Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

raw 65 WFGD, raw 115 GHSV - please abreviattion

- the N2 sorption characterization is not properly done, the authors should take in consideration that this is type II isotherm in combination with Type IVa with H3 histeresis. They should be carefull because usualy when the capillary condensation occurs near 1P/Po and not under 0.6 P/Po, macropores are encountered. please use the last iupac for interpretation http://sol.rutgers.edu/~aneimark/PDFs/IUPAC_Report_PAC_2015.pdf

- reformulate "Figure 2(a) (B) shows that the catalyst is mainly a mesoporous structure [18]"

- reformulate "Figure 2(a) (A) shows the N2 adsorption-desorption isotherms"   A its only the pore size distribution not the isotherms.  please also add the rest of the pore size distribution

- where is the sample 1:2 from N2 sorption analysis ?

- reformulate  "Ce:Mn=1:4, XRD peaks at 2θ are 37.68, 57.361, and 59.767, corresponding to 101,121, and 220 of MnO2". where is Ce ?

- it could improve the article if the TEM were also done for the rest of the samples

- reformulate:  "When the molar ratio of Ce:Mn=1:4, the catalyst still maintained the best catalytic effect in a certain temperature range(25-150oC)"

- they should split figure 4 , and explain more what its containing. explain what other catalyst you add in figure 4b ?

-for conlusions, the authors should also point out how the surface area influence the materials.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript “Catalytic oxidation of NO by ozone over Ce-Mn/Al2O3/TiO2 catalyst” represents study of over Ce-Mn/Al2O3/TiO2 catalyst. Authors used XRD, TEM, N2 adsorption, XPS and O2 TPD to characterize the properties of catalysts. Authors tried to investigate of mechanism of catalysts promoting O3 oxidation of NO. Despite the large number of methods used, the analysis of catalytic data, the quality of scientific presentation is not satisfied. There is no analysis between properties and structure of catalyst, the mechanism is not proved.  I have doubts about the correct interpretation of the XRD and XPS data and findings are not proved. The results reported in this paper can not be published in a journal with good impact factor such as “Processes”.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper describes the preparation of Ce-Mn/Al2O3/TiO₂ catalyst by impregnation method. The catalytic activity was used for synergistic O₃ oxidation NO.

However, I would like to recommend the publication of this manuscript in " Processes Journal".

 The following Main points should be considered, Please

 The reaction should be checked by leaching or reusability studies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Despite changes in the manuscript, the quality of scientific presentation is not satisfied.  I still have doubts about the correct interpretation of the XRD and XPS data and findings are not proved. The results reported in this paper can not be published in a journal with good impact factor such as “Processes”.

Figure 1c, all peaks should be marked.  

From figure 1c and text, It is not clear why reflections of MnO2 were not observe in the low 2theta region.

In the 2.1 part, there is no information about the ratio between active component and support

From the 2.1 part, the preparation temperature was 300C, it is not clear how calcination at 300C leads to transformation from gamma alumina to corundum (see XRD analysis). According to my opinion, XRD pattern contain reflections of gamma alumina (2 theta=66.6).  

Line 178, «Further, it can be seen that the increase  of the Mn:Ce ratio promoted the decrease of the crystallinity of MnO 2 [21]» To prove such finding, crystalline size of oxides should be estimated. For this purpose, Scherrer equation could be used.    

Line 184, «the change of Mn:Ce ratio has little effect on the crystallinity of  CeOx» Please, comment this findings.

 Figure 1c, with increase of Mn/Ce ratio, relative intensity of reflections changes. Probably, it indicates change in the amount of phases or  appearance of new ones. For example, peaks at  30-40 apper only in case of catalyst with Mn:Ce=5:1.

Table 1, please estimate the errors for SBET, Vp, Dp. I have doubles that S BET for Mn:Ce=1:2 is exactly 27.5637, not 27.564.The same situation with errors is observed for Table 3.

Figure 6 should be improved. Figure does not give possibility to interpret the adequacy of the spectrum decomposition.  The fitting of Ce3d core-level spectra is incorrect: the order of peaks corresponded to Ce3+ and Ce4+ is incorrect, the lineshape is incorrect (should be Gaussian, but not Lorentz), the additional peaks that could not be corresponded cerium are observed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf