Trade unions call on the British government to inject £ 200 million into British Staal, in a final attempt to run his two blast furnaces in Scunthorpe until electrical arch replacements can be brought online.
The trade union community warns that without additional support the rapid closure of Scunthorpe’s Coal-Fulleovens could cause nearly 2,000 immediate jobs.
British Steel, owned by the Chinese group Jingye, has already been committed to installing cleaner electric bow ovens (EAFs) in Scunthorpe. However, Union leaders fear that the abrupt closure of blast furnaces, without an interim plan, will destroy the local economy of Lincolnshire and eliminate the most important steel options prematurely.
Roy Rickhuss, general secretary of the community, described the plan as a “route map to a just transition” and a way to prevent a “destructive cliff-edge” in job losses. He believes that government intervention to cover an extra £ 200 million in carbon costs, which are levied on large polluters, can both keep blast furnaces and retain income flows until EAF’s are operational.
Syndex, the consultancy commissioned by the community, supports the case of the trade union. She states that government support to finance the short -term costs of carbon is the only way to make both ovens ‘financially viable’. Maintaining only one oven or the closing of both would be too expensive, warns Syndex, especially in view of the high fixed costs and potential loss of critical raw material access.
The request follows a separate step from the government to provide about £ 500 million to Tata Steel from India for upgrading the Port Talbot factory in Wales, a deal that included the closure of its blast furnaces there, which cost 2500 jobs. Ministers have promised up to £ 2.5 billion to further support to help the British steel industry, but details remain vague and it is unclear how much could go to British Steel.
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds has indicated a wish to “Champion Decarbonization Without Deindustrialization”, “with a consultation about the steel strategy of the UK. Yet a cocktail of global forces – such as a steel abundance fed by the Downburg of China and the 25% American Rates for Staalimport – further manages the prices, making the British Steel switch to greener activities complicated.
Although EAFs produce considerably less carbon dioxide compared to traditional blast furnaces, they need extra facilities to convert iron ore for steel. Such an infrastructure is not yet established on the necessary scale in the UK, which means that fears are fueled – in particular with some politicians and defense officials – that the country could lose core production skills if Scunthorpe’s Hoogovens are motivated.
Despite these worries, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) says that it is quickly switching to modern, cleaner technology “vital” if the British steel is competitive worldwide. “It is essential that we continue to produce steel in Britain, and low -carbon poor is the only way we can do that in the long term,” the TUC Secretary General Paul Nowak will stop.
For now, British Steel acknowledges that government discussions are underway, and emphasizes that its “trade union partners will be an important part of that future.” The question remains whether ministers agree to pump another £ 200 million, whereby community and syndex claim that it is the only strategy that scunthorpe will save from large -scale dismissals and retain a fully functioning household steel industry until Greener Technology is ready to take to take to take over.