Self-Immobilizing Metals Binder for Construction Made of Activated Metallurgical Slag, Slag from Lignite Coal Combustion and Ash from Biomass Combustion
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The reviewer considers that the paper entitled "Self-immobilizing metals binder for construction made of activated metallurgical slag, slag from lignite coal combustion and ash from biomass combustion" presents an original topic and interesting for the readers. However, the reviewer considers that the paper is not well structured according to the criteria established by the journal. Reading the instructions for authors of the journal Materials and resolving the following conflicts would make it possible to publish the article.
- The introduction is too long and confusing for the reader. The motivation for the research and different previous studies are presented. However, the reasons why this research is considered original and a step forward for science should be clearly defined. In addition, the function of the materials or waste used should be clearly defined, as well as the critical points to be taken into account. At the same time, the very specific description of the materials in sections 1.1. and 1.2. is not adequate in the Introduction. This information, organised, should appear in the materials section of the Materials and Methods section.
- Very little information on materials is provided in the Materials and Methods section. This makes it very difficult to reproduce the research. It is necessary to provide general information on the materials used as well as their particular characteristics. It is also interesting to define how the sample was taken and if any treatment was carried out.
- The methodology followed in this research should be defined, defining why each test is conducted and for what purpose. Do not just present a series of tests.
- Results should not be defined in the methodology. These results should be defined in an orderly manner in the Results section.
- X-ray fluorescence and loss on ignition results should be discussed. Obviously, they should be discussed under Results and not under Methodology.
- Why has the percentage of carbon and hydrogen not been analysed through the elemental analysis test?
- Why have you not taken into account the possible problems of expansivity? It would be very interesting to carry out tests to evaluate this effect.
- The document should be structured in a much more logical and orderly way. The methodology followed and the objectives to be achieved with this methodology should be adequately described. The Results section should contain the results of the tests defined in the Materials and Methods section. In turn, the Discussion section should describe the results in more detail. The reviewer recommends combining the results and the discussion in a single section.
- The conclusions should clearly state the assessed benefits of this study.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
the paper is of scientific and original nature, related to Self-immobilizing metals binder for construction made of ac-tivated metallurgical slag, slag from lignite coal combustion and ash from biomass combustion.
For a better clarification, please edit your paper as follows: Enlarge the Introduction with current results reported in the world and Europe, - References to expand the results of European authors registered in SCOPUS / WoS such as: Simulation of wood biomass combustion in hot water boiler. Figures 1 - 6 should be contrasting and readable and insert according to the instructions in the template. Figure 12 – the description is not clear. The diagrams are unreadable. Some referencies are missing in the text, please complete them.
Conclusions and future work should be extended to contain practical applications based on research described in this paper, edit the paper according to the template. You should improve the English language of the manuscript. Please, edit the paper according to previous comments and after minor changes I recommend the paper to be published.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
