Physical and Chemical Characteristics of Agricultural-Plastic Wastes for Feasibility of Solid Fuel Briquette Production

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present manuscript entitled “Physical and Chemical Characteristics Assessment of Agricultural-Plastic Wastes for Feasibility of Solid Fuel Briquette Production” is looking interesting. The authors designed experimental methodology based on that characterization of Imperata cylindrica, Mango peels and Face mask wastes as raw materials for the production of solid fuel briquettes. The reported work obtained results were encouraging and more precisely fits to the Sustainability Journal. There are some queries to be taken up, so that the manuscript will be clearer for the readers.

1.   Language errors were encountered at some points which need to be resolved   prior to publication.

2.    Authors must define clearly the novelty and the critical improvements in your   paper compared to results of other similar works.

3.    Introduction: Please, give clear feedback about the current uses of Solid Fuel   Briquette in a different areas of this field.

4.     Please, declare the current trends and research gaps in the field. Also, taking into account the expertise of the authors, they should declare how these processes could reach their establishment in the field.

5.  Improve the quality of the figures and tables.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting paper. Nonetheless, before acceptance, it needs to do the following minor revisions:

1. The need for further research in the topic is not properly justified. The main reason is to replace fossil fuels, in addition to other uses, such as fermentation, preparation of carbon materials, etc. But this is not explained, this must be in-depth discussed in the introduction with proper referencing to profitability analysis on the topic.

2.  English grammar is very messy in some points. Please check and upgrade.

3. w1，w2，w3  in the formula 2 should be w4, w5, w6.  The same problem occurs with the formula 3.

4. The symbol lowercasex in Equation 5 should be *

5. Please double check reference format.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The document has serius shortcomings in its methodological description. The experimental desing is not presented, neither the treatments are not descripted,   also the number and size of simple are not indicated. Finally, there is not statistical analysis around the main variables. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Please, according to the authors' answer, include in section 2.1; that you made three replication for each raw sample in order to run all of the physicochemical analyses.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf