Valorization of a Highly Organic Sediment: From Conventional Binders to a Geopolymer Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper reports the investigations concerning dredged sediments valorisation.

Please consider changing the title to better suit the content.  The part of the title that is in brackets should be removed or rephrased.

The novelty of the work must be addressed and discussed, compare your research with current research findings and highlight novelty.  In line 274 we find out that dredged material would be used for road construction. However, in the discussion Authors refers to pavement blocks and aggregate production.  It is necessary to introduce information about the prospective application of the material in the abstract and in the title. This will give the context to your research.

 

Abstract: „A geopolymer was introduced as an activator, and its effects are studied and presented in this paper.” Please rephrase  - „an activator was introduced” to activate aluminosilicates.

What type of activator was used?  Neoltx is a commercial manufacturer of activator?  NeoliX®  composition provided in table 5 is water and silicon oxide  - please double-check.  Usually, for activation of aluminosilicates, an alkaline solution is needed -  please clarify this issue in the text.

The main objective of the work must be written in a clear and more concise way.  The paper is multi-threaded: 3 dredged sediments; different binders, pozzolanic materials FA GGBFS, granicalcium and lime, NeoliX® …. Lot of parameters were studied, and the research was carried out in stages.  A clear presentation of the logical sequence for the conducted research is necessary.  At present form the paper is incoherent.

In Table 7 - 10 different formulations are presented – but in Figures 9 and 10 - test results for formulations M0 to M8 are shown.  Why  M9 and M10 are not presented in the same table?

Please be more precise in your statements. It is a technical/scientific paper.  Please avoid general statements ex. line 346 „The replacement of 5% and 3% GGBS with lime and granicalcium®, respectively, raised the UCS value by a significant amount (!).

Some perspectives related to the future research work, quantifying the main research findings, and highlighting the relevance of the work should be provided.

The conclusion section is missing.

Discussion is chaotic and does not resume all conclusions for all types of studied materials.

Line 363  - „The feasibility of CHN30 as a road construction material could not be determined because CBR testing is not possible due to the high-water content in these mixtures.” – testing protocol failed?  An explanation is needed.

In the present form, the paper is not ready for publication.

A major revision is required.

 

 

Author Response

A common report to answers has been written.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic presented in the manuscript entitled: “Co-valorisation of high organic dredged sediment with alkali- activated industrial byproducts {From stabilized soils to aggregates}” is relevant for the Journal of Composites Sciences. The article based on original research connected with using sediments for the production of the material that could be useful for construction purposes.

 

The main weakness of the article is the background of the literature. It is not properly presented. The publications used are quite old (the newest is from 2017). The information presented is not supported by up-to-date literature analysis.

 

The article requires major changes before for be considered to publication, including:

• Abstract - please add measurable results.
• Introduction – lines 44-47: please add some references to other UE directives connected with waste management (https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs5090243);
• Introduction - add some information about usage geopolymers in this area, for example: https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/202032201026 (lines 79-83);
• Introduction - The novelty aspect for provided research should be stressed (last paragraph);
• Chapter 2 (and other) – please apply the numeration according to the total. Not the points a), b) c)…;
• Tables 1 and 2 - What kind of method for measurement was used?
• Tables 3, 4 and 5 – add the information about the source of data (own research or manufacturer data?).
• Line 144 - Please add some additional information about XRD (methodology of measurements);
• Chapter 2: all research methods used in the article should be characterized;
• Figures 9 and 10 explain the statistic measurements. These plots require minimum error bars.
• Discussion – the discussion given in this point is not a proper discussion it is just a conclusion marks.
• Conclusions – the discussion with up-to-date is required. What about other investigations and currently used methods for valorisation of sediments? What about possibility of usage this method for other places? What are the potential problems?
• References: the literature used is very old; lack of publication after 2017.

Author Response

A common report has been written for all the reviewers comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for addressing the comments. I am satisfied with the Autors' responses and happy to see the improved quality of the manuscript. 

The Authors added substantial value to the manuscript:

the title was modified into A possible valorization of a high organic sediment: from conventional binders to a geopolymer approach

consider a minor change: Valorization of high organic sediment: from conventional binders to geopolymer approach

• objective  and main valorization targets of this study are clarified
• tables were updated
• supplementary data were added
• conclusion was rewritten

The paper in the present form is more suitable for publication, with the title revision. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The article has been significantly improved and it requires only slight changes before publication:

1) please order the reference according publisher requirements. In line 51, there is a reference number [29].

2) XRD, please add the name of used equipment

3) Reserch methods - based on Table 1 add separate point. Fill in the information about the used equipment and if necessary number of samples.