Analysis of Thermal Pollution Reduction Efficiency of Bioretention in Stormwater Runoff under Different Rainfall Conditions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The research deals with important issue of the analysis of thermal pollution reduction efficiency of bioretention in stormwater runoff under different rainfall conditions. To understand the influence of different rainfall conditions on the reduction of thermal pollution load of rainwater runoff from bioretention facilities and the correlation between the parameters, the experimental study was carried out by using the Beijing P&C rainfall pattern to change the rainfall parameters. The results show that the heat pollution load reduction rate (HR) has a strong negative correlation with rainfall inflow volume (IV), rainfall duration (RD), and the service area ratio of bioretention facilities (CAR). Remarks: Please, indicate the novelty of the presented approach. The left axis is very light in the figure 3, please provide better quality of this figure: line 267: Figure 3. Experimental results of thermal pollution in bioretention facilities. Line 307: The choice of reference should be supplemented with respect to the future research of using the prediction model of implementation of the the landslide triggering by preferential flow in fractured soil under rainfall conditions, and established a preferential flow infiltration prediction model reflecting this mechanism (e.g. Ref. Modelling water distribution network failures and deterioration, 2017, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 2017-December, 924-928. DOI 10.1109/IEEM.2017.8290027.Line 382: small caption of this figure a) and b) on this Figure 7. Experimental results of rainfall and outlet heat: (a) 60min rainfall and outlet water heat curve; (b) 60min rainfall and outlet water heat accumulation curve; (c) 120min rainfall and outlet water heat curve; (d) 120min rainfall and outlet water heat accumulation curve. On what base the linear functions were selected? Line 283: Figure 4. Linear fitting result diagram. Add some perspectives of the future work.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic of the paper under the title “Analysis of thermal pollution reduction efficiency of bioretention in stormwater runoff under different rainfall conditions” is current and within the scope of the Water journal. However, some issues require clarification and extension. Therefore, I recommend major revisions before the publication of the manuscript. Please find some details below.
1. The keywords should be different from the words in the title. Please change the following keywords: “bioretention”, “thermal pollution”, “stormwater runoff”.
2. There is something wrong with the equations. Equation (1) is not used to calculate rainfall intensity. Additionally, the explanations of the symbols (lines 138-140) are not consistent with the equations. Please correct it. Please also note that equations (1) and (3) are identical.
3. Table 1 – How were the parameter combinations determined? Has any software been used for this? Please describe the "orthogonal experiment method" in more detail.
4. Please provide examples of using the Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Method in similar analyzes. Why was the research based on this method and not, for example, on Cramers'V coefficient? Correlation grading tables are the same in both cases.
5. Please expand the discussions. More references to the literature and to the results provided by other authors should be added.
6. Section 4 should be rewritten. Please present the main conclusions of the research, their limitations and directions for further research. The current section 4 repeats the content of section 3 and adds nothing new to the manuscript.
7. Please also consider the following issues:
- Line 20 (“(at) during”) – Please correct.
- The way of citing the literature should be adapted to the mdpi guidelines. For example, “[2-3]” should be replaced with “[2,3]” (line 34). “[23]” should be changed to “[23]” (line 238).
- Lines 82-90 (“However, at present, (…)”) – This sentence is very confusing. It should be rewritten.
- Figure 1 – Please mark the location of the thermometers in the figure.
- Line 162 – Please change “1.” to “2.3.1.” Likewise, subsequent points.
- Line 246 – Please add that it is about the air temperature.
- Figures and tables should be referred to in the text before these objects (e.g. Fig. 3, Table 5).
- Figure 4 – Please enter the value of R2 in the figure.
- Line 313 – “from Figure 1” – Are you sure?
- The formatting of the References should be adapted to the mdpi guidelines.
Best regards
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Li et al., paper title" Analysis of thermal pollution reduction efficiency of bioretenion in stormwater runoff under different rainfall conditions" paper is very interesting subject for readers. However, author fails in many points and thus, this paper is considering for major revision.
Abstract- "Because the delay between.................temperature reduction" need to re-write this statement.
Major comments:
What is a significant importance of this study? Please highlight it in introduction section.
R2 values in Figure 4 is very less, have you check with other model probabilities? If not, please quote the references.
In common, bio-retention system need study of bio materials of plants, This is missing in your research. Please justify this point.
Minor comments;
Figures- Need to mention error bar in Figure 2, 3, 4
Spell out RT, RP, CAR, RD and IV in table 1, 3. Similarly in Figures.
R2 values in Figure 4 is very less, have you check with other probabilities?
Figure 7, Y axis labels and units are missing.
Conclusion need to shorten and specific. No need to repeat results again with detail.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper can be published.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Li et al. reports on thermal pollution reduction in stormwater runoff under the condition of different rainfall has improved significantly after their revision stage 1. This paper can be accepted in water journal for further publication.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments
