Matt Loszak Profile picture
Feb 5 14 tweets 2 min read Read on X
When you turn on a light in your house, turbines can feel it!

Normally, steam turns a turbine which produces electricity.

But the grid can also PUSH BACK on the turbine itself.

And this draws MORE power from the turbine, stabilizing the grid.

GRID INERTIA THREAD 🧵👇 Image
When you flip a switch, you're adding load to the grid.

That load has to be balanced instantly: supply must equal demand.
Large generators (coal, gas, nuclear, hydro) use massive spinning turbines.

These have enormous rotational inertia; they store a lot of kinetic energy.
When demand increases, more current is drawn from the generator.

That current creates its own magnetic field, which opposes the turbine's rotation (thanks to Lenz's law).

In other words, the turbine feels a braking force from the grid!
But the turbine doesn't stop instantly.

Its inertia means it slows down gradually, and as it does, that kinetic energy gets converted into electrical energy.

This helps meet the extra demand right away.
Grid frequency (60 Hz in the US, 50 Hz in Europe) is set by how fast the generators spin.

When turbines slow down under increased load, frequency drops. Every generator on the grid feels this simultaneously.
The spinning mass acts like a short-term battery, automatically releasing stored energy when demand spikes, buying time before frequency falls too far.

This is "grid inertia."
Meanwhile, the turbine's governor detects the slowdown and opens more steam/fuel to restore speed.

This happens within seconds, no computer required!

How?
Spinning weights on the turbine shaft move outward when it speeds up, inward when it slows (centrifugal force).

Those weights connect to linkages that open or close the steam valve.

No sensors, no processors, just masses, springs, and levers. This tech is from the 1700s!
So that's how grid inertia works.

More spinning mass on the grid = more stored energy = more buffer time to respond to sudden changes in demand.
Renewables like solar and wind don't naturally provide this.

Solar has no spinning parts. Wind turbines are often decoupled from the grid electronically.
This is one reason grid operators worry about retiring too many conventional plants too fast.

You lose this physical buffer.
Solutions exist: synchronous condensers, grid-forming inverters, batteries programmed to mimic inertia.

But they add cost and complexity.
So in closing, turbines might not be sexy, but they are one of the reasons the lights stay on when millions of people vary their load on the grid.

And it's cool to think: When you flick the switch at home, the turbines can *feel* it!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Matt Loszak

Matt Loszak Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MattLoszak

Sep 4, 2025
When a uranium atom splits, you’d think it would split in half.

U-235 splitting into two 117 - 118 nucleon atoms.

But it doesn’t. It splits lopsided: ~95 and ~140.

And it turns out, this is the main reason nuclear reactors work at all.

Why? 🧵 Image
U-235 has 92 protons and 143 neutrons.

An even split would give 46 protons and 71 - 72 neutrons.

That would be palladium (Pd, with atomic number = 46)

But Pd is not stable when it has over 70 neutrons... it's stable at 60.

Why is it unstable at 70+? Image
As nuclei get bigger, they need more neutrons to remain stable.

This can be seen in the chart below.

Neutrons act as the "glue" with the strong atomic force, which combats the electromagnetic repulsion between protons in the nucleus. Image
Read 16 tweets
May 21, 2025
Why did we choose liquid metal (sodium) as our reactor coolant?

Water-based reactors have way more operational history, so are we taking unnecessary risk?

No - it’s the inevitable next step in nuclear.

Here's why! 🧵 Image
Image
First we'll cover advantages of sodium.

Then we'll discuss the challenges.

At the end I'll explain why sodium is the inevitable endgame coolant for fission.
ADVANTAGES 👍

Sodium allows you to make a much more compact reactor and plant design.

This optimizes the plant for mass manufacturing, and economics.

How so? Image
Read 17 tweets
Mar 26, 2025
I asked someone high up in government,

“How would you reform nuclear regulation to maintain safety, while optimizing economics?”

They asked to remain anonymous, but here’s their take: 🧵 Image
1) Fix radiation limits:

Currently, nuclear must not exceed 10 mrem / year in a release to the public.

This is 1% of the threshold known to have any measurable impact on human health.

Measurable impact here means a slightly observable impact in expected lifespan.
Comparing this to the limits for oil and gas plants (for PM2.5, VOCs, NOx) shows that nuclear is held to a much higher standard.

Limits for oil and gas plants are higher relative to the threshold known to have measurable impacts on health.
Read 8 tweets
Feb 24, 2025
Henry J Kaiser was incredible.

He built highways, bridges, and The Hoover Dam.

But most impressively, he built 1,490 ships during WWII, 1/3 of the entire U.S. cargo fleet.

Here's how he reduced the time to build a ship from 8 months, to 4 days 🤯 (🧵) Image
Image
Before Kaiser entered the industry, shipbuilding was a slow, meticulous craft, much like constructing a cathedral.

The process followed a traditional, step-by-step sequence that hadn’t changed much in decades:
1. Keel Laying
2. Frame Construction
3. Plating & Riveting
4. Welding & Outfitting
5. Launch & Finishing Image
Read 20 tweets
Nov 11, 2024
What would it take to create the SpaceX of Nuclear, cutting costs by 10x?

For rockets, the answer was obvious: Make them re-usable.

What is the equivalent insight for reactors? 🧵 Image
One possible answer: Factory mass manufacturing.

Let’s dive into exactly how this would lower costs, and by how much. Image
A major problem with nuclear is: Every plant that’s ever been built was bespoke.

This chart shows different designs (colors) and versions (shades) in the US.

Nobody has built the same reactor more than a few times. Image
Read 23 tweets
Jul 17, 2024
How much nuclear waste has the US ever created?

You may have heard it would fit on a football field...

But stacked how high? And stored how?

@whatisnuclear wrote a great post on this... 🧵(1/8) Image
All the nuclear waste in the history of US Nuclear Power would fit in 8516 dry casks, shown above.

See below for a size comparison with the field goal posts.

This pile would be 135 m tall, about as tall as a 40 story building. Image
But those casks contain a lot of concrete for shielding, and other structural metals.

How much nuclear waste is really stored within the casks?
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(