The European Project: the future of the EU.

I can buy these explanations on a renewable energy problem, we run on a great percentage of renewable in Portugal as well, but I don't see these as attack on renewables but more as "this happened because of that". Maybe, in the near future, add those "shock absorbers" to renewables as well and all will be fineish!
 
The plot thickens:

Britain’s electricity grid operator is investigating unexplained outages that hit the UK’s system hours before Spain and Portugal were plunged into blackouts.

Control room staff at the National Energy System Operator (Neso) observed unusual activity on Sunday that saw the power frequency shift unexpectedly in the early morning and the evening.

Keeping the frequency of the electricity system within certain limits is vital to keeping the lights on.

The first event began at around 2am with an outage at the Keadby 2 gas-fired power plant in Lincolnshire, followed by the unexplained failure of the Viking Link interconnector between the UK and Denmark.

At around 6pm, the frequency shifted unexpectedly again – with the cause currently unknown.

Neso, the quango that manages the British grid, confirmed to The Telegraph on Tuesday morning that officials were investigating.
A spokesman did not provide further details but said there was currently no suggestion that the outages were linked to each other or the massive system failures that occurred on Monday throughout Spain, Portugal and parts of southern France.

The unexpected outages in Britain on Sunday were of a much smaller magnitude but have still spooked officials.


 
Pedro Sánchez says the blackout was caused by two consecutive disconnections of the solar energy system or something like that, and that private operators (the company managing the network is 2O% public in fact) were to blame (he's never to blame for anything), although nothing is ruled out yet, including cyber attacks and such. Apparently the problem was located in the southwest where most of the solar power is generated. (That is true, you have endless fields planted with solar panels here, they have replaced sunflowers, do the same rotation movement and all. The other fields are occupied with wind generators)

He also says that the problem was solved thanks to interconnections with France, Morocco, and hydroelectric and combined cycle plants and that nuclear plants were not a solution but an added problem because they sucked a lot of energy during the blackout just to keep the cores stable (the guy is heavily invested against nuclear).

May be or may be just the opposite. Sánchez is not very reliable to say the least.
 
Last edited:
I can imagine investigating the full cause of this blackout will take months if not years. I remember when I was a kid there was a huge blackout in half the northeast US and parts of Canada in like 2003 or so. It took I think 17 months to figure out the failure was a software update that was pushed without proper testing. Not really much reason to finger point right now too early.
 
I can imagine investigating the full cause of this blackout will take months if not years. I remember when I was a kid there was a huge blackout in half the northeast US and parts of Canada in like 2003 or so. It took I think 17 months to figure out the failure was a software update that was pushed without proper testing. Not really much reason to finger point right now too early.

In an interesting coincidence, I watched a pretty good video on the 2003 one a couple of days ago:


Even if the root causes of yesterdays blackout are different, it still gives a good idea on how large electrical networks can collapse suddenly from relatively small local problems cascading.
 
Yeah honestly that's the safest takeaway, the grids are very fragile, a minor issue from an overload somewhere or a blockage that isn't isolated basically immediately, spirals out of control.
 
I can imagine investigating the full cause of this blackout will take months if not years. I remember when I was a kid there was a huge blackout in half the northeast US and parts of Canada in like 2003 or so. It took I think 17 months to figure out the failure was a software update that was pushed without proper testing. Not really much reason to finger point right now too early.
Need to spread the propaganda early before people lose intrest, no one will remember it next month, that's why it's really important to not believe anything and check for possible opportunist to spot out untrustworthy people.
 
He also says that the problem was solved thanks to interconnections with France, Morocco, and hydroelectric and combined cycle plants and that nuclear plants were not a solution but an added problem because they sucked a lot of energy during the blackout just to keep the cores stable (the guy is heavily invested against nuclear).

Hmmm... Modern nuclear reactors shouldn't 'suck a lot of energy' during a grid blackout to keep their cores stable. The reactor should scram automatically and shut down. The water covering the core also acts as the moderator, so fission stops by itself if the water level is affected.

Where a nuclear plant will need external power, is when its operations are starting up again, as it can't 'start itself'. Like an ICE car needs a battery to start the engine.
 
The reactor should scram automatically and shut down. The water covering the core also acts as the moderator, so fission stops by itself if the water level is affected.
This is misleading, as after shutting down a fission reactor will still produce significant heat from decaying fission products. Obviously the power decreases, but is still around 1% of the total thermal power a few hours after the shutdown, i.e. at a few dozen MW. See Wikipedia: Decay heat.

This is sufficient to cause a core meltdown if cooling stops soon after shutting down. See Fukushima.

This means that cooling a reactor is critical, even if it is shut down, and obviously requires power.
 
A lot depends upon the reactor design.

