Promote Sponsor
verified SJR 0,32 · Q3 • database Scopus / SJR indexed
Energetika. Proceedings of CIS Higher Education Institutions and Power Engineering Associations
Belarus · Belarusian National Technica...
workspace_premium Q3 — Energy Engineering and Power Technology verified Plan S Compliant visibility_off Single blind Peer Review lock_open Open Access Unclaimed

Energetika. Proceedings of CIS Higher Education Institutions and Power Engineering Associations

Energetika. Proceedings of CIS Higher Education Institutions and Power Engineering Associations is a journal indexed in SJR in Energy Engineering and Power Technology and Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment with an H index of 10. It is an CC BY Journal with a Single blind Peer Review review system The scope of the journal is focused on electrical power engineering, ?eat power engineering, hydraulic power engineering, general power engineering, power engineering economics, energy efficiency. It has an SJR impact factor of 0,32 and it has a best quartile of Q3. It is published in Russian. It has an SJR impact factor of 0,32.

ISSN: 1029-7448
Editorial: Belarusian National Technical University
Category: Energy Engineering and Power Technology
Indexation: verifiedScopus / SJR

Unclaimed profile — some fields may be incomplete.

open_in_new Portal NPD menu_book Guía para Autores (Guidelines)
schedule Datos CoP · solo campos en BD
SJR Impact Factor trending_up
0,32 Q3
H-index 10
Tasa de Aceptación pie_chart
57%
Fuente Acceptance_Rate
Tiempo a publicación hourglass_top
8 semanas
Campo Average_time_publication_weeks
Coste de Publicación (APC) payments
NPD Open Access
Ruta Non-OA NPD

Metrics

Campos Scimago / CoP — sin series inventadas

Scopus / SJR

SJR Impact

0,32

H-index

10

Docs (year)

36

Docs 3y

124

Total refs

763

Cites 3y

100

Citable 3y

124

Cites/Doc 2y

1

Ref/Doc

21.19

Immediate OA

—

Embargoed OA

NPD

Non OA / Submission

- €

shield Researcher voice

Name good journals. Call out predatory ones.

Share what peer review, fees, and timelines were really like. Praise fair editors. Flag APC traps, fake metrics, or spam solicitations — with facts from your submission.

Fair & fast peer review Clear APC / no surprise fees Suspected predatory Fake impact claims
rate_review Write an honest review

Researcher reviews

sentiment_dissatisfied No reviews yet — be the first to share an honest experience.
User
* Only to validate authenticity — identity is not shown publicly.

FAQS