OVERALL COMMENTS:

This paper gives us a full glimpse of incense smoke by the non-target approach of GC×GC-MS which 371 compounds are identified. Incense and I/SVOCs emissions are neglected as part of burning studies before. The emission of incense burning is an important source of contribution to ozone and SOA formation. The MIR, OFP, SOA yields, EF factors, and tracers of incense burning are also listed which can give scientific support to other studies. The potential risks of these compounds evaluated in this paper can also give an important effect to reveal and assess the epidemiological influences of incense burning in future work.

INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS:

Line 119-120: What is the quantification rule, as shown in lines 119-120? Usually, the data was calculated as 1/2 LOQ when it matched the IDL.

Lines 190-197: The Tenax-TA method is not a very efficient sorbent for VOCs as the authors showed in lines 185-188. So the result from lines 190 to 197 should be clarified the VOCs here are the part of compounds captured by Tenax-TA, not the common VOCs detected by SUMMA-GC/MS.

This study provides a detailed characterization of VOC-IVOC-SVOC emissions from incense burning, estimates the OFP, SOA formation, and the toxicity risks. Furfural is proposed as the molecular marker of incense burning due to its stable emission among different types of incense materials. The intensive domestic usage of incense imposes significant health risks for a large number of Chinese residence and this works gives a valuable set of data to assess the epidemiological influences of incense burning for future work. I recommend publication in ACP before a few comments to be addressed as below.

It is well known that TA tubes are designed for sampling gaseous organics in a given volatility range. The common way is to collect samples in I/SVOCs range using TA tubes and VOCs using summa tanks. There indeed are commercially available tubes for VOC collections. In this regard, further information on the methodology section and quality assurance is needed, either in the main text or SI. How did you choose the sampling materials, and what are their adsorption efficiencies for VOCs and IVOCs. The authors also mentioned that VOCs contributed to the majority of total EFs, i.e., over 80% as shown in Figure 1. Are these numbers arising from sampling biases that tubes don’t trap IVOCs efficiently?

Line 146 a space missing before Table S3.

Lines 267&269, delete the “_”.

Lines 138&139. The sentence “Where EFi is ….” is grammatically incorrect. Please re-write it.