Microclimate-Monitoring: Examining the Indoor Environment of Greek Museums and Historical Buildings in the Face of Climate Change
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript evaluates the hygrothermal behavior of the Archaeological Museum of Delphi and the Church of Acheiropoietos in Greece, with a focus on preserving cultural artifacts. A year-long monitoring campaign identified extreme temperature and humidity levels, highlighting the impact of external climate factors. The authors present a comprehensive introduction to the significance of monitoring temperature and relative humidity in historical sites, along with various methods for analyzing year-long data. However, the manuscript lacks clarity regarding the aim of the study despite effectively introducing the subject and the interest in monitoring these variables. The introduction states that the primary objective is to assess the suitability of internal microclimates, with a focus on early warning for extreme conditions predicted by climate change scenarios. The authors also aim to contribute to timely mitigation of extreme temperature and humidity values by proposing an innovative real-time data analysis approach. However, the need for developing this approach has not been introduced. Additionally, the authors have not demonstrated their innovation in their approach. To demonstrate their innovation, the authors must mention existing approaches and compare them to their own methodology in the discussion section.
In regards to the final paragraph of the introduction, it is recommended to avoid presenting the structure of the manuscript as an aim. Instead, it would be more beneficial to focus on detailing the methodology used.
In the methods section, it is important to mention the manufacturer of the Extech RHT20. Additionally, the tools used to generate the heatmap presented in Figure 1, as well as the data figures illustrated in Figures 6, 7, and 8, should be specified.
Regarding the results section: The paragraphs often conclude with sentences interpreting the significance of the results. The results section should focus solely on presenting data, leaving interpretation for the discussion section. Additionally, descriptions of figure content should be included in the figure legends rather than in the main text. Detailed information contained within figures does not require exhaustive presentation in the main text.
In the discussion section, it is crucial for the authors to provide a deeper interpretation of the data and explain its significance. Merely citing existing studies is not sufficient; they should also compare their results to existing data, highlighting similarities or differences. Additionally, the discussion should address the aims formulated in the introduction, particularly exploring whether their findings indicate a change in indoor climate due to climate change. Moreover, there is a need for a thorough discussion of the proposed methodology and an explanation of its innovative aspects.
Regarding the figures legend, providing more detailed descriptions of the content would be beneficial. This includes describing the content of the figures, which is currently mentioned in the main text.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
I’ve examined your work with great interest. This is example of well-though and well-written paper based on a really perfect research project. The posed research question is internationally appealing, and it is answered appropriately. The methodology is strong, and the results and interpretations are clear and reasonable. The study is well-related to the international research context. The manuscript is written, structured, referenced, and illustrated perfectly. I’ve tried to check your work as critically as possible, but I’ve find nothing to criticize. Generally, I like this work and specify several recommendations on how to improve it.
1) Title: add word “Heritage” after “Monitoring”.
2) Key words: please, avoid the words already available in the title.
3) Introduction: you provide some forecasts of temperature changes in Greece. And what about precipitation (humidity)?
4) Introduction: please, cite your previous paper and explain its difference from the present work:
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/14/4/663
5) In Section 2, you have two subsections 2.1 – please, check numbering everywhere.
6) “Case Studies”: please, cite some literature about these objects.
7) Fig. 1: are photos your own? If so, please, indicate the source and check whether you have permission to re-publish them,
8) Discussion: please, write a bit more about how the available scenarios of climate changes in Greece (in regard to temperature and precipitation) would affect the microclimate of the study objects? What may be the resulted damage for these objects?
9) I do not insist, but encourage you to think about one important aspect. The Greek built heritage is old, which means it already survived significant climate changes in the historical past (Medieval warmth, then Little Ice Age). Did these changes affect the buildings? What can be learnt from those historical records?
10) Discussion: please, tell a bit about the managerial implications. Well, you record vulnerability of your objects to the projected climate change. And what to do?
11) Please, consider and cite these sources:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809522000357
https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/9/1/10
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/11/6/637
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSection Materials and Methods
Specific technology as well as HVAC (Archaeological Museum of Delphi) and heating systems (Church of Acheiropoietos) could be described in more detail.
The dimensions and technical features of the analysed environments should be included in the paper.
Improve the quality of Figure 3.
Line196: instead of “We used a custom methodology” could be better “a custom methodology was used”.
Line199: The Figure 3 is referred to in the text but it is not commented. The comments are reported in paragraph 3.1. Consider whether to refer to it in the paragraph or not.
Line 215: If “Skewness and Kurtosis” is a reference it has to be be inserted in the text in the correct form.
Line 238: Please specify how short-term trends and anomalies could be managed.
Line 256 : the value is -1 or 1?
Lines 255 e 256: Reread carefully the sentence, probably “is” is missing?
Line 277 and following: Check how °C is written
Line 293: Is it possible that the different daily variations also depend on the different structure of the building? Especially in the one without HVAC system? This very important concept should be explained more clearly.
Lines 309-310: The concept and its management in the building must be better explained.
Line 317: What are the “factors influencing extreme climatic conditions” referred to in the paper?
Lines 380-381: Why air temperature and relative humidity are more “unstable” in the museum?
Line 484: If (Fabbri and Bonora 2021) is a reference it has to be be inserted in the text in the correct form.
Section Discussion
Lines 502-516: The references are general and should be mentioned in the introduction instead of the discussion.
The discussion should make more reference to the specific results of the paper rather than to general concepts. The references can be mentioned in the discussion if there is a comparison between the paper results and those of the reference papers. In this case, it might be very interesting to compare the results of reference with those of the paper.
Line 518: Insert a line break when it comes to the “focus” of the paper.
Line 541: Reference is made to the building materials, but in the paper there is no info on this topic.
Lines 555-556: Reference is made to the visitors of the Church and the Museum, but in the paper there is no info on this topic.
Lines 565-566: Reference is made to thermal materials and the thermal mass of the buildings, but in the paper there is no info on this topic.
Line 605: Reference is made to materials and architectural features of the buildings, but in the paper there is no info on this topic.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Some typos and errors must be reviewed and corrected
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you to the authors for addressing my comments.
Author Response
Dear reviwer,
Thank you very much for your kind feedback.
