Evaluation of Polyurethane Foam Derived from the Liquefied Driftwood Approaching for Untapped Biomass
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript reports an experimental research on the production of polyurethane foam starting from residual biomass.
Although a partly innovative process is described, it is believed that this topic falls more in the field of materials and not of processes, and therefore not very relevant to the journal.
Section 2.3 should be expanded, reporting more details on lignin analysis.
Section 2.4: change to "Elemental analysis" and "CHN analyser"
In table 2 the identification of the foams (fossil and biogenic) is not clear. Please use acronyms that are more effective in expressing the formulation and the experimental procedure.
2.11: Report the origin of the soil used for biodegradability tests (natural or simulated). The microorganism content is also believed to be of major relevance to these tests.
The comment of figure 3 is very limited and its analysis is not as immediate as the authors report in the text. The comparison with fossil oils should be also reported.
Fig. 4: It is of low quality. To be improved
Fig, 5 and 6: the authors must indicate whether the residual content refers exclusively to the bio-oil or to the total reagents used for the preparation of the foam. What is the final mass content of biogenic origin in the foam obtained with this alternative procedure?
The introduction is somewhat generic and needs to be reformulated providing more discussion on the references that have been mentioned, especially those concerning the use of biomass, and expanding the literature analysis to the international context. The final paragraph of the introduction needs to be rewritten, specifically indicating the innovative content of the research.
The diagram of figure 2 is unclear and probably wrong in some points (raito). Please, improve.
Row 241: probably it is 3.3.1. This paragraph is very qualitative and it does not add very much to the paper. To be improved.
3.3.2: Again SEM analysis is very qualitative. The comparison is hard among the samples. Magnification or scale is not reported in Fig. 7. Porosimetry analysis should be performed and discussed.
The conclusions must be reformulated, even in a more concise form. The impact of liquefaction (use of reactants) on the overall process should be recalled, limiting the emphasis that the authors place on the use of this residual biomass.
Quality of English Language for presence of some errors and poor style. Use of "We" should be avoided.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript
Title: „Evaluation of polyurethane foam derived from the liquefied driftwood approaching for untapped biomass”
Authors: Go Masuda, Ayana Nagao, Weiqian Wang and Qingyue Wang
Dear Authors
I revised the manuscript: " Evaluation of polyurethane foam derived from the liquefied driftwood approaching for untapped biomass” submitted to the „Processes” Journal. The paper is very interesting. However, I have some concerns, which need to be addressed.
Line 2-3. Article topic
The theme of the article is concise and accurately reflects the content of the article.
The structure of the article, divided into chapters and subchapters, is clear and logical.
Abstract
Line 9-22. The content of the abstract should indicate the measurable effect of the research in terms of giving a numerical value and indicating the most important conclusions generalised even within the implementation of the case study. Please take this into account.
The abstract is a self-contained part of the article which requires repetition of any explanatory notes.
In the „abstract” chapter, formal elements such as the purpose, scope of the research, indication of research methods are not clearly presented.
It is difficult to identify the leading result and the leading conclusion of the research. Please take this into account.
Line.13, 15, 105, 107, 365 „…CHN coder…” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation.
For example: c-carbon, h-hydrogen , n-nitrous analyser MT-5 Yanaco Co. Ltd.
Elemental Analyzers Yanaco CHN Corder MT-5, MT-6 (manufactured by Yanaco Apparatus Development Laboratory Co., Ltd.
Line 17. „….10 wt.%,…..” The notation is incomprehensible. Please consider modifying the unit of measurement,
Line 17. „….12.5 w/w%....” The notation is incomprehensible. Please consider modifying the unit of measurement, for example:12.5% w/w
Keywords. Line 23-24. The authors used the full spectrum of matching wording. Keywords contain word clusters and are too literal, but represents the spectrum of information well. The order of keywords should follow the concept of „from generalities to specifics”. Keywords may also reflect the order in which the research issues are addressed. Please consider changing the order of keywords.
