Modeling and Optimizing the Process of Identifying Energy-Saving Potential Scope (ESPS) in Municipalities: A Combinatorial Approach to ISO 50001 Implementation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript presents a novel combinatorial approach, PG2E, for identifying Energy Saving Potential Scopes (ESPS) in small to medium-sized municipalities (SMMs) that implement ISO 50001. The methodology is innovative, the results are promising, and the topic aligns well with sustainability goals.

1. The existing method to identify ESPS is too lengthy. The reviewer suggests that this section should be shortened for clarity.
2. The results from the current method and the existing method should be compared quantitatively.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic to offer efficient energy audits to municipalities is a valid one because of shortage of skilled staff and limited means to contract externals.

The introduction should be closer linked to the issues small and medium municipalities are facing. As such, it is very generic or focusing on the residential sector: please use also literature which highlights typical energy related pro blems in the public sector. Please explain the elements and relations in figure 1, provide captions, This applies to all figures. how is the POI defined, what does it express?

can you please explain: PG2E requires certain indicators for all buildings in a municipality. To obtain this is difficult. If we have the required indicators, why do we not conduct regular energy audits on e. g. on the units with the highest consumption?

I do not understand how no engineers time need be mobilized. How can concrete suggestions for the buildings be presented, if there is no technical analysis. The statistical analysis can establish a potential range of savings to expect, but cannot point at root causes of inefficiencies and corresponding corrective measures: please explain

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General Comments

The paper proposes an innovative solution, based on a combinatorial approach to quickly and efficiently identify Energy Savings Potential Scopes.

A current and relevant proposal in the context of energy management. The authors conducted a good bibliographic review, presented in section 1, Introduction. The research context and objectives are presented clearly, as well as the traditional methods of identifying Energy Savings Potential Scopes.

However, I have some doubts and suggestions presented below.

 

Comment 1. Text presentation

Some observations about the structure and presentation of the text:

-Correct the keywords field, do not put the words in quotation marks;

-Use cardinal numbers in the numbering of the equations;

-Instead of “local authorities” evaluate the use of “public building”;

-In line 643, correct the text ISO 50001.

 

Comment 2. Tables

Use the table standard indicated by the journal.

Correct the table titles, which have a different font and color than recommended.

Comment 3. References

Include the ISO 50001 standard in the list of references.

Comment 4. Methodology 1

The PG2E software is cited in line 513, in section 3, methodology, however, it is presented in detail only in section 4, line 717. I suggest adapting the presentation of this information.

Comment 5. Methodology 2

The authors consider French regulations as a reference, such as the REMP, proposed by ADEME. I recommend that this be clearly stated in the text, starting in the abstract. The same applies to the Cit'ergie system method.

Comment 6. Methodology 3

Energy performance indicators are important for characterizing the specific energy consumption for each end use, enabling the implementation of the ISO 50001 management system, based on the PDCA cycle. In this sense, how does the proposed methodology intend to deal with the supervision of the energy performance of systems? I also didn't understand the cycle structure in PG2E. How do you evaluate this?

Comment 7. Methodology 4

I suggest consulting the ISO 50006 standard (Energy management systems — Measuring energy performance using energy baselines (EnB) and energy performance indicators (EnPI)), as well as citing and discussing it, since it specifically addresses energy performance indicators, especially with the use of statistical methods, statistical correlation analysis, Pearson correlation, among others.

Comment 8. Methodology 5

I consider the proposed method suitable for evaluation and planning by municipal managers for a preliminary analysis, as a criterion for choosing which buildings the implementation of ISO 50001 will be implemented in. However, individual analyses and the definition of performance indicators are essential in the energy management of a building or process.

Comment 9. Results

I suggest improving the presentation of the results, detailing the data in tables 8, 9 and 10.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors made the proposed changes.