Hydropower Functional Zoning with Crowdsourced Geospatial Data: A Case Study in Sichuan Province

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

The topic of the paper is interesting and the general choice of methods is suitable. The manuscript presents a strong procedural framework. However, conclusions section must be improved because it does not explain clearly, what was found and what are the main conclusions. Reviewers' suggestions may be of assistance to you in the preparation of future papers. 

1. [Title] The phrase "Research on" can be removed from the title of the manuscript. Also, since the findings of this manuscript are highly influenced by the region of the study, consider changing the title of the manuscript to something like "Hydropower functional zoning with crowdsourced geospatial data: A case study on OOO".

2. [L46] In the manuscript, citation [3] is followed by [15], [16], not [4]. Please check and correct citation number and proper location.

3. [Figure 1] Figure 1 caption reads "The study area", please be more specific (to better explain what is in the figure).

4. [L75-77] In this study, the authors employed publicly available data voluntarily built by non-professionals (as the title of the manuscript also uses the phrase "crowdsourced geospatial data"). However, there is no discussion on the pros and cons of this. What is the purpose or reason for using "crowdsourced data" in particular. Also, what are the advantages or disadvantages of using it?

5. [L114] In L77, the authors mentioned ‘Open street map’ and its abbreviation ‘OSM’, so from then on the authors only need to refer to it by its abbreviation. However, in L114, the authors mentioned ‘Open street map’ and its abbreviation ‘OSM’ again. Please remove the ‘Open street map’ in L114 and use OSM only.

6. [Figure 6] Figure 6 uses the phrase ‘runoff volume’ and the text uses the phrase ‘runoff depth’. (I understand that the term ‘runoff’ is presumably interpreted to mean ‘surface runoff accumulation’ in the field of geographic information systems. In this case, runoff volume presumably refers to the amount or volume of rainwater flow.) But what exactly does runoff depth mean?

7. [Table 3] Table 3 shows the results of spatial clustering for hydropower Station with different indices. However, there seems to be a lack of meaningful interpretation of each index and numerical results. The authors need to add this supplemented.

8. [Conclusions] In the conclusion of this manuscript, only a summary of the findings is presented. Please add improvements, significance, and anticipated impact of this research to the conclusion.

9. [References] Many of references are not conform to the instructions for authors of Applied Sciences journal. Please check and revise all.

 Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

We appreciate all the comments from reviewers, and we have carefully revised the manuscript following the advices in detail. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

The manuscript entitled "Research on hydropower functional zoning with crowdsourced geospatial data" is substantial and well structured. It presents an innovative and promising study that explores the application of crowdsourced geospatial data in hydropower functional zoning.

Given the increasing global demand for clean energy, the article addresses the pressing need for effective hydropower planning. It introduces the concept of hydropower functional zoning as a strategic approach to identify suitable locations for hydropower development while considering environmental, social, and economic factors. The authors propose leveraging crowdsourced geospatial data to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of this zoning process.

Considering all these some minor issues should be addressed. In particular:

1. The authors should use passive voice within the whole manuscript.

2. Figure 1 should be enlarged and the used text within the map should be readable. Perhaps the use of Halo can solve this. Also, use blue color for the Basin boundary.

3. The authors should check the entire manuscript for various inconsistencies. e.g. P9L271. "...in the eastern hills(Figure 7C).". It should be "...in the eastern hills (Figure 7C)."

3. Figure 8 is not understood. The reader cannot understand the boundaries of each level. The authors should provide a more readable map for the Level zoning results in Sichuan Province.

The use of English is in a fine state.

Author Response

We appreciate all the comments from reviewers, and we have carefully revised the manuscript following the advices in detail. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

In this study, the authors applied the framework of hydropower functional zoning to Sichuan Province, 422 divided it into 53 level-3 zones, 27 level-2 aquatic-eco functional zones, and 17 level-1 eco-423 logical functional zones. Generally, the results are also interesting and relevant to the Applied Sciences Journal. The revised version of the manuscript has been improved significantly. I only have two comments:

1-    I have a major concern on the proposed protocol the authors implemented, which lacks sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. I recommend performing the sensitivity analysis to assess the relative importance of the input variables. Thus, the scarce information provided in this section in combination is misleading to the reader.

2-    Gap analysis needs to be made in relation to the study area but state if there is any limitation for the modelling strategy in applying to any other study area.

Author Response

We appreciate all the comments from reviewers, and we have carefully revised the manuscript following the advices in detail. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

The authors answered all the questions and corrected all the comments. I recommend the article for publication.

Author Response

All the authors appreciate your previous kind and valuable comments.

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 paper presents an application of a zoning method for the Sichuan Province in China, focusing on hydropower generation. However, it seems a case study report rather than a research paper, it offers limited value to the scientific community. The authors do not introduce any novel methodology but instead apply existing ones or their fail to effectively communicate their innovations.

Here are some recommendations to increase the relevance of their work:

1. I will suggest to clearly state a specific objective in the introductions, such as the development of a novel zoning methodology. Authors could discuss the expected advancements by stating the limitations of previous zoning methods and defining their hypothesis on the new methods performance.

2. Emphasize the paper's novelty more explicitly, ensuring that it is well and clearly defined in the introduction.

3. Expand the methodology section to provide a more detailed explanation of the approach used (replicability). Maybe you could include a flowchart of the overall method. Include a section about statistical analysis to compare your method with others possible zoning methods. A comparative analysis of the proposed methodology against existing methods can highlight the overall improvements offered by the new approach.

4. Utilize those statistical analyses to strengthen the results and discussion sections, demonstrating the impact and relevance of your zoning method. 

5. Increase the importance of the discussion section by referencing relevant literature on zoning methods, demonstrating how the proposed method is superior to existing approaches. After, discuss the implications of these differences for the study site and the potential broader applications.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We appreciate your pertinent comments, which are constructive and helpful for the improvement of the manuscript. Please find my itemized responses the attachment and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

Kind regards,

Han Luo (Corresponding author)

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Environmental problems of the environment, such as soil erosion, land degradation, constantly threaten the health of ecosystems and the quality of settlements in Sichuan province, therefore, a quantitative analysis of the development of hydroelectric power plants using the spatial clustering method based on OSM data on hydroelectric power plants is necessary to identify its impact on the environmental safety of the environment in ecofunctional zones.

In this work, based on OSM data on hydroelectric power plants, spatial clustering algorithm and the principle of zoning of water ecological functions, Sichuan Province is divided into 53 zones of the 3rd level, 27 water-ecological functional zones of the 2nd level and 17 ecological functional zones of the 1st level. 

Based on these data, a quantitative analysis of the development of hydroelectric power plants was carried out using the spatial clustering method based on OSM data on hydroelectric power plants in order to identify its impact on environmental safety in ecofunctional zones.

The work has a scientific novelty and does not contain critical flaws, but there are comments on the text of the article:

1. Line 127 specify the year for which the data was used, exactly 2005?

2. Line 199 the link to the figure is incorrect.

3.  It is surprising that 42 papers were cited in the absence of Applied Sciences Journal. If the authors were unable to locate any references in this journal, the paper is most likely out of scope. Please thoroughly review and include references to the Applied Sciences journal's knowledge body. This provides readers with a sense of continuity and allows them to pace your paper in relation to what the journal has been publishing, greatly increasing the impact of your article.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We appreciate your pertinent comments, which are constructive and helpful for the improvement of the manuscript. Please find my itemized responses in the attachment and my revisions in the re-submitted files.

Kind regards,

Han Luo (Corresponding author)

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf