The promotion of carbon-reduced steel often pushes the boundaries of credibility, said speakers at the Future Steel Forum in Stockholm last month.
“At the moment, the brand development [of so-called green steel] is outpacing the technological development,” Stanislav Zinchenko, chief executive of Ukrainian consultancy GMK Center, said at the event attended by Kallanish. “There is more declaration than existing progress.” This signals intent for the future, but does not necessarily define the present reality, he added.
In his presentation, Zinchenko also questioned the market maturity of green steels. He cited the wide range of premiums for such steels, between €150/tonne and €250/t ($162-$270), which he finds is an indication the market is too small yet to see realistic pricing emerge. “The price is not market-based, and depends on many factors, with no real connection in-between them,” he noted.
The conference included a dedicated panel entitled “How do we define green steel?” Caroline Ashley, director of critical non-profit organisation SteelWatch, proposed that anything under 400kg of CO2 per tonne of steel produced could be called “green”. But she also expressed strong scepticism over the label of “hydrogen-ready” that is applied to many facilities.
In her presentation, Ashley warned the audience that “you might not agree with everything I say”. For example, ArcelorMittal claims to be a leader, but she finds the company’s efforts are not sufficient. “We need leaders that are bold and have a vision,” she argued, and “there is a lot of hype, I find.”
Christian Koehl Germany
