Dear authors,

As you can see from the comments posted by the two reviewers, both see merit in your paper and consider it a valuable contribution to our understanding of acidification models. However, both reviewers also raise several points both with respect to the equations presented (reviewer 1) and to the lack of external validation of the model outcomes (reviewer 2).

Both issues will need to be addressed before the manuscript can be published. In your response to the reviewer comments regarding the equations, you indicate in my view adequate changes and explanation to address the issue. Please incorporate these in your revised manuscript. With respect to the lack of validation, I see your point in the focus lying on a review of performance of modelling under hypothetical scenarios where sharp changes can be applied, and appreciate that validation would not be easy to add. However, you must very clearly explain in the text of the manuscript why this choice was made.

With kind regards,

Boris Jansen
Topical Editor of SOIL

Thank you for submitting this revised version. After re-reading the revised manuscript and your response to the issues raised by the reviewers, I conclude that you have adequately addressed the points mentioned. Therefore, I will recommend acceptance of your manuscript to the Executive Editor.

Dear authors, I am glad to inform you that after the revisions made your manuscript is ready to be accepted for publication in SOIL. Thanks for consider our journal to publish your interesting research.

Best regards

Jorge