Delaying investment into new electric arc furnace capacity in the UK could result in steelmakers missing out on demand for lower-emission steel, Kallanish learns from a new report.
Research by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) says the window for a managed transition is narrowing. It notes that new EAF capacity takes three to six years from investment decision to commissioning, meaning investment decisions taken in 2026-2027 determine competitive capability for 2028-2031.
This period is when demand for green steel is expected to surge from consuming sectors. The automotive sector will see its first wave of green steel targets, while the offshore wind procurement pipeline will be at peak volume, and the transmission and distribution build-out will accelerate.
Capacity commissioned after this window misses the demand surge it was designed to serve, the research suggests.
UK steel demand is projected to grow by 54% from 9.1 million tonnes in 2025 to 14mt in 2050, driven by construction, offshore wind, electric vehicles and grid infrastructure. Against an expected domestic production pipeline of approximately 6.7mt, this leaves a production shortfall of 7.3mt by 2050, which would require more than two Port Talbots’ worth of new EAF capacity and an additional 4.7 GW of energy capacity.
This represents a market opportunity of £93 billion ($122.8 billion) between 2025 and 2050 across sections, plates, strip and specialist steel that is currently being met by imports.
It notes that Tata Steel is building its 3.2mt EAF, alongside 7 Steel’s planned investment at its 1.2mt facility in Cardiff and the expansion of Marcegaglia’s Sheffield plant, in addition to the proposed transition of British Steel. These plants represent an investment pipeline that will shift the UK from 38% EAF share today to 75-85% once Port Talbot comes online, exceeding the current global average of approximately 30%.
The sunk cost trap works in both directions. Continued investment in ageing blast furnace infrastructure delays the transition, while inaction on new EAF investment forfeits the opportunity to displace imports. A change that will be progressively harder to displace once procurement chains have shifted.
ECIU says the UK’s confirmed transition trajectory makes it unlikely that any blast furnace will still be operating by 2035. For any operator already facing structural operating losses, the Emissions Trading System (ETS) cost escalation alone over a nine-year period makes the investment case for continued blast furnace operation increasingly difficult to justify on commercial grounds.
This switch is supported by projected demand growth, an available feedstock surplus, proven technology, and a grid decarbonisation trajectory that provides a structural emissions advantage over time.
Addressing electricity costs remains a precondition for the long-run viability of the post-transition industry, which has not been fully addressed. UK steel producers paid 27-38% more for electricity than competitors in Germany and France in 2025/26. Against France, the gap was almost 40%, costing the sector around £41 million in 2025/26 alone.
The study identifies risks including the tightening procurement window, the feedstock quality challenge, the electricity cost disadvantage, and the design weaknesses in the UK CBAM regime. Together, and given the compressed timescales involved, they constitute a material risk that the opportunity is ceded to imports by default rather than seized by design.
It warns that while the conditions for a successful transition exist, whether these are put in place in the available window is the central question for UK industrial policy over the next two to three years.
