Keep it up IBM. The Spanish government won't hide the truth for long.

"Funny how people threatened by new technology - or just unsettled by change - suddenly interpret routine mishaps as proof that the new technology is too unreliable."

No, my concern is with the wind and solar con and the harm that will come to people from it.

"If it plays out that the reliance on renewables had a hand in this blackout, this event could be used as a warning against other countries relying too heavily on these intermittent energy sources. As reported by the Telegraph, a lack of inertia was probably a major contributor to the blackout, which is a direct result of a reliance on renewable generation. This blackout in Spain is an example of what Meredith Angwin, author of Shorting the Grid: The Hidden Fragility of Our Electric Grid and longtime nuclear advocate who spent her career in science and research, calls the “fatal trifecta," that is, an overdependence on renewables, just-in-time natural gas, and imports from your neighbors. Spain’s grid is clearly a prime example of this trifecta, led by an overdependence on renewable energy."

https://www.ans.org/news/article-6996/spain-portugal-seek-answers-following-massive-power-outage/

Fester,

All very noble-sounding - but you provide no reason to believe it’s true, and every reason to believe it’s not:

//No, my concern is with the wind and solar con and the harm that will come to people from it.//

If this were truly about concern for harm to people, we’d see the same outrage when fossil fuels cause economic instability, deadly air pollution, or catastrophic climate impacts. But you reserve your concern exclusively for renewables - and only when something goes wrong or gives you an opening to score a point.

That’s not concern - that’s confirmation bias. It’s resistance to change and identity protection, dressed up in the language of empathy.

And calling something a "con” is not how someone engages critically with infrastructure risk - it’s how someone talks when they’ve already decided there’s a grand deception. This isn’t about safety or reliability - it’s about delegitimising the transition because it challenges a worldview you’re more comfortable with.

The irony of the article you linked is staggering. It literally opens by saying the cause of the blackout is still under investigation - and yet you leap straight to “renewables did it” like it’s settled fact.

The piece doesn’t confirm anything. It speculates and cites one theory - from Meredith Angwin, a long-time nuclear advocate with a clear ideological position.

And even if it turns out that the blackout did involve grid management, that’s a case for better integration and backup - not an excuse to abandon progress.

You’re not exposing a con. You’re just using one unresolved event to validate a story you’ve already told yourself is true.