I'm pretty sure that your graph of the power distribution is wrong, and that actually power generation was zero for a few hours. REE automatically generated data is often misrepresented.
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Some points which I didn't understand:
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
(3) Where are the nuclears in the figure by red eléctrica?
1. The initial generation loss was at 12:32:57, but it's not included in Leonhard's image
2. You're right, the correct phrasing there is "While LOW inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " (just edited)
3. Nuclear is the bright purple in the pre-blackout section, you're right that it's missing from the legend!
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Some points which I didn't understand:
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
(3) Where are the nuclears in the figure by red eléctrica?
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Two points which I didn't understand.
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Two points which I didn't uderstand.
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Two points which I didn't uderstand.
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
Thanks for this, it was some really interesting and useful context. I was wondering if you'd seen Ketan Joshi's analysis of the Spanish energy market in the run-up to the apagón, and what you thought of it?
Broadly speaking, he identifies, in the period before the apagón itself - an "unprecedented, partly-intentional, partly-mysterious shutdown of half of Spain’s nuclear fleet", which can't be explained by any economic factors, and might even suggest a deliberate, politically motivated withholding of capacity.
Hi Tim, it's an interesting commentary and I had not heard about it before.
In general, the system should be robust enough to deal with that missing capacity, so there was probably something else at play the day of the blackout.
Still, it would be interesting to hear directly from nuclear operators about their "strategy" in those weeks.
🙌🏿
I'm pretty sure that your graph of the power distribution is wrong, and that actually power generation was zero for a few hours. REE automatically generated data is often misrepresented.
Check energy-charts, they have now corrected this
Thanks! Just added a note, the goal there is more to show the energy mix at blackout time :)
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Some points which I didn't understand:
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
(3) Where are the nuclears in the figure by red eléctrica?
Hi Manuel, thanks.
1. The initial generation loss was at 12:32:57, but it's not included in Leonhard's image
2. You're right, the correct phrasing there is "While LOW inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " (just edited)
3. Nuclear is the bright purple in the pre-blackout section, you're right that it's missing from the legend!
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Some points which I didn't understand:
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
(3) Where are the nuclears in the figure by red eléctrica?
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Two points which I didn't understand.
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Two points which I didn't uderstand.
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
Very interesting insights beyond the usual articles. Thanks.
Two points which I didn't uderstand.
(1) "There were 19 seconds between the first and second generation loss events. This timeframe could have been sufficient to disconnect a fleet of EV chargers, ..."
In the figure by Leonhard Probst it suggests a time delta of 1.3 sec betwenn 1st and 2nd.
(2) "While inertia undeniably makes a grid more sensitive to frequency deviations, there are also other theories. " Should't it read "make a grid LESS sensitive to freq. deviations" ?
Thanks for this, it was some really interesting and useful context. I was wondering if you'd seen Ketan Joshi's analysis of the Spanish energy market in the run-up to the apagón, and what you thought of it?
https://ketanjoshi.co/2025/05/05/why-no-one-is-asking-questions-about-spains-mysterious-missing-nukes/
Broadly speaking, he identifies, in the period before the apagón itself - an "unprecedented, partly-intentional, partly-mysterious shutdown of half of Spain’s nuclear fleet", which can't be explained by any economic factors, and might even suggest a deliberate, politically motivated withholding of capacity.
Thank you!
Tim
Hi Tim, it's an interesting commentary and I had not heard about it before.
In general, the system should be robust enough to deal with that missing capacity, so there was probably something else at play the day of the blackout.
Still, it would be interesting to hear directly from nuclear operators about their "strategy" in those weeks.