Assessment of the Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic Stay-at-Home Measures on Potable Water Consumption Patterns, Location, and Financial Impacts for Water Utilities in Colombian Cities
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)
I read again the article (Assessment of the effects of COVID-19 pandemic stay-at-home measures on potable water consumption patterns, location, and financial impacts for water utilities in Colombian cities) submitted for re-review with great interest. The main problem is presented in a very interesting way: several studies suggest that social distancing measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic have affected the water sector, specifically regarding its demand and supply. The topic related to the presentation of water distribution in Colombia is also interesting.
The article presents very interesting research that can be used to describe subsequent analyzes by a researcher in this field. This paper aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on the water consumption patterns in four Colombian cities known for their important commercial, industrial, academic, and touristic features. And it has been presented.
All my comments in this version have been taken into account and I am satisfied because I have received explanations and answers to my questions.
Thank you for considering my opinion.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
The authors have quantified the hydraulic and economic effects of an important long-term disturbance on water demand in four cities. The study is well defined and the paper is well written. I recommend acceptance after minor revisions.
First, I suggest the authors consider more literature, particularly in the introduction and discussion. A few papers have highlighted the need for the very research the authors have completed, and referring to it will further justify their contribution. Examples include:
Considerations for Studying the Impacts of COVID-19 and Other Complex Hazards on Drinking Water Systems
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000658
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Water Utility Operations and Vulnerability
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001560
2020: Looking Back on the Year of COVID
https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1788
In the discussion, the authors should compare their findings to other COVID studies of water demand, and note important novelties and similarities.
Next, Figure 3 needs to be labeled with units. Incidentally, I like the method of showing the time series predictions vs. observations here.
I am pleased to see a rather simple OLS model. Many studies go too far into more advanced models that are difficult to interpret and defend.
Overall, the paper seems a bit excessive in the writing; I suspect that some portions could be abbreviated.
I commend the authors for carrying out the work and documenting it so well.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript, water-1829300-peer-review-v1- entitled "Assessment of the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on potable water consumption in Colombian cities," is well written and has potential, but it should be more organized. This research investigates the impact of the pandemic on the water consumption patterns in four Colombian cities known for their important commercial, industrial, academic, and touristic features. In my opinion, a careful revision of the English language should be carried out as there currently are some unclear sentences. The study seems to be well designed. The methodology and results are technically sound. Discussions on the scientific and practical values of the study, the limitations of proposed models, and future work are meaningful. I recommend accepting this manuscript after revision. The main concerns are as follows:
1) The title section should be edited and rewritten since it is too general. What kind of effects of the COVID-19 pandemic? It should be more clarified.
2) The first paragraph should explain more about the importance and necessity of the research. Water consumption patterns should be highlighted in the introduction section.
3) Quantitative results and conclusions should be clarified in the abstract to make it more comprehensive. Also, The originality and importance of the study should be clearly mentioned in the abstract.
4) Improve the keywords by including only the phrases in the whole body. It is better to avoid using phrases that are repeated in the title.
5) Some abbreviations in the paper have already not been addressed in the text in an appropriate way.
6) More literature review about the other methods is needed. The manuscript could be substantially improved by relying and citing more on recent literature about contemporary real-life case studies of sustainability and/or uncertainty, such as the followings.
· Vadiati, M., Beynaghi, A., Bhattacharya, P., Bandala, E. R., & Mozafari, M. (2022). Indirect effects of COVID-19 on the environment: How deep and how long?. Science of The Total Environment, 810, 152255.
7) For readers to quickly catch your contribution, it would be better to highlight significant difficulties and challenges and your original achievements to overcome them more straightforwardly in the abstract and introduction.
8) Explaining the flowchart, Fig. 1, is highly recommended by researchers, so please explain the flowchart representing the methodology in the paper.
9) Colombian cities is adopted as the case study. What are other feasible alternatives? What are the advantages of adopting this case study over others in this case? How will this affect the results? The authors should provide more details on this.
10) I suggest explaining more about Fig. 3 since it is the core of the current research.
11) Presenting the results in a specific table is essential in the manuscript; unfortunately, the authors did not provide a table and discuss it in a specific way. A comprehensive discussion emphasizing would significantly improve the paper on the table.
12) It is important to give a better description of the samples and the sampling protocol since we are trying to understand the data variability. What are the advantages of adopting these parameters over others in this case? How will this affect the results? More details should be furnished.
13) The methods should be better presented, with details of the models, etc.
14) The discussion section in the present form is relatively weak and should be strengthened with more details and justifications.
15) Comparing the current study with previous research could be improved by more literature review.
16) It seems that conclusions are observations only, and the manuscript needs thorough checking for explanations given for results. The authors should interpret more precisely the results argument.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
I read the article (Assessment of the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on potable water consumption in Colombian cities)submitted for review with great interest. The main problem is presented in a very interesting way: several studies suggest that social distancing measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic have affected the water sector, specifically regarding its demand and supply. The topic related to the presentation of water distribution in Colombia is also interesting.
However, it would introduce a few amendments, mostly editorial:
· please check the unit area in table 1,
· please provide all figures in a uniform system (periods or commas),
· in my opinion, figure 3 should be presented in one part (possibly 3 cont. should have a sequential number, which will change the numbers for the remaining figures as well as the content of the comment).
The article presents very interesting research that can be used to describe subsequent analyzes by a researcher in this field. This paper aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on the water consumption patterns in four Colombian cities known for their important commercial, industrial, academic, and touristic features. And it has been presented.
Thank you for considering my opinion. I encourage the authors to continue working on improving the manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript, water-1829300-peer-review-v1- entitled "Assessment of the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on potable water consumption in Colombian cities," investigates the impact of the pandemic on the water consumption patterns in four Colombian cities known for their essential commercial, industrial, academic, and touristic features.
In my opinion, the revised manuscript is not entirely addressed by my comments and the authors have not tried their best to revise it. Still, the below comments should be addressed.
In conclusion, the current version is unsuitable for publication in the journal. The paper didn't assess the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on potable water consumption since if you replace the COVID-19 pandemic with the years that the pandemic happened or leave out the COVID-19, the whole concept and structure of the paper will not change. Also, when you talk about the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the environmental effect of the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered on potable water consumption. The paper did not consider and assess the wastewater since there should be a close correlation between potable water consumption and wastewater volume.
Comments number 1; The title section should be edited and rewritten since it is too general. What kind of effects of the COVID-19 pandemic? It should be more clarified.
Comments number 7; For readers to quickly catch your contribution, it would be better to highlight significant difficulties and challenges and your original achievements to overcome them more straightforwardly in the abstract and introduction.
Comments number 11; Presenting the results in a specific table is essential in the manuscript; unfortunately, the authors did not provide a table and discuss it in a specific way. A comprehensive discussion emphasizing would significantly improve the paper on the table.
Comments number 12; It is important to give a better description of the samples and the sampling protocol since we are trying to understand the data variability. What are the advantages of adopting these parameters over others in this case? How will this affect the results? More details should be furnished.
Comments number 16; It seems that conclusions are observations only, and the manuscript needs thorough checking for explanations given for results. The authors should interpret more precisely the results argument.
