Palm Oil Mill Effluent Treatment Processes—A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript Palm oil mill effluent treatment processes is well described review of technologies that are used for treatment of Palm oil mill effluent. I believe that the subject matter taken up by the authors is interesting and the authors have done a lot of work to present in an interesting way the possible treatment technologies. Recently, there have been a few works on the treatment of POME, but from what I learned all the works deal with the issue in a different way.
Despite, the work is a review, the authors should provide methodology that was used to search the publications.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript is very well written. I would recommend to put different route of POMA processing in one schema. I am also very suprised that authors don't provide a lot of information on the thermochemical treatment of POMA. I would recommend to reconsider the entire chapter and talk about thermochemical treatment using also other feedstock. There are also pre-treatment processes like torrefaction "Characterization of woodstove briquettes from torrefied biomass and coal" and hydrothermal treatment. "Hydrothermal carbonization of olive wastes to produce renewable, binder-free pellets for use as metallurgical reducing agents". Even both articles were written using olive waste, in my opinion similar processes could be applied to POMA. Authors should integrate the discussion on hydrothermal treatment and torrefaction using these articles and speculate about potential to blend POMA with other feedstock for the cost efficient conversion. Finally, I would add a chapter on the life cycle analysis of POMA and indicate which method was the most cost-efficient using the available data. The abstract and conclusion should be changed accordingly to the results of LCA.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors must remove the images from conclusion. If they are interested to add the processes from the images. They should use bullet points, but overall the conclusion must be not more than 10 sentences. Try to keep it short, but comprehensive.
Author Response
Thank you for the input.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
