Spain says April's Iberian blackout was caused by multiple technical factors, not a cyberattack
Spain's Ecological Transition Minister Sara Aagesen, who manages the nation's energy policy, said in a press conference that small grid failures, concentrated in the south of Spain, led to a chain reaction among larger ones, while completely ruling out questions about a cyberattack.
The minister said several technical causes that contributed to the event, including 'the poor planning' by operators of the grid who didn't find a replacement for one power plant that was supposed to help balance power fluctuations.
The April 28 outage started shortly after 12:30 pm in Spain and lasted through nightfall, disrupting businesses, transit systems, cellular networks, Internet connectivity and other critical infrastructures. In just five seconds, Spain lost 15 gigawatts of electricity — or about 60% of its supply. Portugal, whose grid is connected to Spain's, also went down. Only the countries' island territories were spared.
Power was fully restored by the early hours of the following day.
The government report included analysts from Spain's national security agencies, which concluded, according to the minister, there were no indications of cyber-sabotage by foreign actors.
The only solid information made public shortly after the system went down came from Spain's grid operator Red Eléctrica, which had narrowed down the source of the outage to two separate incidents in southern Spain where substations had failed.
In the weeks following the blackout, citizens and experts were left wondering what triggered the event in a region not known for power outages and igniting a fierce debate about whether Spain's high levels of renewable power had something to do with the grid failing.
Spain is at the forefront of Europe's transition to renewable energy, having generated nearly 57% of its electricity in 2024 from renewable energy sources like wind, hydropower and solar. The country is also phasing out its nuclear plants.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez pushed back against such speculation and defended renewables. He asked for patience and said that his government would not 'deviate a single millimeter' from its energy transition plans, which include a goal of generating 81% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fed latest: What Powell said about this year's rate cuts
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said on Tuesday that the Fed would have cut interest rates by now were it not for President Trump's tariffs. Yahoo Finance Senior Reporter Jennifer Schonberger joins Market Domination with Josh Lipton to discuss Powell's recent comments. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination here. Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, speaking in Portugal on Tuesday, told a gathering held by the European Central Bank that the US Central Bank may have changed their plans for the fight against inflation if not for the president's trade deals. Yahoo! Finance's Jennifer Schonberger has more. Hey there, Josh. Fed chair J. Powell didn't take a rate cut off the table for the Fed's next policy meeting later this month. And as you said, said that if it weren't for tariffs, the Fed would already be cutting rates. and on the data and um we we are going meeting by meeting. I mentioned um, you know, how I'm thinking about that, but I wouldn't take any meeting off the table or put it directly on the table. It's going to depend on how the how the data evolve. Powell noted that a quote "solid majority" of the Fed's interest rate setting committee thinks it will be appropriate to begin lowering interest rates at some point later this year, explicitly saying in the remaining four interest rate setting meetings, which would include the next meeting in July. When asked if the Fed would begin already cutting rates had it not been for tariffs, Powell had this to say. I think that's right. We're, in effect, we went on hold uh when we when we saw the size of the tariffs and where and essentially all all inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs. Powell reiterated that the Fed has not seen much of an impact yet from tariffs on inflation, noting that the central bank expects to see, quote, "some higher readings on inflation", but that officials are prepared to learn, and that inflation could be higher, lower, later, or sooner than expected. Powell has roughly 10 months left in his term as chair. And when asked what keeps him awake at night, he says he wants to turn over an economy to his successor that is in good shape. Asked whether he would remain on as a Fed governor after his term ends as Fed chair next May, Powell said "I don't have an answer for you today." Josh. Thank you, Jen.
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
What the Justice Department's push to bring denaturalization cases means
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is ramping up its plans to revoke the citizenship of immigrants who've committed crimes or pose a national security risk, according to a recent memo underscoring the Trump administration's hardline immigration agenda. Efforts to identity and go after those suspected of cheating to get their citizenship are not new to this administration.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Did the ‘Deep State' Invent the U.F.O. Craze?
The last few times I wrote about unidentified flying objects, in the spring and fall of 2023, there had been a series of curious happenings — reveals and leaks and would-be whistle-blowing — that convinced me that some group of people inside our government wanted Americans to believe that the national security state had secret knowledge about U.F.O.s. This was a deliberately circumspect take on an extremely weird situation, which had three notable features. First, the kinds of people coming forward with claims and the footage and accounts of mysterious flying objects being publicized (in this newspaper, among other places) were more serious-seeming, more difficult to eye-roll away, than what we'd seen in prior eras of U.F.O. enthusiasm. Second, the sudden bipartisan interest from senators and congressmen — not just eccentrics in the House of Representatives but also figures like Senator Chuck Schumer, who was then the majority leader, and Senator Mike Rounds, Republican of South Dakota — was real and substantial, suggesting that a bit more was visible behind the curtain than we knew. But third, at the same time, all the leaks and insider accounts fell consistently short of what U.F.O. believers call, expectantly, 'disclosure' — offering enough to feed speculation about secret government programs, but not nearly enough to overcome a basic skeptical default. At the time, I argued that all the high-level political and media interest was removing the impediment that many believers argue stands between us and the truth — the alleged fear, among those with secret knowledge, of being jailed or killed if they speak out. If would-be whistle-blowers with national security backgrounds like David Grusch and Luis Elizondo were hale and well (and in Elizondo's case, publishing a best-selling book), then surely there was no better time to deliver the supposedly world-altering truth. And if nobody stepped forward — well, you should be more inclined to assume that the truth was never really out there. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
