Induced atmospheric oscillations.

Ain't that the truth!..

Probably not, probably very unlikely, but we don't know for sure.

Not as big as the risk of AI or a Nuclear Holocaust, but still significant.

Its entirely in the hands of the Office of Nuclear Regulation.

RR says it would take about 3 years from regulatory approval to on line.

But the Officers have been bribed one assumes to drag their feet as much as possible.

And far far less than a super volcano in Yosemite or being hit by a random asteroid

No. I don't think so. We know the risk of a killer asteroid is very small. Super volcanos the risk is significant, but they are more constrained in extent.

Yellowstone more like.

Not really.

The Siberian Traps extinguished nearly all life on earth for years. If Yosemite goes up, the Western USA is simply gone. And it will be a 10°C drop worldwide for a decade or more.

That's what I meant

Well yes, they would say that. I can't see the fossil fuels lobby giving in that easily. 2040 at the earliest for a significant rollout my guess.

I don't think the renewable boondoggle will last that long. People are questioning Nut Zero, Spain has demonstrated the imbecility of an all renewable grid, and voters are tired of promises that do nothing except increase energy prices

If the government had the balls, the SMRs could be operating before Reform get in.

But I expect it will be Reform who make it happen

Spain does not have an all renewable grid

and voters are tired of promises that do nothing except

Beforehand Spain seemed to be exporting 1GW to France, 3.5GW to Portugal. The French connector starts in Catalonia, probably close to the 3 nuclear stations that were running at about 1Gw each, but shut down within 5 seconds of whatever the initial event was. Unlikely that South West France had any generation capacity available immediately to send to Spain.

They do have a reasonable amount of hydro.

Siberian Traps was 500 million years ago, not something with a reasonable probability happening in the next few years. Yellowstone might have something like 0.1% chance of happening in the next century, but as you say would have a localised or short term effect. Besides, we can't do anything about it.

I don't think we can quantify the chance of catastrophic global warming at under 0,1% in the next century. We also know global warming will likely have expensive negative effects, even if overall that is just warming a few degrees.

Mitigation, such as rushing the introduction of nuclear and developing solar (where appropriate) are relatively cheap. Something we really should have been doing economically to mitigate carbon fuel prices. Like the French did in the 1980s, but maybe they did it earlier than necessary.

No, it hasn't, any more than the Tay Bridge disaster demonstrated the imbecility of building railway bridges. New technology has teething problems, we have no particular reason to believe this is anything more. That is, if it is renewable related at all.

Frequency plot as seen from the Spanish and Latvian "ends" of the European grid in the run-up to the blackout.

OK, so it's not deviating *that* far from 50Hz, but speeding up and slowing down 6 times per minute must put a huge strain on the system?

Amplitude measured in milliHertz, something lost in translation?

It's not so much RR that I see being the slow party ...

In previous times we have had:

- The Roman Warm Period (RWP)

- The Late Antique Little Ice Age (LALIA)

- The Medieval Warm Period (MWP)

- The Little Ice Age (LIA)

It is to be noted there is a pattern to this sequence, in that the cold periods are followed by warm ones and vice versa, like the warming the planet is currently entering after the cool period of the LIA.

None of these have anything to do with changes in atmospheric CO2 levels.

However, the CO2-driven warming narrative is to link the rise in temperatures of the current warm period with a rise in CO2 levels, but unfortunately the RWP, the LALIA, the MWP, the LIA, and the current as-yet unnamed warm period show this connection to be false.

The response to this uncomfortable scientific fact is to claim that as these previous warming and cooling events were not global, with the result that they cannot count as global events, which conveniently would leave intact the narrative of current CO2-induced global warming.

Unfortunately for this approach, current global temperatures are also not evenly spread about the globe, which logically would support the existence of the warm and cool periods mentioned. The method chosen to overcome this unwelcome fact is to use for this current warm period globally-averaged temperatures.

Note at this point that the comparative globally-averaged temperatures of the RWP, the LALIA, the MWP, and the LIA have never been determined, and as a result of this it cannot be claimed that these periods did not exist in the same global sense of the current narrative. If that is true then the current narrative that warming is driven by increases in atmospheric CO2 levels is, at best, not well founded, as some other mechanism must have driven those climate changes of the periods mentioned and cannot be discounted for the current warming.

Some Spanish engineer said earlier that what happened there, lack of spinning generation stability will happen in the UK!..

There is one place where solar can help.

Spain needs a lot of aircon, which produces a load on the grid just when solar is working.

A little solar to hit that daytime peak could help.

The peak in the UK is of course in the early evening in winter when it is already dark.

Andy