@IceCubeSoup@cough The grid is already recovering within 24 hours. It is taking that long because fossil generators, frequently touted by fudders you sound like you listen to as "better for load peaks", are completely unable to react. Somehow this is all renewables' fault.
Deranged republican priors award No idea what you're talking about award
Your thesis depends on the idea that there are no constraints or restrictions places on Spanish grid engineers (and other engineering types) by EU politicians.
The immediate "cause" of the failure isn't the issue. The inability to recover is the issue.
@IceCubeSoup@cough "EU politicians and Spanish grid engineers are the same people"
OK pal
Nobody knows the cause. Their working hypothesis is induced atmosphere vibration.
It was sunny in the whole of Spain for the whole day and solar kept working through the outage. As usual, nobody has any idea what they're talking about.
the point is that the same people making decisions about inclusion of "renewable" in the grid are the same morons responsible for mis-managing a grid with no understanding of how difficult it is to do a "black start" after everything goes haywire due to an overly interconnected grid.
So, if I'm understanding, renewables can make the load deviation far greater. If so, doesn't that entail that if the deviations are greater than historical norms, we can conclude that renewables are the "proximate cause," since they are the change to the status quo?
We've seen problems like this going back to the '70s. And it has nothing to do with "fossil" or "renewable".
It has to do with the fragility of the grid, and how bringing a power station back onto the grid suddenly can trip all the safety features which causes a cascade of failures to being with.
The problem with "renewables" is that you don't have the flexibility to "pour on the coal" to make up for losses due to losing one of your plants
@Humpleupagus@IceCubeSoup@cough Yes they did. The British have a hydroelectric power station whose sole purpose it is to respond to the demand from people turning the kettle on during TV ad breaks, because fossil generators can not react.
Their reaction time is not impacted just because someone built a switching inverter that can do it in 10 seconds. Sorry, they'll just have to do better!
@Humpleupagus@IceCubeSoup@cough >renewables can make the load deviation far greater No they can't. Load is power draw, not generation. He is simply talking out of his ass. The sun was out the whole day, solar panels can immediately respond to spikes in demand, whereas fossil generators take hours to spool up.
My issue is really one of cause. To paraphrase Aristotle, for every event there are an infinite of causes. Pointing to fossil generators seems a little misguided when the result was likely predictable.
@Humpleupagus@IceCubeSoup@cough I wasn't even pointing at fossil generators. It's clearly a grid issue, their hypothesis is some atmospheric interference and I believe I've said this. In contrast, THIS ENTIRE THREAD is "pointing to renewables" as the sole cause
@IceCubeSoup@Humpleupagus@cough the argument from the OP is what I was responding to and it literally is "they built renewable and therefore the grid crashed" and that's obviously what I meant. what the fuck are you saying?
if "fossil generator" hurts your feelings, just replace it with the correct term, who cares.
It *is* a grid problem but you kept inserting things about how it's still renewables fault. Not even sure what your point is anymore. Mine was simply "blaming renewables for this is not accurate"
@Goalkeeper@WandererUber@IceCubeSoup@cough I hate green grift kikes so fucking much it's unreal. They've completely subverted and destroyed real environmentalism for their own benefit.