Preparation of Iron Salt-Modified Sludge Biochar and Its Uptake Behavior for Phosphate
and Chuan Fu 1,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please find the attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We highly appreciate the detailed valuable comments of the referees on our manuscript of ‘Processes-1886205’. These comments are very valuable and helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. We carefully modified the whole manuscript. The modified details marked in red are shown in the ‘Highlighted manuscript revised’. The comments are replied to one by one.
We hope that the editor and reviewers will be satisfied with our responses to the ‘comments’ and the revisions for the manuscript.
Thanks and Best Regards!
Yours Sincerely,
Yan Wu
2022-09-14
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
row 24 - reformulate
row 99 - reformulate
row 115 - reformulate
row 194-196 - figure 2 should be corrected
row 305 - table 3, how come have only 17m2/g and this high total pore volume ? i think the values should be checked and be corrected, please add the isotherms
row 315 - in order to compare intensity of the sample , you should not translate the graphs. And where are the diference between SB-Raw, SB-AN-KF, SB-B-Fe, and spent SB-B-Fe (denoted SB-Fe-P)? they all look the same
row 333- 335, figure 9 , the sample a and b are identical , and you should put the same resolution for d if you have it.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We highly appreciate the detailed valuable comments of the referees on our manuscript of ‘Processes-1886205’. These comments are very valuable and helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. We carefully modified the whole manuscript. The modified details marked in red are shown in the ‘Highlighted manuscript revised’. The comments are replied to one by one.
We hope that the editor and reviewers will be satisfied with our responses to the ‘comments’ and the revisions for the manuscript.
Thanks and Best Regards!
Yours Sincerely,
Yan Wu
2022-09-14
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This manuscript has presented the utilization of biochar prepared from Fe-salt treated sludge for phosphate removal from water. The capacity obtained is very low, and the manuscript has serious flows. Therefore, I cannot accept this for publication at the current state. Also, the reviewer has the following specific comments for authors to improve the manuscript before resubmission.
Has the biochar been washed after treatment with iron salts? Fe3+/Fe2+ ions make insoluble precipitates with phosphates, and the phosphate removal may not be due to adsorption. So, it is more appropriate to use the word uptake if the material has not been washed thoroughly with de-ionized water.
The phosphate analytical method needs to be briefly described, or appropriate reference needs to be given.
Please use different models to describe the kinetics data. The PFO and PSO fits are very poor
Since the material’s capacity is very poor and please compare with capacities with similar materials including relevant benchmark details
Label the important IR bands
SEM scale bars need to be presented clearly
The manuscript has too many figures, and some of them may be combined
The iron salt crystals may have been converted into iron oxides during the pyrolysis of sludge. Salt crystals are very unlikely to attach and retain on the biochar surface. This discussion has severe errors in Chemistry.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We highly appreciate the detailed valuable comments of the referees on our manuscript of ‘Processes-1886205’. These comments are very valuable and helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. We carefully modified the whole manuscript. The modified details marked in red are shown in the ‘Highlighted manuscript revised’. The comments are replied to one by one.
We hope that the editor and reviewers will be satisfied with our responses to the ‘comments’ and the revisions for the manuscript.
Thanks and Best Regards!
Yours Sincerely,
Yan Wu
2022-09-14
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
Thanks for the response.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have adequately addressed the reviewer comments and the manuscript can now be accepted for a publication.
