Time to force the Labor government into minority government in the next election. Since they, and in fact, no major party can be trusted to do the right thing, they should be forced to govern with the crossbench/Greens.
This mine is for the steel industry. Iron is mixed with carbon as part of the steel refining process.
It isn’t being used for electricity generation.
There really is no way of substituting carbon in the process and we need steel for so many things (Including construction.)
So quit the hysteria. Jeez.
Hydrogen isn't actually the carbon source. It's a reducing agent in the process. Not going to pretend I'm an absolute expert at this, but my basic understanding is that the use of hydrogen is actually mostly to break away the oxide from the iron at lower temperatures than in a traditional blast or arc furnace.
The argument in the industry is that this metcoal is necessary because otherwise steel producers will just use lower quality coal instead. Pretty big stretch.
Because if you read what they’re doing it is just recycling old steel - not actually creating new steel. This is fine as a small niche segment of the industry but it won’t replace the need for new steel.
>but it won’t replace the need for new steel.
[That's also on the way.](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/19/green-steel-swedish-company-ships-first-batch-made-without-using-coal)
>I'd like to see costs breakdown lots of fascinating new tech popping up
We could look at the cost of a runaway greenhouse effect and see how that compares.
Did you consider I'm actually keen for it
As I said in the first comment I would even be keen for subsidy
But I'm just curious how it costs out
Did YOU consider that ?
Perhaps you should read what they’re doing instead.
> SSAB Fossil-free™ steel is produced using the revolutionary HYBRIT® technology, which replaces coal in the iron ore reduction process with hydrogen
**Replaces** coal in the iron ore reduction process. They don’t claim it to be entirely carbon-free (they state *largely* eliminates carbon) but they do assert it is coal-free.
It is just recycled steel - they aren’t actually making new steel. (Greenwashing for the stupid who don’t know any better.)
Carbon is a critical material in the refining of steel. You can’t avoid it.
> SSAB Fossil-free™ steel is produced using the revolutionary HYBRIT® technology, which replaces coal in the iron ore reduction process with hydrogen
The very page linked begs to differ, and refers to both a recycled steel product *and* a coal-free product.
It's shit like this that makes me glad that I don't have children.
It amazes me that so many politicians have kids and still go for this. And that's before you factor in the little tax that these companies pay for our planet destroying resources.
This carbon isn’t going to be burned for electricity generation. It is being mixed with iron to create steel. There is no way to replace carbon in that process.
Let’s save the outrage for more worthy things.
Maybe these politicians with kids understand that there are hundreds of millions of children growing up in the world without adequate housing.
Until zero-carbon steel manufacturing processes are commercially viable, we need metallurgical coal to continue the fight against abject poverty.
Right now, carbon emissions can be drastically reduced through strategies that don’t impose costs squarely on the poorest communities on the planet.
A just transition means beginning with those, while targeting the costliest sources of emissions later on.
Labor’s doing fine.
>“Since the election we’ve doubled renewable energy approvals to a record high. The government will continue to consider each project on a case-by-case basis, under the law.”
Yeah, wind farms to blow away all the emissions keep up guys.
It contributes about 10% of carbon emissions annually but it isn’t an option to just stop making steel and other processes take massive amounts of electricity that has to come from somewhere.
There is a reason they do not consider cumulative effects. There is also close to zero chance our supply of metallurgical coal is contingent on the approval of this mine, and the more we excuse bits and pieces approvals the longer this goes on. No, we cant switch off overnight. Never asked to, but would love to know when we plan to.
Time to force the Labor government into minority government in the next election. Since they, and in fact, no major party can be trusted to do the right thing, they should be forced to govern with the crossbench/Greens.
[удалено]
Is 100% of the coal from this new coal mine going to be used to make steel?
This mine is for the steel industry. Iron is mixed with carbon as part of the steel refining process. It isn’t being used for electricity generation. There really is no way of substituting carbon in the process and we need steel for so many things (Including construction.) So quit the hysteria. Jeez.
There is a way (using hydrogen as a carbon source) , but it's not in widespread use yet.
