Next Article in Journal
Ultrasound-Assisted Photocatalytic Degradation of Azo Dyes under Visible Light Irradiation Using Polythiophene-Decorated CoFe2O4 Nanohybrids
Next Article in Special Issue
Boosting Benzene’s Ozone Catalytic Oxidation at Mild Temperatures over Highly Dispersed Ag-Doped Mn3O4
Previous Article in Journal
Pt/Nb2O5-Al2O3 Catalysts for the Hydrogenation and Reductive Amination of Furfural
Previous Article in Special Issue
Efficient Green Synthesis of Hydrazide Derivatives Using L-Proline: Structural Characterization, Anticancer Activity, and Molecular Docking Studies
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Catalyst Development for Biogas Dry Reforming: A Review of Recent Progress

Catalysts 2024, 14(8), 494; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal14080494
by Wei Hu 1,2, Jundao Wu 3, Zeai Huang 1,2,4,*, Hao Tan 2, Yifan Tang 2, Zilong Feng 2, Rui Deng 2, Hongwei Zhang 5, Rustem Zairov 3,6 and Zhicheng Pan 4,7,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Catalysts 2024, 14(8), 494; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal14080494
Submission received: 9 July 2024 / Revised: 29 July 2024 / Accepted: 29 July 2024 / Published: 31 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Catalytic Energy Conversion and Catalytic Environmental Purification)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper provides an overview of the state-of-the-art development of biogas dry reforming catalysts, including categories of recently advanced catalysts and their strategies for addressing coking and sintering issues. The topic is relevant, and the discussion is comprehensive. The paper could be published once the following questions are thoroughly addressed.

1. The authors may double check the format of the references. Some references didn't include the page number (i.e. [13], [16]). Just making sure all the references format are consistent. 

2. Could the authors briefly discuss why the biogas dry reforming may outperform classical dry reforming? Since the 2000s, the shale gas revolution has produced substantial amounts of shale gas, keeping classical dry reforming competitive.

3. Should the authors consider adding a sub-section for the current theoretical computation (i.e. DFT calculations) findings and reaction mechanism study of the biogas dry reforming catalysts?

4.  It's might be a good idea to using a table or graph to summarize the state-of-art biogas dry reforming catalysts performance for comparison. (e.g. activity, selectivity)

5. In section 4 (Challenges and future trends), the author mentioned 'machine learning will be crucial'. Recently, the generative AI has been a hot spot in ML . The generative models like Transformer, Diffusion, and Generative Adversarial Nets (GAN) have been broad to the attention of the public. Maybe they could exceed the limitation for just predicting the performance and also generate the structures with high performance and help researcher understand what kind of structures possess high performance. Could the author utilize 3-4 sentences in the paper to talk about the future application of generative AI in dry reforming catalysts design? 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The authors may double-check for minor grammar mistakes. For example, in line 121, "et al." should follow three or more listed items.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review covers various catalysts used in biogas dry reforming, including noble and non-noble metal catalysts. It does well to outline the challenges such as coking and sintering. It could be published on Catalysts after solving the following issues:

1) The introduction provides a robust context for the significance of biogas, yet it could be enhanced by incorporating more recent statistics and perhaps a brief discussion on the economic impact of improved biogas technologies, which would underline the practical relevance of the review;

2) The discussion adeptly synthesizes findings from recent studies, highlighting advancements in catalyst efficiency and stability. However, it reads like a list of studies rather than a cohesive narrative. Integrating these findings into a broader discussion about the implications for future technology development could provide more depth;

3) Consider including more graphical representations of the data, particularly reaction mechanisms and the effects of different catalyst modifications. 

4) Provide more detailed and specific future research directions, particularly how new findings could be practically applied.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop