Potential on Energy Performance Upgrade of National Stadiums: A Case Study for the Pancretan Stadium, Crete, Greece
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please see attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see our answers to your comments in the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper focuses on a case study concerning the energy performance upgrading/retrofitting of stadium buildings. The topic is interesting and needs to be investigated.
The paper is well organised, but considering its complexity and the number of touched topics, the following suggestions are reported:
- The state of the art section is very condensed in term of bibliography and does not consider quotations individually, but in long condensed groups (e.g. [14-21], [22-30]…) Please expand a bit this part including some personalised description of outcomes from the quoted researches;
- do you have considered to include TRNSYS schemes?
- The hourly graphs arrive till 9000, please delete this number and substitute it with 8760;
- In Figure 3(b) the vertical axis reports “wind velocity (m/s)”, I think it is instead “sea water temperature”, please change it;
- P. 7 the natural ventilation coefficient of openings is equal to 3 and 1. It is 3 and 1 ACH?
- RH% is 50% or varies in a range?
- Table 1 and 2. Please use the same names in these tables for comparable voices. The paper is quite long and touch several topics, so the adoption of a sole language is essential. “annual final thermal energy required for indoor space conditioning” is in comparison to the “heating and cooling total annual …”? Monthly loads is in comparison to conditioning loads? Thank you
- Figure 10, the trend is due to the fact that you use a daily average monthly value for each day of the month? Why do not including daily/hourly variations? You are using TRNSYS so probably this can be done
- P.14 line 416, is “lt” the symbol for litre? Please use IS standard “l”
- BEMS section. Please consider or to shorten it by including only general information, or detailing it with advanced description of the potential devices and control, I suggest the first. Figure 15 is not adding specific information to SoA
- Page 19, line 607, it is 20% saving and not additional consumptions?
- Add a quotation for BEMS manufacturer (20% assumed)
- Economic analysis, do you have considered a LCC analysis? Why do not include a discount rate calculation? At present it is very simple as approach. Which is the cost for window replacement? Have you use this calculation to define the number of window that you have changed – e.g. validating your considerations at page 7, lines 245-248
- Please add a quotation for the Greek directive on building energy performance (CO2 eq. emission)
Author Response
Please see our answers to your comments in the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
No Major Comments. The manuscript has been improved throughout. Please ensure a final review of all references to tables and figure numbers, equation numbers etc have been checked. Also please complete a final grammar check.
