The final verdict – expendable structures

How was industrial heritage value of Odda Smelteverk substantiated by the National Directorate for Heritage in the final listing decision? Unlike the County Directorate for Cultural Heritage it did not grant the lime kilns any reprieve. This particular decision regarding Odda Smelteverk will act as the fundamental threshold regarding the physical appearance of the old smelter for years to come. The list of structures subject to legal

protection will shape the form of the site and the activities taking place. It also gives us a clear idea of the value criteria that have influenced the extent of and purpose with industrial heritage preservation at Odda Smelteverk:

1 Odda industristadsmuseum [lit.:Odda Industrial Town Museum] changed its name in 1994 to Vestnorsk industristadsmuseum [lit.:Western Norwegian Industrial Town Museum] and finally in 2000 to Norsk Vasskraft- og Industristadmuseum [lit.: Norwegian Hydro Power and Industrial Town Museum, off.: Norwegian Museum of Hydropower and Industry] which is its current name.

“The purpose of the preservation is to secure an industrial monument of international and national value. The preservation of selected

buildings/structures on the smelter is done with the purpose of protecting significant physical relics. These represent, on the one hand, particular techno-historical values in the plant and on the other hand they illustrate the historical importance and the activities of the site as a totality. The preservation will furthermore safeguard historic architectural values as well as the visual panoramic impact of the smelter in the townscape” (Holme and Grønn 2011: 2, my translation).

The stress here is clearly on the techno-historical values of the smelter site. The visual panoramic impact seems less important than the role played by a technical structure or building in the production of calcium carbide, cyanamide and dicyanamide. The issue is to establish how central the particular object/building was within a larger production sequence.

These dimensions are fairly straightforward to determine. For how long was it in operation and how important was it to the production of a specific product and in how far did the enterprise contribute to technological innovation and economic development? The description above demonstrates the privilege that is given to technological/architectural significance in a national and international context.

The lime kilns were not covered by legal protection because they allegedly would not stand out significantly compared to other sites internationally (Holme and Grønn 2011). An important consideration in this decision was to assure that the minimum requirements for a World Heritage listing could be maintained in the future while also allowing for new development. It places the specific buildings and structures in relation with other comparable sites globally and emphasizes uniqueness as the most important criterion. In this context the lime kilns were not considered central as the carbide production line had already been severely reduced due to extensive demolition. The latter part of the justification which stresses the visual panoramic impact of the smelter in the townscape could open for a

consideration of the symbolic significance or identity value of these structures. The lime kilns could be of greater relevance if the landmark quality and monumentality was given additional weight and it would be recognized as a vital part of the skyline. Precisely this line of

reasoning was employed by the County Directorate for Cultural Heritage which stressed the visual impact in the townscape as a significant feature in favor of listing the lime kilns. The directorate suggested that the lime kilns should be made part of the final listing for the following reason:

“The kilns are important parts of the production sequence from raw material to finished calcium carbide. They are conspicuous and tall and highly visible on the site. They have an important visual significance with a clear and undisclosed machinelike industrial look characterized by winding pipes and open steel constructions” (Hordaland fylkeskommune 2011: 7, my translation).

This approach would establish the landmark quality as a vital element on the site as it points to how the kilns are integral to the larger townscape. The facts that the functional core is visible and makes it stand out from other production buildings where the production purpose is not revealed by the exteriors. The open steel structure would however turn out to be a quality weighing heavily against preservation. Leading up to the final decision in 2011, a report requested by the National Directorate for Cultural Heritage was prepared by two international experts, Axel Föhl and Rolf Höhmann. It was called Taming the Waterfalls and it assessed electrometallurgical sites at Rjukan and in Notodden as well as in Odda with an eye to a joint World Heritage nomination. It left little hope for the lime kilns due to the maintenance problems one would encounter in the long run:

“The three lime kilns are located in mostly open steel structures, which will pose another long term conservation problem. Exposed structures like these will heavily suffer from the elements, especially in hard wet climates and salty sea air. Anti-corrosion measures are costly because of the very complex construction, adaptive reuse is nearly impossible” (Föhl and Höhmann 2010: 23).

