Contact

What we would like to hear about

Four kinds of messages are genuinely useful to us, and each one follows a different path once it lands in the inbox.

Factual corrections. Every article in Analysis cites primary sources — regulator filings, grid operator data, national statistics, vendor documentation. If a figure on this site contradicts the source it points to, tell us which claim and which source. We re-check the passage against the original document, and if we are wrong we correct the text and update the review date shown on the article. Substantive corrections are noted in the piece itself rather than quietly patched.

Broken tools and dead links. Our free tools run entirely in the browser, so a bug usually reproduces on the first try. A short description of what you did and what you expected is enough for us to find it.

Topic suggestions. We publish long-form explainers on AI infrastructure, energy systems, climate risk and digital policy. If you work in one of those fields and think a question is being answered badly everywhere else, that is a good pitch.

Attribution and permissions. Images come from free-licence sources and are credited on the page. If you believe something on this site uses your work without proper credit, write to us and we will resolve it quickly.

How we handle a correction

We publish a review date on every article rather than a publication date alone, because the useful question is not when a piece was written but when someone last checked it. When a correction arrives, we trace the claim back to the source it cites, update the passage if the source disagrees with us, and move the review date forward. Where a number has been revised by its publisher — a restated quarterly figure, an updated emissions inventory — the article says so instead of silently swapping the old value for the new one.

What to include in a correction

The fastest corrections come with the evidence attached. Four things make a report actionable on the first read:

• The page address — a link to the article or tool page, so we land on exactly the version you saw.
• The sentence or number — quote the passage you believe is wrong rather than describing it. Short quotes are fine; we only need enough to locate the claim.
• The source — a link to the document or dataset that contradicts us. A report against the source we cite gets priority, because it can be checked in minutes.
• For tool bugs, the steps — what you entered, what you clicked and what you expected. Since every tool runs locally in your browser, telling us the browser and device type also helps.

You do not need all four to write to us — a partial report is still worth sending. But the more of this you include, the shorter the gap between your message and the fix.

What happens next

Every message is read by a person. Replies normally take two to three working days; during busy periods it can take longer, but nothing is ignored and good suggestions usually surface in a later update. We do not run a mailing list, we do not add correspondents to one, and your address is used only to answer you. Direct advertising enquiries are not handled by email — if the pending Google AdSense application is approved, advertising on this site will be served through Google AdSense.