No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
Is there some massive clamour amongst the public to hugely liberalise abortion? If so I must have missed it. Why on earth are Labour doing this, "decriminalising" full term abortions by doctors is a shocking change. Was it in the manifesto?
This is a government of cranks, traitors and incompetents, all pushing their own crazy theories
One of the few blessings of being British rather than a Yankee is that we don't have their horrible abortion arguments. This risks importing that toxic debate
Why??
If by Labour you mean the government then they are not doing this. They are two backbench amendments to the Police and Crime Bill which the government have no power to stop. They have promised a free vote on them which is entirely usual on matters of conscience. This would have been handled in exactly the same way by a Tory government.
Well, Creasy is claiming this is a leftwing move to "head off the right"
Tragic politicisation of the debate. So stupid
So much of what tbe state does seems to be done with the sole aim of pissing off the right. And it works, but it's no way to run a country.
They seem to be doing a good job at pissing off everybody. Non-Doms, OAPs, farmers, people on PIP, ....
Turning to the new prison next to HMP Gartree, I can advise that Ministry of Justice have signed an order with Wates Construction Limited to complete the main works for the new prison, which we expect to be complete by early 2029. You are likely aware that the new prison will be given a new name. We are preparing to launch a consultation with both stakeholders and the local community to find a name for the prison, so that it will have its own clear identity separate to HMP Gartree. I think it is very important that local culture and history is appropriately reflected in the choice of name and that we hear and consult with those living close to the prison on what they would like it to be called.
Its a f##king prison....it should take you 5 minutes to decide on one. Nobody living very close to a new prison will be going well at least they conducted a consultation and went with HMP Rainbow rather HMP Gulag for Slags.
Why is asking locals a problem? Might damp some of the concern and help with recruitment. Seems a reasonable idea and is part of the outreach.
Starlink has been available in Iran, since it was turned on at the request of the Biden administration. Which was seen as rather interesting, since this went against ITU rules, which require consent from the countries government.
There’s gonna be a coup before long isn’t there.
In the UK? The way things are going, Yes
I worry for the UK quite a bit next decade, if Reform’s internal contradictions cause their platform to unwind as quickly as Starmer’s has. Not obvious where the disaffected would turn to next.
That said, by 2035 the world will be so different thanks to that thing you are banned from talking about that it’s probably not worth worrying about.
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
Starlink has been available in Iran, since it was turned on at the request of the Biden administration. Which was seen as rather interesting, since this went against ITU rules, which require consent from the countries government.
There’s gonna be a coup before long isn’t there.
The Iranians obviously believe that there are realtime Israeli assets transmitting information.
Starlink has been available in Iran, since it was turned on at the request of the Biden administration. Which was seen as rather interesting, since this went against ITU rules, which require consent from the countries government.
There’s gonna be a coup before long isn’t there.
The Iranians obviously believe that there are realtime Israeli assets transmitting information.
One assumes the Israelis have a contingency to Iranian ISPs being disabled. Seems a bit desperate
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
No argument here
It's worth pointing out that there are two amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill that seems to be being bracketed together in people's minds. The Antoniazzi one is proposing that later term abortion be decriminalised for women doing it to themselves but would still be illegal for medical providers. Personally, I sympathise with this as if you're desperate enough to abort your own foetus that late in the pregnancy then I don't think the criminal justice system is where you need to be.
The second Creasy amendment proposes to decriminalise it for medical professionals too which I agree is more troubling. It's worth noting that the Antoniazzi one is much more likely to pass than the Creasy ones
Nonsense on point 1. You might as well decriminalise raping and murdering your own children by that logic.
I think that's a disgusting comparison. No one rapes a child out of fear and desperation which is why the vast majority of women choose to abort their own foetus. The medical and legal authorities should do everything they can to prevent a woman aborting her own foetus late term just like it does with suicidal people. I just can't see what possible purpose it serves to drag these women through the legal system.
What if the fear and desperation is because the foetus is female?
Not relevant, as the sex of the foetus is easily determined long before the 24-week period.
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
No argument here
It's worth pointing out that there are two amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill that seems to be being bracketed together in people's minds. The Antoniazzi one is proposing that later term abortion be decriminalised for women doing it to themselves but would still be illegal for medical providers. Personally, I sympathise with this as if you're desperate enough to abort your own foetus that late in the pregnancy then I don't think the criminal justice system is where you need to be.
The second Creasy amendment proposes to decriminalise it for medical professionals too which I agree is more troubling. It's worth noting that the Antoniazzi one is much more likely to pass than the Creasy ones
Nonsense on point 1. You might as well decriminalise raping and murdering your own children by that logic.
I think that's a disgusting comparison. No one rapes a child out of fear and desperation which is why the vast majority of women choose to abort their own foetus. The medical and legal authorities should do everything they can to prevent a woman aborting her own foetus late term just like it does with suicidal people. I just can't see what possible purpose it serves to drag these women through the legal system.
Let's take a better comparison then: a mother of a newborn with severe post partum depression or psychosis that kills her infant newborn after a week of not coping. Should that be against the law?
If it should be against the law, why should that be and not the same pregnant women aborting the foetus 10 days prior?