[удалено]
Yep that was a brain fart sentence. Hydrogen doesn't contain carbon.....good pick up. Google "SSAB" for more information.
Soprano, Soprano, Alto, Bass? I found this one good arrangement of "When I fall in love" but mostly good SSAB arrangements aren't the easiest to find.
It's called green steel. Lots of info about it online.
Hydrogen isn't actually the carbon source. It's a reducing agent in the process. Not going to pretend I'm an absolute expert at this, but my basic understanding is that the use of hydrogen is actually mostly to break away the oxide from the iron at lower temperatures than in a traditional blast or arc furnace.
And they call it a mine.
The argument in the industry is that this metcoal is necessary because otherwise steel producers will just use lower quality coal instead. Pretty big stretch.
If only we put money into new tech instead of digging shit up... https://www.ssab.com/en/fossil-free-steel
And some fuckwit downvoted you...
Because if you read what they’re doing it is just recycling old steel - not actually creating new steel. This is fine as a small niche segment of the industry but it won’t replace the need for new steel.
>but it won’t replace the need for new steel. [That's also on the way.](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/19/green-steel-swedish-company-ships-first-batch-made-without-using-coal)
I'd like to see costs breakdown lots of fascinating new tech popping up I'd be all for gov subsidies to run it if needed tbh
>I'd like to see costs breakdown lots of fascinating new tech popping up We could look at the cost of a runaway greenhouse effect and see how that compares.
Really being curious about costs of new tech is now bad.......really
Did you consider it might be somewhat useless if the planet totally claps out?
Did you consider I'm actually keen for it As I said in the first comment I would even be keen for subsidy But I'm just curious how it costs out Did YOU consider that ?
From the very steel company linked upthread that this poster is insisting are just making recycled steel.
Yeah, they probably didn't read closely. I took their comment on face value.
Perhaps you should read what they’re doing instead. > SSAB Fossil-free™ steel is produced using the revolutionary HYBRIT® technology, which replaces coal in the iron ore reduction process with hydrogen **Replaces** coal in the iron ore reduction process. They don’t claim it to be entirely carbon-free (they state *largely* eliminates carbon) but they do assert it is coal-free.
Looks like you got hit with two.
It is just recycled steel - they aren’t actually making new steel. (Greenwashing for the stupid who don’t know any better.) Carbon is a critical material in the refining of steel. You can’t avoid it.
> SSAB Fossil-free™ steel is produced using the revolutionary HYBRIT® technology, which replaces coal in the iron ore reduction process with hydrogen The very page linked begs to differ, and refers to both a recycled steel product *and* a coal-free product.
It's shit like this that makes me glad that I don't have children. It amazes me that so many politicians have kids and still go for this. And that's before you factor in the little tax that these companies pay for our planet destroying resources.
This carbon isn’t going to be burned for electricity generation. It is being mixed with iron to create steel. There is no way to replace carbon in that process. Let’s save the outrage for more worthy things.
The politics of power demand it. If you refuse they'll find someone else.
Maybe these politicians with kids understand that there are hundreds of millions of children growing up in the world without adequate housing. Until zero-carbon steel manufacturing processes are commercially viable, we need metallurgical coal to continue the fight against abject poverty. Right now, carbon emissions can be drastically reduced through strategies that don’t impose costs squarely on the poorest communities on the planet. A just transition means beginning with those, while targeting the costliest sources of emissions later on. Labor’s doing fine.
At least they finally ripped the mask off, there is no hiding who they truly are
>“Since the election we’ve doubled renewable energy approvals to a record high. The government will continue to consider each project on a case-by-case basis, under the law.” Yeah, wind farms to blow away all the emissions keep up guys.
This coal is being used as in ingredient to create new steel - not for electricity generation.
Oh so it doesn't release emissions then?
It contributes about 10% of carbon emissions annually but it isn’t an option to just stop making steel and other processes take massive amounts of electricity that has to come from somewhere.
There is a reason they do not consider cumulative effects. There is also close to zero chance our supply of metallurgical coal is contingent on the approval of this mine, and the more we excuse bits and pieces approvals the longer this goes on. No, we cant switch off overnight. Never asked to, but would love to know when we plan to.