Yes and no. If a nuclear power plant puts out 3 GW of thermal heat, you'll need to get rid of tens of MW of thermal heat for a few hours after shutdown no matter how the reactor is designed. And even though there are designs that are supposed to do that passively, few of those have ever been built and even less are in commercial operation. More importantly, even if you had a reactor that is designed to survive a total loss of power, you will probably want to keep it powered anyway - there is no point in relying on the passive safety systems more than absolutely necessary.
 
Nuclear power plants typically have on-site diesel generators precisely for doing that, they don't simply rely on the general power grid.
 
Update:

Amid the usual blame game that always occurs after any catastrophe in Spain (resigning isn't an option here), the winning theory with the 99% of the votes is that the grid wasn't ready for so much renewable energy, especially solar photovoltaic. The conclusion is that there's a lack of turbines that can stabilize so much solar energy (perhaps autosuggestion, but before the blackout I thought that the sunlight seemed too intense; the sky looked strangely white but without a single cloud).

On the other hand, the connections with France and Morocco are too small to compensate for this lack of turbines. Indeed, the Iberian Peninsula is an energetically self-sufficient island, which is great but also dangerous if you don't have a stable grid. One solution would be to increase the capacity of these connections to help stabilize the grid frequency from outside, but France apparently puts up all kinds of obstacles because it couldn't compete with Spain's abundant cheap solar energy when it comes to exporting energy to the rest of Europe.

Even the former director of REE (Red Electrica Española) says that photovoltaic has increased way too much in recent years without preparing the grid. Pedro Sánchez, of course, continues with his anti-nuclear tirade. What he doesn't say is that if a higher percentage of the mix at the time of the blackout had been nuclear, the blackout probably wouldn't have happened to begin with (in fact, nuclear energy is the most stable of all).

On the positive side, it seems that the restart from scratch was relatively quick having in mind how severe the situation was, with hydroelectric pumping plants being the key to getting the system up and running again. These plants pump water uphill using solar energy in daytime to use this accumulated potential energy at night, in fact if you look at the graphics in REE web, you will see a good chunk of consumption during the sunny hours comes from these plants pumping water uphill. Apparently it took 3 minutes exactly for these plants to stop pumping and begin producing stable power.

So hydroelectric pumping plants made it possible to turn on the combined-cycle plants, and then the rest of the system. Nuclear plants remained off because after a shutdown, xenon poisoning occurs, which prevents them from turning on for a few days. Connections with France and Morocco also helped but not so much because they are tiny (EU says intercountry connections should be 15% at least but Spain-France connection is 3% of Spain's capacity only and much smaller with Morocco)

In short, it seems Tsunami is right and the cause was too much renewable photovoltaic power without adequate grid preparation, having a practically isolated grid didn't help either. Apparently the epicenter of the failure was in some big solar farms located in Extremadura, South West Spain near the border with Portugal.

The rest of Europe has gotten its act together and there will be a special session in the EU Parliament to study the issue. Other countries with many renewables are taking note so that the same thing doesn't happen to them.

Here, for now, the photovoltaic contribution to the mix is being limited, and nuclear power plants remain mostly shut down and only now they appear to start waking up. The lacks are being fulfilled mainly with combined cycle gas plants, which has caused the price of energy to rise considerably since the blackout.
 
Last edited:
Update:

Amid the usual blame game that always occurs after any catastrophe in Spain (resigning isn't an option here), the winning theory with the 99% of the votes is that the grid wasn't ready for so much renewable energy, especially solar photovoltaic. The conclusion is that there's a lack of turbines that can stabilize so much solar energy (perhaps autosuggestion, but before the blackout I thought that the sunlight seemed too intense; the sky looked strangely white but without a single cloud).

On the other hand, the connections with France and Morocco are too small to compensate for this lack of turbines. Indeed, the Iberian Peninsula is an energetically self-sufficient island, which is great but also dangerous if you don't have a stable grid. One solution would be to increase the capacity of these connections to help stabilize the grid frequency from outside, but France apparently puts up all kinds of obstacles because it couldn't compete with Spain's abundant cheap solar energy when it comes to exporting energy to the rest of Europe.

Even the former director of REE (Red Electrica Española) says that photovoltaic has increased way too much in recent years without preparing the grid. Pedro Sánchez, of course, continues with his anti-nuclear tirade. What he doesn't say is that if a higher percentage of the mix at the time of the blackout had been nuclear, the blackout probably wouldn't have happened to begin with (in fact, nuclear energy is the most stable of all).