Starlink has been available in Iran, since it was turned on at the request of the Biden administration. Which was seen as rather interesting, since this went against ITU rules, which require consent from the countries government.
There’s gonna be a coup before long isn’t there.
The Iranians obviously believe that there are realtime Israeli assets transmitting information.
One assumes the Israelis have a contingency to Iranian ISPs being disabled. Seems a bit desperate
Given that the US was using satellite comms with its agents in Russia in the 1980s, and we are now in the age where your cellphone can send texts and even make calls via satellite…
Yeah, that ship has long sailed. Even without Starlink.
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
And I was right.
Right in the sense that if power is 100% renewable then every blackout will be "caused" by renewable energy.
There will doubtless be some better engineering solutions than just binning every solar panel.
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
And I was right.
You were wrong. The blackout was 'caused' by the network not managing to do its job when some providers went out. This has happened before with conventional power plants many times, and is not due to renewables per se, but to the fact that someone dropped a bollock on the network side. Almost certainly due to a lack of investment.
Yes, renewables are slightly different as RCS and others have pointed out passim, but not so different that a well-designed network with them in should fail in this manner.
So you were wrong. As you were with your hilariously stupid idea to go back to coal power generation.
But there will be lessons here that I hope that the government and national grid are looking at. But the lesson is not to go back to coal power...
Starlink has been available in Iran, since it was turned on at the request of the Biden administration. Which was seen as rather interesting, since this went against ITU rules, which require consent from the countries government.
There’s gonna be a coup before long isn’t there.
The Iranians obviously believe that there are realtime Israeli assets transmitting information.
One assumes the Israelis have a contingency to Iranian ISPs being disabled. Seems a bit desperate
It’s more to do with cutting off non-Iranian news sources.
Dictatorial regimes *can’t* appear weak. If the Israeli’s have complete air superiority, then video of their UAVs flying slow circuits in Iranian airspace are an existential threat to the regime.
“… make me look ridiculous. And a man in my position can't afford to be made to look ridiculous.”
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
And I was right.
You were wrong. The blackout was 'caused' by the network not managing to do its job when some providers went out. This has happened before with conventional power plants many times, and is not due to renewables per se, but to the fact that someone dropped a bollock on the network side. Almost certainly due to a lack of investment.
Yes, renewables are slightly different as RCS and others have pointed out passim, but not so different that a well-designed network with them in should fail in this manner.
So you were wrong. As you were with your hilariously stupid idea to go back to coal power generation.
But there will be lessons here that I hope that the government and national grid are looking at. But the lesson is not to go back to coal power...
I think the report suggests there was plenty of infrastructure, just that it wasn't being utilised properly.
@kaitlancollins "Governor Walz wishes that President Trump would be a President for all Americans, but this tragedy isn’t about Trump or Walz. It’s about the Hortman family, the Hoffman family, and the State of Minnesota, and the Governor remains focused on helping all three heal," Teddy Tschann, a spokesman for Walz, said
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
And I was right.
“Caused by renewable energy” is disingenuous & simplistic. This stuff is perfectly solvable - technologies exist today to compensate for the lack of reactive power offered by solar & wind inverters. Failing to use them was the cause of the Spanish Grid failure.
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
And I was right.
You were wrong. The blackout was 'caused' by the network not managing to do its job when some providers went out. This has happened before with conventional power plants many times, and is not due to renewables per se, but to the fact that someone dropped a bollock on the network side. Almost certainly due to a lack of investment.
Yes, renewables are slightly different as RCS and others have pointed out passim, but not so different that a well-designed network with them in should fail in this manner.
So you were wrong. As you were with your hilariously stupid idea to go back to coal power generation.
But there will be lessons here that I hope that the government and national grid are looking at. But the lesson is not to go back to coal power...
No, you were wrong, as anyone reading this mealy mouthed pile of sub-Starmer shit will instantly apprehend. The cause was absolutely renewables. Of course the Spanish grid could have spent billions re-ordering their grid to remediate the effect, but that is quite beside the point, and has isn't a million miles within the ballpark of the criticisms made of me when I stated (I didn't even state, I suggested) that renewables could be responsible.
Starlink has been available in Iran, since it was turned on at the request of the Biden administration. Which was seen as rather interesting, since this went against ITU rules, which require consent from the countries government.
There’s gonna be a coup before long isn’t there.
The Iranians obviously believe that there are realtime Israeli assets transmitting information.
One assumes the Israelis have a contingency to Iranian ISPs being disabled. Seems a bit desperate
It’s more to do with cutting off non-Iranian news sources.
Dictatorial regimes *can’t* appear weak. If the Israeli’s have complete air superiority, then video of their UAVs flying slow circuits in Iranian airspace are an existential threat to the regime.
“… make me look ridiculous. And a man in my position can't afford to be made to look ridiculous.”
The Nazi government made radios that could practically only be tuned to Nazi frequencies, to stop the German public from listening to Allied broadcasts (in the daytime at least). They also tried jamming the foreign broadcasts. The lack of success of these efforts is probably going to be paralleled by the Iranian moves.
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
Is there some massive clamour amongst the public to hugely liberalise abortion? If so I must have missed it. Why on earth are Labour doing this, "decriminalising" full term abortions by doctors is a shocking change. Was it in the manifesto?
