Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 314 posts

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#291

Post by defrost »

nikau wrote: post #290
defrost wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can reel off a list of plants being torn down for scrap also. The question is, does that actually mean there is no way to get a smelter up and running in the event of a critical need within a useful timeframe . Bear in mind, right now today, Australia has multiple shuttered lithium production sites that went up in anticipation of a much greater battery demand than actually occurred, and have since been shuttered. I…

I guess that's the question - how fast can you build required plants during war time? How do you get the very bespoke equipment from overseas if supply chains are being attacked? Where do you get the designers and operational staff, bearing in mind the industry might have been closed for a while and all prior talent has retired or died? What's the risk of above vs the government subsidising a plant to keep it operati…

> How do you get the very bespoke equipment

For manganese ore concentration and binding with carbon?? Ball mills, acid washing, screening, anodes, et al. are 'bespoke' now?

Look, there are big speciality bits which you can order in from overseas, fabricate locally, or retrieve from "stashed one over there" yards.

When existing processing plants are "scrapped" that usually means that beams, catwalks, and all manner of things are crushed and melted down - but it also means that motors, crucibles, linings, etc. are sold on (usually within Australia), or stored and eventually refurbished and sold or reused.

> to keep it operational and known good state?

Is it? It's been going for a while and no one was interested in stepping in due to economics and clean-up issues: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-17/future-liberty-bell-b...

Some might take the approach of suggesting a partial teardown / refit to be more Norwegian in its carbon consumption: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019592552...

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#292

Post by lazide »

t0mpr1c3 wrote: post #260
lazide wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notably, things like that is why they had their colonies.

In fact, during the age of empire Britain exported coal all over the world. That was one resource it did have. Cotton was another matter.

It still has 3+ billion tons of coal reserves - no one wants to burn them though, apparently.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#293

Post by nikau »

defrost wrote: post #291
nikau wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that's the question - how fast can you build required plants during war time? How do you get the very bespoke equipment from overseas if supply chains are being attacked? Where do you get the designers and operational staff, bearing in mind the industry might have been closed for a while and all prior talent has retired or died? What's the risk of above vs the government subsidising a plant to keep it operati…

> How do you get the very bespoke equipment For manganese ore concentration and binding with carbon?? Ball mills, acid washing, screening, anodes, et al. are 'bespoke' now? Look, there are big speciality bits which you can order in from overseas, fabricate locally, or retrieve from "stashed one over there" yards. When existing processing plants are "scrapped" that usually means that beams, catwalks, and all manner of…

So really its all conjecture unless an actual project plan is written up with supply chain sources, and the plan is kept up to date with inventory of items scrapped vs placed in storage and capacity from current importers & manufacturers.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#294

Post by defrost »

nikau wrote: post #293
defrost wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you get the very bespoke equipment For manganese ore concentration and binding with carbon?? Ball mills, acid washing, screening, anodes, et al. are 'bespoke' now? Look, there are big speciality bits which you can order in from overseas, fabricate locally, or retrieve from "stashed one over there" yards. When existing processing plants are "scrapped" that usually means that beams, catwalks, and all manner of…

So really its all conjecture unless an actual project plan is written up with supply chain sources, and the plan is kept up to date with inventory of items scrapped vs placed in storage and capacity from current importers & manufacturers.

A lot of things could happen, sure.

One thing that I, personally, am not overly concerned about would be a long lasting critical shortage of ferromanganese production ability in Australia.

If the demand / desire is there then we have the resources and in-country skills to step up and make it happen.

We are, as a country, aiming too low on what we can do with mineral resources and charging other countries / non-Australian companies far too little for the privilege of extracting our "wealth" / assets and flogging them on overseas.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#295

Post by nikau »

defrost wrote: post #294
nikau wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So really its all conjecture unless an actual project plan is written up with supply chain sources, and the plan is kept up to date with inventory of items scrapped vs placed in storage and capacity from current importers & manufacturers.

A lot of things could happen, sure. One thing that I, personally, am not overly concerned about would be a long lasting critical shortage of ferromanganese production ability in Australia. If the demand / desire is there then we have the resources and in-country skills to step up and make it happen. We are, as a country, aiming too low on what we can do with mineral resources and charging other countries / non-Austra…

Unfortunately too many Australians are swayed by scare campaigns and vote against their own interest.

