A Literature Review of Cooling Center, Misting Station, Cool Pavement, and Cool Roof Intervention Evaluations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is an interesting review of a very topical subject. Although they do not mention them in the title and objectives of the work, all the systems that use vegetation to mitigate heat in cities through evaporative cooling are left out of this review. For example, vertical gardens (living walls), green roofs, and traditional gardening systems. I believe it is necessary to include and review such heat mitigation works.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This article is not organized as a scientific paper. Many editing is required in the reference style, paragraphs, section numbers, etc. Moreover, the authors confused a lot in meteorological terms, e. g. ambient temperature and air temperature as well as no indicated temperature. The review results look like a report, not a scientific review. A more deep understanding of meteorological and climatological terms and physics is required. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This review aims to evaluate urban interventions in the form of cooling centers, misting stations, cool pavements, and cool or green roofs. A total of 23 articles met inclusion criteria, evaluating interventions in urban areas of Chile, China, Greece, India, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States, using a variety of metrics including ambient, surface, and indoor measures of temperature and humidity, vulnerability assessments, residential access to interventions, and questionnaires. 

To be considered for publication in this journal, this manuscript need to a major revise.

More detailed suggestions about the manuscript are below:

1. An updated and complete literature review should be conducted. The relevance to Atmosphere should be enhanced with the considerations of scope and readership of the Journal. 

2. The structure of the whole article is confusing and difficult to understand, I recommend improve the structure and organization quality of the manuscript. 

3. The resolution of Figure 1 needs to be improved

4. Tables summarizing and organising the main findings about outdoor human thermal comfort index in the form of cooling centers, misting stations, cool pavements, and cool or green roofs need to be presented.

5. Section 1.1 Cool Pavements  A table summarizing the cooling pavement’s types, parameters (such as material, emissivity, reflectivity.....), cooling effects (such as Air temperature, average radiation temperature, long and short wave radiation....), and using areas need to be presented.

6. Section 1.1 Cool Roofs, Green Roofs A table summarizing the green roofs’ types (what kind of plant was used), parameters (such as leaf area index, covering thickness, reflectivity.....), cooling effects (such as air temperature, average radiation temperature, long and short wave radiation....) need to be presented.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This is far from a systemetic review. Many good high-contribution papers (Levinson, et al) are ignored. I do not support the publication of this uncomplete paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Ok, I agree with your comment but I think it is very biased, it only takes into account 4 types of systems that improve thermal comfort in cities through evaporative cooling, but leaves out other more prominent techniques. Anyway, it is an interesting work.

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback. We did look at a specific set of interventions and agree that others exist and may be evaluated further in future research.

Reviewer 2 Report

This revised article looks much improved. After changing some problems listed below, it can be accepted in the journal.

1.       In line 77, the eligible number of articles about cool pavement was mentioned here four, but five studies were mentioned in line 95. Correct it.

2.       “During dry periods, the surface …… air temperature decreased” were duplicated in lines 155-158 and 163-165.

3.       Please identify whether temperature is air temperature or surface temperature, e.g. 48.1 ℃ in line 182.

4.       “None of the studies measured temperatures at the cooling centers or human exposure” was duplicated in lines 201-202 and 207-208.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The author responded  very well to my comments, and the quality of the revised manuscript has been greatly improved. 

Author Response

Thank you for the revision recommendations, glad to hear the manuscript looks improved.