journal article·2021-04Open access

Low-carbon production of iron and steel: Technology options, economic assessment, and policy

Zhiyuan Fan, S. Julio Friedmann

Joule· Volume 5· Issue 4

Abstract

Summary Given increased urgency to transition the global economy to net-zero CO2 emission, governments and industry have increased focus on decarbonizing hard-to-abate sectors, including steel making, which contributes roughly 6% of global CO2 emission and 8% of energy-related emission (including power consumption emission). This paper reviews current global iron and steel production and assesses available decarbonization technologies, including hydrogen injection, solid biomass substitution, zero-C electricity substitution, carbon capture and storage (CCS) retrofit, and combinations of these decarbonization approaches. Blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) dominates production (71%) and is particularly stubborn to any decarbonization technology. Direct reduced iron to electric arc furnace (DRI-EAF) production is 5% and growing, it appears to have better decarbonization potential to move toward net-zero. Secondary steel production using mainly steel scrap in electric arc furnace (EAF-scrap) is 24% of global production and has both the lowest energy consumption and is technically simplest to decarbonize through electrification but is limited in market share to recycled steel capacity. Of the options assessed, blue hydrogen, carbon neutral biomass, and CCS appear to have the lowest cost and highest technical maturity. However, no single approach today can deliver deep decarbonization to the iron and steel industry and all approaches lead to substantial production cost increase. No uniform ideal solution exists, and different geographies, infrastructure, and economies will determine the local optimum solution with viability and cost. Policy measures will be required to provide financial incentives for decarbonization and to avoid unwelcome outcomes such as emissions leakage or job loss.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Iron and Steelmaking Processes · Extraction and Separation Processes · Metallurgical Processes and Thermodynamics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (64)

Show source-provided references
1. Summary for Policymakers
2. Friedmann · 2019
3. Sandalow · 2019
4. Friedmann · 2019
5. Low CO2 emission technologies for iron and steelmaking as well as titania slag production10.1016/j.mineng.2007.02.007 ↗
6. Hasanbeigi · 2019
7. Blast Furnace Ironmaking Analysis, Control, and Optimization
8. Influence of direct reduced iron on the energy balance of the electric arc furnace in steel industry10.1016/j.energy.2011.07.050 ↗
9. 2000
10. Power Quality Measurement and Analysis in Electric Arc Furnace for Turkish Electricity Transmission System10.5755/j01.eie.23.6.19691 ↗
11. van der Stel
12. Present needs, recent progress and future trends of energy-efficient Ultra-Low Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Steelmaking (ULCOS) program10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.101 ↗
13. Progress and Future of Breakthrough Low-carbon Steelmaking Technology (ULCOS) of EU10.11648/j.ijmpem.20180302.11 ↗
14. A new anode material for oxygen evolution in molten oxide electrolysis10.1038/nature12134 ↗
15. Energy survey of the coal based sponge iron industry,10.1016/j.csite.2015.04.001 ↗
16. Holling
17. 2012
18. Energy intensity and greenhouse gases footprint of metallurgical processes: A continuous steelmaking case study10.1016/j.energy.2010.05.022 ↗
19. A Comparison of Iron and Steel Production Energy Use and Energy Intensity in China and the U.S
20. 2019
21. van Hulst · 2019
22. Dickel · 2020
23. Assessment of hydrogen direct reduction for fossil-free steelmaking,10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.279 ↗
24. Modeling and simulation of hydrogen injection into a blast furnace to reduce carbon dioxide emissions10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.162 ↗
25. Effect of hydrogen addition on reduction behavior of iron oxides in gas-injection blast furnace10.1016/j.tca.2016.12.009 ↗
26. Longbottom · 2008
27. Chevrier
28. Kawakami · 2020
29. Life Cycle Assessment and Water Footprint of Hydrogen Production Methods: From Conventional to Emerging Technologies10.3390/environments5020024 ↗
30. Hydrogen production from natural gas and biomethane with carbon capture and storage – A techno-environmental analysis10.1039/D0SE00222D ↗
31. Goodbye to carbon neutral: Getting biomass footprints right10.1016/j.eiar.2008.11.002 ↗
32. Numerical Study of biomass use in a steel plant
33. Optimization of a Steel Plant with Multiple Blast Furnaces Under Biomass Injection10.1007/s11663-012-9790-8 ↗
34. Mayhead
35. Future Perspectives of Biomass Torrefaction: Review of the Current State-Of-The-Art and Research Development10.3390/su10072323 ↗
36. Global assessment of biomass suitability for ironmaking – Opportunities for co-location of sustainable biomass, iron and steel production and supportive policies,10.1016/j.seta.2018.03.001 ↗
37. Mathieson
38. Using Biomass for Pig Iron Production: A Technical, Environmental and Economical Assessment10.1007/s12649-013-9223-1 ↗
39. Towards More Sustainable Ironmaking—An Analysis of Energy Wood Availability in Finland and the Economics of Charcoal Production10.3390/su5031188 ↗
40. Carbonization characteristics of biomass/coking coal blends for the application of bio-coke10.1016/j.cej.2020.124943 ↗
41. The potential of using biomass-based reducing agents in the blast furnace: A review of thermochemical conversion technologies and assessments related to sustainability10.1016/j.rser.2013.05.005 ↗
42. Research
43. Sandalow · 2020
44. Chapter 14 - Cultivated Biomass for the Pig Iron Industry in Brazil
45. Effect of Woody Biomass Addition on Coke Properties10.2355/isijinternational.54.2454 ↗
46. Charcoal Behaviour by Its Injection into the Modern Blast Furnace10.2355/isijinternational.50.81 ↗
47. Bioreducer use in Finnish blast furnace ironmaking – Analysis of CO2 emission reduction potential and mitigation cost10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.008 ↗
48. Can bioenergy with carbon capture and storage result in carbon negative steel?10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103104 ↗
49. Biomass reducing agent utilisation in rotary hearth furnace process for DRI production10.1179/1743281215Y.0000000001 ↗
50. Friedmann · 2020
51. Bataille · 2020
52. High-resolution assessment of global technical and economic hydropower potential10.1038/s41560-017-0006-y ↗
53. CO2 capture from the industry sector10.1016/j.pecs.2017.07.001 ↗
54. Wilcox
55. Techno-economic assessment and comparison of CO2 capture technologies for industrial processes: Preliminary results for the iron and steel sector10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.079 ↗
56. Carbon mitigation potential of Indian steel industry10.1007/s11027-014-9605-0 ↗
57. Techno-economic study of an integrated steelworks equipped with oxygen blast furnace and CO2 capture10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.651 ↗
58. Kuramochi · 2011
59. Comparison of MEA capture cost for low CO2 emissions sources in Australia10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.06.004 ↗
60. Costs and Potential of Carbon Capture and Storage at an Integrated Steel Mill10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.648 ↗
61. Sakaria
62. Carpenter · 2012
63. CO2 Capture in the Steel Industry Review of the Current State of Art
64. Financial viability of biofuel and biochar production from forest biomass in the face of market price volatility and uncertainty10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.08.085 ↗