Announcements

We are pleased to share that Batteries (ISSN: 2313-0105) was awarded an increased Impact Factor of 4.8 in the 2024 Journal Citation Reports™ released by Clarivate™ in June 2025. The journal ranks as follows:

• Q2 (12th out of 44 titles) in the “Electrochemistry” category;
• Q2 (84th out of 182 titles) in the “Energy and Fuels” category;
• Q2 (148th out of 460 titles) in the “Materials Science, Multidisciplinary” category.

The 2024 Journal Impact Factor is calculated by dividing the number of citations received in 2024 for all publications in the journal from 2022 and 2023 by the total number of citable publications from those same years.

For further statistics, please visit our journal statistics website. For more information about MDPI flagship journals’ citation metrics, please see here.

The support and dedication of all the editors, reviewers, authors, and readers are integral to the journal’s success. We would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has contributed to the journal.

We are pleased to announce that the Young Women in Engineering Award is open for nominations. This award was established to acknowledge the achievements of young women investigators in the field of engineering and to inspire young women to consider research and careers in engineering. All the nominations will be assessed by an Award Evaluation Committee, and winners will be announced online on 8 March 2026.

Prizes:

• CHF 1000;
• An electronic certificate;
• A voucher to waive the article processing charges (APCs) for one submission to a journal within the field of engineering (subject to peer review)—valid for one year.

Number of winners: 2.

Eligibility and requirements:

• This role is designated for female candidates;
• Must have received their Ph.D. no more than 10 years prior to 31 December 2025;
• Must have produced groundbreaking research and made a significant contribution to the advancement of engineering;
• Must be nominated by senior scientists.

List of documents for nomination:

• Detailed curriculum vitae, including an updated publication list and a list of the researcher’s own research grants;
• Scanned copy of doctorate certificate;
• Signed nomination letters from two established senior scientists.

Schedule:

Open for nominations: 23 June 2025;
Nomination deadline: 30 November 2025;
Winner announcement: 8 March 2026.

Nominations and contact:

All nomination materials and award-related communications must be submitted via our official email: ywe-award@mdpi.com.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. We look forward to receiving your nominations.

Young Women in Engineering Award Team

We are pleased to announce that Batteries (ISSN: 2313-0105) received an increased CiteScore of 6.6 in June 2025, which is an impressive achievement, with the following ranks: 

• Q1 (204th out of 970, improvement) in the “Electrical and Electronic Engineering” category;
• Q2 (79th out of 299, improvement) in the “Energy Engineering and Power Technology” category;
• Q2 (27th out of 64, improvement) in the “Electrochemistry” category;

For more journal statistics, please visit the following websites:

• https://www.mdpi.com/journal/batteries/stats;
• https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/21100905390.

The current CiteScores measure the average number of citations of a journal over a four-year window (2021–2024). The Scopus database provides a comprehensive suite of metrics that support informed publishing strategies and research evaluation and enable the benchmarking of journal performance.

This achievement reflects the collective efforts of our authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. Together, we will continue to track the progress of Batteries and its growing impact in the energy field.

Thank you to all those who have contributed to the journal.

Batteries Editorial Office

In May 2025, Batteries (ISSN: 2313-0105) co-hosted a scientific publishing exchange event at the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche—Istituto per lo Studio dei Materiali per l'Energia e le Tecnologie Sostenibili (CNR-STEMS) in Naples, Italy. The event was organized in collaboration with Dr. Ottorino Veneri, a senior researcher at CNR-STEMS, and Dr. Bianca Maria Vaglieco, the Director of CNR-STEMS. Focused on advancing scholarly communication, the program featured insights into MDPI’s open access publishing model, practical guidance on scientific article writing, and strategies for crafting effective review reports.

Participants engaged in discussions on the multifaceted advantages of open access, including enhanced visibility, broader accessibility of research outputs, and alignment with global academic impact goals. The workshop also delved into structural best practices for manuscripts—such as optimizing clarity, adhering to international journal standards, and refining narrative flow. A key highlight was the dual-perspective session on peer review, which addressed both the professional techniques for writing constructive review reports and the strategies authors can employ to respond effectively to reviewer feedback.

