Applied Energy 'Under Review': What Each Status Means and When to Expect a Decision
If your Applied Energy submission shows Under Review, here is what each status means, how long each stage typically takes, and when to follow up.
What to do next
Already submitted to Applied Energy? Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next step.
The useful next step is understanding what the status usually means at Applied Energy, how long the wait normally runs, and when a follow-up is actually reasonable.
Applied Energy review timeline: what the data shows
Time to first decision is the most actionable number. What happens after varies by manuscript and reviewer availability.
What shapes the timeline
- Desk decisions are fast. Scope problems surface within days.
- Reviewer availability is the main variable after triage. Specialized topics take longer to assign.
- Revision rounds reset the clock. Major revision typically adds 6-12 weeks per round.
What to do while waiting
- Track status in the submission portal — status changes signal active review.
- Wait at least the journal's stated median before sending a status inquiry.
- Prepare revision materials in parallel if you expect a revise-and-resubmit decision.
_Last reviewed: 2026-05-16._
Quick answer: If your Applied Energy manuscript shows "Under Review," elapsed time is the reliable signal. Applied Energy has a 2024 JCR impact factor of 11.0, accepts about 25 percent of submissions, and publishes a 3-day median first-decision time plus 56-day median time-to-decision-after-review. If still Under Review past 2 weeks, you have likely cleared the initial editorial screen.
Submission portal and editorial contact: Applied Energy uses Elsevier Editorial Manager at editorialmanager.com/apen. Editorial questions go through the Elsevier author portal; for technical support, contact support@elsevier.com, referencing your manuscript ID.
Applied Energy desk-rejects roughly 50 to 60 percent of submissions, often within 3 to 7 days. If past that window, peer review is active.
While you wait
You can't speed up Applied Energy's review. A Applied Energy submission readiness check flags techno-economic gaps, system-integration framing, and deployment-realism issues that drive most desk rejections, in about 5 minutes.
Applied Energy's review pipeline
Status | What is happening | Typical duration |
|---|---|---|
Submitted to Journal | Administrative processing | Day 0 to 2 |
With Editor | Editor evaluating desk-screen fit | Days 2 to 7 |
Under Review | Reviewers invited or actively reviewing | Days 7 to 70 |
Required Reviews Complete | Editor synthesizing reports | 5 to 10 days |
Decision in Process | Editor finalizing decision letter | 3 to 7 days |
Decision Sent | Reject, R&R, or accept | Check email |
The editorial desk screen (about 50 to 60 percent rejected)
Applied Energy editors evaluate system-level framing, techno-economic depth, and deployment realism. A desk rejection usually means scope (the paper is component-optimization without systems context), missing economic analysis, or weak deployment framing.
Day 0: Editorial Manager upload
The editorialmanager.com/apen portal accepts the package and routes to a handling editor.
Days 1 to 7: Editor desk-screen
The handling editor reads the paper, evaluates system framing and techno-economic depth, and decides whether to invite reviewers. The 3-day median first-decision target concentrates here for desk rejections.
Days 7 to 21: Reviewer invitations
Applied Energy typically invites two to three reviewers with energy-systems, techno-economic, and deployment expertise.
Days 21 to 77: Peer review
Reviewer reports return on a 6 to 10 week cadence; the 56-day-post-review median reflects this band.
Days 56 to 91: First editorial decision
Major revision is the most common outcome.
Days 91 to 270: Revision rounds and acceptance
Single-revision acceptances run 4 to 6 months total.
When to worry
- Rejection within 1 to 3 days: Administrative issue or scope mismatch.
- Rejection within 5 to 10 days: Desk rejection. Paper does not meet Applied Energy's bar.
- Still Under Review after 2 weeks: Good sign.
- Still Under Review after 10 weeks: Reviewer delay; polite inquiry appropriate.
- Status changes to "Required Reviews Complete": Decision within 1 to 2 weeks.
Readiness check
While you wait on Applied Energy, scan your next manuscript.
The scan takes about 1-2 minutes. Use the result to decide whether to revise before the decision comes back.
What to do while waiting
- Do not contact during the first 8 weeks unless urgent.
- Prepare a point-by-point response template focused on system-integration framing and techno-economic completeness.
