Energy & Environmental Materials

After experiencing rejections from Angew, EES, and Nanoletters, my advisor decided to try submitting to this journal.
6.9 submitted
7.25 received feedback with two reviewers, one provided 6 comments and the other requested language and grammar optimization, the editor made minor revisions.
7.31 spent 5 days revising and submitting responses to the feedback.
8.01 paper accepted, requested high-resolution images and submitted formal acceptance.
This work started submitting in October 2021 and went through rejections from Angew and EES, and after answering 38 questions from 5 reviewers for Nanoletters, it was rejected. After multiple revisions, it was finally smoothly accepted by EEM. I thought I would be excited when it was accepted, but in reality, I didn't feel any emotions. This work has been tormenting me for over two years, and it finally went out. I originally planned that if EEM rejected it, I would continue conducting experiments, supplementing the experiments, and rewriting this article. Therefore, I only felt a sense of relief in my heart, without any joy.
This is the first article with an impact factor greater than 10 from our group, without any background connections. My advisor said that our work is definitely worthy of better opportunities, but some things cannot be forced. I hope we can strive to produce better work in the future!

2022-03-10 Submission
After about a week, the system showed "under review."
2022-04-06 Editor returned with reviewer's comments, both minor revisions. Editor provided two months for revisions.
2022-05-01 Submitted revised manuscript.
2022-05-13 Official acceptance.
Background of submission: The first author and corresponding author are not renowned experts, and their institution is not a prestigious platform like 985 or 211. This is the first time submitting to EEM.
Initially, this article was submitted to AFM, but it was rejected on the same day, possibly due to the platform not being well-regarded. Then, I decided to try EEM, and unexpectedly, it was sent for review.
Dr. Xu Kang, the associate editor handling my manuscript, is a renowned expert in my field. The chosen reviewers were also very professional. I appreciate the hard work of the associate editor and reviewers.