Skip to content
Shashank Karnad
Go back
Frazer-Nash energy visualisation tool showing node-based system map

Frazer-Nash Visualiser

An interactive map of Australia's energy trade-offs.

An interactive tool built for Frazer-Nash to make Australia's energy transition trade-offs visible and explorable for non-technical stakeholders.

2025 · 13 weeks / Lead UX & Systems Designer · Figma, FigJam, ProtoPie · Web Application

Visit prototype
  • Systems Thinking
  • Data Visualisation
  • University project
  • Energy Transition
  • Web App

The Problem

Energy transition decisions are shaped by simplified narratives that hide the system beneath.

Energy transition discussions are frequently shaped by simplified narratives that isolate individual technologies rather than considering the system as a whole. Existing tools often present static data or dense dashboards, making it difficult to explore 'what-if' scenarios or understand the consequences of different decisions.

As a result, stakeholders struggled to interpret fragmented and technical data, compare trade-offs across cost, emissions, and reliability, and understand how changes in one area affected the wider system. Frazer-Nash needed a way to make these interdependencies visible, navigable, and open to exploration.

Research & Discovery

01
Simplified narratives create blind spots
Energy discussions consistently isolated individual technologies: solar, wind, and storage, rather than treating the system as a whole. This fragmentation prevented stakeholders from understanding second-order effects.
02
Static data blocks exploration
Existing tools presented dense dashboards that required technical literacy to interpret. There was no way to ask 'what if' or test assumptions. Stakeholders were passive viewers, not active explorers.
03
Interdependencies are invisible by default
Stakeholders could not see how a change in one part of the energy system, say increased renewable mix, rippled across cost, reliability, and emissions simultaneously. The connections were the missing piece.

How I Approached It

01

Problem Framing with Domain Experts

Worked closely with engineers and mentors at Frazer-Nash to understand the real-world constraints of Australia's energy system. This collaboration ensured the design reflected domain knowledge, not just UX assumptions.

02

System Mapping

Early work focused on mapping the energy transition as a connected system rather than a linear flow. Relationships between generation sources, storage, emissions, cost, and reliability were explored through iterative system maps. These mappings surfaced key dependencies and informed the visual model's underlying structure.

03

Interaction Model Design

Designed interactive controls that allowed users to adjust energy inputs and explore different scenarios dynamically. The goal was to shift the experience from passive viewing to active exploration, enabling stakeholders to test assumptions and compare outcomes in real time.

04

Trade-Off Visibility

Designed the interface to surface trade-offs across cost, emissions, and system reliability simultaneously, without prioritising any single metric. This supported more nuanced discussions and avoided overly simplified conclusions.

What I Decided, and Why

01
Node-based visualisation over a traditional dashboard
Use a spatial node structure to represent energy sources and their relationships
A conventional dashboard would have presented data in isolated tables and charts, hiding the very interdependencies stakeholders needed to understand. A node-based structure communicates relationships spatially, making it immediately apparent how changes in one source affect others, in a way that no tabular layout could.
02
Real-time exploration over step-by-step comparison
Live controls that update the system map instantly as users adjust inputs
Testing revealed that sequential comparison (set state A, record it, set state B, compare) broke the mental model of how the system worked. Immediate visual feedback as users adjusted sliders created a causal understanding that static before/after comparisons could not produce.
03
Surfacing trade-offs across all metrics simultaneously
Show cost, emissions, and reliability together without prioritising any single metric
Different stakeholders enter with different priorities: a community advocate cares about equity, an industry rep about cost, a policy maker about emissions targets. Prioritising one metric would have steered the tool toward a predetermined conclusion. Showing all three simultaneously let each stakeholder draw their own informed judgement.

The Design

1 / 3

Node-based energy system map

Energy sources and their relationships are represented as connected nodes. The spatial structure makes interdependencies immediately visible. Users can see at a glance how generation sources, storage, cost, and emissions are connected, and how changes propagate through the system.

Outcomes & Reflection

Outcomes

  • Delivered an interactive prototype enabling real-time energy scenario exploration for Frazer-Nash stakeholders

  • Node-based system map made interdependencies visible and navigable without requiring technical literacy

  • Real-time interaction model supported causal understanding of trade-offs across cost, emissions, and reliability

  • Prototype live at energy-comparison-viz.vercel.app

Reflection

“This project reinforced the importance of designing for systems rather than isolated interfaces. The most valuable design decisions weren't visual. They were structural. How information is connected matters more than how it looks. If I were to continue, I'd invest more time in the onboarding experience for stakeholders unfamiliar with the energy domain, and explore how the tool could support collaborative scenario-building across teams.”

Systems ThinkingData VisualisationUniversity projectEnergy TransitionWeb App
PreviousGrove
NextVitalScan