This is a government of cranks, traitors and incompetents, all pushing their own crazy theories
One of the few blessings of being British rather than a Yankee is that we don't have their horrible abortion arguments. This risks importing that toxic debate
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
A post of mine seems to have been deleted. It was about GG, which I thought we were able to discuss now, and I wasn't one of those not permitted to talk, but anyway, kudos to @david_herdson for his reply to Peter Walker on X from 2023.
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Vanilla closed the thread because people ignored the ban about talking about the grooming story.
The ban is in place until further notice. I cannot make this any clearer.
My patience is close to being exhausted on this.
Hadn't seen this, but just wanted to give David H some credit rather than make a point about anything else. I can't be bothered to have to tiptoe around subjects, so don't say anything, and thought I read that discussion was allowed after how yesterday (@cyclefree article) went
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
I'm going to double down on this prediction (that Farage will attack Labour over genocide complicity in the run up to the next election, to undermine Labour's pitch to left/libs there's a moral duty to vote for them to keep Reform out)
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
No big surprises. Basically what was speculated (a cascading failure of generators dropping off the grid after an initial perturbation) has turned out to be the case.
The one interesting wrinkle is that the report claims that electricity generators who were being paid to dampen grid oscillations completely failed to do so. It says that conventional generators were up & running & being paid to step in to compensate for grid power loss but failed to do so.
It’s not clear whether there was actually enough capacity available to compensate for the solar providers going offline though - the majority of the criticism is apparently aimed at the National Grid operator for not having the means to stabilise the grid.
So it was conventional power generators who failed to do their job? That wasn't the line one poster was taking...
It’s possible that, had the conventional power plants done the job they were being paid for, the grid fluctuations might have been kept small enough that the solar generators would not have dropped off the grid en masse but I don’t know whether the report says that.
The implication of the reporting is that the fluctuations were too large, but a) I don’t know if the report has been published anywhere yet and b) I don’t speak Spanish, so wouldn’t be able to read it anyway. (I guess I could push it through AI, but that sounds like a recipe for confusion given the technical depth.)
Apparently the grid survived similar fluctuations in two previous periods in the year or two before this grid failure, with very similar generation mixes so there’s some plausibility to that idea though.
Ultimately, it seems that the National Grid hasn’t invested enough in grid stability & that needs fixing.
So I was right.
Your answer appears to be “get rid of solar and wind” which, unless you’re going full nuke (which, honestly has a certain appeal...) isn’t realistic. (I’ve read that gas generators are actually quite poor when it comes to their contribution to grid stability - similarly prone to dropping offline to protect their expensive turbines.)
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
I haven't issued 'an answer', I alleged that the massive Spanish blackout was caused by renewable energy, for which I was roundly condemned and mocked by people who preferred the theory that it was an attack by the Goldeneye satellite.
And I was right.
You were wrong. The blackout was 'caused' by the network not managing to do its job when some providers went out. This has happened before with conventional power plants many times, and is not due to renewables per se, but to the fact that someone dropped a bollock on the network side. Almost certainly due to a lack of investment.
Yes, renewables are slightly different as RCS and others have pointed out passim, but not so different that a well-designed network with them in should fail in this manner.
So you were wrong. As you were with your hilariously stupid idea to go back to coal power generation.
But there will be lessons here that I hope that the government and national grid are looking at. But the lesson is not to go back to coal power...
No, you were wrong, as anyone reading this mealy mouthed pile of sub-Starmer shit will instantly apprehend. The cause was absolutely renewables. Of course the Spanish grid could have spent billions re-ordering their grid to remediate the effect, but that is quite beside the point, and has isn't a million miles within the ballpark of the criticisms made of me when I stated (I didn't even state, I suggested) that renewables could be responsible.
Sub-Starmer ---- ?
If you've read my posts before, you'll know that events such as this can have many causal factors. This plays into what some people call the Swiss Cheese Model of failure. So if you're saying that one *causal factor* was renewables, then you may have a point. Or not, if the same thing would have happened without renewables in the mix. But in most cases - and especially this case - there will be many other factors as well that have little, if anything, to do with renewables. As I've said many times, and you ignore, blackouts such as this have happened before with conventional power plants.
That's the way things like this almost always happen. fools focus on one factor and screech that's the 'cause', ignoring everything else that contributed - even if they were more significant factors.
Now, you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about renewables, and want us to move back to the good old days of smog. But I think this is a very poor piece of 'evidence' against renewables. But it might be cautionary.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
Radiological incident from bombing nuclear plants leading to a wider war Iran making a dirty bomb in a hurry Incident in Hormuz Nimitz false flag/vietnam type thing
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
It's actually quite hard to see it turning into WW3, because no one wants that, and Iran is not big, important or mighty enough to start it by itself
Could easily become a very nasty regional war, however, with western powers getting terrorist blowback
The tabloids get very excited talking about WW3 all the time, which is generally understood to mean the End of Days. I worry more about a collapse of Iranian civil society and what that means for the uk future population stats given the wet blanket we have in charge of our borders.
It’s just stage management no? Propose the brutally horrific amendment. So the only less slightly brutally horrific bill doesn’t seem so bad when it’s removed. Shame on them all.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
It's actually quite hard to see it turning into WW3, because no one wants that, and Iran is not big, important or mighty enough to start it by itself
Could easily become a very nasty regional war, however, with western powers getting terrorist blowback
Yes, quite. It needs the Russians to get involved, and they have too much on their plate right now to start another war in the ME (and they’ve been pretty ambivalent thus far).
Perhaps most plausibly, if the US gets involved then China might see it as distracted and decide now is the time to do The Taiwan Thing - and that is one that could conceivably spiral.
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
It's actually quite hard to see it turning into WW3, because no one wants that, and Iran is not big, important or mighty enough to start it by itself
Could easily become a very nasty regional war, however, with western powers getting terrorist blowback
Yes, quite. It needs the Russians to get involved, and they have too much on their plate right now to start another war in the ME (and they’ve been pretty ambivalent thus far).
(Snip)
Russia got its fingers burnt badly in Syria, when the dictator they were supporting fell. They've had reverses with their interests in Africa over the last couple of years. And Iran has been a good friends of theirs over Ukraine - they relied heavily on Iranian drones. AIUI they've set a plant to make the drones in Russia, but two sources is always better than one.
Russia will really want the current Iranian regime to stay in power; but they don't particularly have much military means to help Iran atm.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
Iran has managed to make a nuke (maybe just one). Thinks its game over either way, and some engineering young chaps manage to get it onto a rocket. Launch at Tel Aviv. Huge bit of luck, kaboom.
United States respond by making the rubble bounce in a nuclear way. Blow back from the radiation is so bad and wind patterns unfortunate that the radiation spreads both south and east, radiating Saudi Arabia and the gulf states, and Pakistan and India.
Millions die. US and Israel becomes pariah states.
German Chancellor publicly imploring America to take out what remains of Iran’s nuclear capability. Trump slaps down Gabbard and Tucker Carlson. The die is cast if you ask me.
Trump is on rhetorical form with "Kooky Tucker"
I had read on here that Tucker was the handsome exciting new face of right wing media. Mind you there have been a few false dawns in that area.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
It's actually quite hard to see it turning into WW3, because no one wants that, and Iran is not big, important or mighty enough to start it by itself
Could easily become a very nasty regional war, however, with western powers getting terrorist blowback
Yes, quite. It needs the Russians to get involved, and they have too much on their plate right now to start another war in the ME (and they’ve been pretty ambivalent thus far).
(Snip)
Russia got its fingers burnt badly in Syria, when the dictator they were supporting fell. They've had reverses with their interests in Africa over the last couple of years. And Iran has been a good friends of theirs over Ukraine - they relied heavily on Iranian drones. AIUI they've set a plant to make the drones in Russia, but two sources is always better than one.
Russia will really want the current Iranian regime to stay in power; but they don't particularly have much military means to help Iran atm.
Don't see what Russia could provide other than "moral support", they're already stretched very thin with the Ukraine invasion and Israel/USA is a completely different prospect compared to Ukraine for them. It's not within the realm of possibility that Russia provides a nuclear first strike capability or guarantee to Iran either so barring the impossible Iran seems friendless. Even the condemnation from Arab/Muslim countries has been severely lacking after years of funding proxies to fight wars against them.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
Iran has managed to make a nuke (maybe just one). Thinks its game over either way, and some engineering young chaps manage to get it onto a rocket. Launch at Tel Aviv. Huge bit of luck, kaboom.
United States respond by making the rubble bounce in a nuclear way. Blow back from the radiation is so bad and wind patterns unfortunate that the radiation spreads both south and east, radiating Saudi Arabia and the gulf states, and Pakistan and India.
Millions die. US and Israel becomes pariah states.
Israel has hundreds of nukes. It would do its own retaliation.
The whole radiation thing depends on lots of ground bursts. Which haven’t been a thing since multi megaton warheads went out of fashion.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
It's actually quite hard to see it turning into WW3, because no one wants that, and Iran is not big, important or mighty enough to start it by itself
Could easily become a very nasty regional war, however, with western powers getting terrorist blowback
Yes, quite. It needs the Russians to get involved, and they have too much on their plate right now to start another war in the ME (and they’ve been pretty ambivalent thus far).
(Snip)
Russia got its fingers burnt badly in Syria, when the dictator they were supporting fell. They've had reverses with their interests in Africa over the last couple of years. And Iran has been a good friends of theirs over Ukraine - they relied heavily on Iranian drones. AIUI they've set a plant to make the drones in Russia, but two sources is always better than one.
Russia will really want the current Iranian regime to stay in power; but they don't particularly have much military means to help Iran atm.
Don't see what Russia could provide other than "moral support", they're already stretched very thin with the Ukraine invasion and Israel/USA is a completely different prospect compared to Ukraine for them. It's not within the realm of possibility that Russia provides a nuclear first strike capability or guarantee to Iran either so barring the impossible Iran seems friendless. Even the condemnation from Arab/Muslim countries has been severely lacking after years of funding proxies to fight wars against them.
I think the only thing of any real effect Russia could provide to help Iran is propaganda. And they're very good at that, around the world.
