2020.9.14, submitted; 2020.10.10, major revision was required in the first review (one week was given); 2020.10.16, the revised manuscript was submitted. The first review had sharp words; two reviewers said it must be improved; two reviewers said it can be improved. There were about 10 comments raised in total. They said that one section of my article was confused and unclear, and there were several exclamation marks were used in the text. I wrote an 8-page reply, mainly to supplement the simulation process. And then, the evaluation was made, and all of the 5 reviewers accepted it. The reply “I do appreciate very much your response to my comments and also the improvements done in the paper.” 10.19, reducing the competition rate was required. There were more than 10% of the sentences were similar to my previous related conference paper. The editor required to reduce the competition rate, but did not specify how much it should be reduced. However, I tried my best. 10.20, the revised manuscript was resubmitted, and it was accepted in an hour. Summary: Some reviewers were still very responsible and will have some relatively in-depth comments; Some reviewers are not responsible. The fourth reviewer only gave me one sentence, and I didn’t know how to revise (according to his comment). The efficiency of the editor was high. He was online on weekdays and replied the email extremely fast. The difficulty of submission is slow, the speed was fast, but the fees are relatively high. There are advantages and disadvantages. But as the first SCI article in my life, I am very grateful.

(47) Thank | 木子

The manuscript was submitted on August 19. The first reviewer’s individual comments were received on August 26. The editor sent them to me in advance. The comments were ordinary; only one comment was relatively difficult to answer. The verification test was repeated to illustrate the problem. The revised manuscript was resubmitted in the afternoon of August 30. One major revision was given in the afternoon of September 7. There were three reviewers in total. The first reviewer praised me, and said nothing else. The second reviewer was the previous one. The third reviewer was relatively strict, who asked a lot of questions on sentences, and asked a question which was relatively difficult to answer. After thinking about it for two days, I finally answered it. I thought about it carefully and wrote a reply letter. The response letter of the first review was returned to the editor in the afternoon of September 11. The notice of acceptance was received on September 14. Proofreading was required on September 16. The last revision was made on September 17; the revised manuscript was submitted at 2 P.M., and the status changed to conversion skipped at 6 P.M. Two hours later, there was a heated discussion in the group. It turned out that the teacher was congratulating me, for the official acceptance of my article. And then I checked the website online. My hanging heart finally let go completely. Finally, let me make a comprehensive evaluation: The publication fee of this journal was high. However, the efficiency of the editors and the reviewers were very high. Generally speaking, the difficulty was not great. As long as your article is based on objective facts and data, and clearly stated, it basically will not be rejected. Timely rain, thanks to myself for hard work and the help of many people. It is my first SCI article in my life, and it is also a stepping stone to my Ph.D. application. I hope I can make persistent efforts in the future!

(14) Thank | THXqifei

As things have changed, let's talk about the results first. I wanted the result quickly for rewards, so I submitted it to this journal, but it was rejected. I resubmitted it to a Q 2-journal with an impact factor of more than 3, and it was accepted. Let's talk about the process. There were three reviewers, two of them whose opinions were very positive, agreed to accept it. The third one was argumentative. From the comments, it appeared that he has no in-depth understanding in this field, but he was fond of teaching others. I replied several pages and even drew an analysis chart to explain to him, but he didn't even talk about the article, and began to attack the language logic in my reply. In the second round, I indirectly said that this problem is a very basic recognized thing in our field and so on, and then it was rejected. Two acceptances, one rejection, and the editor rejected it. I don’t mean to discredit this journal; I just want to condemn those inner twisters who didn’t tend to accept articles, but made efforts to pick questions. PS, in order to explain to that argumentative reviewer, I had a little idea in the process of replying, combined with the things I said in reply, I wrote another article, it was irritating!

(62) Thank | 改革春风吹满地

Rejected without review.

(9) Thank | Sisi

I have finished my second round of revisions and am ready to be hired, but I have been waiting for the editor's decision for six days.