The National Directorate for Cultural Heritage followed up on this conclusion and made it clear that preservation of the lime kilns could not be legitimized on the basis of rarity in a wider context as they lacked the all-important “international dimension” (Holme and Grønn 2011: 14). They claimed they had balanced the concern for preservation with future

development on the southern end of the site. Given that the owner would not take the financial responsibility of maintaining the lime kilns, it would pose a long-term challenge to the viability and sustainability of the heritage scheme. On the national level the proprietary right was emphasized as a fundamental aspect:

“The listing allows for public use and business development in the southern section of the site […] With regards to the extent of the total area and all of the other buildings at the smelter site, the listing will in our opinion, not lay down too severe restrictions on the owners’ right to use the properties”

(Holme and Grønn 2011: 14, my translation).

The decision reflects the ambitions of heritage authorities nationally to strike a balance between re-use of land and preservation. In order to meet the request to redevelop parts of the site the lime kilns were sacrificed. Having avoided the extensive listing in the southern end of the smelter site, Odda municipality could now grant owners the permission to demolish the lime kilns. The decision was based on the poor condition of the structures as well as the costly maintenance of the vertical ovens. The demolition permit was obtained 15.06.2011 and executed about one year later.

In July of 2012, both structures which had earned the moniker ‘Odda’s Eifel towers’ were demolished one week apart. The demolition could be read as an attempt to end the debilitating standstill and uncertainty that had prevailed for such a long time. Several rounds of political negotiation, consultations, feasibility studies, expert evaluations, development plans and appeals from owners as well as heritage authorities had caused considerable impatience among the locals. A regional newspaper, Bergens Tidende, soon published a video of the demolition, attesting to the blast as a sort of public event which had caught the attention of many local inhabitants². People gathered to observe and the atmosphere was celebratory rather than regretful. The blast was accompanied by gasps of excitement and rounds of applause. From the video, recorded by a camera on a tripod in a static and disengaged manner, one can see how the blast soon covers the site in a grey cloud of concrete and lime dust. As the final blast of dynamite was discharged on the 25^th of July, the taller of the two structures toppled. Tall, cylindrical furnaces clad with pipes, steel landings and ladders collapsed in a matter of seconds.

2 “Kalkovnene sprengt i luften”, Bergens Tidende, 25.07.2012:

http://www.bt.no/nyheter/innenriks/Kalkovnene-sprengt-i-luften-2739920.html#.Uhx2dX9YX3U

Figure 4.5 - The tallest of the two lime kilns was knocked down on the 25th of July 2012. The lime kilns lacked the international significance and were considered expendable in so far as the demolition of the kilns would not jeopardize the World Heritage bid. Photo: NVIM/Harald Hognerud.

The controversy and popular and political pressure for redevelopment and new activity on the site had made it difficult to release the structures from the pecuniary and utilitarian realm and make the transition to commemorative landmarks at home in the industrial townscape. The pressure to prepare the site for new business development was considerable. With mounting popular and political pressure the final listing decision bears witness of a compromise which reduces the scale and visual impact of the smelter site significantly. The protracted indecision concerning the responsibility and the extent of heritage protection had caused many built structures to fall into ruination. The attempts of reinterpreting the lime kilns as icons of the industrial age failed and the cost of securing and maintaining the kilns weighed heavily against this alternative. The more immediate (re-)use-value remained an overriding concern.

Lime kilns are difficult to repurpose and their preservation was difficult to legitimize politically and economically. For this reason, the failure of the structures to attain lasting value beyond their utilitarian purpose offers a contrast to the more successful process of

defamiliarization of Kokerei Hansa which stressed the visual, sculptural and artistic qualities of the decommissioned plant in Dortmund.

The faith of the lime kilns aptly illustrates some of the conceptual shortcomings in preserving industrial heritage. Without any clear architectural pedigree or unique signature the lime kilns fails to live up to the expectations of the traditionally minded preservationist. The pure and unadorned functional structure without re-use potential except as sculpture or icon

undermines its present-day value. Their young age and generic form makes them incompatible with some fundamental criteria of preservation based on uniqueness and aesthetic distinctiveness. So beyond a socio-political (class), or cultural (battle of representations) understanding of the conflict we should take note of the way this case challenges the process of coming to terms with industrial matter as heritage. The stress on material object authenticity and singularity is difficult to reconcile with the materiality of mass production.