A Comparison between Various Polymeric Membranes for Oily Wastewater Treatment via Membrane Distillation Process
, Nur Syafiqah Farhanah Dzulkharnien 1, Abdul Wahab Mohammad 1,2,3, Peer Mohamed Abdul 1,2 and Suriani Abu Bakar 4
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study presents the evaluation of various membranes for OW treatment, and a promising result was obtained for the MT and XT membranes from the pressure-filtration and MD methods. The selected membranes were successfully tested in the long-term MD and pressure-filtration, and the performance was compared for OW treatment. The results show that this method is feasible. Several questions may be considered before the manuscript is published in the journal.
1. The introduction fails to highlight the significance of this work.
2. For the "2.2 Preparation of synthetic OW", stabilizing the oil in water emulsion (O/W) without an emulsifier?
3. "Firstly, a compaction test was carried out using distilled water and the test was performed for 10 minutes at 4 bar until a stable flux value was obtained." The membrane has a stable flux, preferably achieved by running for at least 30 minutes.
4. In addition to the test method of the membrane to affect membrane fouling, whether it is related to the size of the membrane pore (the higher the pore size is, the easier it is to be blocked), the surface charge of the membrane, the hydrophilicity and hydrophobicity of the membrane, etc., it is suggested increasing the relevant data and discussion.
Author Response
Thank you for your thoughtful and constructive comments. The authors have carefully considered the comments and addressed all of them. We have adopted your suggestions and improved the quality of the revised manuscript. We hope the manuscript after careful revisions meet your high standards. The detailed response and manuscript has been included in this attached submission.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your thoughtful and constructive comments. The authors have carefully considered the comments and addressed all of them. We have adopted your suggestions and improved the quality of the revised manuscript. We hope the manuscript after careful revisions meet your high standards. The detailed response and manuscript has been included in this attached submission.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors address all my concerns, it is now publishable.