Please try to arrange your keywords according to a coherent concept and dispense with near-meaningful expressions and duplicate messages.
1. Introduction
Line 26- 79. The introduction sufficiently indicates the scientific background of the research and contains many references to the state of scientific knowledge in the area under study.
However, the lack of information on current methods for converting biomass to the form of plastics with plastic-like characteristics is a serious deficiency. The lack is due to the form of the material tested, which was transformed from biomass form. Please complete this information.
Line 71 - 77. The goal and scope of the research has been briefly presented. Please consider expanding on the content indicated and include more information potential.
Line 48. „…90,000 to 300,000 tons….” The unit of measure should be present with both range values. Both range values should have the unit of measurement „Mg”. Please use units of measurement from the SI system. For example: (Mg) Megagrams.
2. Materials and Methods
Line 80 – 170. The assumptions of the research methods are correct. However, it is important to identify alternative methods based on an analysis of the state of knowledge. Please consider this.
Limited information about the goal and scope of the research makes it difficult to assess the applicability of the research methods used. A more in-depth presentation of these aspects should be considered.
Line 87. „…silicone surfactant (SH193….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation.
Line 95. „…110℃….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 110_0C.
Line 99 – 101. Figure 2. „…SEM, TG-DTA, FT-IR….”
Abbreviations require a verbal description in the figure legend. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation.
Line 107. „….using a CHN coder (MT-5 Yanaco Co. Ltd.),….” as above.
Line 107 – 108. „…set at 950℃ for CF, 850℃ for OF, and 550℃ for RF,….” Abbreviations (CF, OF, RF) require a verbal description. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation.
Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 950_0C
Line 115. „….15, 30, 90, 180, and 300 minutes….” Range values should have indicated units of measurement. Each range value should have a unit of measurement, for example [minutes].
Line 119. „….Temperature 140, 150, 160℃…..” Range values should have indicated units of measurement. Each range value should have a unit of measurement, for example [minutes]. Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 140_0C, 150_0C, 160_0C.
Line 127. „….ADVANTEC filters (C5)…..” Please explain abbreviations and clearly indicate brand names and manufacturers. Unambiguous presentation of information helps readers to understand the text.
Line 128. „…105℃….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 105_0C.
Line 134. „….PUF-PEG400…. , PUF-LW1(non-residue), ….PUF-LW1:7…” The description of the table headings is incomplete. - there is no distinction for "foam types, PUF foam types"? For example: PEG - polyethylene glycol, LW1?, LW1:7?
Line 134. Table 2. „….[NCO]/[OH]….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 134. Table 2. „….DBTDL….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation.
Line 135. „…liquefied driftwood samples or PEG400….”Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation. For example: PEG - polyethylene glycol.
Line 136. „….1000-1200 rpm…..” The unit of measure should be present with both range values. Both range values should have the unit of measurement „rpm”.
Line 137. „….STABIO….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Please explain abbreviations and clearly indicate brand names and manufacturers. Unambiguous presentation of information helps readers to understand the text.
Line 144. „….Au-Pd coating….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 144. „…HITACHI S-2400…..” Please explain abbreviations and clearly indicate brand names and manufacturers. Unambiguous presentation of information helps readers to understand the text. Please indicate the function of the device and the parameters to be analysed.
Line 146. „….JIS K7209….”….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. If the designation relates to a normative document then this document should be included in the list of literature references.
Line 154. „….TG-DTA analysis…..” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation. For example: Simultaneous Thermogravimetry and Differential Thermal Analysis.
This analyzer can simultaneously perform differential thermal analysis and thermogravimetric analysis with a single sample.
Please specify which parameters are included in the analysis.
Line 155. „….10°C/min……” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 1_0C·min-1 . Please use the notation of the quotient in units of measure using mathematical notation with a power exponent, for example: 0C·min-1 .
Line 163. „…25°C….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 25_0C.
3. Results and Discussion
Line 171-296. The obtained results are derived from the presented research methods. The research methods presented are relevant to the research problem.
