Spanish grid operator faulted for Iberian blackout, report finds
MADRID, Spain: A routine oversight by Spain's power grid operator, REE, has been identified as the trigger behind the large-scale blackout that swept across the Iberian peninsula in late April, according to findings from a government-led investigation released this week.
The report found that REE underestimated the amount of electricity needed to ensure voltage stability during peak hours on April 28 — a miscalculation that set off a chain reaction, plunging cities into gridlock and stranding thousands in elevators and trains.
"The system did not have sufficient dynamic voltage control capacity," Spain's Energy Minister Sara Aagesen told reporters in Madrid.
She said REE failed to keep enough thermal power plants online during critical hours. "They only set it for the early hours of the day, not the central hours."
The report, published in full on June 17, also found that some power plants legally required to help stabilize the grid failed to absorb the reactive power needed to manage the surge.
"Many of them were economically remunerated to do so," Aagesen said. "They did not absorb all the reactive power that was expected in a context of high voltages."
Maintaining grid stability requires the system frequency — usually 50 Hertz (Hz) across Europe — to remain within narrow bounds. Deviations can damage infrastructure and equipment.
The minister confirmed there was no evidence of a cyberattack.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
22 minutes ago
- New York Times
Insurers Pledge to Ease Controversial Prior Approvals for Medical Care
Facing regulatory crackdowns and intensifying criticism from patients and doctors, the nation's biggest health insurers said on Friday that they would retreat from tactics that have delayed medical care and led at times to denials for necessary treatments. For years, the widespread practice known as prior authorization has vexed patients who might not have been notified until the day of surgery whether a procedure would be covered by their insurance or if a prescription medicine would be denied for no clear reason. Insurers often send unintelligible form letters, leaving patients to puzzle out the basis for the denial or what their next steps should be. Patients may delay or even abandon necessary medical care because they may not even be aware that they can appeal the decisions. Lawmakers, regulators and public outrage have drawn attention to abuses of the system, leading to mounting calls for reforms. Insurers have also been the target of myriad lawsuits, some of which attributed patient deaths to those denials and delays. The murder of Brian Thompson, a UnitedHealthcare executive, last December renewed criticisms of the tactic, unleashing a barrage of complaints that the practice was deployed to avoid covering care. 'Prior authorization is a huge issue for people who are in managed care plans because it is one of the ways plans use to control their costs,' said David A. Lipschutz, co-director for the Center for Medicare Advocacy. He pointed to several studies showing that insurers may have inappropriately denied care, particularly in private Medicare plans. Various reports from federal regulators and researchers show that the vast majority of appeals are successful. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Daily Mail
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Royal Mail boss jumps ship after Czech takeover
Royal Mail's boss has quit weeks after the postal service fell into foreign hands for the first time in its 509-year history. In a move that caught the business world by surprise, Emma Gilthorpe left having been appointed chief executive a little over a year ago. The former Heathrow director will be replaced on an interim basis by chief operating officer Alistair Cochrane. Her departure comes after Royal Mail's parent company International Distribution Services (IDS) was bought by Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky for £3.6billion. The energy tycoon nicknamed the 'Czech Sphinx' for his inscrutable approach to business decisions swooped on the firm last year in a move that prompted outrage from politicians and businesses. The controversial deal, which was approved by 80 per cent of shareholders, saw the postal service fall into overseas ownership for the first time since it was established by Henry VIII in 1516. IDS chairman Keith Williams and the rest of the board stepped down as planned when the firm delisted from the London Stock Exchange in May. But IDS chief executive Martin Seidenberg and finance chief Michael Snape will stay in their roles. The company had not publicly confirmed whether Gilthorpe, 55, would continue to lead Royal Mail under its new owner. Dan Coatsworth, investment analyst at AJ Bell, said: 'A new owner means a different way of thinking and that normally includes a fresh sweep in the boardroom. 'Daniel Kretinsky is a brave man for wanting to own Royal Mail as it comes with a multitude of challenges. He'll already have a firm idea how to fix it and he'll want to parachute his own choice of leader into the company. 'Gilthorpe might have come to the conclusion that if she did not leave of her own free will now, it was inevitable that she would have been pushed out later on.' As part of the deal, Kretinsky agreed to a series of conditions to secure approval from ministers. The Government will retain a 'golden share' in the business. This means any changes to Royal Mail's ownership, tax residency or where its headquarters are based will need ministers' approval. Kretinsky, 49, must also retain the Universal Service Obligation (USO), which guarantees a first-class postal service to anywhere in the UK for a fixed price six days a week. But these rules are set to be changed by the regulator Ofcom, which has proposed cutting second-class deliveries to every other working day. Gilthorpe said yesterday she 'will always be incredibly proud to have led Royal Mail', adding: 'I look forward to seeing Royal Mail continue to transform in the years ahead.'
Reuters
22 minutes ago
- Reuters
Walmart to pay $10 million to settle US FTC lawsuit over money transfer fraud
June 20 (Reuters) - Walmart (WMT.N), opens new tab has agreed to pay $10 million to settle a U.S. Federal Trade Commission civil lawsuit accusing the world's largest retailer of ignoring warning signs that fraudsters used its money transfer services to fleece consumers out of hundreds of millions of dollars. The settlement was filed on Friday in Chicago federal court, and requires approval by U.S. District Judge Manish Shah. Walmart also agreed not to process money transfers it suspects are fraudulent, or help sellers and telemarketers it believes are using its services to commit fraud. "Electronic money transfers are one of the most common ways that scammers tell consumers to send them money, because once it's sent, it's gone for good," said Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC consumer protection bureau. "Companies that provide these services must train their employees to comply with the law and work to protect consumers." The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer did not admit or deny wrongdoing in agreeing to settle. Walmart did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In its June 2022 complaint, the FTC accused Walmart of turning a blind eye to fraudsters who used its money transfer services to cash out at its stores. Walmart acts as an agent for money transfers by companies such as MoneyGram, Ria (EEFT.O), opens new tab and Western Union (WU.N), opens new tab. Money can be hard to trace once delivered. The FTC said fraudsters used many schemes that included impersonating Internal Revenue Service agents, impersonating family members who needed money from grandparents to avoid jail, and telling victims they won lotteries or sweepstakes but owed fees to collect their winnings. Shah dismissed part of the FTC case last July but let the regulator pursue the remainder. Walmart appealed from that decision. Friday's settlement would end the appeal. The case is Federal Trade Commission v Walmart Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, No. 22-03372.