How Applied Energy compares to nearby alternatives for status tracking
Feature | Applied Energy | Energy & Environmental Science | Energy | Renewable Energy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Desk rejection rate | 50 to 60 percent | 50 to 60 percent | 50 to 60 percent | 40 to 50 percent |
Desk decision speed | 3 days median | 7 to 14 days | 7 to 14 days | 14 to 21 days |
Total review time | 56 days post-review median | 30 to 45 days first decision | 6 to 10 weeks | 8 to 12 weeks |
Editorial bar | Applied energy with deployment realism | Top energy with sustainability framing | Broad energy systems | Renewable-tech-focused |
Submit if your paper passed the desk
If your Applied Energy paper is Under Review past 2 weeks, you have likely cleared the desk screen.
Applied Energy submission readiness check. It takes about 1-2 minutes.
Think twice before assuming "Under Review" means safe
Applied Energy editors retain discretion to reject after partial review. Our Applied Energy manuscript fit check flags techno-economic gaps and deployment-realism issues before reviewers do.
For a free pre-upload diagnostic, use the Applied Energy manuscript fit check to surface the desk-screen issues most likely to come up.
Last verified: Applied Energy author guidance, Elsevier Editorial Manager portal at editorialmanager.com/apen, and Elsevier author portal.
The Applied Energy reviewer experience
Reviewer focus area | What Applied Energy asks reviewers to evaluate | How to prepare |
|---|---|---|
System-level framing | Does the paper address energy-systems decisions, not just components? | Frame contribution around an operating-or-deployment decision |
Techno-economic completeness | Is cost/performance analysis with realistic assumptions present? | Include sensitivity analysis and source commercial cost data |
Deployment realism | Are barriers and scale-up challenges acknowledged honestly? | Add explicit deployment-barriers paragraph |
Methodology rigor | Are simulation, experimental, or modeling methods appropriate? | Document assumptions and validate against existing data |
Reproducibility | Could another team reproduce these analyses? | Deposit data/code; describe parameter selections |
In our pre-submission review work with Applied Energy manuscripts
Three failure patterns generate the most consistent rejections.
System-level framing missing. Component-optimization papers without system context get desk-rejected.
Techno-economic assumptions not sourced. Cost figures without commercial-data attribution get flagged.
Laboratory-scale results claim deployment relevance without scale-up acknowledgment. Reviewers expect honest scale-up barrier discussion.
Methodology note
This page was created from Applied Energy's public author guidance and Manusights review work. We did not test the private manuscript-status system.
Frequently asked questions
Your manuscript has cleared Elsevier Editorial Manager admin checks and is being evaluated, either by the handling editor or by external peer reviewers. Applied Energy treats 'Under Review' as the active editorial period from desk screen through peer review.
Applied Energy reports a median first-decision of 3 days (per ScienceDirect) and a median time-to-decision-after-review of 56 days. Most full peer-review decisions land 6 to 14 weeks after submission.
Wait at least 10 weeks before inquiring. Contact the editorial office through the Elsevier portal at support@elsevier.com, referencing the manuscript ID.
A handling editor is evaluating the paper. Applied Energy typically invites two to three reviewers spanning energy-systems, techno-economic, and deployment expertise.
Yes. The 56-day-post-review median means roughly half of papers take longer. System-modeling and techno-economic-heavy papers extend the timeline.
Past 10 weeks is the right moment for a polite, factual inquiry. Past 14 weeks suggests a reviewer dropped out. Silence in the first 6 weeks is normal.
Sources
Best next step
Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next sensible move.
For Applied Energy, the better next step is guidance on timing, follow-up, and what to do while the manuscript is still in the system. Save the Free Readiness Scan for the next paper you have not submitted yet.
Guidance first. Use the scan for the next manuscript.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
- Applied Energy Review Time: What Authors Can Actually Expect
- Applied Energy Submission Process: What Happens From Upload to First Decision
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Applied Energy
- Is Applied Energy a Good Journal? Scope, Reputation, and Fit
- Applied Energy Submission Guide
- Applied Energy APC and Open Access: Current Elsevier Pricing, Timing, and Agreement Coverage
Supporting reads
Conversion step
Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next sensible move.
Guidance first. Use the scan for the next manuscript.