Next Article in Journal
Application of Blockchain Technology in Environmental Health: Literature Review and Prospect of Visualization Based on CiteSpace
Previous Article in Journal
Digitization of Manufacturing Processes: From Sensing to Twining
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Selected Techniques for Cutting SOx Emissions in Maritime Industry

Technologies 2022, 10(5), 99; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies10050099
by Christos Papadopoulos 1, Marios Kourtelesis 1, Anastasia Maria Moschovi 1,2, Konstantinos Miltiadis Sakkas 2 and Iakovos Yakoumis 1,2,*
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Technologies 2022, 10(5), 99; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies10050099
Submission received: 25 July 2022 / Revised: 17 August 2022 / Accepted: 24 August 2022 / Published: 30 August 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

See Attached File

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer , 

We wish to thank you for your kind and detailed comments. We have managed to reply in all of them and introduce changes and amendments . Please find our reply in your comments. 

We are looking forward to hearing your final decision.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper reviewed the DeSOx techniques in maritime industrial, mostly on catalyst SCR DeSOx, in general, it can be considered for publication after some revisions.

1:  Ref. 16,-18, for China and India, the higher total amount of emission is caused by the huge population, for the value per people may be less. From the Ref., China has  put the emission control after 2000, not like authors said, fail to someting

2: line 221, "calcination of limestone powder into a furnace at high temperatures (500 – 221800 oC) for the decomposition of limestone to CaO", calcination temperature may be lower here, please confirm this temperature range, please find the Ref. in desulfurization in CFB boiler.

3: line 225, the data on efficiency and utilization rate is not common, for the limestone injection desulfurizaiton in CFB boiler in China, it is common to realize over 90% efficiency, please find more Ref. to accurate these values. 

4: line 266-269, it is better to mark the region where such number was recorded.

5: table 4, what means of 3nm here?

6: equation 7, +  changed to -->

7: line 585, CO/SO2=2, mole ratio or mass ratio?

8: discussion, it is better to give a route of the chemical reactions;  Is there the possibility the produced elemental S cover the surface of the catalyst, causing the poisoning? if like that, how to regenerate it? 

9:  at last, is there some research on the reactor design for the 

10: the discussion on "gas state of the art DeSOx processes" was bit more, it jt has less relation with paper title, and the depth is not enough. 

word and spelling

line 26, coil ---> coal

line 65, "deteriorating", not suitable word here, decreasing or alleviating is better

Author Response

Dear Reviewer , 

We wish to thank you for your kind and detailed comments. We have managed to reply in all of them and introduce changes and amendments . Please find our reply in your comments. 

We are looking forward to hearing your final decision.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Paper deals with important task. The authors made a review on the state of the art DeSOx technologies both for land-based applications and for ships.

Paper has great practical value.

It has a logical structure all necessary sections. The paper is technically sound.

Suggestions:

1.       The introduction section should be extended using GRNN-SGTM predictors that were developed for air quality evaluation.

2.       It would be good to add the remainder (structure) of this paper

3.       It would be good to explain the methodology used for doing this review

4.       The sentences like this one  The current technologies available for the flue gas desulphurization can be classified in 2 major categories:” or “The most notable wet technologies include the:” should have a ling to the references

5.       The conclusion section should be extended using: 1) results obtained in the paper; 2) limitations of the conducted review; 3) prospects for future research.

6.       Some of references are outdated. Please fix it using 3-5 years old papers in high-impact journals.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer , 

We wish to thank you for your kind and detailed comments. We have managed to reply in all of them and introduce changes and amendments . Please find our reply in your comments. 

We are looking forward to hearing your final decision.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed in a very satisfactory manner all questions/comments raised by the reviewer. 

The revised Ms can now be accepted for publication. 

Back to TopTop