We sincerely thank the reviewer for this important and constructive general comment. In response, we have revised the manuscript to more clearly state that the study is analytical and scenario-based rather than experimental. More specifically, we have clarified that the manuscript does not present original monitoring data from Mohammedia, but instead develops a comparative framework based on literature-derived parameters, technical assumptions, and analytical modeling. We also strengthened the justification of the proposed coefficients and assumptions, revised the discussion of spatial coverage and cost analysis, and added a dedicated section on study limitations and applicability. In addition, we improved the positioning of the manuscript by clarifying its contribution relative to existing monitoring and calibration-based approaches. This change can be found in Section 1 (Introduction), Section 2.5 (Research Gap), Section 2.6 (Research Objectives and Contributions), Section 4, and Section 6.3 (Study Limitations and Applicability).

We appreciate the reviewer's valuable and constructive feedback on this fundamental aspect of our work. To address these concerns, we have updated the manuscript to better emphasize that our study takes an analytical, scenario-driven approach rather than an experimental one. We have made it clear that this work does not include new monitoring data collected from Mohammedia. Instead, our research creates a comparative analysis framework using parameters from published literature, technical specifications, and analytical models. We have also enhanced our explanation of the proposed coefficients and underlying assumptions, updated our discussion of spatial scope and cost considerations, and included a new section that addresses the study's limitations and potential applications. Additionally, we have better positioned our manuscript by explaining how it contributes to the field compared to existing monitoring and calibration methods. These revisions appear throughout Section 1 (Introduction), Section 2.5 (Research Gap), Section 2.6 (Research Objectives and Contributions), Section 4, and Section 6.3 (Study Limitations and Applicability).