Journal Relations Specialist Mr. Cosmin-Iulian Artan facilitated an interactive Q&A session, encouraging participants to share their experiences with Batteries (ISSN: 2313-0105) and other MDPI journals. This dialog fostered a collaborative environment for exchanging insights on publishing workflows and editorial expectations.

Committed to supporting the academic community, Batteries looks forward to organizing future events that empower researchers at every stage of their publishing journey, reinforcing its role as a bridge between innovative scholarship and global scientific discourse.

We are pleased to announce the winners of the Batteries 2023 Best Paper Award. All papers published from 1 January to 31 December 2023, in Batteries (ISSN: 2313-0105) were considered for the award. After a thorough evaluation by the Award Committee of the Editorial Board, based on the originality and significance of the papers, citations, and downloads, five winners were selected.

First Prize: CHF 500 and a paper published for free in Batteries

Article:
“State of Charge and Temperature Joint Estimation Based on Ultrasonic Reflection Waves for Lithium-Ion Battery Applications”
by Runnan Zhang, Xiaoyu Li, Chuanyu Sun, Songyuan Yang, Yong Tian and Jindong Tian
Batteries 2023, 9(6), 335; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9060335
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2313-0105/9/6/335

Second Prize: CHF 200 and a paper published for free in Batteries

Article:
“Design, Properties, and Manufacturing of Cylindrical Li-Ion Battery Cells—A Generic Overview”
by Sabri Baazouzi, Niklas Feistel, Johannes Wanner, Inga Landwehr, Alexander Fill and Kai Peter Birke
Batteries 2023, 9(6), 309; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9060309
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2313-0105/9/6/309

Review:
“Battery State of Health Estimate Strategies: From Data Analysis to End-Cloud Collaborative Framework”
by Kaiyi Yang, Lisheng Zhang, Zhengjie Zhang, Hanqing Yu, Wentao Wang, Mengzheng Ouyang, Cheng Zhang, Qi Sun, Xiaoyu Yan, Shichun Yang and Xinhua Liu
Batteries 2023, 9(7), 351; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9070351
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2313-0105/9/7/351

Third Prize: 100 CHF and a paper published for free in Batteries

Article:
“Trends in Automotive Battery Cell Design: A Statistical Analysis of Empirical Data”
by Steffen Link, Christoph Neef and Tim Wicke
Batteries 2023, 9(5), 261; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9050261
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2313-0105/9/5/261

Review:
“Challenges and Future Prospects of the MXene-Based Materials for Energy Storage Applications”
by Svitlana Nahirniak, Apurba Ray and Bilge Saruhan
Batteries 2023, 9(2), 126; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9020126
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2313-0105/9/2/126

Please join us in congratulating the winners of the Batteries 2023 Best Paper Award. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank all our authors for their continued support.

Batteries Editorial Office

World Environment Day is an urgent call to action as nature suffers from the devastating impacts of human activity. Annual plastic production exceeds 400 million tons, half of which is single-use plastic, with under 10% recycled. 11 million tons of plastic (equal to 2,200 Eiffel Towers) pollute waterways yearly. Microplastics contaminate our food, water, and air, with humans ingesting over 50,000 particles annually. This pollution harms health and ecosystems globally. A solution does exist, however. Governments, businesses, and individuals must adhere to the 5Rs—Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, and Rethink. Join #BeatPlasticPollution this World Environment Day to create a sustainable future.

On this significant day, we are proud to present a curated collection of articles and initiatives dedicated to groundbreaking research and innovative solutions for protecting the environment and beating plastic pollution. We invite readers to explore these resources and join us in our shared mission of a sustainable vision of the future. Together, we can pave the way for a cleaner, healthier planet.

