Energy Utilization Assessment of Municipal Sewage Sludge Based on SWOT-FAHP Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In the manuscript entitled "Energy utilization assessment of municipal sewage sludge based on SWOT-FAHP analysis" the authors evaluated the anaerobic digestion, incineration, gasification and pyrolysis technologies on problem solving, environmental impact, technological development and legal regulatory aspect by using SWOT and FAHP analysis. Overall, this manuscript is demonstrating an important and promising research direction, however part of this manuscript seems to be enhanced in much clearer discussion. Herein, it is suggested that the manuscript could be accepted for publication in Water unless major corrections has been conducted according to the recommended points.

Required corrections:

1) Abstract: It is suggested that the authors should emphasize and point out the important and significant results of this study, not only numerical conclusions. Please balance this situation.

2) Key words: It is suggested that Sustainable development should be added in this section.

3) Introduction section: The authors have demonstrated the current disposal processes of sewage sludge, such as landfill, agriculture, incineration, and so on. However, sewage sludge and other biomass waste could be also produced as bio-coal briquettes in residential sector for rural household heating, which the manuscript should be mentioned and introduced. Some recent literatures could be referred to, such as (a) and (b): (a) Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2023, 29, 102975; (b) Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 2022, 37, 102251.

4) In the methods section, please mention that if triplicate sets of measurements had been carried out. This is very critical for an analytical manuscript, in which the statistical analysis will be the fundamental of the conclusions. Besides, please also indicate what is the software of data analysis in this study.

5) In the 4.3 section: It is suggested that the authors should list the advantages and comparison of this study through comparing the current studies, such as pyrolysis of the other biomass materials. Some recent literatures could be referred to, such as (a), (b) and (c): (a) Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 355, 131768; (b) Bioengineering, 2022, 9(11), 637; (c) Biochemical Engineering Journal, 2022, 179, 108330.

6) The future perspective should be summarized in this manuscript.

7) The English language should be revised by an expert.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The submitted article, “Energy utilization assessment of municipal sewage sludge based on SWOT-FAHP analysis” is interesting, original and within the scope of the journal but some changes should be addressed:

1.       Please update the state of the art by discussing briefly about the potential use of sewage sludge for materials obtaining for CO2 adsorption application (please see https://doi.org/10.3390/app11157139).

2.       Try to highlight the novelty and the aim of the study in the introduction section.

3.       Please make figure 3 more readable.

4.       Maybe the information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of disposal methods which are shown in table 5 could be inserted in a figure in the section 2.3 Treatment and disposal of MSS.

5.       I recommend to use a figure instead of table 5.1 (SWOT..) in order to have an overview of the informations.

6.       I recommend to introduce in the conclusions section some future directions or predictions taking into account your evaluation.

7.       Please check the references and rewrite them according to the journal guidelines.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The revised manuscript is clear and significantly improved. Acceptance is recommended unless some errors have been corrected:

1) Some of the references format and infromation were incomplete and need to be supplemented by authors, such as the pages of references are missing.

Line 552-554: Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 2022, 37: p.102251.

Line  555-556: Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2023. 29: p. 102975.

Line 613-615: Fuel Processing Technology, 2020. 205: p. 106425.

Line 628-630: Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022. 355: p. 131768.

Line 631-634, 637-638: .....

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx