Fuel Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

Fuel follows Elsevier's general abstract format.

• Word limit: 200 words for research articles
• Structure: Unstructured single paragraph. Should cover purpose, methodology, main findings, and conclusions
• Citations: Not allowed
• Keywords: 4 to 6 keywords, listed after the abstract
• Abbreviations: Define at first use in the abstract; redefine in the body text

The abstract for Fuel papers should be quantitative. Include specific values for combustion parameters, conversion efficiencies, emission reductions, or whatever your core metrics are. Reviewers in combustion and fuel science expect numbers, not qualitative descriptions.

Keywords should be specific to your sub-area. "Biodiesel" is too broad. "Transesterification of waste cooking oil" is better. The editorial office uses keywords for reviewer matching, and precise keywords lead to better-matched reviewers who can evaluate your work properly.

Fuel's scope is so broad that abstract clarity is especially important for helping editors assess whether a paper fits. If your work is at the boundary (say, catalysis that could go to a chemistry journal), make the fuel-relevance explicit in the abstract.

Fuel uses Elsevier's standard figure requirements.

Figure specifications:

No strict limit on figure count. Most Fuel papers include 6 to 10 figures and 2 to 4 tables. The journal publishes a lot of combustion data plots, flame images, TGA/DTG curves, and process schematics. Multi-panel figures are common and expected for comparative studies.

Graphical abstract: Optional but encouraged. Standard Elsevier specs: 531 x 1328 pixels minimum, single image. For Fuel papers, effective graphical abstracts typically show a process schematic with key performance numbers or a before/after comparison of a fuel treatment.

Color figures are free in the online version. For combustion and flame imaging, color is essential and reviewers expect it. Grayscale alternatives should still be legible for readers who print articles.

TGA/DTG curves are among the most common figure types in Fuel. Best practice: include both TGA and DTG on the same plot with dual y-axes. Label temperature ranges of interest clearly. Multiple samples on one plot should use distinct line styles as well as colors.

Fuel uses Elsevier's numbered citation style, identical to other Elsevier energy journals.

In-text citations: Bracketed numbers [1], [2], [1-3]. Sequential order of first appearance.

Reference list format:

[1] A.B. Author, C.D. Author, Title of article, Fuel Volume (Year) Pages.

Key formatting specifics:

• Author names: Initials then surname
• Article titles included
• Journal names abbreviated per ISO 4 standards
• Volume in bold, year in parentheses
• DOIs required when available
• For books: Author, Title, Edition, Publisher, City, Year
• Conference proceedings: Author, Title, Conference Name, Location, Year

Reference counts typically range from 30 to 60 for original articles. Fuel reviewers expect a thorough literature review that covers the specific fuel type, process, and measurement techniques used. A paper on biomass pyrolysis should cite recent pyrolysis studies, not just general biomass references.

The journal has a strong tradition of long-running research programs, particularly in coal, petroleum, and more recently biomass fields. Citing foundational papers in these areas (even if they're from the 1990s or earlier) alongside recent work shows awareness of the field's history.

Supplementary material follows Elsevier's standard approach.

Common supplementary content for Fuel:

• Extended combustion data and emission profiles
• Detailed kinetic modeling parameters
• Additional characterization data (XRD, FTIR, BET full reports)
• Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) mesh details and validation
• Mass and energy balance spreadsheets
• Video recordings of combustion experiments

Submit supplementary files through the Editorial Manager system. Label clearly (Fig. S1, Table S1) and reference in the main text. All supplementary material is peer-reviewed.

File size limit is 50 MB per individual file. For large simulation datasets, use Mendeley Data or another public repository and cite the DOI.

Fuel papers often involve complex modeling or simulation components. Rather than crowding the main text with every parameter and boundary condition, move detailed modeling setup to supplementary material. Keep the main text focused on results and their physical interpretation.

Data sharing: Elsevier encourages data sharing through Mendeley Data. For Fuel specifically, sharing raw thermogravimetric data, combustion profiles, and emission measurements in machine-readable formats (CSV, Excel) adds value and is appreciated by reviewers.

These are details specific to Fuel that experienced authors know:

Highlights are checked by the system. The 85-character limit per highlight is enforced automatically. The submission system counts characters in real time and blocks submission if any highlight exceeds the limit. Write highlights in a separate document first, verify character counts, then paste in.

Nomenclature is expected for symbol-heavy papers. Fuel papers often involve thermodynamic equations, kinetic rate expressions, and transport models with many symbols. A nomenclature section (after abstract and keywords, before the introduction) is expected for these papers. Organize by Roman letters, Greek letters, subscripts, and superscripts.

Units and standard conditions. Fuel is strict about consistency. Report temperatures in both Celsius and Kelvin where ambiguity could arise. Gas volumes should specify standard conditions (STP: 0 degrees C, 1 atm, or NTP: 25 degrees C, 1 atm). Heating values should specify higher heating value (HHV) or lower heating value (LHV) explicitly.

Proximate and ultimate analysis tables. For papers involving solid fuels (coal, biomass, waste), a proximate and ultimate analysis table is expected. Report on both as-received and dry bases. Include ash content. This is so standard in Fuel papers that its absence will prompt reviewer comments.

CRediT author statement. Required for all submissions. Describe each author's contribution using the standardized CRediT taxonomy.

Conflict of interest declaration. Mandatory. Required even when no conflicts exist.

Data availability statement. Required for all submissions. Appears after acknowledgments.

These are flagged repeatedly during Fuel's technical review:

1. Highlight character count. The most common submission failure. Authors underestimate how short 85 characters is (about 12-15 words). Draft highlights separately and count characters carefully.

1. Fuel characterization data completeness. Reviewers expect comprehensive fuel characterization for any paper using a solid or liquid fuel. At minimum: proximate analysis, ultimate analysis, and heating value. For biomass, add lignocellulosic composition.

1. Error bars and statistics. All experimental data should include error bars or standard deviations. Report the number of replicates explicitly. Single-measurement data without uncertainty quantification will draw reviewer criticism.

1. Equation numbering. All equations must be numbered sequentially. In-text references use "Eq. (1)" format. Unnumbered equations that are later referenced cause confusion.

1. SI units throughout. While some traditional units persist in fuel science (BTU, calories), Fuel requires SI units as the primary reporting standard. Non-SI units can be included in parentheses for context.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Fuel, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

Highlights missing or incorrectly formatted. Fuel is an Elsevier journal requiring 3-5 bullet highlights, each under 85 characters including spaces. Papers without highlights or with bullets exceeding the character limit are returned through Editorial Manager before peer review. This is the most frequent administrative return at this journal and takes less than a day to fix if caught before submission.

Combustion or fuel performance data lacks comparison to established benchmarks. Fuel reviewers expect performance data to be contextualized against published benchmarks: cetane number, calorific value, and emissions data for alternative fuels must be compared against conventional diesel, gasoline, or the nearest published alternative. Papers reporting absolute performance without contextual benchmarking are returned with reviewer requests for a comparison table.

Environmental or sustainability framing absent for alternative fuel studies. Fuel's scope explicitly includes the environmental implications of fuel production and use. Papers reporting the combustion performance of a biofuel or synthetic fuel without a CO2 balance, life cycle analysis, or waste-to-energy calculation are viewed as incomplete, particularly for biomass-derived or hydrogen-related fuels where sustainability is the central justification.

Scope is combustion engineering or reactor design rather than fuel science. Fuel publishes fuel properties, combustion chemistry, fuel production, and environmental impact of fuels. Papers where the primary contribution is a burner design, combustion chamber optimization, or engine modification without new fuel characterization or combustion chemistry data are desk-rejected for scope and redirected to combustion engineering journals.

A Fuel submission readiness check evaluates manuscript scope, Elsevier formatting compliance, and benchmark data completeness against these desk-rejection patterns.