UK construction sustainability standard misalignment disqualifying domestic steel
The construction sector pathway to net zero is excluding domestic steel from being used in projects due to a misalignment in sustainability standards between the two sectors, panellists said during last week’s UK Metals Expo in Birmingham, attended by Kallanish.
Ben Cunliffe, director of sustainability at British Steel, told delegates there needed to be an “urgent discussion” regarding the “alignment of steel consuming sectors and alignment particularly of government policy”.
The construction sector, which is British Steel’s largest steel consuming sector, is taking a completely different path to net zero, he noted. He added the sector was in a race to remove embodied carbon steel from buildings. The impact of that means “British Steel or other steel producers in this country are essentially disqualified from supply into an increasing number of projects, [which] are being replaced by imports,” he added.
There is a “complete mismatch between, on one hand, the steel industry doing its best to decarbonise and being part of national policy, and on the other hand, the market being offshored for structural steel,” he noted.
This was causing serious difficulties for the steelmaker, and the issue was being made worse by the wide market adoption of product classifications such as Steelzero and the construction leadership council. These frameworks disqualify UK produced steel from supply into British projects, Cunliffe highlighted.
“Why are we allowing that to happen?” he asked.
He also highlighted the Welsh government net zero policy excludes steel by Tata Steel and British Steel from schools, hospitals and public buildings. “They’ve failed to understand the bigger picture of the UK Steel Strategy,” he added.
He warned of deindustrialisation in place of decarbonisation as a serious threat for the UK.
Elsewhere, during a separate panel discussion on the construction sector, panellists noted a divergence in the willingness to pay for low-emission steel used in projects.
Jonathan Clemens, ceo at BCSA, highlighted the divide in the construction sector for these products. “There are certain markets, [such as] commercial in London which is very much into the green agenda, and there are certain clients in parts of the UK and certain product types [that have] no interest at all in low-carbon steel,” he said.
“It isn’t everyone all going in one direction. Part of the challenge is the cost of lower carbon steel versus traditional steel,” he concluded.
Carrie Bone UK
Customers drive emissions reduction, technology shift: British Steel
Customers are driving the emissions reduction efforts and technology shift by steelmakers, according to Chris Vaughan, technical director at British Steel.
“It’s important to reflect the reasons why we are shifting is a primary drive to drive down CO2 emissions, and the way that we are governed on that. It’s policy that’s driving it, it’s public perception, but the pace of change that’s really driving the removal of emissions and taking those to another level is the customer base,” he said at last week’s UK Metals Expo attended by Kallanish.
“Customers are driving the manufacturers to decarbonise as quickly, if not more quickly than the policy timescales with 2035 and net zero by 2050,” he added.
British Steel has a £1.25-billion ($1.65 billion) decarbonisation plan to shift away from blast furnaces to electric arc furnace, with planning permission for this secured in Scunthorpe and Teeside earlier this year.
Vaughan noted some of the challenges the firm is facing came from the customer base potentially switching to materials other than steel which lower emissions.
“They would consider other materials for construction, etc, if we are unable to decarbonise quickly enough to meet the aspirations of their timelines,” he said.
“The transition for us is about reduction in emissions. From a British Steel perspective and an integrated manufacturer currently, the vast majority of our emissions sit within scope 1, so when we talk to clients and customers and they’re looking at us to decarbonise their own downstream, it sits in their scope 3, but their scope 3 is our scope 1,” he added.
The move to EAF-based steelmaking makes sense for the UK, but other global locations may better suit other technologies. “There’s a set of circumstances that fit electrification for the UK and the drive towards EAF, but EAF is not the only technology and it will not be the only technology on a global scale for decarbonisation,” Vaughan observed.
“Globally, it’s got to be considered from geography, where you are in your economic cycle, what is the raw material access … where’s the infrastructure as well to allow that decarbonisation,” he continued.
Amid the UK-wide move away from blast furnaces, much of the conversation has focused on whether EAF technology will be sufficient for grades that have traditionally been produced via primary steelmaking.
“It’s been around a long time. We have domestic producers using EAF technology and have done for decades. It’s proven technology which we can capitalise on to help that shift,” he added. “All grades can be made from that [EAF] route; it’s what you feed the furnace, and the raw material input that drives that, in around working with the supply chain to achieve it as well.”
He also noted that EAF steelmaking would allow more flexibility. “Our current method within British steel on integrated production requires stability, it’s not easy to take capacity up and down … whereas the EAF allows you to respond more dynamically and flexibility to market requirements which gives the benefit to be able to tune your operation to what you’re facing from the market perspective,” Vaughan concluded.
Carrie Bone UK
