Power System Impacts of Electric Vehicle Charging Strategies
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors explore the potential impacts of integrating electric vehicles (EVs) and varia[1]ble renewable energies (VRE) on power system operation. The topic is interesting and falls within the scope of the journal. The data design is reasonable and the results are convincing. However, some important issues should be addressed to improve the quality of the manuscript before it can be published in Materials. The detailed comments and suggestions are as follows.
Point 1: The background and literature review fail to reveal the motivation of this study. Authors should further improve these two sections. Here are some literature suggestions for a better background: Energies 15, no. 3 (2022): 942; Energies 14, no. 3 (2021): 786; Energies 14, no. 6 (2021): 1688.
Point 2: Authors must look into the results section. Discuss the key findings.
Point 3: The structure of the paper is not too sound.
Point 4: Authors must try to mention the contribution of the study. It is one of the critical conditions.
Author Response
I appreciate your feedback. Please find in the attachment our responses to your comments in blue.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper tries to study the potential impacts of integrating electric vehicles (EVs) and varia-ble renewable energies (VRE) on power system operation.
The paper is well written and offers interesting findings; however, it requires further significant improvement and correction.
1. The novelty of the paper needs to be justified and clearly defined. It includes the clear difference with the available literature and previous works. The authors are asked to provide the limitations of the previous correlated works and then linked those limitations to the current ideas and contributions of the current work.
2. Several references are lumped together without providing sufficient description for each of them. It gives nothing to the readers. Please provide a short description or descriptor for each used references, hence, the readers can understand the content of each used references.
3. In section 2, please provide a figure or table showing the data; therefore, the trend can be easily observed.
4. Mathematical models used in section 3 should be explained sufficiently.
5. Very long paragraphs are made throughout the manuscript. Please divide them into shorter and concise paragraphs.
6. How do you deal with any uncertainty, including the availability, willingness to participate, etc.
Author Response
I appreciate your feedback. Please find in the attachment our responses to your comments in blue.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Paper investigate the potential impacts of integrating EV and RE on power system operation. Some comments can be found below:
1. There is an error line in the abstract which mixed Abstract with the keywords lines.
2. In my opinion, the abstract was too long. It needs to be rewritten to clearly express the main idea of the paper.
3. The authors need to clearly express the main contribution of the manuscript by some outlines.
4. Please present the paper’s organization at the end of the Introduction part.
5. Section 2 should be combined in the Introduction part instead of open a very short section. The data in the Section 2 could be summarized by a figure.
6. Section 3 should have a brief description about the production cost model which you are using in the paper (what are the objective functions, constraints, etc).
7. The data of the test system in Section 4 should be presented in a table or figure to cut down some unnecessary description by words. This section needs to be reorganized, the reviewer had a hard time to find key information in the whole section.
Author Response
I appreciate your feedback. Please find in the attachment our responses to your comments in blue.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript has been improved significantly and is ready to be published. Thanks. I hope it will have a high impact.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have revised the paper as mentioned. I have no further comments.
