chemical-engineering-journal

name	chemical-engineering-journal
description	Use when targeting Chemical Engineering Journal or deciding whether an applied chemical-engineering / functional-materials manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the applied-advance-with-mechanism bar, performance and benchmarking rigor, house style, the applied-vs-fundamentals routing, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

Chemical Engineering Journal (chemical-engineering-journal)

Journal positioning

Chemical Engineering Journal (Elsevier) is a broad, high-volume venue for chemical engineering with a strong applied and functional-materials emphasis: reaction engineering and catalysis for environmental and energy applications, adsorption and separation, functional materials engineered for chemical-engineering processes, and water/energy treatment and conversion. Where AIChE Journal rewards the transferable principle, this journal rewards a demonstrated, well-characterized advance on a real process problem — provided the work still explains why it works, not only that it works. Papers that report a new material and a property number with no mechanistic or process insight, or that lack credible benchmarking, are a weak fit. This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current official author guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live Chemical Engineering Journal Guide for Authors on the Elsevier site.

When to trigger

• The author names Chemical Engineering Journal for an applied catalysis, adsorption, separation, functional-materials, or water/energy-process manuscript.
• A paper must be re-framed from "we synthesized a material" into an application-with-mechanism story tied to a chemical-engineering process.
• The author is choosing between this journal's applied slant and AIChE Journal's fundamentals bar, or between it and a pure-materials venue.
• The author needs the journal's performance-and-benchmarking rigor bar and desk-reject heuristics.

Scope & topic fit

• Catalysis and reaction engineering for environmental and energy uses: pollutant degradation, CO2 conversion, photo/electro/thermal catalysis with process relevance.
• Adsorption and separation: sorbents, ion exchange, and separation processes with capacity, kinetics, selectivity, and regeneration data.
• Functional materials engineered for a chemical-engineering function (membranes, catalysts, sorbents, electrodes) where the process performance is central.
• Water and wastewater treatment: advanced oxidation, membrane and hybrid processes, resource recovery, with mechanism and performance under realistic conditions.
• Energy-related processes: conversion, storage materials in a process context, and energy-efficient separations where the chemical-engineering advance is clear.
• Process and reactor engineering for the above, including intensification and scale considerations.

Method & evidence bar

• The central claim is a demonstrated applied advance with mechanism: a material or process that performs better, with direct evidence for why (active site, transport, structure–performance link), not a property table alone.
• Performance must be quantified and benchmarked against credible state-of-the-art and measured under realistic, clearly stated conditions (concentration ranges, matrices, cycling, stability).
• Mechanism claims need direct evidence (operando/in-situ characterization, kinetic analysis, controlled variation), not morphology-property correlation alone.
• Stability, reusability, and applicability under non-idealized conditions are expected for any application claim; single-cycle ideal-solution results are weak.
• Characterization must be appropriate and statistically representative; report conditions, controls, and reproducibility.

Structure & house style

• Standard research-article structure (introduction, materials/methods, results, discussion); the journal also uses highlights and a graphical abstract — re-check current article types and requirements on the live guide.
• The introduction frames the process/application gap and the mechanistic question; the discussion ties structure or process variables to the measured performance.
• Figures are load-bearing: performance curves with benchmarks and error bars, mechanism schematics, and characterization supporting the active-site/transport claim.
• Supporting information carries full synthesis, extended characterization, and stability/recyclability data; main-text figures must stand alone for the central claim.

Official-submission checklist

• Before giving submission-ready advice, read ../../resources/source-basis.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the Elsevier anchors, then cite the current Chemical Engineering Journal Guide for Authors page you checked.
• Search the live site for "Chemical Engineering Journal guide for authors" and follow the current Elsevier/Editorial Manager version.
• Re-check article types, highlights and graphical-abstract requirements, and length/figure expectations.
• Confirm data-availability and any deposition/sharing requirements for datasets.
• Re-check competing-interests, funding, author-contribution (CRediT), and AI-use disclosure requirements.
• If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.

Pre-submission self-check

• The contribution is an applied advance with direct mechanistic evidence, not a new material plus a property number.
• Performance is benchmarked against credible state-of-the-art under realistic, clearly stated conditions.
• Mechanism is supported by operando/in-situ or kinetic evidence, not morphology-property correlation alone.
• Stability, reusability, and non-idealized-condition performance are reported for application claims.
• Characterization is appropriate, controlled, and statistically representative.
• Highlights and graphical abstract represent the actual process advance.

Common desk-reject triggers

• "New material, better number" with no mechanism and no process relevance.
• Performance claims without credible benchmarking or measured only under idealized lab conditions.
• Adsorption/catalysis studies missing stability, regeneration, or realistic-matrix data.
• Mechanism asserted from morphology alone, with no operando/in-situ or kinetic support.
• Pure-chemistry or pure-materials paper with chemical-engineering process relevance only as a label.
• Incremental variant of a known sorbent/catalyst with marginal improvement and no new insight.

Re-routing decision

• Fundamental, generalizable transport/thermo/reaction-engineering science → aiche-journal.
• Membrane materials and transport mechanism as the core → journal-of-membrane-science.
• Systems-level energy conversion / techno-economic scope → applied-energy.
• Electrode/electrolyte materials for batteries as the core → energy-storage-materials.
• Environmental-process work with environmental-science framing → environmental-science-and-technology.
• Catalysis as a chemistry/mechanism advance over process engineering → nature-catalysis.

Output format

[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Chemical Engineering Journal
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest applied-CE subtopics>
[Applied advance] <the material/process advance and what it improves, one line>
[Mechanism] <the why-it-works evidence in one line>
[Benchmarking] <state-of-the-art comparison + realistic conditions present?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article type / highlights / graphical abstract / data policy / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>