« Running in the rain | Main | Turning the table »


zuil serip

I am a fan of Sankey diagrams and agree with Kaiser that the original is not particularly bad - just very busy.

For simple flows like this, it is also often possible to get away with a standard 'waterfall' chart. Here is an attempt:


I followed Kaiser's lead and framed it as a 'constant input' chart to make it easier to understand. I do understand why the original chart chose to look at it as from a 'constant output' perspective: It is frequently more natural to ask the question: 'given my electricity and heating needs, how little fuel can I spend' rather than 'given a fixed amount of fuel, how much electricity and heating can I generate'.


I like the format of the second chart better, but it may have a slight problem: How do you know that it's linear - that a ~30% decrease in input results in the same decrease for all outputs?


Dreikin: that is a great question. I don't know. Since the original uses the arbitrary outputs of 30 and 45 units, it seems plausible that these numbers are scalable. But true, it may very well not be.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Link to Principal Analytics Prep

See our curriculum, instructors. Apply.
Marketing analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker. Currently at Columbia. See my full bio.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Good Books

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter