Spain’s Blackout Blame Game, And That Lost Virtue We Call Patience

-Analysis-

BARCELONA — After the massive power outage in Spain in late April, the push for quick answers was inevitable. The media was soon flooded with simplified analyses, punchy headlines and finger-pointing. For some, renewable energy turned into an easy scapegoat; others blamed poor planning or specific political decisions.

But this knee-jerk response has led to a reductive — and often deeply flawed — reading of a highly complex issue. The electric system is an intricate, interconnected web, made up of hundreds of thousands of components working in tandem. It involves numerous stakeholders operating under very specific technical, commercial and regulatory conditions.

That means any significant event, like a blackout, must be analyzed rigorously based on hard data and complex physical models — not gut feelings or hasty judgments.

The absence of immediate information doesn’t automatically mean there’s a lack of transparency. Investigating a blackout of this scale takes weeks of work, and it’s perfectly normal for conclusions to take time. Much of the confusion comes from mismatched expectations — society is used to instant answers. But getting to the bottom of what actually happened is no simple task. Solid information takes time.

And rest assured: what happened will come to light. There are systems in place — within Spain and beyond — to ensure events like this are thoroughly investigated.

Spain’s electric grid is part of a wider, interconnected European system under continuous supervision. Continental institutions have specific mandates when it comes to safety, stability, and transparency in energy supply. Independent bodies like the EU Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) and ENTSO-E — neither of which answer to the Spanish government or any specific operator — are already digging into the event with a high level of technical detail. Much of that data will eventually become public, either due to institutional requirements or standard transparency practices.

But obsessing over whether or not we’ll find out the truth risks missing the point: What matters most is what we do once we know.

The path ahead

When the full sequence of events is finally clear, we’ll likely find that there is no single cause or person to blame. We may discover that certain regulations should have been updated years ago, or that operational decisions were constrained by outdated frameworks.

But even then, the core issue won’t be whether the blackout was preventable, whether too many renewables were feeding the grid or whether another technology might have stopped it.

What matters is the path ahead of us: Was the system ready for the conditions it faced? If not, what changes are needed to prepare it for the next time? In short, the focus should be on adaptation — not assigning blame.

Keeping pace

The debate should also move away from the false dichotomy between renewables and conventional energy sources like nuclear. The real question is how to manage the grid so it can handle potential failures and keep pace with the system’s evolution.

It’s worth looking at how other countries — like the U.S. or Australia — have responded to similar situations. At the same time, Spain’s grid operator (Red Eléctrica) would benefit from deepening its technical dialogue with its counterparts abroad. This kind of knowledge-sharing supports better decision making.

Across Europe, there are permanent working groups where transmission companies, distributors, retailers and other players collaborate on issues like energy storage, grid flexibility and regulation services.

Critical infrastructure like the grid evolves slowly, for good reason.

Despite its historical robustness, Spain’s electric grid is still being managed much like it was decades ago, when fossil fuels and nuclear power were the norm. Critical infrastructure like the grid evolves slowly, for good reason: The technical complexity and the impact on security and stability mean changes can’t be rushed.

But that doesn’t excuse regulators or the system operator from making progress. The rise of renewables, the entry of new players, the growth of digital technologies, and the decentralization of production have introduced technical challenges that demand new solutions. That means reviewing processes, updating rules, and urgently strengthening collaboration among all stakeholders.

Embrace the shift

Because the energy transition isn’t going to stop. Electrification, self-consumption, storage and grid flexibility are only going to expand. Technology costs are falling, investment decisions have already been made, and public engagement is growing — because tackling climate change is no longer optional.

Pretending this shift isn’t happening won’t make it go away. Embracing it, on the other hand, allows us to build a technical, regulatory and organizational response that’s up to the task. That requires dialogue, planning and a shared vision for the future.

What we don’t need is a blame game. The urgency isn’t in pointing fingers — it’s in thinking long-term.