Cyrene™, a Sustainable Solution for Graffiti Paint Removal
, James Sherwood 2, Con R. McElroy 1,3,* and James H. Clark 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript by McElroy, Clark and co-workers deals with the use of the bio-based solvent Cyrene for paint removal applications, particularly for graffiti cleanup. The work presented is considerable, it has been carefully done, and the advantages of the Cyrene solvent clearly demonstrated, with the experimental data strongly supporting the results and discussion. The presentation of the manuscript is excellent and its reading pleasant. I strongly recommend this paper for publication. Personally, I would have liked the authors to include some critical comment on the economic viability of the process since the market price of Cyrene is relatively high compared to other solvents.
Author Response
Answer: Text updated with section 3.10.
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors report a very interesting study on the evaluation of different solvents, including cyrene, for the removal of graffiti paint from different materials. The work developed meets the journal's scope, and the quality standards required for publication. I do recommend it for publication after some corrections/changes:
The experimental part is a bit confusing. Section 2.3 describes samples preparation, meaning the application of the graffiti paint in the different surfaces. However, in the text is seems that the application of the treatment is also described (even if the treatments are described in detail in the following sections). Regarding the poultice cleaning method for example, even the describing figures are here (section 2.3) presented, while they should be referred in section 2.5.
The Hansen solubility scales are not clear. A table with the different parameters considered in the 1-5 scale should be added to SI.
A table summarizing the solvents, graffiti types, substrates, and cleaning methods used should be added to help the reader understanding the experimental part.
Figure 3 and the corresponding text should be moved to introduction, since this information is general and is not particularly discussed in section 3.1.
In figure 4 a ‘blank’, i.e., no solvent, should be added for comparison. Additionally, the use of arrows or other, should be used to make the magnifications more logical.
Authors mention that “cyrene-water mixture showed good paint removal” however data available does not support such a claim. In Figure S8 no visible results are visible. Authors are recommended to remove such claim from the article.
In the sustainability framework, the cost of the solvents and respective cleaning processes should be added as well as some possible hints on the solvents recovered and reuse.
Minor:
Figure 1 and 2 should be mentioned in the text;
Page 2, line 73 and 74: two times ‘but’ in the same sentence;
Page 4, line 135: it looks like a reference is missing.
“ceramic tiles Cyrene, NMP and DMF” – in is missing;
In figure S5 the labels are covering the images;
In table S1 the standard deviation should be added;
In the text, different subjects should be separated by introducing paragraphs; and if needed subheadings;
Figure 5 c-h: the legend should be included in the figure to make it clear.
Author Response
Authors report a very interesting study on the evaluation of different solvents, including cyrene, for the removal of graffiti paint from different materials. The work developed meets the journal's scope, and the quality standards required for publication. I do recommend it for publication after some corrections/changes:
The experimental part is a bit confusing. Section 2.3 describes samples preparation, meaning the application of the graffiti paint in the different surfaces. However, in the text is seems that the application of the treatment is also described (even if the treatments are described in detail in the following sections). Regarding the poultice cleaning method for example, even the describing figures are here (section 2.3) presented, while they should be referred in section 2.5. Answer: The section 2.3 was updated. Hence, the section 2.4 was assigned the Figure S3 and the section 2.5. assigned the Figure S3.
The Hansen solubility scales are not clear. A table with the different parameters considered in the 1-5 scale should be added to SI. Answer: Tables S4 and S5 contains the lists of solvents used for both paints and the scores for each solvent used. The main text was updated.
A table summarizing the solvents, graffiti types, substrates, and cleaning methods used should be added to help the reader understanding the experimental part. Answer: Text updated with Table 1
Figure 3 and the corresponding text should be moved to introduction, since this information is general and is not particularly discussed in section 3.1. Answer: Moved to introduction.
In figure 4 a ‘blank’, i.e., no solvent, should be added for comparison. Additionally, the use of arrows or other, should be used to make the magnifications more logical. Answer: Picture updated.
Authors mention that “cyrene-water mixture showed good paint removal” however data available does not support such a claim. In Figure S8 no visible results are visible. Authors are recommended to remove such claim from the article. Answer: Text updated: While N-Methyl-2-pyrrolidone and N,N’-dimethylformamide were only effective when neat, Cyrene-water mixture showed some cleaning results.
In the sustainability framework, the cost of the solvents and respective cleaning processes should be added as well as some possible hints on the solvents recovered and reuse. Text updated with section 3.10.
Minor:
Figure 1 and 2 should be mentioned in the text; Answer: Text updated
Page 2, line 73 and 74: two times ‘but’ in the same sentence; Answer: Text updated.
Page 4, line 135: it looks like a reference is missing. Answer: Text removed.
“ceramic tiles Cyrene, NMP and DMF” – in is missing; Answer: Text updated.
In figure S5 the labels are covering the images; Answer: Picture updated.
In table S1 the standard deviation should be added; Answer: Table updated.
In the text, different subjects should be separated by introducing paragraphs; and if needed subheadings; Answer: Text updated.
Figure 5 c-h: the legend should be included in the figure to make it clear. Answer: Picture updated.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Accept