“Enhanced Separation of Palladium from Nuclear Wastewater by the Sulfur-Rich Functionalized Covalent Organic Framework”
by Junli Wang, Chen Luo, Wentao Wang, Hui Wang, Yao Liu, Jianwei Li and Taihong Yan
Nanomaterials 2025, 15(10), 714; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano15100714

“Prevention of Biofouling Due to Water Absorption of Natural Fiber Composites in the Aquatic Environment: A Critical Review”
by Cristiano Fragassa, Sara Mattiello, Martina Fronduti, Jo’ Del Gobbo, Radmila Gagic and Carlo Santulli
J. Compos. Sci. 2024, 8(12), 532; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs8120532

“Testing the Effectiveness of an Ecomedia Literacy Environmental Education Lesson”
by Ludovica Lo Iacono, Ludovica Lo Iacono and Emilio Paolo Visintin
Soc. Sci. 2024, 13(12), 645; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13120645

“Airborne Microplastics: Challenges, Prospects, and Experimental Approaches”
by Alexey R. Rednikin, Yulia A. Frank, Artem O. Rozhin, Danil S. Vorobiev and Rawil F. Fakhrullin
Atmosphere 2024, 15(11), 1380; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15111380

“Emerging Technologies for Remote Sensing of Floating and Submerged Plastic Litter”
by Lonneke Goddijn-Murphy, Victor Martínez-Vicente, Heidi M. Dierssen, Valentina Raimondi, Erio Gandini, Robert Foster and Ved Chirayath
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(10), 1770; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16101770

“The Other Side of Fire in a Changing Environment: Evidence from a Mediterranean Country”
by Dimitrios Kalfas, Stavros Kalogiannidis, Fotios Chatzitheodoridis and Nikolaos Margaritis
Fire 2024, 7(2), 36; https://doi.org/10.3390/fire7020036

“A Review of Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling: Technologies, Sustainability, and Open Issues”
by Alessandra Zanoletti, Eleonora Carena, Chiara Ferrara and Elza Bontempi
Batteries 2024, 10(1), 38; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries10010038

“A Comparative Analysis of Different Hydrogen Production Methods and Their Environmental Impact”
by Somtochukwu Godfrey Nnabuife, Caleb Kwasi Darko, Precious Chineze Obiako, Boyu Kuang, Xiaoxiao Sun and Karl Jenkins
Clean Technol. 2023, 5(4), 1344-1380; https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol5040067

“Screening of Microplastics in Aquaculture Systems (Fish, Mussel, and Water Samples) by FTIR, Scanning Electron Microscopy–Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy and Micro-Raman Spectroscopies”
by Kleopatra Miserli, Christos Lykos, Angelos G. Kalampounias and Ioannis Konstantinou
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(17), 9705; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13179705

“Microplastics, Additives, and Plasticizers in Freshwater Bivalves: Preliminary Research of Biomonitoring”
by Giulia Cesarini, Fabiana Corami, Beatrice Rosso and Massimiliano Scalici
Water 2023, 15(14), 2647; https://doi.org/10.3390/w15142647

“Advancements and Applications of Nanomaterials for Removal of Organic Compounds in Aquatic Environment” Guest Editors: Dr. Ramona Riedel and Prof. Dr. Giulio Malucelli Submission deadline: 20 August 2025	“Novel Sources, Designs and After-Use Pathways for Plastics in a Circular Economy” Guest Editor: Dr. María José Arévalo-Caballero Submission deadline: 31 August 2025
“Airborne Micro and Nanoplastics: Detection, Dynamics, and Exposure Assessment” Guest Editor: Dr. Yangyang Liu Submission deadline: 30 September 2025	“Aquatic Microplastic Pollution: Occurrence and Removal” Guest Editor: Dr. Lixin Zhu Submission deadline: 25 October 2025
“Innovative Strategies to Mitigate the Impact of Mining” Topic Editors: Prof. Dr. Chongchong Qi, Dr. Qiusong Chen and Dr. Danial Jahed Armaghani Submission deadline: 31 October 2025	“Enabling Strategies and Policies Toward a Sustainable Environment, 2nd Edition” Topic Editors: Dr. Abdul Majeed, Prof. Dr. Yuantao Xie and Prof. Dr. Judit Oláh Submission deadline: 31 October 2025

The China Materials Conference 2025 will be held from 5 to 8 July 2025, in Xiamen, China. The conference is organized by the China Materials Society.

Areas include the following:

• Energy materials;
• Environmental materials;
• Advanced structural materials;
• Functional materials;
• Material design, preparation and evaluation.

The following MDPI journals will be represented:

If you are attending this conference, please feel free to initiate an online conversation with us. Our delegates look forward to meeting you in person at booth #4052 and answering any questions that you may have. For more information about the conference, please visit the following link: https://cmc2025.scimeeting.cn/.

Name: Dr. Hiroyuki Ueda
Affiliations: ¹ Institute for Frontier Materials (IFM), Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia; ² Battery Research and Innovation Hub, Deakin University, 5/154 Highbury Road, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
Research interests: electrochemistry, rechargeable batteries, solid-state batteries, ionic liquids, plastic crystals, solid electrolytes, electrode slurry preparation, slurry coating

Dr. Hiroyuki Ueda is an Alfred Deakin Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Deakin University. Dr. Ueda received his Ph.D. from Kumamoto University (Japan) and worked as a Battery Development Engineer in the industry for almost 4 years. Since 2020, he has led many industry collaborations. His current studies involve the use of advanced electrolytes and electrodes for battery applications, especially those dedicated to realizing practical solid-state batteries using plastic crystals as promising solid electrolytes.

The following is an interview with Dr. Hiroyuki Ueda:

1. Could you briefly introduce yourself to our readers and tell us a little bit about your fields of interest?
I am a passionate battery chemist with unique work experience in both academic and industry settings. My academic research career started in 2010 at Kumamoto University, under the supervision of Assoc. Prof. Soichiro Yoshimoto. I studied the electrochemistry of redox-active species at ionic liquid | gold single crystal interfaces and received a Ph.D. degree (Doctor of Engineering) in 2016. After graduation, I dived into the battery field; I was committed to many battery projects while I worked in the R&D centers of three companies in the chemical and automotive sectors. I moved back to academia in 2020 and have been working on multiple battery-related projects using solid-state analogs of ionic liquids called organic ionic plastic crystals at Deakin University for over 5 years.
My research interests include (i) the development of solid electrolyte membranes and composite electrodes (containing electrolytes before cell assembly) for solid-state batteries, (ii) the exploration of eco-friendly battery manufacturing without losing performance metrics, and (iii) the strategic accumulation of valuable experimental datasets that help clarify the correlation between a material’s structure or process parameters and an electrolyte’s, electrode’s, or battery’s properties to underpin our understanding of key factors to improve battery performance.

2. Could you elaborate on how you initially learned about the Batteries journal? Furthermore, what inspired you to apply for the Batteries Outstanding Reviewer Award 2024?
I believe the Batteries journal has become one of the well-known journals in the field of energy storage, and I was already aware of its strong reputation (especially for its rapid publication process), since I resumed my academic career in 2020. The Batteries journal has been listed as one of my candidate journals (with ideal intended readers) to which my research findings in the battery field can be submitted.
Because I knew that many senior researchers had commitments to peer reviews to support academic publication systems, I felt that participating in peer reviews would be a must-do as my career grows. I debuted as a peer reviewer for journals in 2022 after completing some online and in-person courses for those who need to be equipped with peer-review skills and ethics. Initially, I helped with some reviews for the journal for which my mentor served as a Senior Editor, which enabled me to gain actual peer-review experience and gradually intensified my willingness to contribute to peer-review processes for battery-focused manuscripts. Therefore, I applied to be a Volunteer Reviewer for Batteries in 2023. Since then, I have been exposed to many opportunities to engage in peer reviews of the latest findings in the battery field and tried to provide accurate, fast, and unbiased comments to help the decision-making process of submitted manuscripts, which I believe was fully recognized by the Selection Committee of the award.

