There is a lot going on around Tata Steel. There is a plan to reduce the burden on the environment with harmful emissions, a plan to produce ‘green’ steel, there is a new cabinet that will decide on subsidy and another RIVM report will be published on Friday. Late, but not too late, Tata Steel has started cleaning and greening. At least, that’s what Hans van den Berg, director of the steel factory, thinks. However, public opinion was needed for that. “The criticism of the company has certainly accelerated that process.”
–
The Dudok House, on the floor of director Hans van den Berg’s office, is undergoing renovation. The old gang had to get out, the floor needs a thorough renovation. An office floor as a metaphor for the company, popularly still called the Hoogovens. Two workmen confer in the hallway, while Van den Berg has a relaxed cup of coffee and sits down in his office.
He wears a gray suit, no tie. A watch, not small, but not too striking either. And although the conversation takes you past complex installations, environmental problems, health issues and ambitious plans, it does not fall into incomprehensible managerial jargon. However, he formulates thoughtfully and accurately.
–
“The coke factory is not at all the biggest emitter in a number of respects”
–
A lot needs to be done at Tata Steel, and a lot to improve, that’s what Van den Berg thinks. In fact, nuisance is and is no longer allowed. “Always that story of the clothesline, where you can remove a layer of Tata fabric with your finger … that is no longer of this time. You don’t want that anymore? That may have been normal in the past, but not anymore ? We still send window cleaners into the neighborhood every morning to clean windows, which is all right.”
He even goes a step further. Van den Berg: “I resist the image that the complainants are only the nagging Amsterdammers who come to live by the sea, where it suddenly turns out to be disappointing. I think that is no longer the case. More people are start thinking: what does it do to our health?”
Tata Steel can use all the help
These are nice words, but Van den Berg also has to put his best foot forward: the future of the company is at stake and Tata Steel IJmuiden can use all the help.
The group must reduce dust, stench and noise nuisance, blow out fewer harmful substances and at the same time reduce CO2 emissions, as the largest emitter in the Netherlands, to zero. And not to forget: good steel has to be made, and profit has to be made.
To do that, the steel manufacturer must first of all regain the confidence of many residents of the IJmond. Tata also needs to quickly secure subsidies and permits that do not yet exist for factories that do not yet exist (the first should run around 2030), and the world of hydrogen technology, the engine of Tata’s greening campaign, needs to make significant strides quickly.
–
Measures to reduce emissions and very far-reaching plans to make green steel. Isn’t it too much at once?
“It’s a lot, but look at what’s happening. It’s not like I can just delete one of those things. We naturally address the concerns of the environment with the Roadmap Plus, the plan with measures to largely reduce the nuisance to the environment by 2023. The nuisance we cause, and the emissions, must be addressed in this and resolved on a short time scale. It is crucial that this succeeds. That the government wants to keep us legally to that plan as much as possible, to that I say: fine, because it is our own plan.”
“And the next step is: less CO2 emissions from the new installations. Yes, that is an ambitious plan. And we hope that we will receive cooperation to be able to realize it. Because the change is for the greater good, what we of course sharing. But it’s an exciting timeline, let me put it this way.”
–
“So far the Roadmap is going reasonably according to plan, but there is more to come: a major repair of blast furnace 6, normal maintenance and investments on the site. We are preparing for the CO2 reductions. So there is currently a unprecedented project package on our solution board.”
–
Whatever you do, it’s always said: that coke and gas plant 2 is the big problem. By doing something about that, you could make a profit in a very short term.
“And that while the coke factory is not the biggest problem. That is quite a difficult one. The perception is: as long as that is solved… but the coke factory is not the biggest emitter in a number of ways.”
Then what?
“That depends on the substance. So if you look at substances of very high concern, metals and the like, that is the pellet factory. New filters should make a big step towards improvement there. If you look at the PAHs (carcinogens, ed.) , then it is the sinter factory, where we are now also reducing emissions with operational measures. As far as odor is concerned, the coke factory is an important source.”
“By doing more maintenance, by replacing the doors faster and things like that, we can show that those door leaks from the coke plant have decreased tremendously. So therefore, our challenges are much bigger than that factory. And by executing that Roadmap, we looked : What does closing that factory add? Yes, it does help somewhat, but it’s pretty limited.”
And then there’s a persistent rumor that you sell coke, so more is being produced than used, leading to a nuisance to the environment. The rest would be for sale and profit.