Line 182. „…18-25% lignin….” The unit of measure should be present with both range values. Both range values should have the unit of measurement „%”.
Line 183. „…7- 10% more….” The unit of measure should be present with both range values. Both range values should have the unit of measurement „%”.
Line 188. „…FTIR absorption spectra….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Please explain abbreviations and clearly indicate brand names and manufacturers. Unambiguous presentation of information helps readers to understand the text.
For example: Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
Line 202. „….140℃, 150℃, and 160℃,…..” Range values should have indicated units of measurement. Each range value should have a unit of measurement, for example [minutes]. Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 140_0C, 150_0C, 160_0C.
Line 204. „…of 140℃ and 150℃,….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 140_0C, 150_0C.
Line 205. „…140℃….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example 140_0C.
Line 206, 207-208 Figure 4.. „….150℃….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example: 150_0C.
Line 230. „…150℃….” Lack of space between parameter value and unit of measurement. Please correct this. For example: 150_0C.
Line 232-233 Figure 6. LW7:1, LW6:1, LW5:1. Lack of reference to acronyms in the text of the article and in the description of Figure 6. For example: LW: Liquefied driftwood?
Line 242. „…The FT-IR spectra…” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms.
Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Please explain abbreviations and clearly indicate brand names and manufacturers. Unambiguous presentation of information helps readers to understand the text.
For example: Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
Line 243. „…amido â…¡ peak…” The designation is ambiguous and enigmatic. Please introduce a description for acronyms and symbols.
Line 245. „…PEG 400….” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 248. „…SEM….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. For example: scanning electron microscopy
Line 251, 253 Figure 7. „…PUF-PEG400 < PUF-LW7:1 (non-residue) < PUF-LW7:1…..”
„….the number of micro-pores in the cells increased in the following order…”
Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article - - there is no distinction for "foam types, PUF foam types"?
The description of Figure 7 is incomplete due to the lack of explanation of the acronym descriptions used.
Line 256, 259. „….SEM images….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. For example: scanning electron microscopy
Line 258. „…PEG400…..”….” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 261. Table 3. „….[kg/m3]….” Please use the notation of the quotient in units of measure using mathematical notation with a power exponent for example: kg·m-3 .
Line 261. Table 3. „…PUF-L(non-residue), PUF-LW, PUF-PEG400….” The description of the table headings is incomplete. - there is no distinction for "foam types, PUF foam types"?
Line 268. „…TG-DTA….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Even popular acronym names need to be explained in scientific articles. A single explanation is sufficient in the execution of the explanation. For example: Simultaneous Thermogravimetry and Differential Thermal Analysis.
This analyzer can simultaneously perform differential thermal analysis and thermogravimetric analysis with a single sample.
Line 270. „….PEG400….” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 271. „….PEG400-based foam….” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 274. Table 4. „…PUF-LW 7:1, PUF-LW7:1(non-residue), PUF-PEG400…”
The description of the table headings is incomplete. - there is no distinction for "foam types, PUF foam types"?
Line 277. „…PEG400-based foam….” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 284. „…PEG….” Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
Line 292. „…FT-IR analysis….” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms.
Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article. Please explain abbreviations and clearly indicate brand names and manufacturers. Unambiguous presentation of information helps readers to understand the text.
For example: Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
4. Conclusions
Line 297-319. Line 298 – 307. The chapter fragment is a post factum presentation of the goal and scope of the research, which should be introduced and developed informatively in Chapters 1 and 2. In Chapter 4, such information is an anachronism.
Line 308 – 319. With regard to the results obtained, the conclusions presented are brief and mainly cite previous research results. In this regard, the study is a "case study". Please consider trying to relate to the level of water absorption, because this parameter strongly influences the reduction of the classic PUF performance.
Line 303. „…PEG400…” Please standardise the notation of the same parameters and terms. Please explain the introduced abbreviations of terms, possibly as soon as they are introduced in the content of the article.
References
Line 332-376. The literature sources have been selected correctly. Please consider introducing a literature source description for the information "Line 146."....JIS K7209....
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The revised paper can be accepted.
