Dear Dr. Kok

thank you for the fast responses to the comments by the reviewers.

Please revise the manuscript accordingly.

Sincerely

Christian Stamm

Hess-2018-461

Dear Dr. A. Kok

Thank you for revising the manuscript Global Phosphorus Recovery for Agricultural Reuse. Two reviewers have assessed the revision and are positive in general. One of them asked for some minor modifications/clarifications.

I also went through the manuscript again and list here (see below) a few minor editorial and content-related aspects that need to be improved or corrected before the manuscript is ready for publications.

Please revise the manuscript according comments provided by the reviewer and myself.


Sincerely

Dr. Christian Stamm
Editor HESS


Detailed comments by the editor:

- Mathematical notations: Please adhere to the HESS requirements. Remove for example the “*” symbol for multiplication in all equations and brackets around units if they are a normal part of the text (such as on p. 1, L. 11; see https://www.hydrology-and-earth-system-sciences.net/for_authors/manuscript_preparation.html)
- p. 1: Move “through struvite crystallization” (p. 1, L. 14) to p. 1, L. 8 (after “wastewater”).
- p. 4, L. 4: Remove comma after “objective”
- p. 4, L. 11: “organisms” instead of “organism”
- p. 4, L. 13 (and elsewhere): What does the symbol “h” stand for in the bracket?
- p. 4, L. 15: The expression “person individual” sounds weird.
- p. 13, L. 23 – 25: “relative accuracy”: Please provide a quantitative description of how well the model performs.
- p. 13, L. 33: Table S7 is actually a figure.
- P. 13, L. 33 – 37: This paragraph is very superficial. Screening through the results that you show in the SI, I think some more findings should be reported. As it appears now it is more an exercise to demonstrate that a sensitivity analysis has been carried out but you do not really provide much insight for the reader. However, your figures reveal quite diverse patterns ranging from a complete absence of sensitivity for certain variable pairs, over linear relationships to very non-linear patterns. Please provide some essential findings and refer for explicitly to specific data that you show in the Supplementary Material.
- Fig. 3: Please increase the font size for better readability.
- Fig. 4: Please change the colour set you use. It is hardly possible to distinguish the different categories.

Dear Dr. A. Kok

thanks for submitting the revised version. You addressed most of the comments. However, without a point-by-point response it is sometimes difficult to link changes in the manuscript with the respective comments.

Going through the changes made, I could not identify the revisions in response to Review #1 of the revised version. For example, information about labour wages was requested, but I couldn't find any specific response.

Please provide a point-by-point Response to Review #1 of the revised version.

Thanks

Christian Stamm