Dear Authors,

The paper titled “An Improved Forecasting Method and Application of China's 2 Energy
Consumption under The Carbon Peak Target” has been taken up for review. The topic is
interesting and well written, but the manuscript requires minor revisions of few parts as
mentioned in the following comments.

1. An abstract should summarize the major aspects of the entire paper in a prescribed
sequence, and it can include i) the overall purpose of the study and the research
problem(s) you investigated; ii) the basic design of the study; iii) major findings or
trends found as a result of your analysis with numerical representation; and, iv) a
brief summary of your interpretations and conclusions.
2. Literature survey to be carried out in more depth, recent references to be included.
3. Citation formats should be standardized to be simple.
4. In Table 8 the MAPE, RMSE and MAE of IWOA-Linear SVR models are the very
smallest among all models. Further, the author claims that IWOA-Linear SVR model
is superior to other algorithms without proper analytical data.
5. K-Fold algorithm is used with a limited sample in order to make predictions on data
not used during the training of the model. Supposed the date set is huge or real-time
then how your algorithm is worthwhile?
6. SVR gives us the flexibility to error acceptable in machine learning problem. How
much error is acceptable in your model to find an appropriate line (or hyperplane in
higher dimensions) to fit the data.
7. Please check the scale on the axis along with unit in figure 6 and 7.
8. There is a need for some discussion as to how their approach makes their solution
more general, and what advantages it offers over this work.
9. The author need to provide the clarification on accuracy while implementing in real
word issues; if possible.
10. Some figures seems to be very tiny further requested to drawn with more clarity.

11. Relevance to the scope of Journal Yes

12. Originality Acceptable
13. Engineering/scientific relevance Yes
14. Completeness of the reported work Acceptable
15. Adequacy of acknowledgment of the past related work by Need to be improved
others, in the reference list
16. Organization and composition of the manuscript, which
must have:
17. a) Definition of the objective Yes
b) Justification of the objective Yes
c) Accomplishment of the objective Moderate
d) Description of the method of the study Yes
e) Clear presentation and discussion of the results Needs improvement
f) Validation of the results Can be made better
g) Comparison to the results by others Need to be improved
h) Concise conclusions/recommendations Must be improved
i) Clarity and good expression in English, and of tables Requires recheck
and illustrations
 j) Appropriate length Acceptable.

In my opinion, this article should be published after amendment of few parts leading to
improvisation.