Next Article in Journal
Characteristics and Satisfaction Analysis of Eco-Tour Ships at Ecotourism Sites: Focusing on the Cases of the Nakdong River Estuary, Suncheon Bay Wetland, and Goesan Lake and Sanmagi-Yetgil in Korea
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainable City and Community Empowerment through the Implementation of Community-Based Monitoring: A Conceptual Approach
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 12
Issue 22
10.3390/su12229585
Review Report
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Improving Liquefied Natural Gas Bunkering in Korea through the Chinese and Japanese Experiences

Sustainability 2020, 12(22), 9585; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229585
by Yu Yong Ung 1, Park Sung Ho 1, Jung Dong Ho 2 and Lee Chang Hee 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Ivan CK Tam
Sustainability 2020, 12(22), 9585; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229585
Submission received: 9 September 2020 / Revised: 9 November 2020 / Accepted: 10 November 2020 / Published: 17 November 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The analysis is very interesting, but I think it is aimed at a limited readership. Chapters should be included that mention the interaction of China-Japan-Korea and Europe. Are there any regulations that do not apply to the European market? I believe that an additional analysis should be made of Asia's relationship with Europe (or/and U.S.) in the implementation of the regulations.

Give your opinion on when you think the regulations will be implemented due to the pandemic of COVID-19.

 

Line 31: please write United Nations (UN)

 

Chapter 1.1: This chapter is very good. An extra chapter is needed from the perspective of Europe and U.S. on this issue.

Line 66-67: please change the font of ‘since 1983’, with the correct one.

 

References

 

[13]. This ref. Is in Korean (Please write: Accessed 30 Aug 2020, in Korean)

[15]. The same with Ref. [13]

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

None

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Ln 31-34 LNG is not a solution to CO2 emissions and it may not the main objective for the HFO change to LNG.

Ln 117 Table 2 is difficult to read with the alignment and adjustment presented. Some data are missing at the bottom of the Table 2.

Ln 151-155 EEDI and CO2 are not related to the change of HFO to LNG or the topic of this study.

Ln 271 Table 3 is difficult to read with the current alignment and adjustment.

Ln 302 Table 4 needs improvement in alignment.

Ln 368 LNG may not be the best solution for GHG problems.

Ln 438 Authors may have to define and differentiate "green", "clean" and "renewable" fuels for ships.

Ln 471-472 There are various studies if LNG can provide long-term objective of "environmental friendliness". Authors may have to study this argument from another prospective.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

-

Author Response

Response to Reviewer’s Comments

English language and style : (x) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required

Reply:

Thank you for your comment. The manuscript has been reviewed by a professional English editing service to improve the language and style.

 

 

Back to TopTop