I'm not sure for all the bluster we're much further forward than we were a couple of days ago.
As a military "conflict", it's over - Iran may still be able to launch a few missiles but Israel commands the skies and can inflict whatever it likes on Tehran and some (though perhaps not all) other Iranian cities. The Iranian air defence system has been shattered and the Iranian Air Force's woefully obsolete planes of little use against modern Israeli jets.
Yet how does it end? What does the end look like? Trump mentions unconditional surrender but that won't happen. I don't have a huge issue with Iran pursuing nuclear power for domestic generation but not for military purposes and if that isn't acceptable there needs to be some form of guarantee a de-nuclearised Iran won't be short of power.
There's the small matter of Iranian internal politics. Presumably no one is proposing an international occupying force to supervise free elections or a transfer of power to a non-theocratic government. It has to be for Iranians to choose what kind of state and Government they want - I imagine we'd like to turn the clock back to 1978 and have a pro-western dictatorship but the Iranians may not (they didn't before to be fair).
I'd also imagine the last thing anyone wants is an unstable and potentially fragmenting Iran given its neighbours and its position in Southwest Asia.
“Due to the 3 year war with Iran, which we are totally winning by the way, I’m happy to announce that I will continue to serve as President until it is over like the great hero Franklin Roosevelt!!”
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
Is there some massive clamour amongst the public to hugely liberalise abortion? If so I must have missed it. Why on earth are Labour doing this, "decriminalising" full term abortions by doctors is a shocking change. Was it in the manifesto?
This is a government of cranks, traitors and incompetents, all pushing their own crazy theories
One of the few blessings of being British rather than a Yankee is that we don't have their horrible abortion arguments. This risks importing that toxic debate
Why??
Idiot Labour MPs who are cosplaying they're American politicians.
Similar to those Labour idiots who went and campaigned for Harris.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
Iran has managed to make a nuke (maybe just one). Thinks its game over either way, and some engineering young chaps manage to get it onto a rocket. Launch at Tel Aviv. Huge bit of luck, kaboom.
United States respond by making the rubble bounce in a nuclear way. Blow back from the radiation is so bad and wind patterns unfortunate that the radiation spreads both south and east, radiating Saudi Arabia and the gulf states, and Pakistan and India.
Millions die. US and Israel becomes pariah states.
I'm not sure for all the bluster we're much further forward than we were a couple of days ago.
As a military "conflict", it's over - Iran may still be able to launch a few missiles but Israel commands the skies and can inflict whatever it likes on Tehran and some (though perhaps not all) other Iranian cities. The Iranian air defence system has been shattered and the Iranian Air Force's woefully obsolete planes of little use against modern Israeli jets.
Yet how does it end? What does the end look like? Trump mentions unconditional surrender but that won't happen. I don't have a huge issue with Iran pursuing nuclear power for domestic generation but not for military purposes and if that isn't acceptable there needs to be some form of guarantee a de-nuclearised Iran won't be short of power.
There's the small matter of Iranian internal politics. Presumably no one is proposing an international occupying force to supervise free elections or a transfer of power to a non-theocratic government. It has to be for Iranians to choose what kind of state and Government they want - I imagine we'd like to turn the clock back to 1978 and have a pro-western dictatorship but the Iranians may not (they didn't before to be fair).
I'd also imagine the last thing anyone wants is an unstable and potentially fragmenting Iran given its neighbours and its position in Southwest Asia.
An oil rich state with one of the hottest (if not the hottest) and driest deserts on the planet does not really need any nuclear stations for power.
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
Iran has managed to make a nuke (maybe just one). Thinks its game over either way, and some engineering young chaps manage to get it onto a rocket. Launch at Tel Aviv. Huge bit of luck, kaboom.
United States respond by making the rubble bounce in a nuclear way. Blow back from the radiation is so bad and wind patterns unfortunate that the radiation spreads both south and east, radiating Saudi Arabia and the gulf states, and Pakistan and India.
Millions die. US and Israel becomes pariah states.
One has to assume that Mossad (and the US) has been pretty confident they don’t have a nuke, or (perhaps the most important) capability to deliver one, otherwise question whether the whole thing would have started in the first place. Yes, intelligence can be wrong (hi Tony/George!) but it would have to have been out by a lot.
I'm not sure for all the bluster we're much further forward than we were a couple of days ago.
As a military "conflict", it's over - Iran may still be able to launch a few missiles but Israel commands the skies and can inflict whatever it likes on Tehran and some (though perhaps not all) other Iranian cities. The Iranian air defence system has been shattered and the Iranian Air Force's woefully obsolete planes of little use against modern Israeli jets.
Yet how does it end? What does the end look like? Trump mentions unconditional surrender but that won't happen. I don't have a huge issue with Iran pursuing nuclear power for domestic generation but not for military purposes and if that isn't acceptable there needs to be some form of guarantee a de-nuclearised Iran won't be short of power.
There's the small matter of Iranian internal politics. Presumably no one is proposing an international occupying force to supervise free elections or a transfer of power to a non-theocratic government. It has to be for Iranians to choose what kind of state and Government they want - I imagine we'd like to turn the clock back to 1978 and have a pro-western dictatorship but the Iranians may not (they didn't before to be fair).
