Theneed to rapidly decarbonise energy systems is widely accepted, yet there is growingcriticism oftop-down', technocentric transition visions. Transitions are,such critics claim, unpredictable,contested, and comprise of multiple andcompeting perspectives. This paper opens up to diversevisions of energytransitions by studying a corpus of 12 visions produced across differentinstitutional settings' of the state, business, science and technology, and civil society in the UK. We introduce a new analytical framework grounded in relational co-productionist perspectives in science and technology studies (STS) to comparatively analysethe similarities and differences of the visions in relation tofour dimensions ofsociotechnical transformation: meanings, knowings, doings, and organisings. Whilstresearch on energy transitions often focuses on dominant imaginaries withinpolitical cultures, regimes andcentres of power, it is an explicit intention of this paperto also comparatively map the distributed,diverse and counter-hegemonic visions. Thepaper reveals that what is often presented as a primarily technical'transition is always normativein bringing forward particular forms of socialand political order. Our analysis reveals importantdistinctions between morecentred' and more decentred or alternative' imaginaries of the energy transition, differences which reveal the inherently political nature of energy futures. Visions which emerge from civilsociety settings are shown to be a key locus of diversity in sociotechnical imaginaries and tend to open up to alternative models of progress, social change, and the roles of publics. This emphasises the significant role played by the settings and the make-up of collective practices through which energy visions are co-produced. We suggest that mapping diverse visions to reveal their respective partialities, exclusions and sociopolitical dimensions in this way, can offer a more humble, reflexive, and responsible foundation for practices of future-making and sociotechnical transformations.