Life Cycle Analysis of Hydrogen Powered Marine Vessels—Case Ship Comparison Study with Conventional Power System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article adopts the LCA method to conduct a life cycle comparative analysis between traditional powered ships and hydrogen fuel ships, evaluating their environmental friendliness and economic feasibility. The result indicates that hydrogen fuel ships have significant advantages in both cost and environmental benefits. The operational phase has the greatest economic and environmental impact throughout the entire life cycle. This study is beneficial for promoting the use of alternative fuels in ships and has certain reference value for energy saving and emission reduction in the shipping industry.
However, there are some limitations to be improved:
1. The article only presents the evaluation results of life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), lacking the analysis of life cycle inventory (LCI).
2. In section 3.3, the sensitivity analysis, there is a lack of uncertainty analysis for the input parameters of life cycle environmental impacts.
The quality of English language in this paper is fairly good.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper Life Cycle Analysis of Hydrogen Powered Marine Vessels Comparison Case Ship Study with Conventional Power System focuses on assessment of Life Cycle Analysis of Hydrogen Powered Marine Vessels with traditional marine diesel oil. In my opinion, the comparison still not yet comprehensive altough the authors develop/ used in-house software that still limited parameters could used. There is no verification study how the result can be benchmarked with similar study.
-line 16 GHG emissions, please provide an abbreviation of this meaning then you could use abbreviation.
-line 300 The situations of 35, 140, 210 and 280 Euro/ton
please provide a citation, how you get this number
-references, you use a different letter style, synchronize it with journal template
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The study is about a current subject of maritime emissions. The paper needs major revisions with below comments;
1- The abtsract should have results of this study with quantative data.
2- The literature review should be widen as a new (2022-2023) academic literature and the difference between these studies have to be stated with novelty.
3- The Methodology should be concise and logical allowing interested researchers to be able to repeat your work. If needed, it could be provided with references.
4- How the authors select four case vessels? What is the impact of these four vessel types to the whole maritime emissions?
5- The results and discussion are not presented well. In this context, results section have to be revised as it should be quantitative, discussed and compared with the results published in the literature.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
All the questions from the first review were answered. It can be accepted.
