Multi-Indicator Assessment of a Thermal Insulation Investment, Taking into Account the Pre-Set Temperature
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article "Multi-indicator assessment of a thermal insulation investment, taking into account the pre-set temperature" presents a technical, economic, and environmental evaluation of thermal insulation application aimed at energy efficiency. The manuscript is well-organized and aligned with the journal's scope. Some considerations are made to improve the quality of the article:
1) Previously, the authors published an article in Energies (ref. [5]) on the same topic with a very similar analysis. What are the main differences between the studies that justify this new publication?
2) What are the contributions and limitations of the study?
3) Abstract: The abstract should provide a brief background of the topic and the motivation for the study. Additionally, the novelty of the study should be highlighted.
4) The authors should include a flowchart illustrating the methodology adopted for the study, detailing the steps.
5) The conclusions should revisit the initial objective and demonstrate whether it was partially or fully achieved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article studies the economic and ecological benefits of evaluating building thermal insulation investment, proposes indicators for evaluating investment, and proposes a method for determining the optimal thermal insulation thickness under economic and ecological reasons. Suggestion: Publish after modification.
1. When introducing the innovative contributions of the paper, the innovation of the proposed methods or solutions can be emphasized more prominently. Clarify the novelty of this study compared to similar studies already available in the literature.
2. The conclusion section can further explore the meaning and possible impact of the experimental results, as well as the direction of future research.
3. The number of references does not correspond to the breadth of the research content of the article, and there should be more references.
4. There are no images throughout the article, and some tables can be represented more intuitively through images.
5. The case study focuses on Polish construction conditions, which may limit the applicability of the findings to other geographic locations with different climates, construction practices, and regulatory frameworks.
6. The study primarily focuses on economic and ecological indicators, with less emphasis on the social dimensions of sustainability, such as thermal comfort, health benefits, and reduction in energy poverty.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageModerate editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper conducts economic and ecological analyses of thermal insulation investment options. The paper is well-organized.
In the Methodology section, the authors establish a series of mathematical formulas and subsequently apply them in a numerical example presented in Section 4. I have two suggestions for the authors:
(1) It would be beneficial to provide explanations for the parameters utilized in the formulas. For instance, what does the thermal insulation thickness represent?
(2) The numerical values presented in the tables of results need clarification. For instance, what does a number in Table 15 (5, 6, or 7) signify?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. The abstract only mentions the final determination of the relevant index values, but does not explain the specific relevant conclusions, which should be supplemented.
2. The second paragraph of Introduction mentions ways to improve energy efficiency, but there is a lack of relevant references.
3. The third part of the paper mentions CEA. In addition to introducing the specific application of cost-benefit analysis in this paper, an appropriate introduction to CEA's own theoretical content should be added, accompanied by some references.
4. The analysis of relevant data in Table 9 is limited, and the specific reasons for missing some results are not explained.
5, the conclusion should be a proper summary of the full text, which can be a simple summary of the research method.
6. Data from the previous experiment can be added to the Conclusion and Discussion to assist in the description of relevant conclusions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper has a large number of formula explanations and tabular data, but there are no pictures and flow charts to explain the problem. It is suggested to add the overall flow chart of the article and relevant pictures of the case study.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
