- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Brits closing their last steel plant
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:20 pm to auggie
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:20 pm to auggie
quote:
You don't think that's being done?
I know it hasn't been done, you retarded or just pretending to be?
If electric arc were better, cheaper and able to produce the exact same as a blast furnace then we wouldn't be using blast furnaces still. Obviously, BFs aren't better or we would have already transitioned off the more expensive less effective method. You're being intellectually dishonest here. It's obvious that EA is not as capable in some facet or they would be using it everywhere.
So, what is holding electric arc back? Why is every country still using the inferior method if electric arc is superior? Because it's not cheaper and can't produce as much.
Come on, use your noggin. Companies aren't using a more costly, less effective method by choice. It's clearly better in some way.
Try not being retarded.
This post was edited on 3/29/25 at 11:26 pm
2
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:27 pm to Barstools
quote:
I know it hasn't been done, you retarded or just pretending to be?
If electric arc were better, cheaper and able to produce the exact same as a blast furnace then we wouldn't be using blast furnaces still. Obviously, BFs aren't better or we would have already transitioned off the more expensive less effective method. You're being intellectually dishonest here. It's obvious that it i was not as capable in some facet or they would be using it everywhere.
So, what is holding electric arc back? Why us every country still using the inferior method if electric arc is superior.
Come on, use your noggin. companies aren't using a more costly less effective method by choice. It's clearly better in some way.
Try not being retarded.
Except that every mill that can do it, is going EAF.
That's all.
The only ones who aren't, are the ones in financial trouble, and have a lack of funds due to backwards thinking.
This post was edited on 3/29/25 at 11:31 pm
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:30 pm to auggie
You're lying or retarded, which is it?
EA cannot produce at the same volume or cost efficiency as BF. You're wrong or were lying for internet points.
EA is not better than BF at producing volume, which would be pretty important if your country is under attack or at war.
So frick off retard, you have the logic of a toddler.
I bet you think wind and solar energy are better than coal powered, too. Yet they have the exact same problems when compared to their alternatives, just like EA.
EA cannot produce at the same volume or cost efficiency as BF. You're wrong or were lying for internet points.
EA is not better than BF at producing volume, which would be pretty important if your country is under attack or at war.
So frick off retard, you have the logic of a toddler.
I bet you think wind and solar energy are better than coal powered, too. Yet they have the exact same problems when compared to their alternatives, just like EA.
This post was edited on 3/29/25 at 11:33 pm
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:32 pm to Barstools
I rarely say bad things about other posters, but you are a severely retarded bitch. You probably can't help it.
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:36 pm to Barstools
quote:
You're lying or retarded, which is it?
EA cannot produce at the same volume or cost efficiency as BF. You're wrong or were lying for internet points.
EA is not better than BF at producing volume, which would be pretty important if your country is under attack or at war.
So frick off retard, you have the logic of a toddler.
I bet you think wind and solar energy are better than coal powered, too. Yet they have the exact same problems when compared to their alternatives, just like EA.
Bitch, you don't know shite, you shouldn't make it obvious.
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:37 pm to auggie
Says the moron trying to argue EA has the same capabilities as a blast furnace. You're clearly stupid and pretending to appeal to authority for the arguement.
See when things are actually better they catch on naturally, they aren't forced by government policy.
So, youre either retarded or a liar, which is it?
See when things are actually better they catch on naturally, they aren't forced by government policy.
So, youre either retarded or a liar, which is it?
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:39 pm to Barstools
quote:
Says the moron trying to argue EA has the same capabilities as a blast furnace. You're clearly stupid and pretending to appeal to authority for the arguement.
See when things are actually better they catch on naturally, they aren't forced by government policy.
So, youre either retarded or a liar, which is it?
Keep on proving what you don't know. You have no clue about anything.
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:49 pm to auggie
quote:
Keep on proving what you don't know. You have no clue about anything.
Serious questions.
You mentioned that arc typically uses recycled steel, is that due to the lack of carbon in the arc process?
Also powdered steel, isn't that still a furnace method?
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:52 pm to auggie
I don't know anything about steel. I'm using logic to completely destroy your either malinformed or retarded posts.
Clearly an electric arc furnace isn't superior to a blast furnace in every way or blast furnaces wouldn't exist. You tried to imply this was a good thing they have no more blast furnaces when that's obviously not the case. Another poster even said it has limitations in quality of the input being used and producing volume. You then came in here and doubled down that EAF are better than BF. Since I saw the retardation on display with your arguement, using an appeal to authority to bolster a stupid comment, i called out the logic in your posts.
So, since you're the industry expert, if EAF can compete with BF at high volume, and is more cost effective, why isn't every steel producer in the world using EAFs and completely replaced BFs? It's easy, one or both of those two isn't true.
So again, you were lying or you are retarded. Which is it?
