By Richard Martin | The Strategic Code
Introduction: The Temptation of Control
In every era new technologies promise to tame uncertainty. In today’s energy transition, virtual inertia, smart inverters, and automated controls are hailed as the solutions that will allow renewable heavy grids to match or even surpass the stability once provided by synchronous machines. The narrative is one of seamless integration, efficient operation, and digital mastery.
But as any military strategist knows, friction is the rule, not the exception. Clausewitz’s dictum applies just as much to grids as to battlefields: machines break, signals fail, people err, and adversaries adapt. To design as if everything will work perfectly is not optimism. It is hubris.
The Grid as a Case of Fragile Optimization
The modern grid is no longer the electro-mechanical behemoth of the mid twentieth century. It has become a finely tuned cyber-physical system. Stability is orchestrated by millions of lines of code, from generator dispatch algorithms to inverter firmware, coordinated through global supply chains and telecoms networks.
This fragile optimization works brilliantly under normal conditions. Frequency and voltage are maintained with extraordinary precision, power flows are optimized in milliseconds, and renewable penetration is rising fast.
Yet the price of this elegance is brittleness. Where synchronous inertia once provided unhackable, always-on stability, we now depend on virtual inertia that is a software emulation of physics. Where mechanical relays once acted autonomously, digital relays now wait on data packets. Where local operators once held discretionary authority, market dispatch engines decide in real time.
A single cyber intrusion, mis-coded control, or communications failure can now cascade through the system faster than operators can respond. The very tools of optimization have become chokepoints.
Friction in Practice: Vulnerabilities Exposed
Recent events underscore the lesson:
- The 2016 Blue Cut Fire in California triggered unexpected inverter disconnections that dropped over 1,000 MW of solar in seconds. No adversary required, only stressed code.
- In 2022 the KA-SAT satellite hack cut SCADA links to nearly 6,000 European wind turbines overnight, leaving operators blind. Generation continued, but control was lost.
- Simulations and lab studies show how coordinated attacks on inverters or aggregator platforms can destabilize low inertia grids within seconds, a prospect that adversaries can surely notice.
These are not outliers. They are warnings. They show that when stability rests on delicate active controls, friction will always find a way in, whether through accident, environment, or enemy action.
Passive Resilience: The Nuclear Analogy
Nuclear power offers a clear model of what prudent doctrine looks like. Early reactors depended on complex control systems and human operators to maintain safety. Accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima revealed how fragile such reliance could be.
The response in Gen III+ and Gen IV designs has been passive safety: gravity-fed coolant, convection loops, and negative reactivity coefficients. These are safeguards rooted in physics, not algorithms. They cannot be hacked, jammed, or misinterpreted. Safety is guaranteed by the laws of nature, not by the perfection of human or machine control.
The grid needs a similar philosophy. Synchronous condensers, flywheels, hydro, and manual switching are not retrograde relics. They are the passive resilience that ensures survival when friction overwhelms optimization.
From Military Doctrine to Civilian Design
The military assumes friction. Commanders know that plans will unravel, that communications will be cut, and that the enemy will find and exploit vulnerabilities. Hence mission command, redundancy, and analog fallbacks.
Civilian infrastructure too often assumes the opposite: that tight coupling, digital oversight, and efficiency will remove uncertainty. The result is fragile optimization.
The military maxim applies: hope for the best but prepare for the worst. For grids, this means designing degraded mode operation into the system, not as an afterthought but as a principle. Assume communications will fail. Assume cyberattacks will come. Assume multiple failures will coincide. Build systems that default to stability even in the dark.
Conclusion: The Doctrine of Friction
The choice before us is not between progress and nostalgia, or between renewables and fossil fuels. It is between fragile optimization and passive resilience. The grid can embrace digital agility without abandoning physical safeguards.
The doctrine of friction demands that we treat the grid not as a machine to be perfected, but as a system that will inevitably face shocks, accidents, and adversaries. Survivability, not efficiency, must be the first criterion of design.
If nuclear engineers could learn this lesson after tragedy, then grid architects can learn it before one.
About the Author
Richard Martin equips leaders to achieve strategic alignment through nested hierarchical action, harnessing initiative for maximal effectiveness with minimal friction.
www.thestrategiccode.com
© 2025 Richard Martin
Discover more from Exploiting Change
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
