24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

jeffezheng

铁虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 788.7
帖子: 37
在线: 14.9小时
虫号: 458352
注册: 2007-11-13
性别: GG
专业: 工程热物理相关交叉领域

[求助] 投稿求助：审稿2让补充实验，但编辑还给出一些修改意见，其目的是？

编辑来信，是不是意味着没有按reviewer2的意见补充实验（需要很大的工作量，完全可以是另一篇更为好的文章），就只有杯具了...不过，值得斟酌的是，编辑还给出一些修改意见，其目的是？该撤稿呢，还是。。。？请各位大侠提供些参考意见。非常感谢！
Editor’sComments to Authors:
One of the reviewers still believes that additional experimentation andanalysis is needed in order to make the work an original contribution to theliterature.

The English in your paper needs to be improved. Energy & Fuels is publishedin English. Please note that we have many readers who are not native speakersof English. Therefore, the language in the articles must be clear, in order forall readers to understand it. If you know of someone who is fluent in English,you could have this person review your manuscript. You might also use anediting service. Here are some links to English Language Editing Services:

http://pubs.acs.org/page/4authors/tools/language_editing.html

You can also access this from the log in page on ACS Paragon Plus by clickingon the Information for Authors link. You will then be presented with a menu ofchoices, one of which is the English Language Editing Services. Note that youdo not have to log into to the site to access this information.

Your manuscript must adhere to ACS format, especially references. In the text,references should be cited as superscripted numbers, no brackets. In thereference list, the format of the references should adhere to ACS format. Inthe attached file you can see examples of the format of the references.

Reviewer:1

Recommendation: Publish after major revisions.

Comments:
As indicated in the first round of its review, this paper contributes to thebody of knowledge in this important area. Authors have contributed more to theclarity of the paper in its second edition. This paper should be published asis. Thanks.

Additional Questions:
Originality: Good

Technical Quality: Good

Clarity of Presentation: Good

Importance to Field: Excellent

Reviewer: 2

Recommendation: Do not publish.

Comments:
This work can be considered as a new submission after detailed surfacecharacterization experiments or XAFS analysis, and multicomponent tests areconducted. Authors should show and discuss evidences that can support theproposed reaction mechanism of Hg on the TAC. Unfortunately this paper does notprovide new results to the community without the discussion of multicomponent testsor characterization experiments. I would recommend this manuscript to berejected.
For future submission the following issues should be clarified in themanuscript. Why was water vapor not added to the baseline gases? Althoughauthors demonstrated the addition of water vapor in Figure 1, water compositionis not specified in Table 1. How does TAC perform in the presence of watervapor? I would recommend repeating experiments with the addition of water vaporto the baseline gas.
Can authors present the breakthrough curve of BL+SO2 experiment after addingwater vapor to the baseline? Water vapor can specifically change the effect ofSO2 on Hg adsorption. SO2 is expected to react with water on the activatedcarbon forming sulfate compounds, which are found to poison the active sites onthe activated carbon required for the adsorption of Hg. Authors should conductmore experiments and provide evidences to understand the effect of SO2. Howdoes SO2 affect Hg adsorption in the presence of HCl, NO and NO2?

Additional Questions:
Originality: Fair

Technical Quality: Fair

Clarity of Presentation: Good

Importance to Field: Fair

回复此楼