However, no-load consumption for the SCG is very low. This point must be taken into account in order to compare the efficiency of the two arrangements.SCG have other advantages different from efficiency, e.g., consumption of oil and maintenance costs are reduced, SCG installation is easier, etc.Nowadays, it is more appropriate to compare SCG with electronic solutions. For instance, a synchronous machine with an AC/AC converter coupled to the prime mover shaft. This kind of solutions is more complex and, so, its reliability is lower than that for mechanical systems. However, from the point of view of efficiency, installation, maintenance, etc., electronic schemes could be the most appropriate.2) As has been assumed, the prime mover power exceeds the electric power requirements, so the electric load variations must not affect the prime mover. In the case of a short-circuit, electric protections usually act in a few milliseconds. As a result, it should not affect the mechanical system. However, we agree with the discusser in that use of a SCG creates dependence between prime mover and electricity generation although an emergency group exists. And therefore, reliability of classical arrangements is a clear advantage with regard to SCG ones. 3) The above-mentioned dependence between Prime Mover and SCG also affects maintenance works. 4) In general, space requirements are higher for diesel units than for SCG. However, these requirements can be comparable in some cases. Nevertheless, situation of components is more flexible in the SCG scheme which implies additional space saving.