Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Unfortunately the authors fail to address the comments provided by the reviewer and hence, it is recommended to reject the paper. The quality of paper is very poor and the literature review conducted doesn't cover many aspects of the subject area.

Author Response

We have tried to improve the final paper as much as possible and to carry out all recommendations suggested by the reviewers.

Thanks for your help

Reviewer 2 Report

The work has improved significantly with respect to the original submission. Thank you.

Author Response

We have tried to improve the final paper as much as possible and to carry out all recommendations suggested by the reviewers.

Thanks for your help

Reviewer 3 Report

Authors clearly improved their work. 

Please run the spelling tool for grammar/typing mistakes, example title in Section 3 “Renewable”; check the format of references, author names should not be in capital, use journal guidelines.

The manuscript is recommended to be published in Applied Sciences journal.

Author Response

We have tried to improve the final paper as much as possible and to carry out all recommendations suggested by the reviewers.

We have checked the format for references and all other grammar/typing mistakes. 

Thanks for your help