Net-Carbon Dioxide Surplus as an Environmental Indicator for Supporting Timber Markets: A Case Study in Italy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)
I have no critical comments.
Author Response
No amendment
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
Methodologically and in presentation wise the manuscript is fine. Despite these, the manuscript has some small mistakes. There are lots of short forms of the texts and many of those short forms have no detail forms. The table and its related texts also need clarification.
L193 delete bracket and full stop check the entire manuscript to avoid these types of typos.
L269 FM: Forest harvesting..it is FH?
Provide the full form of table 3 and 4 ‘s using abbreviations as a note under the tables. Do the correction for other tables as well.
Use the same format for writing CO2
Figure 2, use figure legend/footnote.
What is MMV?
Table 4, why yellow marking in some numbers?
what is L-2AX, L-A3AX, FKL…etc so on…
in Table 10’s text, it is written ….Colli Albani produce 181.41 kgCO2. In table, it is written 181. Use the same value in both places.
Make a list of abbreviations.
Under all the tables/figures put abbreviations
Read your manuscript carefully to avoid unwary mistakes
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We appreciate a lot about your comments and suggestions. Thanks you very much.
Below, we explain how your comments are integrate in the text:
Introduction
Line 193, now line 205 OK
Line 280, now line 285 OK
Provide the full … table as well. OK
Use the same …. CO2 OK
Figure 2 OK
What is MMV? Mistake. See line 158, MWM= minor wood material
Table 4 mistake.
What is L-2AX, L-3AX, FKL we put in all tables/figures a legend of explanation
In table 10’s … both places OK
Viterbo, January 26th 2023
Corresponding author
Francesco Carbone
Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)
Introduction
Lines 74-76 please unify the wood species names with the big and small letters e.g. „Douglas fir“, „maritime pine“
At the end of the introduction, the specification of the contribution of the performed analysis is missing. What should he grow up to and contribute to?
Methodology:
Attention to indexing (CO2) e.g. title 2.4.2, table 2 title, lines 296-308, etc. The numbering of mathematical formulas is also missing
Table 4, why is the value 18.80 in Cross-cut saw and Trimming-machine marked in yellow? Please add an explanation.
Line 285 incomplete sentence or wrong wording.
Results
Weather and terrain conditions can affect the emission of Co2, especially during harvesting and transportation. Were they always the same? Perhaps it would be appropriate to specify it in more detail in the methodological part of the manuscript.
Table 7 "Loading (Shoots) CO2 emissions" Value "144." There seems to be something missing after the decimal point.
Table 2 – the name is given twice.
Discussion
In the discussion, I miss the comparison with the results of similar studies with other types of tree species. The authors could also mention that one alternative to reduce emissions could be battery or electronic chainsaws. In my opinion, the recommendations in parts a) and b) at the end of the discussion belong more to the amount of the conclusion.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We appreciate a lot about your comments and suggestions. Thanks you very much.
Below, we explain how your comments are integrate in the text:
Introduction
- Line 74 -76, now 74-76, common names of forest species are write in small characters;
- At the end of the introduction …. and contribute to? We introduce new sentences, from line 95 to 100.
Methodology
- Attention to indexing CO2 OK
- Numbering of mathematical formulas OK
- Table 4, value “18.80” mistaken
- Line 285 is not clear what is the problem
Results
- Weather and terrain …. of the manuscript see paragraph 2.1.2 first sentence
- Table 7, value “144” in all tables we haven’t report the decimal number
- Table 2, is not clear what the problem is. We have observed that there are very similar acronyms on which we have intervened.
Discussion
- In the discussion, …., species. see paragraph 4 Discussion, line 506 to 512;
- The authors …, conclusion. we moved the green strategies in the Conclusion.
Viterbo, January 26th 2023
Corresponding author
Francesco Carbone
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)
The "Net-Carbon Dioxide Surplus as an Environmental Indicator for Supporting Timber Markets: a case study in Italy" manuscript follows a logical sequence and points to a relevant topic in the scientific field. The article presents quality spelling, with clarity in the text.
Author Response
No amendment
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an intersting study but it does not follow the LCA methodology as described in the ISO 14040/44 standards. Some examples are: Line 361 and 362 - "... the initial functional unit (total volume of chestnut wood) and the terminal functional unit ..." - in one LCA there is only one FU. Line 219-223 -"...gate 1, gate 2 and gate3 - in one LCA there is only one gate.
In my opinion it is a Material and Carbon Flow Analysis, so all the text related with LCA shoud be deleted.
Other comments:
Line 288 - "... indirect emissions and are estimated as a percentage (2.50%) of the direct emissions of the actions" - you must indicate the author
Line 314 - "According to the experts these indirect emissions could be estimated as a percentage (15.00%) of the direct emissions of the sources" - you must indicate the author
Line 327 - Chapter 2.2.4 is presented after 2.3.3
Line 383-406 - Rewrite this chapter. The calculation of absorption is not clear - you present 2 equation for the same calculation. Present only the second one that you used in chapter 3.2.
Reviewer 2 Report
I attached comments on PDF
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
