the concerns in point-to-point fashion. The reviewer's comment is in italic. The changes in the manuscript are identified with red font.
The study proposes a review on the data driven operation of Power to X cogeneration plant. Even thought the paper is well written and organized, it does not seem complete. Especially, the focus on Power to X plant seems limited. No mention has been made to the cogeneration aspects of a Power to X plant. The examples reported in the study are mostly related to power to gas/fuel process with no direct reference to cogeneration aspects (use of thermal energy). How is the thermal energy managed on the basis of a data driven operation? A revision of the title is suggested.
Reply: We agree with the reviewer. The focus on cogeneration was indeed not reflecting the actual contribution. Following the reviewer's suggestion, we have: (1) changed the focus on cogeneration plants, and (2) added a more detailed review of the cogeneration aspects as well. We decided to do so, because we believe that the paper is more general than cogeneration, while this specific aspect is very important, therefore we kept it in the manuscript. The changes are mainly in Sec. 3.
The result examples reported in Figure 6 and 7 seem out of context with a limited explanation. The review on machine learning and data driven operation seems appropriate, even though a greater detail would improve paper significance.
Reply: We agree with this point. We have now added new parts in the text to better explain our rationale of the numerical example as an illustration of the proposed method. Most changes are in Sec. 5.2.
Besides, we have also made a few changes after a thorough proof-reading.
Reviewer 2 Report
- The topic is very interesting and without a doubt section 5. Example provides data that is valuable to the study area, but the article is restricted to a description of results without providing appropriate references to make a good comparison, discussion and conclusions.- The document has a lack of references and state of the art related to cogeneration plants. The discusion should be discussed and compared with this previous research. (Improve the related syudy review)
Author Response
I would like to express our gratitude for the important comments brought by the reviewer. Below, we answer the concerns in point-to-point fashion. The reviewer's comment is in italic. The changes in the manuscript are identified with red font.
- The topic is very interesting and without a doubt section 5. Example provides data that is valuable to the study area, but the article is restricted to a description of results without providing appropriate references to make a good comparison, discussion and conclusions.
Reply: Thanks for this comment. Indeed, the numerical result was presented suddenly. We have now better explained more details about what we have carried out. As a matter of fact, the numerical example discussed in Sec. 5 is an illustration of how the reviewed studies could be deployed in actual operational decision making processes in P2X. The main changes are in Sec. 5.
- The document has a lack of references and state of the art related to cogeneration plants. The discusion should be discussed and compared with this previous research. (Improve the related syudy review)
Reply: We agree, and we have now improved the literature review of the cogeneration plant. Besides, following the suggestion of the other reviewer, we decided to put more emphasis in the P2X processes while indicating the importance of cogeneration. The main changes are in Sec. 3.
Besides, we have proofread the manuscript more carefully, and made some few changes in order to further improve the text flow.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
After the revision, the paper may be considered acceptable for publication