(0) Thank | 啊啊啊啊荣

Why does it take so long for PED?

(0) Thank | 啊啊啊啊荣

The journal recently opened a special issue on The Sustainability of Energy Systems: Policy, Economy, and Environment, focusing on the assessment of economic and policy environmental effects in the energy field. Contributions are welcome. A: Sustainable Energy. Published papers will be published within 21 days from submission to publication.

(0) Thank | 小丁小几

The journal recently opened a special issue on The Sustainability of Energy Systems: Policy, Economy, and Environment, focusing on the assessment of economic and policy environmental effects in the energy sector. Contributions are welcome, A: Sustainable Energy. Papers submitted will be published within 21 days of submission.

(0) Thank | 小丁小几

Submitted an article and would like to ask the host, do I need to pay before the publication is made online?

(0) Thank | yangwenbai

2025-04-29 18:05 Submission Received
2025-04-30 16:21 under review assigned editor
There were two holidays in between, I wonder if the reviewers were also on vacation.
2025-06-06 17:47 pending Major Revisions from four reviewers
Reviewers 1, 2, and 3 completed in about three weeks, while reviewer 4 waited for a month, totaling 4 yes and 16 can.
2025-06-11 22:51 Manuscript Resubmitted with 7 days for major revisions, completed in advance
2025-06-12 15:17 revised version review
2025-06-16 15:24 pending editor decision
2025-06-16 21:03 paper accepted
2025-06-17 11:20 author proofreading-resubmitted
2025-06-17 12:00 pending conversion
If the fourth reviewer didn't delay, it might have been completed in a month.
The article was initially prepared to be submitted to a second-tier journal, but due to graduation urgency, it was submitted to "Energies" with good speed.

(0) Thank | Tang_maxwell

How many pages is the paper? How is the layout fee calculated, bro?

(0) Thank | 何时赴青山

2025.4.26 Pending review
2025.4.27 Under review Editor assignment

(0) Thank | 关山月ggg

Hello, may I ask how long it takes from submission to acceptance? What type of article did you submit?

(0) Thank | shine022

As a practitioner, I can tell you that the publication volume has decreased to half of what it was in 2022. Overall, this journal is still developing well and there is no need to worry about being removed from SCIE. However, it will be difficult to make academic breakthroughs unless the publication volume is significantly reduced.

(0) Thank | Marcus Feng

Twenty-two thousand two.

(0) Thank | 菲常美丽的巨兔

This thing is thrown really fast, too fast.

(0) Thank | 菲常美丽的巨兔

I am really scared too, just got hired.

(0) Thank | 菲常美丽的巨兔

The project deliverable was submitted, but it was not accepted for nearly a month. I'm afraid that this journal might end up sabotaging itself, as everything about it seems to be indicating a money-grabbing attitude.

(0) Thank | ST8456

How much does this layout cost?

(0) Thank | 王大官人

Is there a deadline for the second review? If one reviewer has completed their review but the other reviewer has not, will the editor continue to wait for the second reviewer to complete their review?

(0) Thank | xiaosang

It is outrageous to allow the publication of pseudoscientific quackery research in abstract journals.

(0) Thank | ctts

Please translate the following paragraph into English: Anti-revisionism

(0) Thank | Y.Wang

Special Issue by MDPI: Water and Energy Monitoring and Their Nexus
Special Issue Homepage: https://www.mdpi.com/topics/EBE4VA9471
Participating Journals: Data (ESCI, IF 2.2), Energies (SCIE, IF 3.0), Sensors (SCIE, IF 3.4), Sustainability (SCIE, IF 3.3), Water (SCIE, IF 3.0)
Deadline: March 31, 2025

There are currently 8 articles published in this special issue, all of which are original research articles. Scholars interested in the nexus between water and energy are welcome to submit their work through the special issue homepage!

(0) Thank | junyao

May I ask what happened afterwards?

(0) Thank | 一定要中

How are you doing now?

(0) Thank | sss.-