3. Which research topics do you think will be of particular interest to the research community in the coming years?
I think the effective use of AI (typically machine learning) in material discovery and process optimization has gradually been playing a crucial role in the battery field. Batteries are very complicated devices, where engineering factors would govern performance rather than chemical factors alone; finding highly functional materials is a minimum requirement for the desired battery performance, but investigating how to make (and test) batteries using these materials is also important to leverage their full potential. We might need an unlimited amount of time to investigate all possible experimental conditions to decipher the material–process–property relationship of the resulting batteries thoroughly and, therefore, reliable data-driven approaches to shorten our time for experiments have been highly sought after to minimize labor and resources. I believe there will still be room for battery experts to make decisions (especially for slurry preparation steps), but I think it is worthwhile for R&D environments to flexibly and wisely exploit AI capabilities so that they can not only streamline many parameterized tasks but also cut out whole battery prototyping for probable dysfunctional compositions to improve their competitiveness in battery R&D.

4. What is your opinion of the open access model of publishing?
Personally, I like the open access model because it allows publications to reach a broader audience. This model often helped me; I was able to read scientific articles even though my employer did not have a subscription to a journal. Furthermore, downloading articles from open access journals just needs one click, which is quite convenient and time-saving, even when compared to the situation for subscribed non-open-access journals, because they usually require authentication before downloading articles.
However, I think the journal’s Editorial Office and invited reviewers for open access journals should diligently contribute to science development and establish a positive reputation within a relevant research community. Scientists know that the existence of so-called predatory journals and the open-access model is often at risk of being criticized as predatory because the journals would have a preference to accept as many papers as possible to gain their revenue without necessarily advancing science. To relieve this concern, I think open access journals need to be transparent about their peer-review and publication processes (i.e., how submitted manuscripts will be handled); editorial board members; and, for the authors and invited reviewers of the submitted manuscripts, how many reviewers are involved, their comments, and decision letters. The more authors and reviewers have a positive experience in the publication procedure and the impacts of published papers in open-access journals, the more the journals will be valuable in the research community, and their open access model will be successful.

5. What qualities do you think reviewers need? Do you have anything to say to other reviewers?
I believe accurate, fast, and unbiased reviews are preferable and truly help the journal’s decision-making process for science development. Reviewers need to leverage their expertise to request corrections about scientifically wrong, illogical, or misleading parts and to suggest room for improvement in submitted manuscripts. To provide accurate comments, reviewers should only accept an invitation for a manuscript in the area in which they are surely an expert. Even though a manuscript falls in their research area, if reviewers think they cannot commit to review within the journal’s standard review time, saying “No” (and suggesting alternative potential reviewers) to a review invitation is recommended. This helps rapid publication without holding manuscripts unnecessarily. Lastly, reviewers should not make their comments based on their positive or negative feelings toward a specific gender, race, or career stage where the author of a manuscript fits in. The science in the manuscript should be evaluated in an unbiased way. This means that submissions from well-known, highly reputable research groups are not a free pass to publications; reviewers need to find their value based on what is written there rather than the fame and past research contributions of the authors. On the other hand, submissions from authors that reviewers would not like should be equally evaluated; unfortunately, I have seen many unscientific overcriticisms because of this (e.g., unnecessarily asking English proofreading for authors from non-English-speaking countries, denying the quality of writing because the authors are graduate students without plenty of past publications, etc.). If reviewers notice a conflict of interest with the authors, they should not accept a review invitation. Also, the Editorial Office of a journal is responsible for removing unscientific overcriticisms (or asking reviewers to correct them) to establish a fair, comfortable review process for all parties.

6. What do you think are the main criteria that should be taken seriously in the process of reviewing manuscripts?
I think manuscripts should properly tell a story: what past studies in the focused field were, what research questions were, what methods the authors used to address them, and what the experimental results and their meanings in addressing the research questions were (plus, remaining issues and their possible countermeasures if necessary). Reviewers need to see if manuscripts deliver a clear story and if the presented data aligns well with it and should not unnecessarily request excellent performance metrics (e.g., rate and cycle performance of batteries) and additional characterizations that would not change the authors’ main findings. In this context, it is fine to present negative experimental results if they surely help form the story and readers can understand the reasons contributing to them; reviewers should not criticize the negative data only because of their appearance.
In addition, experimental procedures and reproducibility of experimental results should be properly explained in manuscripts. In the battery field, I often feel that some submitted manuscripts do not fully explain how electrodes were formulated and their details (e.g., size, composition, information about each ingredient, mass loading, density, porosity, etc.). Because these parameters affect the test results of batteries, the authors should be responsible for describing enough details. I think reviewers need to see if the experimental section delivers concise information about experiments so readers can replicate them in subsequent studies. On the other hand, I recommend ensuring reproducibility; for instance, because the test results of batteries vary from cell to cell, the authors are encouraged to provide how many cells per experimental condition were evaluated. If reviewers feel doubt about the reproducibility, they should ask the authors to clarify this point, which avoids publishing a misleading or actually wrong tendency of the data. These efforts underpin the dissemination of reliable information about scientific findings for research communities.