I'd also imagine the last thing anyone wants is an unstable and potentially fragmenting Iran given its neighbours and its position in Southwest Asia.
An oil rich state with one of the hottest (if not the hottest) and driest deserts on the planet does not really need any nuclear stations for power.
Yeah, the only reason the Iranians have a nuclear program is to build a Bomb.
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
Is there some massive clamour amongst the public to hugely liberalise abortion? If so I must have missed it. Why on earth are Labour doing this, "decriminalising" full term abortions by doctors is a shocking change. Was it in the manifesto?
This is a government of cranks, traitors and incompetents, all pushing their own crazy theories
One of the few blessings of being British rather than a Yankee is that we don't have their horrible abortion arguments. This risks importing that toxic debate
Why??
Idiot Labour MPs who are cosplaying they're American politicians.
Similar to those Labour idiots who went and campaigned for Harris.
The Conservatives and Reformers on the other hand who travelled West and shilled for Trump were fine though.
It has come to my close attention, that the evening hour being condign, it is only proper if I now partake of my nightly jenever spirits, thereto diluted with elixir of quinine
“Due to the 3 year war with Iran, which we are totally winning by the way, I’m happy to announce that I will continue to serve as President until it is over like the great hero Franklin Roosevelt!!”
It has come to my close attention, that the evening hour being condign, it is only proper if I now partake of my nightly jenever spirits, thereto diluted with elixir of quinine
It has come to my close attention, that the evening hour being condign, it is only proper if I now partake of my nightly jenever spirits, thereto diluted with elixir of quinine
Didn't Trump sack John Bolton because he was sick of hearing him going on about taking Iran out?
Yep, I think DC and his advisors are full of people like Bolton though all itching for a war, and they're in his ear a lot. Add to the fact wars =initially= can be quite popular in the States, and AIPAC is a very powerful lobby group.
Decriminalising abortion up to birth ought to be enough for any of them. Kendall, for she is disgusting (and a massive rebellion looms)
There must be quite a few parents of extremely young infants who would wish they could turn the clock back a few days. Why not, what's the difference?
Personally id be moving the latest time to abort a long way towards conception from 24 weeks
Decriminalising full term abortions is grotesque, any MP backing it isn’t fit for office. Agreed that 24 weeks feels too late these days too. Ideally you’d want universal early dna screening and bringing the date back, not moving it forwards (or eliminating it).
Is there some massive clamour amongst the public to hugely liberalise abortion? If so I must have missed it. Why on earth are Labour doing this, "decriminalising" full term abortions by doctors is a shocking change. Was it in the manifesto?
This is a government of cranks, traitors and incompetents, all pushing their own crazy theories
One of the few blessings of being British rather than a Yankee is that we don't have their horrible abortion arguments. This risks importing that toxic debate
Why??
Idiot Labour MPs who are cosplaying they're American politicians.
Similar to those Labour idiots who went and campaigned for Harris.
The Conservatives and Reformers on the other hand who travelled West and shilled for Trump were fine though.
They were cosplaying idiots as well.
But the Labour idiots were worse idiots because they picked the losing side.
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
*nervous chatter of telex thingies, like them on THREADS*
What is the plausible scenario of this going really badly?
Iran has managed to make a nuke (maybe just one). Thinks its game over either way, and some engineering young chaps manage to get it onto a rocket. Launch at Tel Aviv. Huge bit of luck, kaboom.
United States respond by making the rubble bounce in a nuclear way. Blow back from the radiation is so bad and wind patterns unfortunate that the radiation spreads both south and east, radiating Saudi Arabia and the gulf states, and Pakistan and India.
Millions die. US and Israel becomes pariah states.
Israel has hundreds of nukes. It would do its own retaliation.
The whole radiation thing depends on lots of ground bursts. Which haven’t been a thing since multi megaton warheads went out of fashion.
Phew!
Maybe only ten to twenty million killed then…… uhhhh….. depending on the breaks.
It is pretty hard to see where the Iranian regime goes from here.
Even in a “deal” scenario, it will be visibly weakened and exposed to being toppled. I am not sure it can survive otherwise though. It can’t win the conflict, and if it fights to the end it will ultimately go down, either from external bombs or internal insurrection.
It is pretty hard to see where the Iranian regime goes from here.
Even in a “deal” scenario, it will be visibly weakened and exposed to being toppled. I am not sure it can survive otherwise though. It can’t win the conflict, and if it fights to the end it will ultimately go down, either from external bombs or internal insurrection.
Probably better to go the Assad way and just flee to somewhere that will have them,
(Snip) We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
It is pretty hard to see where the Iranian regime goes from here.
Even in a “deal” scenario, it will be visibly weakened and exposed to being toppled. I am not sure it can survive otherwise though. It can’t win the conflict, and if it fights to the end it will ultimately go down, either from external bombs or internal insurrection.
Probably better to go the Assad way and just flee to somewhere that will have them,
Would you support or oppose the United Kingdom helping to defend Israel by assisting in the shooting down of missiles and drones from Iran?
