Monitoring Land Use/Cover Changes by Using Multi-Temporal Remote Sensing for Urban Hydrological Assessment: A Case Study in Beijing, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This revised version is improved a lot but still has shortcomings to consider for publication. We all know that expansion of impervious surfaces has caused changes in environmental parameters from local to global level, though local scale change is much conspicuous than regional and global scales. Having said that the title of this work does not reflect content of this work. At present it seems hydrological responses are determined from remote sensing data but this is not the case. The introduction part of this work is poor, clearly failed to show motivation, international significance and novelty. For instance, the enhancement of flood peak is one of few impacts that is introduced by urban expansion. However flood impact of urban land use change varies according to cities. You discussed a lot about Chinese or Beijing examples in the intro part but does not show how this study can improve or advance existing knowledgebase. I therefore suggest you consider how urban land use change is impacting various environmental components such as degradation of cultivable land, ecosystem services, urban thermal situation etc. These studies (https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EF002401; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2022.101730; https://www.nature.com/articles/nature01675; https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-03138-y) would be of big help to show motivation and rationale of your work. You have used multi-date Landsat data ranging from TM to OLI. However, there is a wavelength difference between these two sensors, I am interested to see how narrower spertcal range in OLI than TM has impacted your land cover data? What was the uncertainty in relation to wavelength difference? You did use software to do this work, this means there is no novelty. Delete software names and their versions from your manuscript. In section 2.5.2 you said you used soil data but how urban area can have soil info? This is a possible blunder. Why only three (2005, 2009 and 2010) rainstorm events were used where is the recent data when you have land cover data till 2017? What was the criteria to use five land covers in this work? In your section 3, discussion part is included but you did use a separate discussion section. When you explain your results do not refer to existing works. Delete from results section. The present discussion section is poor and I suggest to show your contribution here by taking other works (such as those noted above). This means present discussion section must be improved to an extent that shows your contribution to the literature. Fig 7 show flood peak and flood volume to 2015 but three rainstorms data were used that do not coincide with this fig.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
We addressed all the comments provided by you as shown to this attached document.
Thanks.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper provides an interesting analysis of the impacts of land use/land cover on urban runoff. This is a topic that has been long studied and the authors refer to many of these studies (see the extensive reference list). So, the main finding of increase flood peaks and volumes is not that surprising. Nor is the use of remote sensed data to evaluate the land use/land cover. I do think there are some interesting results that the authors might highlight to make the paper provide a novel contribution. These comments include:
· The observations on lines 342 – 349 seem to be important and a contribution that has not be made in the past. This might be something to highlight in the Discussion and/or Conclusions.
· Over 100 references seems to be excessive. I would suggest highlighting the most important studies.
· For Figure 4, is this for one of the event from 2010 or 2017?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
We addressed all the comments provided by you as shown to this attached document.
Thanks.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you