7. What is the secret to a happy scientific life? Have you ever encountered any difficulties conducting research and how did you overcome them?
I think the simplest secret is “Focusing on what YOU can change”. We can (mostly) control ourselves, but we cannot decide other people’s actions. Therefore, it is better to reduce the dependence of our short-term (e.g., daily) targets on what we cannot control. This helps make these targets more manageable and increases the likelihood of being satisfied with achievements. I think the same secret is applied to doing research; we might not have to set optimistic short-term targets (e.g., high performance metrics) because we do not know if our new experiments can deliver the expected results (which we cannot control). Instead, what we might need to do would be to set short-term targets that are less dependent on the quality or significance of data we generate (e.g., conducting three experiments and analyzing the factors that contribute to the results by a specified date). My friend said, “Data is data”, which is still in my mind as a useful, stress-free way of thinking. This encourages us to shift our focal point to discussions about what we can understand from data, which implies the next possible experiments or analyses. So far, I have faced many difficulties in research, but this approach has helped me a lot; a resilient, consistent, and step-by-step research commitment without feeling nervous about negative data surely filled gaps in answering research questions. In addition, it is important to develop our communication skills so that we can ask informal opinions about our research difficulties from more senior or expert researchers in a relevant field. This is because, sometimes, they already know the answers (especially if our difficulties are related to experimental methodology) or the approaches to help address the difficulties.

8. Do you have any advice for aspiring young researchers looking to make a meaningful impact in their respective fields?
I would say, “Follow the path you like intrinsically”. I think you would not be able to make a meaningful impact if you do not really like what you are doing right now; even if you get short-term satisfaction there, your vitality will run out eventually. This would be unscientific, but I presume our gut feelings might be true and often tell the path that we need to follow. If you like your research, you might be able to keep your motivation and consistently contribute to its progress. It is fine if the research that energizes you is away from hot topics, trends, or populated study areas; your continuous efforts will surely generate meaningful research outcomes, and someone will definitely recognize its value (as this happened to me). Therefore, keeping genuine motivation should come first before trying to make a meaningful impact.

The Outstanding Reviewer Award is given annually to recognize reviewers who generously contribute their time to reviewing papers and display thoroughness, professionalism, and timeliness while doing so. The journal Batteries (ISSN: 2313-0105) is proud to present the winner of the Biomedicines 2024 Outstanding Reviewer Award—Dr. Zhen Wei!

Short self-introduction:

Currently, I am a Research Assistant Professor under the supervision of Prof. Ling Fei in the Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. It is an exciting position that allows me to delve deeply into my research interests and collaborate with talented individuals in our department.

I earned my Master’s of Science in materials science and engineering from the University of Central Florida in 2019, followed by my Ph.D. in materials science from the University of Alabama in 2023. Throughout my academic journey, I have developed a strong passion for energy storage technologies, particularly focusing on batteries. Over the past six years, I have gained extensive experience working with various nanomaterials, specifically in the realm of metal–sulfur batteries. This has not only broadened my technical skills but has also fueled my curiosity to explore innovative solutions for energy challenges.

I am proud to share that I have published 22 peer-reviewed articles in the energy storage field, with 5 of those as the first author. Recently, I had the opportunity to present my research at the PRiME 2024 ECS meeting in Honolulu, Hawaii. It was an incredible experience to connect with fellow researchers and exchange ideas that can drive our field forward.

The following is a short interview with Dr. Zhen Wei:

1. Which research topics do you think will be of particular interest to the research community in the coming years?

Climate change and the environment will be of particular interest to the research community in the coming years.

