Page 66 - ENTREPRENEURSHIP Innovation and entrepreneurship
P. 66

53231_Innovation and Entrepreneurship.qxd  11/8/2002  10:50 AM  Page 59




                                    Source: Incongruities                59

              though the demand for steel appeared to be going up steadily, at least
              until 1973.
                 The  explanation  of  this  incongruity  has  long  been  known. The
              minimum incremental unit needed to satisfy additional demand in an
              integrated steel mill is a very big investment and adds substantially to
              capacity. Any expansion to an existing steel mill is thus likely to oper-
              ate for a good many years at a low utilization rate, until demand—
              which  always  goes  up  in  small,  incremental  steps  except  in
              wartime—reaches the new capacity level. But not to expand when
              demand creeps up means losing market share, and permanently. No
              company can afford to take that risk. The industry can therefore only
              be profitable for a few short years: between the time when everybody
              begins to build new capacity and the time when all this new capacity
              comes on stream.
                 Further, the steelmaking process invented in the 1870s is funda-
              mentally uneconomical, as also has been known for many years. It
              tries to defy the laws of physics—and that means violating the laws
              of economics. Nothing in physics requires as much work as the cre-
              ation  of  temperatures,  whether  hot  or  cold,  unless  it  is  working
              against the laws of gravity and of inertia. The integrated steel process
              creates very high temperatures four times, only to quench them again.
              And it lifts heavy masses of hot materials and then moves them over
              considerable distances.
                 It  had  been  clear  for  many  years  that  the  first  innovation  in
              process that would assuage these inherent weaknesses would sub-
              stantially lower costs. This is exactly what the “mini-mill” does. A
              mini-mill is not a “small” plant; the minimum economical size pro-
              duces around $100 million of sales. But that is still about one-sixth
              to one-tenth the minimum economic size of an integrated steel mill.
              A mini-mill can thus be built to provide, economically, a fairly small
              additional  increment  of  steel  production  for  which  the  market
              already exists. The mini-mill creates heat only once, and does not
              quench it, but uses it for the rest of the process. It starts with steel
              scrap instead of iron ore, and then concentrates on one end product:
              sheet, for instance, or beams, or rods. And while the integrated steel
              mill is highly labor-intensive, the mini-mill can be automated. Its
              costs  thus  come  to  less  than  half  those  of  the  traditional  steel
              process.
                 Governments, labor unions, and the integrated steel companies have
              been fighting the mini-mill every step of the way. But it is steadily
   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71