Environmental Assessment of Innovative Paper Recycling Technology Using Product Lifecycle Perspectives
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1) The background and intention of research are assessed and described properly
2) Subject of the paper has quite large amount of novelty, is important from the environmental, economic and functional aspects not only for Japan but also for other countries,
3) The innovative paper recycling technology is described in clear and sufficient manner,
4) The Product Life Cycle assessment is an adequate methodological tool for achieving the research goals,
5) Data base and literature used seems to be adequate and relevant,
6) Figures and tables uprise the understandability of the article and its visual form,
7) The general meaning of the article may be widely understood not only by the specialists, however specific aspects of the new recycling paper technology is not such easy clear,
8) The abbreviation DFP used in position 159 and 164 must be explained by adding its full designation.
Author Response
Dear reviewer
Thank you for your useful comments. We revised manuscript. Please see below.
>7) The general meaning of the article may be widely understood not only by the specialists, >however specific aspects of the new recycling paper technology is not such easy clear,
We think that specific aspects of the new recycling paper technology are reduction of CO2 emission and water consumption by using 3 process (defibration, binding and forming).
Thus, we revised below.
L94-102: Given this, Seiko Epson Corporation has developed a new dry-type paper recycling technology. This technology consists of three technologies “defibration technology” for decomposing used paper into each one pulp fiber, “sheet forming technology” for forming fibers again into uniform sheet, “pressing and binding technology” for increasing fiber density and bonding pulp fibers to each other to create new paper. As a specific aspect, it is possible to reduce CO2 emission and water consumption by this technology. Using this technology not only eliminates the need for both water disposal and drying processing, but because the machine using this technology can produce paper within the office, it also reduces the environmental burden from transport required during collection.
>8) The abbreviation DFP used in position 159 and 164 must be explained by adding its full >designation.
We added below.
166-167: This study applied the fundamentals of the LCA methodology to evaluate the environmental impact of dry fiber paper (DFP) which made by dry-type office paper-making machine in Japan.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
|
The introduction provides a stimulating account of the challenges of paper recycling and the need for a new methodology, that could potentially improve the |
|
The background provides an interesting account of paper and recycling processes and contextualises the importance of the study |
|
|
|
What databases are used and was there any LCA software packages used for the result. What impact assessment levels were used to compare the results |
|
The results are clearly presented, but there is a mix of coloured but Figure 11 provides only raw material usage, and transport, hence there is no visible resources consumed in usage and disposal. This perhaps needs to be removed from the legends (also check for grammatical errors). The sensitivity analysis is well presented. Although, there should be consistency in the location of the legends. |
|
The conclusions are supported by the results and |
|
there is no conflict of interest. |
Author Response
Dear reviewer
Thank you for useful comments. We revised manuscript. Please see below.
>The results are clearly presented, but there is a mix of coloured but Figure 11 provides only >raw material usage, and transport, hence there is no visible resources consumed in usage >and disposal. This perhaps needs to be removed from the legends (also check for >grammatical errors).
As we wanted to highlight the low water consumption during usage and disposal stage, we added usage and disposal to the legend. Thank you for your kind comment.
We revised figure11.
>The sensitivity analysis is well presented. Although, there should be consistency in the >location of the legends.
We revised figure12.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The scope of this manuscript is clear. However, it could be positive to layout the structure of the manuscript at the end of the introduction. In this sense, the structure is not always clear.
There are some statements such as: “A characteristic of paper is that as a medium, it is easier to read, understand, and find errors in information than with electronic media. Even in recent years, these characteristics have resulted in a minimal change in the amount of PPC paper production…” (lines 49-52), that precises the font. I recommend to manage author’s reference there. So, it would be necessary authors develop a little bit more the literature review.
On the other hand, figures and tables that are shown are useful, but it would be valuable give the fonts.
In relation the term LCA, it would be positive to be sure that it is defined the first time it appears. It is helpful to the reader, this means line 68 instead line 69.
Finally, authors should introduce the study limitations.
Author Response
Dear reviewer
Thank you for your usful comments and advice. We revised manuscript. Please see below.
>There are some statements such as: “A characteristic of paper is that as a medium, it is easier to read, understand, and find errors in information than with electronic media. Even in recent years, these characteristics have resulted in a minimal change in the amount of PPC paper production…” (lines 49-52), that precises the font. I recommend to manage author’s reference there. So, it would be necessary authors develop a little bit more the literature review.
L52: We added reference number and reference infromation(L448-449).
>On the other hand, figures and tables that are shown are useful, but it would be valuable give the fonts.
Fig 8-11: We revised figures and added text information.
>In relation the term LCA, it would be positive to be sure that it is defined the first time it appears. It is helpful to the reader, this means line 68 instead line 69.
We revised such as below.
L67-71: In view of this, up until now we have actively been using an LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) for paper [109-221]. LCA is a methodological tool for assessing the environmental impact associated with a process, product, or services by identifying and quantifying the energy and materials used, as well as the waste products released into the environment.
>Finally, authors should introduce the study limitations.
L424-428: As a limitation of this study, this study was evaluated assuming that all processes were performed in Japan. Therefore, it is not rightness to compare with other countries PPC paper. In case of comparisons, it is necessary to make evaluations using primary data, usage conditions, and environmental load database in specific countries and regions.