• Climate change mitigation: Researchers will focus on developing and implementing strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change;
• Renewable energy: Research will explore new technologies for harnessing renewable energy sources like solar and wind power;
• Environmental pollutants: Studies will investigate the health effects of various environmental pollutants and develop strategies to reduce their impact.

2. What is your opinion of the open access model of publishing?

In my opinion there are two major benefits of open access model of publishing:

• Increased accessibility and visibility:

Open access removes the barriers of cost and subscription fees, making research freely available to anyone, regardless of their location or affiliation. This wider access leads to greater visibility, as more people can find and read the research; 

• Higher citation rates:

Studies have shown that open access articles tend to receive more citations than articles behind paywalls. This is likely due to increased accessibility and the fact that researchers are more likely to cite work that is easily accessible and readily available. 

3. Which qualities do you think reviewers need? Do you have anything to say to other reviewers?

Every reviewer needs the following qualities:

• Expertise and knowledge
  • Subject matter expertise: Reviewers should have a strong understanding of the field and the specific topic they are reviewing.
  • Analytical skills: They need to be able to critically evaluate the work, identify strengths and weaknesses, and understand the broader context.
• Objectivity and fairness
  • Unbiased assessment: Reviewers should be impartial and make judgments based on the quality of the work, not personal biases or external factors.
• Constructive feedback

They should provide feedback that is helpful and focused on improvement, not personal attacks.

• Skepticism and critical thinking

Reviewers should be able to challenge assumptions, identify flaws, and consider alternative explanations.

4. What do you think are the main criteria that should be taken seriously in the process of reviewing manuscripts?

• Originality and significance:
  • Originality: Does the manuscript present new information or a novel perspective on an existing topic?
  • Significance: Is the research important and likely to advance the field or have practical implications? 
• Clarity:
  • Writing Quality: Is the manuscript well-written, grammatically correct, and free of errors?
  • Clarity: Is the language clear, concise, and easy to understand for the intended audience?
  • Logical Flow: Does the manuscript follow a logical structure and present information in a coherent manner? 
• Soundness of methodology:
  • Methodology: Is the methodology appropriate for the research question and adequately described?
  • Data analysis: Is the data analysis appropriate and rigorous? 
• Accuracy:
  • Accuracy: Are the findings accurate and supported by the data?

5. Do you have any advice for aspiring young researchers looking to make a meaningful impact in their respective fields?

• A genuine interest in your field of study is crucial for staying motivated and focused throughout your research journey; 
• Seek guidance from experienced researchers, including your supervisor, to gain valuable insights and support; 
• Develop critical thinking, effective communication, and collaborative skills. These are essential for conducting high-quality research and advancing your career;
• Research often involves overcoming obstacles. View setbacks as opportunities to learn and grow; 
• Actively engage with other researchers, attend conferences, and build relationships to expand your network and learn from others. 

6. As the winner of this award, is there something you want to express or someone to thank most?

I wanted to express my heartfelt gratitude to a few important people and organizations that have had a significant impact on my journey.

First and foremost, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the journal for providing me with the incredible opportunity to serve as a reviewer. It has been an enriching experience that has not only allowed me to engage deeply with the latest research but has also helped me grow as a scholar. Reviewing manuscripts has broadened my perspective and honed my critical thinking skills, and I am truly grateful for the trust placed in me. This role has allowed me to contribute to our field in a meaningful way, and I look forward to continuing this collaboration.

I also want to express my gratitude to my parents. Their unwavering support and encouragement have been a constant source of strength for me. They have always believed in my potential and have instilled in me the values of hard work and perseverance. No matter the challenges I face, I know I can always count on their love and guidance. Thank you, Mom and Dad, for being my biggest cheerleaders and for inspiring me to pursue my dreams with passion and determination.

Lastly, I would like to thank my girlfriend, who has been my rock during times of hardship. Life can sometimes throw unexpected challenges our way, and having someone as understanding and supportive as she is makes all the difference. Her comforting presence and wise words have helped me navigate through tough times, reminding me that it is okay to lean on someone when things get overwhelming. I am truly grateful for her love and support, which have been invaluable to me.