Support: 25% Oppose: 49%
It would be interesting to see the same survey done with other countries/places, e.g. "Would you support or oppose the United Kingdom helping to defend shipping by assisting in the shooting down of missiles and drones from Yemen?"
or
"Would you support or oppose the United Kingdom helping to defend Ukraine by assisting in the shooting down of missiles and drones from Russia?"
It is pretty hard to see where the Iranian regime goes from here.
Even in a “deal” scenario, it will be visibly weakened and exposed to being toppled. I am not sure it can survive otherwise though. It can’t win the conflict, and if it fights to the end it will ultimately go down, either from external bombs or internal insurrection.
Probably better to go the Assad way and just flee to somewhere that will have them,
There's a new Chekhov play to be written where a couple of Muslim theocrats swathed in black stand at the windows of a minor manor house a hundred miles from Moscow and stare moodily at the snow thinking what might have been.
It is pretty hard to see where the Iranian regime goes from here.
Even in a “deal” scenario, it will be visibly weakened and exposed to being toppled. I am not sure it can survive otherwise though. It can’t win the conflict, and if it fights to the end it will ultimately go down, either from external bombs or internal insurrection.
Probably better to go the Assad way and just flee to somewhere that will have them,
The problem is not just the mad Mullahs; it's the entire security apparatus they've built below them of true believers. E.g. the morality police.
I rewatched 'The Billion Dollar Brain' yesterday. I could not help but view the insane antagonist as being a more intelligent and better-dressed version of Trump.
"My brain says the hour is at hand, and my brain is never wrong!"
Admittedly, this was written in an educational context;
'[Learning occurs, wrote Herbert Simon,] "only as a result of what the student does and thinks." The assignment itself is a MacGuffin, with the shelf life of sour cream and an economic value that rounds to zero dollars. It is valuable only as a way to compel student effort and thought.'
The harder question is how much of the "work" adults do is also a MacGuffin, whose real value is to the worker developing and sharpening their skills, so that they are available when a proper crisis happens.
Efficiency vs. resilience, I suspect. As we saw in the long, sunny spring of 2020.
It shows the randomness of such research. If they were using PB for data the results may have been very different if @Leon was on one of his ban vacations.
Comments
You can have solar / battery installs that support grid stability instead of depend on it - but the kit has to be there which costs €. € that the National Grid has to pay for one way or another. The ultimate problem is that the Spanish NG hadn’t invested enough in grid stability & as a result exposed the grid to the possibility of these kind of cascading failures.
(Possibly the problem was that hadn’t invested enough in making sure that the companies they were paying to keep the grid stable were actually doing so...)
That said, by 2035 the world will be so different thanks to that thing you are banned from talking about that it’s probably not worth worrying about.
And I was right.
If it should be against the law, why should that be and not the same pregnant women aborting the foetus 10 days prior?
Yeah, that ship has long sailed. Even without Starlink.
There will doubtless be some better engineering solutions than just binning every solar panel.
Yes, renewables are slightly different as RCS and others have pointed out passim, but not so different that a well-designed network with them in should fail in this manner.
So you were wrong. As you were with your hilariously stupid idea to go back to coal power generation.
But there will be lessons here that I hope that the government and national grid are looking at. But the lesson is not to go back to coal power...
Dictatorial regimes *can’t* appear weak. If the Israeli’s have complete air superiority, then video of their UAVs flying slow circuits in Iranian airspace are an existential threat to the regime.
“… make me look ridiculous. And a man in my position can't afford to be made to look ridiculous.”
We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured "stuff." Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.
https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1935009981088280977
We know exactly where the so-called "Supreme Leader" is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1935010520979108104
UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!
"Governor Walz wishes that President Trump would be a President for all Americans, but this tragedy isn’t about Trump or Walz. It’s about the Hortman family, the Hoffman family, and the State of Minnesota, and the Governor remains focused on helping all three heal," Teddy Tschann, a spokesman for Walz, said
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksempfänger
Interestingly, the move to reduce the stations that could be received was part of a cost-reduction effort...
The ban is in place until further notice. I cannot make this any clearer.
My patience is close to being exhausted on this.
Edit: Ah, the latter
There's a million other things happening in the world and politics.
And if anyone simply can't cope without gushing forth on the banned subject then maybe try another forum.
PB continuing is more important.
https://x.com/abiwilks/status/1934977714727113105
I'm going to double down on this prediction (that Farage will attack Labour over genocide complicity in the run up to the next election, to undermine Labour's pitch to left/libs there's a moral duty to vote for them to keep Reform out)
If you've read my posts before, you'll know that events such as this can have many causal factors. This plays into what some people call the Swiss Cheese Model of failure. So if you're saying that one *causal factor* was renewables, then you may have a point. Or not, if the same thing would have happened without renewables in the mix. But in most cases - and especially this case - there will be many other factors as well that have little, if anything, to do with renewables. As I've said many times, and you ignore, blackouts such as this have happened before with conventional power plants.
That's the way things like this almost always happen. fools focus on one factor and screech that's the 'cause', ignoring everything else that contributed - even if they were more significant factors.
Now, you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about renewables, and want us to move back to the good old days of smog. But I think this is a very poor piece of 'evidence' against renewables. But it might be cautionary.
