Dear authors,

thanks for your submission and my apologies for the delay. Please see attached a pdf with notes from me concerning your revised version. I still have troubles in understanding the importance and the impact of the work and I also think there is a lot that could have been done in this regard (e.g., looking at the energy balance terms) to make the manuscript more appealing and better fitting the standards of the journal.

However, reviewers expressed that the manuscript should be published after their comments have been addressed. I have looked again at the manuscript and I have a few points that I would like you to address before accepting the manuscript. One aspect that is crucial is addressing the uncertainty and impact of results on GC-NEt quality and on the choice of the threshold for the PDD.

Please do your best to address those points.

Best,
Marco

Dear authors,

thanks for your submission and my apologies for the delay. Please see attached a pdf with notes from me concerning your revised version. I still have troubles in understanding the importance and the impact of the work and I also think there is a lot that could have been done in this regard (e.g., looking at the energy balance terms) to make the manuscript more appealing and better fitting the standards of the journal.

However, reviewers expressed that the manuscript should be published after their comments have been addressed. I have looked again at the manuscript and I have a few points that I would like you to address before accepting the manuscript. One aspect that is crucial is addressing the uncertainty and impact of results on GC-NEt quality and on the choice of the threshold for the PDD.

Please do your best to address those points.

Best,
Marco