My work is more about the application of drinking water treatment. Processing is very fast. This journal is a new journal in the field of water treatment and is currently doing well.

(1) Thank | yf.huang@utoronto.ca

A big thank you to editor Wenhai Chu for his fast and efficient handling of the submission, taking just over a month from submission to acceptance. Also, special thanks to the journal assistant editors, including Alexander John, for their excellent communication skills.

(0) Thank | 千叶yoko

Which keyword should I choose for water resources? I couldn't find it in that ad, hoping for a kind reply from the author, thank you!

(0) Thank | JasonXiang

Innovate your water impact statement and discuss its impact, value, and significance to the water environment in your research

(0) Thank | 科研-大白

Hello, what content is needed for the water impact statement of the journal? I am a bit confused as this is my first time submitting to this magazine

(0) Thank | NICKYY

The article on the direction of water treatment agents is relatively niche. Personally, I think it is quite comprehensive and clear. It was rejected by JHM, SPT, Zonghuan, JECE, JWPE, ER, ES and other journals one after another. I was originally desperate and didn't know what to do. Finally, I tried to submit to this journal. It took 1.5 months from submission to acceptance, which is quite fast for this type of journal. There were two reviewers, the first one had 6 comments, the second one had 2 comments, both of which were not difficult to change. Finally, the editor requested major revisions, which were completed in three days, followed by a second round of revisions in 14 days and acceptance. I consider myself quite lucky, and I am grateful to editor Wenhai Chu. I feel that there is a good chance of acceptance for articles that are carefully revised

(0) Thank | 科研-大白

First submission to this journal, my article was rejected by the overall environment and water treatment engineering, so I submitted it with a try-and-see attitude. After a total of 4.5 months, the first review took 3.5 months. There were 2 reviewers, 1 rejection, 1 minor revision, and the editor kindly provided major revisions and guidance on how to modify according to reviewer 1. Thank you. After revisions, it was accepted in 10 days. Thanks to editor Liu Ye and also sharing with my buddies

(0) Thank | 冰层下的虫子

May I ask if the final email notification requires self-payment or the option to choose whether it is OA? I haven't received the email yet, and I'm getting a bit anxious. This journal is free of charge, right?

(0) Thank | 刘xxyy

The manuscript submitted at the end of last year was rejected in the first review, but the editor gave an opportunity for resubmission, allowing for revisions based on the reviewer's comments. I made the necessary improvements and also conducted additional experiments. The review process generally takes about a month, and the editor's response is relatively slow. It takes some time from the submission to the external review, unlike some journals that send it out within a few days. This article can be considered as the first article in the field of water treatment, but it involves a long wait. Fortunately, each time the feedback came back, it gradually improved: rejection, resubmission with minor revisions, and finally acceptance. If you are in a hurry to get the article, it can be a bit frustrating, but the reviewers were good and willing to give a chance for resubmission.

(1) Thank | cafeapril

Yes, my situation has already been going on for seven months. It has been ongoing without any results. Suddenly, it has become very slow. Sigh.

(0) Thank | 虾米闯江湖

This year's submission may also encounter delays, as the journal has changed its editing team, which has caused some additional time. The number of reviewers has increased from 2 to 5, and they are carefully selected, often seeking reviewers from the same ethnic background. From sharp criticism to unanimous acceptance, it is not easy. Judging the difficulty of submission based on the Chinese Academy of Sciences' classification is not very accurate, this is my overall impression.

(2) Thank | 极大

Submitted for two and a half months, it has been constantly switching between the "with editor" and "in peer review" statuses. Then, I messaged the editor to inquire about the status and the next day, the editor rejected it, citing the reason that they couldn't find any reviewers.

(1) Thank | lrenelo

It has been three months for me too, jumping back and forth repeatedly, oh my goodness...

(0) Thank | 唯一且隐私

My manuscript has been under review for three months now, and I have changed between editors and in peer review several times.

(0) Thank | 虾米闯江湖

2.25 Submission
4.30 Major revision
6.15 Acceptance
The direction is advanced ozone oxidation, and the review comments were received promptly. There was a slight delay in the middle due to the lengthy modifications. All three review comments required major revisions, but the suggestions given were very helpful. The impact factor of this journal is increasing year by year, and it is expected to return to the second quartile in about two years.
The water impact statement mainly focuses on highlighting the highlights of one's own research and the significance of the research related to water.

(0) Thank | 无敌大混子

May I ask if you are doing ozone catalytic oxidation treatment of wastewater? Does this direction align?

(0) Thank | defushw

Hello, what content should be included in the water impact statement for the journal? I'm a bit confused since it's my first time submitting to this magazine.

(0) Thank | 哈哈哈哈哈哦哦哦哦

3.17 submitted - Submitted on March 17th
5.07 Major Revision - Major revision requested on May 7th
6.06 Revision submitted - Revision submitted on June 6th
6.20 under review - Under review on June 20th
7.05 Accepted - Accepted on July 5th
The speed is acceptable. It took a long time to find reviewers, and there were several back-and-forth exchanges between peer review and the editor. The comments and suggestions provided by the reviewers were very good and responsible. The second round of review took a long time because one of the reviewers did not respond, and ultimately only two reviewers' comments were given.

(0) Thank | 科研民工小明

5 days rejected, doing heavy metalAdsorption, said to be inconsistent with the journal

(4) Thank | 897358680@qq.com