The mining super profits tax, franking credits, and similar failed reforms benefited only the top 1% of 1% of Australians, yet people voted against them.

Hopefully the recent negative gearing and trust changes stick.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#296

Post by psd1 »

linksnapzz wrote: post #127
gruez wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The idea of making money by making things (as opposed to arbitrage) is anathema to them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editorial_stance_of_The_Econom... They're pro free trade against government intervention. That's not the same as "making things ... is anathema to them". They're for planning reform in uk, to help build infrastructure and homes, for instance.

They're pro-offshoring of any sort of industrial base. Line-goes-up!

It is candid about the negatives of off-shoring. It certainly does have its back foot in economic orthodoxy, but a mouthpiece for the Rothschilds? Read three editions and see if you still think so.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#297

Post by psd1 »

pjc50 wrote: post #102
traceroute66 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> look at China, look at their manufacturing industry and what they are able to do with it. "look at China" what ? Have you seen the population size of China ? Have you seen the geographic size of China ? Remember what is often said when Mr Trump talks about bringing tech manufacturing back to the US .... Yes great idea Mr Trump. But even with the most generously optimistic figures, due to the lack of available workf…

> Have you seen the population size of China ? Have you seen the geographic size of China ? British thinking seems to be that because we won the Opium War we should just expect a country with 20 times our population and a vast land area to be poorer, both per capita and in total, than our island, forever.

I think you're ascribing intent to a stochastic outcome.

China's rise comes because it acquired, from inauspicious beginnings, competence at planning an economy.

Britain's decline relative to China comes because it is a democracy - which is to say, vacillating.

Britain has been particularly callow over the part decade, because we indulged ourselves in a bunfight about Brexit to the exclusion of all other concerns. This created a purge of ministerial talent and a sequence of governments primarily occupied with propping themselves up. Elections have been fought on Get Brexit Done and I Would Have A Pint With That Man, not on policy.

The entire edifice is deeply stupid, but it is a stupidity orthogonal to questions of industrial policy. Ministers haven't been in post long enough to reveal any strategy about such.

In a microcosm, the compulsory land purchases were done for HS2 and it was as on-track as infrastructure projects get, when Sunak cancelled half of it, writing off the sunk costs but crippling the long-term value of the project. Meanwhile, China laid more track than the test of the world combined, because it has the will to make large long-term investments.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#298

Post by illliillll »

t0mpr1c3 wrote: post #280
illliillll wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhere under the sea at this very moment there is a British submarine captain who could nuke Moscow tonight if he (and his crew) wanted to. There’s absolutely nothing the Americans could do about it.

NATO can and probably would shoot them out of the sky using ballistic missile defence. IIRC Britain has a total of 8 missiles. Britain's obsolete Trident subs are manufactured by Lockheed, so if they fall out with Trump they will lose access to spare parts. The replacements aren't due until 2028.

NATO has no capabilities for doing that, what you are suggesting is very very far from what is actually possible today.

But yes, Britain could lose its nuclear deterrent. That’s not going to matter for any conflict which starts in the near future though.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#299

Post by warumdarum »

warumdarum wrote: post #275
Deukhoofd wrote: post #22

It's probably not a bad idea. Steel is one of the things that an industrialized country needs to produce to protect its own sovereignty. Letting it shut down and just hope you'll always be able to import enough steel from other countries is a bad long-term strategy. You'd be left unable to fend for yourself.

Its also not price competitive as producedin the uk. No high energy industry will survive in europe

A political movement that destabilizes the living situation for large parts of the population feeding them to the populists to archieve a lofty abstract goal, thats almost poetic.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#300

Post by Hikikomori »

timschmidt wrote: post #272
Hikikomori wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not your credentials specifically, but Steven Quay. Cursory search suggest he's not an expert in relevant fields, but does have a book about lab leak theory. Immediately suspicious as there are a lot of scientists that turn to grifting in areas that were not relevant to their expertise.

I don't much care what the man does with his free time. I'm more interested in the veracity of his statements. On that front he supplies copious references to peer reviewed research by numerous others and primary sources. Character assassination is for folks who can't argue on the merits. You still haven't offered your own credentials.

I guess you can continue doing your own research then.
Post reply on HN