On the positive side, it seems that the restart from scratch was relatively quick having in mind how severe the situation was, with hydroelectric pumping plants being the key to getting the system up and running again. These plants pump water uphill using solar energy in daytime to use this accumulated potential energy at night, in fact if you look at the graphics in REE web, you will see a good chunk of consumption during the sunny hours comes from these plants pumping water uphill. Apparently it took 3 minutes exactly for these plants to stop pumping and begin producing stable power.

So hydroelectric pumping plants made it possible to turn on the combined-cycle plants, and then the rest of the system. Nuclear plants remained off because after a shutdown, xenon poisoning occurs, which prevents them from turning on for a few days. Connections with France and Morocco also helped but not so much because they are tiny (EU says intercountry connections should be 15% at least but Spain-France connection is 3% of Spain's capacity only and much smaller with Morocco)

In short, it seems Tsunami is right and the cause was too much renewable photovoltaic power without adequate grid preparation, having a practically isolated grid didn't help either. Apparently the epicenter of the failure was in some big solar farms located in Extremadura, South West Spain near the border with Portugal.

The rest of Europe has gotten its act together and there will be a special session in the EU Parliament to study the issue. Other countries with many renewables are taking note so that the same thing doesn't happen to them.

Here, for now, the photovoltaic contribution to the mix is being limited, and nuclear power plants remain mostly shut down and only now they appear to start waking up. The lacks are being fulfilled mainly with combined cycle gas plants, which has caused the price of energy to rise considerably since the blackout.
I wouldn’t be so hasty to come to conclusions. Whilst indeed renewables lack the inertia to help maintain frequency, I’m not sure we can conclude that this was the cause of the issue here. I think more likely there was another trigger, and this lack of inertia made the system more vulnerable to falling over.

In general I agree though, as renewables penetrations rise, and other aspects of resilience are weakened (the UK for example, has given up on gas storage) the topic of resilience needs to be taken more seriously.
 
I wouldn’t be so hasty to come to conclusions. Whilst indeed renewables lack the inertia to help maintain frequency, I’m not sure we can conclude that this was the cause of the issue here. I think more likely there was another trigger, and this lack of inertia made the system more vulnerable to falling over.

In general I agree though, as renewables penetrations rise, and other aspects of resilience are weakened (the UK for example, has given up on gas storage) the topic of resilience needs to be taken more seriously.
It was not the cause inndeed, the cause is still unknown. But having such huge amount of photovoltaic power in the mix (more than the 54%) in that moment made the situation worse for not mitigating the oscillation in frecuency, as others power sources had done.

That said I am totally pro renewables, they are the cheapest, cleanest and best energy possible, but they are not perfect (yet).Solar and wind still need some backup and a power grid properly adapted. Spanish governnenr though is totally Taliban about renewables and totally incompetent preveing this sort of things, which apparently was a well known possibility for any expert.

In fact according to last info the immediate cause was the French-EU network automatically disconnecting from the Iberian network 1,5 seconds after the big oscillation happened. In that moment Spain was sending about a gigawatt of solar energy to France, when both networks disconnected there was a huge power peak in the Iberian network that triggered all the protection systems shutting everything down in cascade.

The primary cause however was of course that big oscillation in the frecuency whose origin is still unknown. First hypothesis is it was some failure in a solar farm in southwest Spain , but there is also rumors the oscillation came from Morocco.
 
Last edited:
The far right are crashing the Romainian economy before they even get elected

Romania's national currency fell to a record low, with the euro trading at 5.1222 lei, according to the National Bank of Romania (BNR) - a 0.45% drop from the previous rate of 5.0991 lei. This is after a strong showing in the first round of the presidential elections for the far right candidate George Simion.

The Romanian currency crossed the psychological threshold of 5 lei on Tuesday following the first round of presidential elections, which was won by a far-right candidate, and the resignation of the government led by Social Democrat Marcel Ciolacu.

In an effort to curb the currency’s decline, the National Bank has intervened in the market, leading to a notable rise in interest rates. The three-month ROBOR index surged to 7.25%, the highest level since January 2023.

Over the past few days, the central bank has spent at least 7 billion euros to stabilize the currency.

Despite attempts to soften his rhetoric and position himself as “Romania’s Meloni,” George Simion has so far failed to ease public or investor concerns.

Simion has announced plans to form a government composed of the far-right AUR and POT parties if he wins the second round of the presidential elections on May 18.

B8Ogosy.png
 
Last edited:
I really don't know much about Romanian politics.

But I'd posit that bankers not liking a candidate and selling the currency to undermine him is a point in his favour.
 
I really don't know much about Romanian politics.

But I'd posit that bankers not liking a candidate and selling the currency to undermine him is a point in his favour.
No, it sure as heck isn't. These sort of people don't fix issues with the system, instead they turn it into an utterly corrupted version of itself that is ten times worse than anything before.
 
Back
Top Bottom