Qualitative Assessment of Hazardous Gas Emissions from Sewage Sludge-Derived Biochar

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

File attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

File attached.

Author Response

Our response is in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please see the comments.

Author Response

Our response is in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall, the manuscript looks good and it was interesting to read. You have described the problem with pyrolysis gas and the harmful effects that they can have on people exposed to these. You describe your experimental set up and the results in a clear way (minor exception, see comments below) and the discussion is sound as well. In the conclusion, you re.connect to the harmful effects caused by the pyrolysis gas and you suggest what to do to reduce this problem, well done!

However, there are always issues that needs to be revised, please see comments below:

1. The words in the title of the manuscript should not be the same as in the list of keywords. Now, most of the words are the same with some exception.

2. There is some unclarities though:

a. Figure 1 is difficult to see unless magnified. The colored boxes and the white text along with the font size (especially in the column to the left, the word "byproduct" is extremely difficult to read). Would it be possible to use black text on the lighter background colors instead?

b. Please check the spelling/language on the following pages and lines

- page 3, line 3 from the top: contami   -nants,

- page 3, line 6 from the top: "the majority of"

- page 3, line 25 from the top: explain GUS-data, it seems to be statistics from Poland, and as a reader one ponder upon what kind of statistsic you refer to. Is GUS a governmental authority (or something else) that collect data and provides it for researchers/public? The reference (18) doesn't say much to readers that are not familiar with the Polish language

- page 4, line 29 from top: rea-  son

- page 5, line 13 from top: in-  volves

- page 5, line 20 from top: 500 ml·min-1, and 

- page 5, line 21 from top: says "rotamers" should be "rotameters"?

- page 6, line 30-31 from top: Says "Lyczko and al" should be "Lyczko et al"

- page 7, line 3-15, from top (2nd paragraph), check margins

- page 10, reference 8: If this reference is written in Polish, please provide a translated title and indicate that the reference is written in Polish

3. Clarifications needed

- page 4, section 2.1.1, is it the raw sludge sewage that was ground and dried before testing?

- page 4, section 2.1.2, what do you mean by ”material” in this sentence? Do you mean the raw sewage sludge that was ground and dried as mentioned in the above paragraph? If so, did you freeze the sludge twice? Please clarify.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The overall impression of the English language looks good. There are some automatically indicated words in the manuscript (under-striked), please check and see if the language could be improved.

Author Response

Our sesponse is in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

File attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Our answers are included in the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

File attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf