Sustainable Energy-Related Infrastructure Development in the Mekong Subregion: Key Drivers and Policy Implications
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
From section 2 to section 5 - page 11 of the article, it is a well-written document, but it only fits the work carried out, identifying and characterizing a set of policies / projects that are relate to the case study.
The author does not present or refer to the source of the data / values that allow obtaining the values presented in section 5 and in Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5.
The text at the end of page 13 “Electricity from hydropower is expected to increase from 133 MWh in 2017 to 252 MWh in the BAU scenario and to 245 MWh in the APS by 2050.” This text is not in agreement with Figure 3. Does it refer to Electricity from hydropower or Electricity from Gas?
About Figure 3 (page 13):
- The figure and figure caption must be on the same page;
- It is advisable to put a legend on the yy axis.
The number of references is very satisfactory and can be considered current.
The article is well structured and in the correct language. The values are possible and realistic, however, it is not possible to validate them because the source of information is not clearly presented and can only consist of an exercise.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Responses to Reviewer#1:
Dear Editor/Reviewer,
Thank you so much for taking time to comment on this paper. We are very pleased to respond to your comments and you will find our answers placed below each comment and how I have addressed your concerns. Again, thank you so much for taking time in commenting this paper.
Please find the attached file of our responses.
Sincerely yours,
Han Phoumin
Sopheak Meas
Hatda Pich An
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
- Tables should be numbered and mentioned in the text (Table 1shows ….). Tables should be made by the authors with the indication of the source of numbers and values if applicable (It is not clear if the table was done by the authors; if it was, authors should say the source of data is…)
- Page 11 paragraph2 : what table? (“as shown in the table, railways took 62%...”)
- Caption of figures is placed after the figures.
- References should be improved since the beginning. Ex. Placed at the end of paragraph where the numbers and values to BAU and APS are mentioned.
- Figure 3 authors should check values and also last paragraph of page 13;
- Conclusions should be reorganized; there is no advantage in considering a separate item for key policy implications
Second paragraph : as written it seems that CO2 is not a GHG
Author Response
Responses to Reviewer#2:
Dear Editor/Reviewer,
Thank you so much for taking time to comment on this paper. We are very pleased to respond to your comments and you will find our answers placed below each comment and how I have addressed your concerns. Again, thank you so much for taking time in commenting this paper.
Please find our responses in the attached file.
Sincerely yours,
Han Phoumin
Sopheak Meas
Hatda Pich An
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Was table 1 made by the authors?
All other previous comments were addressed by authors.
