Review of an article submitted to the conference

Article’s title

Formation of nanostructured copper electrodes for the conversion of carbon (IV) oxide

The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article?

Yes

Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished?

Yes

Does the article embrace contemporary issues in the area?

Yes

Does the article contain new and not published results?

Yes

Was the article clearly written and easily understood?

Easily understood

Conclusions illustrate the research results, recommendations and giving suggestions for future research

Yes

The references are full and grounded?

Yes

How adequate was the writing and used terminology?

Adequate

Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article

The work is relevant and methodologically correct, and makes a significant contribution to the development of research in the field of electrochemical conversion of CO₂. The chosen approach is justified.

At the same time, it is advisable to note some remarks:

1. The description of the methodology is somewhat generalized: there are no exact values of temperatures, concentrations, duration of processes, and electrolysis parameters, which complicates the reproducibility of the results.

2. There is not enough data on the morphology and structure of nanoparticles (SEM images), which is important for confirming the nanostructure of the electrodes.

The above remarks are of a recommendatory nature, and their consideration will significantly strengthen the scientific argumentation and practical significance of the work.

I confirm that there is no conflict of interests regarding reviewed article.

I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have insignificant reservations, as outlined above.