Photocatalytic CO2 Conversion to Ethanol: A Concise Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this work, the authors reviewed the Photocatalytic CO2 Conversion to Ethanol.. The manuscript was well organized. The motivation for this work was clearly mentioned. It might be approved for publishing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Li et al reported a review for Photocatalytic CO2 conversion to ethanol. However, the author needs to improve the manuscript to be published in this journal. Comments are given below.
1- Please explain more about utilization of semiconductors in this research area.
2- Also summarize application of nitride materials for CO2 reduction
3- English and grammatical mistakes should be addressed while revising the manuscript.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The review manuscript discussed an emerging topic on the class and subclass of photocatalysts for photocatalytic CO2 conversion to ethanol. After the thoroughly reading the manuscript, I cannot recommend this manuscript for publication in Catalyst in the present form due to lack of clarity and discussion in some parts. My concerns and questions are listed below.
1. As we know, the photocatalytic reduction of CO2 research is very hot and there are many review papers in the field of CO2 photoreduction over various materials and semiconductors such as https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.202200389, https://doi.org/10.1039/C6EE00383D , https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201207199, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12209-022-00328-9, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40843-014-0003-1, and many more. How is this manuscript compliment to previous review? Is it really necessary to make another review on this field? If it is necessary, why? Please state the necessity of this review to further advancing CO2 photocatalytic reduction in the introduction section.
2. Each class of photocatalysts for CO2 conversion were discussed. However, the author did not mention the challenges and remaining problem of each photocatalysts in photoconverting CO2 into ethanol.
3. Authors should more focus on the outlook, rather than gathering the literatures.
4. Authors may add a discussion on several governing factors affecting the efficiency of photocatalytic CO2 reductions in the section 2.
5. Authors have not mentioned the surface engineering of semiconductor materials : See https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211285520305164, https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2022-0204
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Author has improved the quality of the manuscript based on the reviewer's comments. So, I recommend approving the manuscript in Catalysts in the present form.
