[Nursie]

> This would have a lot to do with the price of energy.

That's speculation.

The old furnaces weren't using electricity, they used coal and the primary reason for shutting them down and moving away from that is climate change targets - https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cj6e863nxn8t

This is not "Tata moving production to India because energy is expensive".

It does support the more generic point that UK industry could be in decline, but as a single data point it doesn't really give us anything meaningful there either.

[roenxi]

The debate in this thread so far seems to have included whether Britain has the highest electricity prices in the world, with the most vociferous complaint against that idea being that Ireland is #1 and UK is merely top 4. Then you put down an article saying that modern steelmaking is an electricity-demanding process and that the unions are worried because labour isn't really as needed any more.

Speculation it may be. But as speculation goes, it is tame to say that the reason the UK may potentially (and I quote your article again because the quote is delicious) "left without a way of transforming iron ore into steel" is because of the world-famously expensive electricity that they are responsible for.

That article is pretty a pretty solid point in Kognito's favour. The evidence is compelling.

[Nursie]

Except that’s not why the current furnaces are being shut down. They’re being closed because of emissions.

Nor have you got the right read on why Britain will be "left without a way of transforming iron ore into steel".

For a start when you bring up the quote about there being no demand for a second furnace, they are talking about a second steel recycling furnace, not an ore refining one. Which makes it irrelevant to the quote you’re so enamoured with.

Secondly, the UK will be left without a way to transform ore into steel. Port Talbot has closed. Scunthorpe is closing. There is no ‘might’ here and the capability will be lost because nobody is investing in new plants to do that, not the private sector nor government. There are a myriad of reasons Tata might choose to either spin up new capacity elsewhere or just decide it doesn’t need capacity. Either way it’s not clear that energy prices in the UK are a significant factor in the loss of ore processing capability, compared to (as they explicitly say) CO2 emissions.

What they are investing in is an energy-intensive electric-arc steel recycling furnace. Which kinda makes it look like energy prices aren’t that much bother.

It seems to me that you and the OP are both making unsupported assumptions of single motivators in a complex picture of international trade and climate concerns. Not sure why you’re so keen on that, but if you want to ignore the stated reasons in favour of conjecture, that’s on you.

[roenxi]

> Except that’s not why the current furnaces are being shut down. They’re being closed because of emissions.

You've said something like that a few times. Do you have a source for the mechanism by which it is being done? Because your links don't support the idea that this is being done to meet a climate target. They talk about the high costs and large daily losses (£1m a day) that the blast furnaces were facing. When you factor in the supply problem that the UK has with coal that is surely an energy problem.

[Nursie]

So we have -

Tata's decarbonisation plans - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c03jy91w87ko

British steel talking about their plans for decarbonisation - https://britishsteel.co.uk/news/british-steel-today-unveils-...

Both also talk in other places about their lack of profitability, sure, at least in part that seems to be down to crumbling, ageing facilities -

https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/tata-steel-to-close...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgm7xp1erkeo

"Imports of raw materials are continuing but have reduced in light of ongoing production issues. We are working to restore production levels from our ageing blast furnaces"

Both are moving to energy intensive but greener arc furnaces which don't run directly from fossil fuel and which will recycle steel, with partial government backing/investment.

Is energy cost a factor ? Perhaps, but is seems far from a cut-and-dried simple narrative.

Is loss of 'virgin' steel production in the UK a big deal? Yeah probably. But it seems like virgin steel production and climate goals are currently incompatible, which is a bit of an issue!

As hydrogen-based ore refining is not yet very widespread this raises all of the usual questions about whether developed nations are simply exporting their CO2 emissions overseas, though if recycling with arc furnaces can cover part of the shortfall it's less bad. There is (AFAICT) one H2-based virgin steel production facility in Sweden - https://www.mining-technology.com/news/green-steel-hydrogen/ - which perhaps shows the way forward, using H2 to produce "Sponge Iron" from ore, which then goes to an arc furnace. A first stage iron ore facility like this could potentially feed the new arc reactors in the UK, but from what I can see nobody is proposing to build one of those.

[zarzavat]

I agree and people are missing the bigger issue here.

Energy prices are an existential issue for brick-and-mortar businesses. Restaurants and cafes in particular struggle to pay their energy bills. Even if you have no customers you still have to heat and cool your premises otherwise you will definitely have no customers.

There is a potential for economic collapse if energy prices were to spike further from here, because many of these small businesses would become uneconomical and shut, leading to mass unemployment.

In many parts of the UK this scenario is already a reality but nobody will take notice until it happens in London.