Could easily become a very nasty regional war, however, with western powers getting terrorist blowback
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg759nykj0ro
Iran making a dirty bomb in a hurry
Incident in Hormuz
Nimitz false flag/vietnam type thing
Antoniazzi amendment (backed by Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the major abortion providers) will be voted on first.
If Antoniazzi amendment passes, Creasy amendment will be dropped.
I'm not sure how that decision was come to - but it looks highly sensible. Much better to pass the one that has the backing of the medical profession.
We'll have to wait and see but I would think this will pass very comfortably.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy5w4900153o
Perhaps most plausibly, if the US gets involved then China might see it as distracted and decide now is the time to do The Taiwan Thing - and that is one that could conceivably spiral.
https://x.com/HondaJP/status/1934940854247997745
Yes, it's been done before. But it's still cool.
Is that Vulcan armed?
Russia will really want the current Iranian regime to stay in power; but they don't particularly have much military means to help Iran atm.
United States respond by making the rubble bounce in a nuclear way. Blow back from the radiation is so bad and wind patterns unfortunate that the radiation spreads both south and east, radiating Saudi Arabia and the gulf states, and Pakistan and India.
Millions die. US and Israel becomes pariah states.
Mind you there have been a few false dawns in that area.
In the latest news, by the way, the budget for Themis has blown out. Again.
The whole radiation thing depends on lots of ground bursts. Which haven’t been a thing since multi megaton warheads went out of fashion.
I wonder how the current campaign compares (Iran claim the Iraqi attacks killed 2,300 people, 422 of whom were in Tehran).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_cities
(*) A civil servant really knows he's not in his government's favour when he gets transferred from London to an active war zone...
I'm not sure for all the bluster we're much further forward than we were a couple of days ago.
As a military "conflict", it's over - Iran may still be able to launch a few missiles but Israel commands the skies and can inflict whatever it likes on Tehran and some (though perhaps not all) other Iranian cities. The Iranian air defence system has been shattered and the Iranian Air Force's woefully obsolete planes of little use against modern Israeli jets.
Yet how does it end? What does the end look like? Trump mentions unconditional surrender but that won't happen. I don't have a huge issue with Iran pursuing nuclear power for domestic generation but not for military purposes and if that isn't acceptable there needs to be some form of guarantee a de-nuclearised Iran won't be short of power.
There's the small matter of Iranian internal politics. Presumably no one is proposing an international occupying force to supervise free elections or a transfer of power to a non-theocratic government. It has to be for Iranians to choose what kind of state and Government they want - I imagine we'd like to turn the clock back to 1978 and have a pro-western dictatorship but the Iranians may not (they didn't before to be fair).
I'd also imagine the last thing anyone wants is an unstable and potentially fragmenting Iran given its neighbours and its position in Southwest Asia.
Who are we surrendering to this time? Russia, Iran or Israel?
https://x.com/vnovak_404/status/1935021816936022100
“Due to the 3 year war with Iran, which we are totally winning by the way, I’m happy to announce that I will continue to serve as President until it is over like the great hero Franklin Roosevelt!!”
https://x.com/OleBeeM/status/1935022962328928275
Similar to those Labour idiots who went and campaigned for Harris.
He is so vain, the parade was comical, he's feeling the small dick energy, so he takes out Tehran, to prove he's the big guy once again
@SpencerHakimian
·
1h
🚨🚨 *SUPREME COURT ASKED TO HEAR CHALLENGE TO TRUMP'S GLOBAL TARIFFS
Tariffs going to the Supreme Court.
2 out of 6 conservative judges can save the world from this stupidity.
Do the right thing.
https://x.com/SpencerHakimian
Support: 25%
Oppose: 49%
But the Labour idiots were worse idiots because they picked the losing side.
Maybe only ten to twenty million killed then…… uhhhh….. depending on the breaks.
Even in a “deal” scenario, it will be visibly weakened and exposed to being toppled. I am not sure it can survive otherwise though. It can’t win the conflict, and if it fights to the end it will ultimately go down, either from external bombs or internal insurrection.
Using AI makes you stupid, researchers find
Study reveals chatbots risk hampering development of critical thinking, memory and language skills
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/06/17/using-ai-makes-you-stupid-researchers-find/
or
"Would you support or oppose the United Kingdom helping to defend Ukraine by assisting in the shooting down of missiles and drones from Russia?"
"My brain says the hour is at hand, and my brain is never wrong!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObX1FRR2moU
It was a much better film than I remembered.
'[Learning occurs, wrote Herbert Simon,] "only as a result of what the student does and thinks." The assignment itself is a MacGuffin, with the shelf life of sour cream and an economic value that rounds to zero dollars. It is valuable only as a way to compel student effort and thought.'
https://bsky.app/profile/timbale.bsky.social/post/3lp5d223ids27
The harder question is how much of the "work" adults do is also a MacGuffin, whose real value is to the worker developing and sharpening their skills, so that they are available when a proper crisis happens.
Efficiency vs. resilience, I suspect. As we saw in the long, sunny spring of 2020.
All U.S. Navy and allied ships have been put to sea from Naval Support Activity Bahrain, on the coast of the Persian Gulf.