“Sell cooking? We have often supplied numbers, it is not a revenue model. Every now and then a boat leaves, but you are talking about one hundred thousand tons of the almost two million tons per year, less than five percent.”
“We are self-sufficient. You always make a little more coke than you need, so that you always have hot electricity. In the long run you build something with it, and you sell it. It usually goes to England. You can’t just build that factory turn it off, then you can’t get it back on. But it’s not like we’re kicking the factory on the tail to make as many coke as possible and sell it.”
–
“Did we start too late? The answer is of course ‘yes'”
–
You have certainly come up with improvements lately, but they are always viewed with suspicion, and with the question ‘is that right?’ How difficult is it to really make it clear that you are on the right track?
“We are not under a magnifying glass, but under a microscope. All documents are sent to the government, everything is wobbed, everything is dug through, that is the reality. And everything is communicated very quickly via social media. And you have mistrust, and there would be I want to get rid of it. So we need to communicate even better.”
“We just have to improve physically. According to our measurements, we are already doing that, but it only starts to take effect if the perception of local residents changes. Like: they are living up to what they have said. It would be nice if we could To take another step in that direction in 2022. But I have no illusion that the confidence situation will be completely back by the end of this year.”
–
However, about that transparency: as NH Nieuws we regularly ask for a response to all kinds of events at Tata Steel, and then we often receive a sort of standard text: ‘We take the concerns seriously, we like to continue discussing’. It will be a strategy, but the question is not answered concretely. dThat doesn’t help much with the suspicion some people view Tata Steel with.
“Sometimes it also has to do with the fact, as with RIVM reports, that they are nuanced in terms of content, but the report is unilaterally exposed to the outside. And then we struggle with how to deal with it. in no time you downplay the problem, or you don’t take it seriously.”
“We said with the last RIVM report: yes, that is quite heavy stuff. And this confirms part of the concern of people in our environment. But we have our plan, the Roadmap. That plan is being developed and that takes time. We are now running into the speed with which we can do things. Obtaining project management is difficult, for example, and we are also suffering from the chip shortage in the world for certain installations.”
–
When we talked about this with Jan Rotmans, professor of transition science, he said, even if Tata’s green transition is successful, the steel will probably be too expensive to compete in the global market. And there is a chance that Tata will still have to close down.
“Yes, but well… I am in charge here. This is the time when things are moving. And that risks also have to be taken. It is a tough competition worldwide, that has been going on for a long time, of course. means that you are always pushed to make the products that someone else just can’t make.”
–
“And what Rotmans refers to as a comparison is shipping. (Despite billions of subsidies, shipyards went bankrupt, ed.) Well, shipbuilding in the Netherlands has once again found a few nice niches, for example for large yachts. I see such a direction too. for steelmaking in Europe, yes. If you can now make that move in greening, you will also end up in a new position. But there are all kinds of uncertainties, that’s simply true.”
–
A lot is indeed happening right now. If people hadn’t complained and public opinion hadn’t been so against Tata, do you think you would have taken action too?
“Yes, I think so, but later. The criticism of the company has certainly accelerated the process. But even before public opinion clearly turned against Tata, about three years ago, we received about a thousand complaints a year. We have even reached four thousand a year. I have thought back to that later… did we start too late? From ourselves, as a company? The answer is of course ‘yes’ And it raises the question: do we is it good enough now?”
–
There is a new cabinet, with new people. In some cases, it is the third minister with Tata Steel in the portfolio in a year. Does that slow down the process?
“I’m not that negative about that. Because in the background we are of course dealing with high officials. And there is often the necessary continuity. Unless, of course, they start separating ministries.”
“Legislation on climate, nitrogen and nature management does lead to major dilemmas and discussions. Then you also see that governments are struggling with this. With us, for example, we see that a new installation that reduces CO2 emissions, for example, has negative consequences for the precipitation of other substances. So that creates problems with regulations.”
And finally: there will be a new RIVM report on the sources of dust that has settled in the IJmond, followed by a debate in the House of Representatives on environment and health in the IJmond. What do you expect from the report.”
“We do not know what it will contain, but we hope that our measures will lead to improvements. This will undoubtedly also influence the parliamentary debate.”
—
Related posts:
ASML Buys Thirteen Homes on Heerseweg in Veldhoven: Excellent Relations with Residents and Competiti...Utrillo High School Appeals to Unions for Support in the Battle for Education Resources and Against ...Pepinster: insurance companies oppose the destruction of several housesGermany's largest bank, harsh warning: Inflation could cause crisis in years to come - News source
