Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper's subject is a great interest to readers and researches.  Some proofreading and editing are required to improve comprehension of the text for the readership.

1. Tables 1 and 2 - it is necessary to identify the chemical compounds using a legend (under the table). Also, the abbreviations identifications in Table 3 (w.t, AE, W/B, Ms) are missing.

2. What is the source of BFS, paper sludge, and wood chips? Industry? Are they recycled or disposed of in landfills?

3. The phases of the experimental methodology (fig. 1) have to be explained in more detail. For example, how the materials mixing were performed? Were the materials compacted? Which form? What were the standards followed in conducting the experiments?

4. Page 4 - lines 112 to 121 - please, correct the text font.

5. It is required to present some figures showing the experiments conducted at the laboratory (materials, mixing, performance tests).

6. Comparing the obtained results with others from the consulted literature is necessary.

7. What was the main finding of your research? The conclusion should contain the following items:

a) Contribution to the body of knowledge,

b) Contribution of the study to the practice,

c) Limitation of the research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper "Research on recycling various wastes in papermaking as eco- 2

friendly slurry" is very well written and easy to follow. The authors have clearly stated the objectives. Methodology and described the outcomes. The article may interest to the readers of the journal.i have few minor comments that authors may consider to improve the overall presentation. 
A. The abstract should bere-written to highlight the novelty of the paper  

B. Consider revising few sentence suchas L75, L 89, L 119 etc.  

C.table 1, The composition should by wt %, this should be mentioned.  
D. Table 2 is redundant, it can be described in the text,-separate table 2 is not required.  
E. All the abbreviations must be defined at the first use in the manuscript, better to include a nomenclature
Overall, the manuscript can be accepted with minor revisions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Regarding the samples (the BFS and lime mud, paper sludge, bottom ash, and wood chips used in this study), the sampling method, amount, shape, pretreatment method, representativeness, etc. should be described.

I would like to know the rationale for setting the period of 28 days and the optimal period setting.

In addition to evaluating strength, I would like to see considerations related to other environmental impacts and issues to be considered in the future.

In Table 2, 2 for SiO2 and Na2O should be subscripted.

There are two tables 4.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf