The Impact of Land-Use Structure on Carbon Emission in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper discussed the impact of land use structure on carbon emissions. But there exists some shortcomings that should be revised. My major concerns are as follows.
1. I did not see the method part of this manuscript. I encourage the author to add a method part to provide a clear methdology for this study.
2. The contents is not very consistent with the title. In the manuscript, the authors analyzed the carbon emissions from national, patition and city level, But the discussion is not focusing on the "land use". Although the authors discussed the relationship between the land use and carbon emission, the main body of text is about the built-up land/construction land. Therefore, this study is lack of clear logic thoughts, Instead, it becomes a pile of irrelevant contents. I suggest that the author further clarify thoughts and highlight the key points.
3. A discussion part, I think is needed, to compare with the results of this study with previous studies.
4. The novelty of this study should be further raised and highlighted.
5. The limitation and estimation accuracy/uncertainty should be discussed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1) Line 109: The method of relational research, a confusing statement
2) Line 110: At present, there is still a shortage : This sentences not reflect a good scientific writing
3) Line 121: what does POI and AOI means
4) 126-131: China High 126 Resolution Emission Gridded Database CHRED (China High Resolution Emission Grid-127 ded Database) that organized by the Environmental Planning Institute of the Ministry of 128 Ecology and Environment, EDGAR (Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Re-129 search) and China's multi-scale emission inventory model MEIC (Multi-resolution Emis-130 sion Inventory for China). There is repetitions of abbreviations
5) The Justification section of the MS need an improvement
6) 4.2. Research Object ‘ I do not understand the scope of this section.
7) Figure 3; is of poor quality
The MS is well written, I have gone through the MS. However, this MS is clearly lacking a proper structure of an article. A typical research article consisting of the Abstract, introduction (This section must consist of the relevant background study; aims and scope; justification and objective of the study) The methodology section (must clearly written the proposed methodologies followed), the results section, discussion section and conclusion section. The author is needed to structure the MS following the widely acceptable style of MS. After given a proper shape and style to the MS I will be able to go for further review.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The spatial structure or land use has various activities. Each activity will generate emissions. Each emission will have an impact on the surrounding environment.
This research is interesting because it looks at land use and its impact on air conditions. Maybe, not the air around it. However, the air condition in urban areas as a whole is.
This research is exciting. The same thing happens when there is research on land use and rainfall. This is very interesting because the proportion of land functions must be regulated. In addition, the population of a city must also be controlled.
I don't see any significant corrections in this paper. The way it is presented must show more academic studies, so the author must continue to perfect it. You have to see that there is a simple study, but it impacts future land use policies. This is because each proportion of land use affects the surrounding environment, including conditions on the land.
Author Response
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes marked in revised paper which will not influence the content of the paper. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The author has revised the manuscript carefully according to the comments, which improved the quality the whole text. Still, I have some concerns, as following.
1. The" Atmospheric" in the title should be deleted. I suggest the tiltle be changed to"The Impact of Land Use Structure on Carbon Emissions in China"
2. The method part is currently the description of this study. I encourage the author to futher explain the methods.
3. L242, CO2 should be CO2.
Author Response
1. The" Atmospheric" in the title should be deleted. I suggest the tiltle be changed to"The Impact of Land Use Structure on Carbon Emissions in China"
Response 1: Thank you for this comment. We have revised this part according to your suggestion.
2.The method part is currently the description of this study. I encourage the author to futher explain the methods.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We have added methods in the description .
3. L242, CO2 should be CO2.
Response 3: Thank you for this comment. We have revised this part according to your suggestion.
Reviewer 2 Report
The structure of the MS is much improved please have a careful check on grammar and spelling mistakes
Author Response
Thanks for your suggestion.
