Plans to Slash Emissions at Britain’s Largest Steel Plant Cause Unease

Their plan could turn this Port Talbot facility into one of Europe’s most sweeping efforts to slash greenhouse-gas emissions in heavy industry.

SEATTLE (Scrap Monster): Two hulking towers nearly 300 feet high rise from the steel-making complex that dominates the shoreline of the faded industrial city of Port Talbot in Wales.

These two blast furnaces are centerpieces of Britain’s largest steel-making facility, a four-square-mile complex of cavernous factories and rusting metal conveyors on Swansea Bay that produce steel eventually used in cars, cans for baked beans and sports stadiums.

But these massive structures may be gone in a few years or even months if the plant’s owners, Tata Steel, and the British government have their way. Their plan could turn this Port Talbot facility into one of Europe’s most sweeping efforts to slash greenhouse-gas emissions in heavy industry.

Tata, which is based in India, wants to replace the blast furnaces and other parts of the plant dating to the 1950s with one of the world’s largest electric arc furnaces. These devices use a completely different technology: high-voltage current to melt scrap metal from things like factory waste, junked cars and demolished buildings into crude steel that could then be processed by other Tata plants scattered around Britain.

The plan would reduce the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere here by 80 percent, Tata says, a critical goal as Britain aims to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The government has agreed to contribute 500 million pounds, or about $600 million, to pay for the £1.25 billion proposal.

But it seems clear that the plan will also result in fewer jobs, and many of the 4,000 employees at Port Talbot say they are worried about severe cutbacks at an industrial site that has sustained families for generations. They also say some of the steel made at Port Talbot could be replaced by material produced at Tata plants in India or elsewhere, where environmental laws may be less strict.

The work force is “scared and concerned” said Barrie Evans, an employee and representative of the Community union, which represents many steel production workers.

 This experiment will be watched closely. Companies and governments — especially in Europe, where concern about climate change runs strong — are wrestling with how to clean up steel making, which accounts for around 7 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, according to the International Energy Agency. Steel makers in Britain and the European Union also face rising carbon taxes on their emissions, and some plants in Europe seem likely to close or be reduced in size.

Dirty as its production may be, steel is important — even strategic. It is essential for producing the wind turbines and electric automobiles needed for the energy transition, and for armaments at a time of rising military spending. Around 340,000 people in Britain and across the European Union have jobs connected to the steel industry.

Those factors have prompted governments to agree to provide steel makers with billions to help pay for ways to cut emissions, but tens of billions more will probably be needed over the next three decades.

Deploying new technologies for greener steel will be an important contribution to tackling climate change, “but it will come at the cost of tremendous investments,” said Akio Ito, a steel expert at the management consultancy Roland Berger.

Courtesy: www.nytimes.com

• Panama President Sees No Environmental Threat from Copper at Closed First Quantum Mine
• Consumers Sue Exxon, Dow, Others over Plastic Recycling Claims
• VLS Environmental Solutions Announces Acquisition of Clearfield MMG in Virginia
• December 19, 2024: Scrap Gold and Platinum Prices Dipped, Silver Up on the Index