Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Process to Select Waste-to-Energy Technology in Developing Countries: The Case of Ghana
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The goal of the study is to use the analytical process 16 hierarchy (AHP) to select appropriate waste-to-energy technology for the city of Accra. The paper is interesting however there are many typos and English mistakes.
Author Response
Response to reviewer 1 comments: Manuscript ID: sustainability-1453567
General Comments |
Authors Response
|
(V) We noticed that you cited reference[22][24][25] in the caption of Table |
OK. Thanks for the constructive comments. Table 1, Figure 1, Figure 3, and Figure have been revised and clarified. For example,
The source with Table 6 has been deleted. Reference is made in the text. The title for the table is: Intensity of preference scale for pairwise comparison. The new sentence reads: “Ten experts were asked to make a pairwise comparison between criteria and sub-criteria on a nine-point scale adopted from [46]. |
REVIEWER 1
Reviewer Comment |
Authors response
|
The goal of the study is to use the analytical process 16 hierarchy (AHP) to select appropriate waste-to-energy technology for the city of Accra. The paper is interesting however there are many typos and English mistakes.
|
OK. Thank you for pointing this out: The sentence has been written as: The goal of the study is to use the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to select appropriate waste-to-energy technology for the city of Accra. The language of the paper has also been checked by a native English speaker for typos and English mistakes accordingly.
|
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors presented an interesting and actual article that presents a real case study and can contribute to presenting a solution for the presented problem.
The authors must refer precisely this situation in the introduction, showing how the issue is important and how can contribute to a solution.
I don't like when is a section numbered, for example 1. Introoduction, followed by text, and after arrives a subsection numbered 1.1... The authors must avoid this because it is not correct. Include a subsection 1.1. Framework, for example, and after the previous 1.1 will pass to 1.2.
The same recommendation applies to all sections.
The quality of the figures is poor. Must improve and avoid excessive colours.
The authors must create their own Figure 3 instead of using this poor quality figure presented in the text.
To present a figure such as a Figure 5, must include a legend, a scale, north orientation and the relative position of Ghana in Africa. But it may be redundant because everybody knows where Ghana is. So, consider removing the figure.
Methodology should be section 2.
Author Response
Response to reviewer 2 comments: Manuscript ID: sustainability-1453567
REVIEWER 2
Reviewers Comments |
Authors’ responses
|
The authors must refer precisely this situation in the introduction, showing how the issue is important and how can contribute to a solution.
|
OK. Thank you for the comment. Additional elaboration has been added: For example, we have rewritten the introduction to include the sentences below:
“Properly addressing the disposal of these wastes contributes to indirect progress concerning global greenhouse gas emission and transitioning towards global environmental sustainability standards. Efficient management of municipal solid waste also contributes to the economic development of a city or country. With multiple WtE technologies available, localities have a challenge when comparing the technologies for selecting which is more optimal for their circumstances.” .
“ Moreover, WTE technologies promote hybrid waste to energy plants in Ghana that create new jobs and sustainable solutions for the solid waste disposal and management problems in the country. Furthermore, WTE technologies would contribute to saving a lot of emissions of environmentally harmful gases each year in Ghana, which ultimately facilitates Ghana’s climate change mitigation strategy.” .
|
I don't like when is a section numbered, for example 1. Introduction, followed by text, and after arrives a subsection numbered 1.1... The authors must avoid this because it is not correct. Include a subsection 1.1. Framework, for example, and after the previous 1.1 will pass to 1.2. The same recommendation applies to all sections.
|
OK. This has been corrected as suggested following sample articles from the Mdpi publication. |
The quality of the figures is poor. Must improve and avoid excessive colours.
|
OK. The quality of the figures has been improved as suggested. |
The authors must create their own Figure 3 instead of using this poor-quality figure presented in the text.
|
OK. Thank you for the correction. The quality of Figure 3 has been improved. |
To present a figure such as a Figure 5, must include a legend, a scale, north orientation and the relative position of Ghana in Africa. But it may be redundant because everybody knows where Ghana is. So, consider removing the figure.
|
OK. Very grateful for the comment. Figure 5 has been deleted. |
Methodology should be section 2.
|
OK. Thank you for the comment. The Methodology is in Section 2 |
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors addressed all my questions. For that reason I recommend to be published.