A Location Selection Method for Wastewater Treatment Plants Integrating Dynamic Change of Water Ecosystem and Socio-Cultural Indicators: A Case Study of Phnom Penh
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for the submitted manuscript. The subject of the work is very important and interesting, but the text requires significant corrections.
Starting with line 277. As noted in the article template, and which you did not delete in your manuscript - '' Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted from the perspective of previous studies and of the working hypotheses. The findings and their implications should be discussed in the broadest context possible. Future research directions may also be highlighted''.
I am asking for a thorough completion of the results, as well as conducting a discussion, referring to the works of other authors. You can refer to similar cases of using GIS methods elsewhere in the world. I think you can find some interesting cases based on a database search - https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=wastewater+treatment+plant+gis+location&hl=pl&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2010&as_yhi=
Yours faithfully
Author Response
Reviewer #1:
We appreciate reviewer #1 for his/her effort to review our manuscript, and his/her positive feedback. The reviewer provided an accurate summary of our work and brought forward constructive questions. We have addressed them below.
Starting with line 277. As noted in the article template, and which you did not delete in your manuscript - '' Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted from the perspective of previous studies and of the working hypotheses. The findings and their implications should be discussed in the broadest context possible. Future research directions may also be highlighted''.
Response: We apologize for our error. After your reminder, we have deleted the template and have provided more detail on the results and discussion. (4.3 Discussion)
I am asking for a thorough completion of the results, as well as conducting a discussion, referring to the works of other authors. You can refer to similar cases of using GIS methods elsewhere in the world. I think you can find some interesting cases based on a database search - https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=wastewater+treatment+plant+gis+location&hl=pl&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2010&as_yhi=
Response: We are grateful for the suggestion. We refer to the findings of different scholars to make comparisons between the different characteristics of our selected sites. The literatures are presented in INTRODUCTION[References 12-27]. The results of the discussion of our experiments are presented in Table 8. Based on the reviewer's suggestion, we added more details in lines 337-349.
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper, a novel indicator system based on GIS spatial analysis location selection model was proposed, and the indicator system selected 12 criteria to compose exclusion indicators, suitability indicators and demand indicators. It is an interesting content, but arranged structure needs to be further improved. Therefore, it needs minor revision before it is published in this journal. Some issues should be carefully addressed. Please check the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reviewer #2:
We appreciate reviewer #2 for his/her effort to review our manuscript, and his/her positive feedback. The reviewer provided an accurate summary of our work and brought forward constructive questions. We have addressed them below.
Q1: The abstract should be rewritten, i.e., it should highlight the originality, innovation and uniqueness of this paper.
Response: We are grateful for the suggestion. We have rewritten the abstract. To be more clearly and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a more detailed interpretation regarding result discussion.
Q2: Recent developments are missing, and this is a significant defect in this article.
Response: We want to thank reviewer for constructive and insightful criticism and advice about the reference. Hence, we supplement some recent literature in Introduction (2021 and 2022 years). The comparative literature is comprehensive, which not only include location selection of the WWTP, but also the other city infrastructure. Our paper on GIS and RS based spatial location selection of wastewater treatment plants has been added for completeness.
Q3: Flotation is a useful method to recover heavy metals from wastewater, so it should be described in the “Introduction”, and several relevant references may be added to support this point, such as Miner. Eng. 187 (2022) 107796; Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol. 31 (2021) 1117–1128.
Response: Thank you for your reminder. We’ve added References[3-4] to the text(lines 36-38).
Q4: The English of this manuscript is largely okay. But occasionally the texts get mixed up and require the reader to guess what the authors were trying to say. I suggest a careful and thorough editing.
Response: We apologize for the text confusion problems in the original manuscript. We have checked and revised the manuscript.
Q5: More details about the experimental conditions should be provided.
Response: Thank you for the above suggestion. We have supplemented our experimental software and processing method in the data sources (lines 216-222).
Q6: Analyses of data/results and focus of aims should be further elevated in “3.5 Demand analysis”.
Response: We are grateful for the suggestion. As suggested by the reviewer, we have added more details . We have divided section 3.5 into two subsections. The first subsection focuses on how to describe the water ecosystem condition into demand indicators. Subsection 2 describes the obtaining of overall demand points.
Q7: It is suggested to compare the results of the present research with some similar studies which is done before.
Response: We are grateful for the suggestion. As suggested by the reviewer, we have evaluated the reasonableness of the WWTP location based on our indicators. The results are then compared with the case where the location was not selected according to our indicators and are discussed in Section 4.3.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for the submitted manuscript.