Clearly an electric arc furnace isn't superior to a blast furnace in every way or blast furnaces wouldn't exist. You tried to imply this was a good thing they have no more blast furnaces when that's obviously not the case. Another poster even said it has limitations in quality of the input being used and producing volume. You then came in here and doubled down that EAF are better than BF. Since I saw the retardation on display with your arguement, using an appeal to authority to bolster a stupid comment, i called out the logic in your posts.
So, since you're the industry expert, if EAF can compete with BF at high volume, and is more cost effective, why isn't every steel producer in the world using EAFs and completely replaced BFs? It's easy, one or both of those two isn't true.
So again, you were lying or you are retarded. Which is it?
This post was edited on 3/29/25 at 11:57 pm
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:58 pm to Narax
quote:
Serious questions.
You mentioned that arc typically uses recycled steel, is that due to the lack of carbon in the arc process?
The process sometimes also uses DRI( Direct Reduced Iron) and pig iron in the recipe, but the final requirements are usually corrected in the LMF (Ladle metallurgical furnace or Little mother fricker), before it's good to go to casting.
The powder steel method is usually used for engine blocks, transmissions, or casing that are always the same. It's not really steel, it's cast iron. It's cast into a mold that is always the same. It's a different thing.
It also requires less heat and can be done in smaller facilities.
In other words" if you need more carbon you can add it at the LMF"
This post was edited on 3/30/25 at 12:25 am
Posted on 3/29/25 at 11:59 pm to Barstools
quote:
I don't know anything about steel
Damn! That's a shock!
To be completely honest. I was a crane operator at these places, but I had to try and figure out methods and timing to be efficient.
Big stuff moves slow.
This post was edited on 3/30/25 at 12:34 am
Posted on 3/30/25 at 7:22 am to auggie
quote:
The process sometimes also uses DRI( Direct Reduced Iron) and pig iron in the recipe, but the final requirements are usually corrected in the LMF (Ladle metallurgical furnace or Little mother fricker), before it's good to go to casting.
The powder steel method is usually used for engine blocks, transmissions, or casing that are always the same. It's not really steel, it's cast iron. It's cast into a mold that is always the same. It's a different thing.
It also requires less heat and can be done in smaller facilities.
In other words" if you need more carbon you can add it at the LMF"
Appreciate the insight!
Posted on 3/30/25 at 7:35 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
Collective punishment for Brexit.
That this got almost exclusively upvotes shows a profound ignorance level on the Board.
Brexit is Britain leaving the European Union, which is a supra-national organization of unelected bureaucrats that was forcing unfettered immigration on the Brits. Brexit was the first big step to free the UK from this WEF one-worldism and multi-culturalism.
Posted on 3/30/25 at 7:48 am to Barstools
quote:
If electric arc were better, cheaper and able to produce the exact same as a blast furnace then we wouldn't be using blast furnaces still.
I thought the Brits went to electric to save the planet, not anything to do with it being better or more efficient. It can't be more efficient unless there's some nuanced temp control that fossil fuels aren't capable of.
Posted on 3/30/25 at 7:49 am to Narax
quote:
Appreciate the insight!
I'm not sure that there is any insight involved.
I worked briefly at an engine plant that did powder iron casting for the blocks. We machined it after that was cast.
It was in no way the same type of process as making steel.
Posted on 3/30/25 at 7:59 am to Flats
quote:
I thought the Brits went to electric to save the planet, not anything to do with it being better or more efficient. It can't be more efficient unless there's some nuanced temp control that fossil fuels aren't capable of.
The big difference in savings, is the energy used to mine the raw materials out of the ground vs. buying scrap at a yard and just remelting and repurposing it. Mining is costly.
There's plenty of iron and steel laying around on top of the ground that can be bought and reused.
Posted on 3/30/25 at 8:01 am to Penrod
Yes. And there are many in the UK (populace & government ) very bitter about it still. They want to be governed and judged by their EU masters. They suffer some fetish and desire to be controlled. Its collective Western civilization guilt run amok.
Posted on 3/30/25 at 8:07 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
Yes. And there are many in the UK (populace & government ) very bitter about it still. They want to be governed and judged by their EU masters. They suffer some fetish and desire to be controlled. Its collective Western civilization guilt run amok.
Explain to me what has improved in the UK since Brexit? I've lived here since 2004, and can literally see no benefit from leaving the EU...Health service strained more than ever (partly do to lack of European workers who were helping to keep it running), and no more free movement for Brits around the EU. All the promised "we will govern ourselves" BS - yet the conservatives literally just replaced EU laws with the same stuff.
Posted on 3/30/25 at 8:09 am to Night Vision
British Steel owned by a Chinese Corp.
Do some people here still not see the issue with this?
Do some people here still not see the issue with this?
Posted on 3/30/25 at 8:29 am to auggie
quote:
I'm not sure that there is any insight involved.
I worked briefly at an engine plant that did powder iron casting for the blocks. We machined it after that was cast.
It was in no way the same type of process as making steel.
More in the how carbon is added for non coal based steel making.
I have read on powder metallurgy for steels, it seems like it's not done in the USA.
But to note, passively reading is not the same as being in the field.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News