Note: This opinion piece was originally published in Business Green.

As the world warms, the search is hotting up for a 'green transition' - shifting the building blocks of the economy onto a sustainable footing. There are many uncertainties around how - and how fast - we can make this happen, but one thing is certain: steel will be at its heart. Whether it is wind turbines or electric cars, buses, trains or bicycles, steel has to be part of the solution.

At present, though, it is also part of the problem. Because much of current steel production is highly polluting, dependent on massive blast furnaces which produce the metal by smelting iron ore with heat generated from burning coal. The sector accounts for around a quarter of all industrial emissions globally; if steel were a country, it would be the fourth biggest emitter on the planet.

Change has to happen - and fast. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned the sector as a whole has to cut emissions by 90 per cent by 2050 to keep it in line with global climate goals as set out in the Paris Agreement. Now, a new report from ResponsibleSteel has detailed the speed and scale of the shifts required in the coming years. According to its analysis, every steel plant in the world needs to be emitting less than today's average emissions intensity by 2030. In other words, today's average emitters will become the industry's worst offenders by 2030 - if they do not take steps now to improve.

In this year of elections, it is clear that governments on both sides of the Atlantic are keen to support their domestic steel industries, but also demonstrate they are making progress on the climate front. Meanwhile, major procurers looking to decarbonise their supply chain want action, too. So the search is on for steel which doesn't cause unacceptable environmental impacts.

There is one beguilingly simple answer: make new steel from scrap. This can result in emissions savings of around two-thirds compared to so-called virgin steel. It is also around half the price. Small wonder then that steel producers with access to scrap - or with the purchasing power to gain it - are racing to meet demand.

But as a long-term solution, this leaves much to be desired. For one thing, there simply isn't enough recyclable steel around to meet demand. And the race for scrap risks leaving longer-term solutions, such as systems that use 'green' hydrogen, starved of the investment they need to go to scale.

Any meaningful strategy to decarbonise the sector must combine using all the scrap that is available, with some serious drivers that ensure innovation in primary steel production from iron ore. And that will only come about when the market demands it, and is prepared to pay for it.

But there is another element to the search for sustainable steel: the social and community one. A focus on decarbonisation pure and simple risks leaving people behind - failing to take account of the need for a 'just transition' to a greener future. Threatened closures of relatively high-emitting plants, for example, can destabilise local communities and create huge headaches for governments, as we have seen recently in the UK.

Increasingly, these dilemmas are being recognised by both business and governments, and the search is on for all-round sustainable steel - sustainable environmentally and socially.

But how is that best defined? There's no shortage of 'green steel' labels and initiatives - over 80 at the last count. But their focus - and rigour - vary hugely. Some are global; some regional. Some cover specific steel products; others just company-wide impacts. Most are principally focused on carbon emissions, and don't take into account wider ESG issues such as labour rights, community impacts or biodiversity.

This lack of alignment creates confusion - just at a time when there's increasing impatience with green claims that are not robust. In Europe, the EU's Green Claims Directive is poised to subject businesses found to be making misleading claims to hefty fines and a ban on tendering for public procurement.

Against this background, there's a case for a certification scheme which covers the full spectrum of sustainability impacts - and does so with a rigour that can ensure its credibility. That's where ResponsibleSteel comes in. The result of wide consultations within the industry as well as civil society, its aim is to provide a common language of assessment that steel's customers, communities, investors, and workforce can all get behind.

It uses independent auditors to certify steel production sites, specific steel products, and company-wide impacts, too. It doesn't just assess progress on cutting carbon emissions, but also issues around the local environment and communities, and the way the workforce and supply chain are treated. As a broad-based certification initiative, ResponsibleSteel does seem to be gaining traction: it's been endorsed by the IEA, UNIDO's Industrial Deep Decarbonisation Initiative, as well as the German government and the Chinese Iron and Steel Association.

This is encouraging. But there is no time to lose. The whole sector needs to demonstrate it is shifting - at speed and scale - to steelmaking which protects both communities and the climate, while providing the essential building blocks of a greener future. Transforming the industry will require bold and universal action. No one can sit on the sidelines. Delay is not an option.

By Annie Heaton, CEO, ResponsibleSteel

On August 9th, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna introduced a new bill to strengthen the US's domestic steel industry and build new iron and steel sites - the Modern Steel Act.

As our Director of Development and Innovation, Sivakumar Kuppuswamy, commented, “We are delighted by the introduction of the Modern Steel Act 2024, which aims to drive innovation, and the development of near-net-zero steel production. This transformative bill not only promotes innovative practices in near/net-zero steel production but also fosters a collaborative approach to boost job creation and community development. We're encouraged to see the ResponsibleSteel standard referenced as a benchmark for measuring and defining near-zero steel, which will drive meaningful transparency and progress in the sustainability efforts of the steel industry and its stakeholders."

The Modern Steel Act would build new iron and steel sites in deindustrialised towns, bringing a new generation of steelmaking to the US, creating jobs, and increasing US industrial competitiveness.

To achieve these goals, the Modern Steel Act plans to:

- Partner with the steel industry and workers to build new, modern facilities producing near-zero emissions iron and/or steel, using cutting edge technologies like hydrogen direct reduction

- Give priority to existing and legacy steel, iron, coke and coal communities

- Enable production of near-zero emissions iron and steel

- Upgrade existing integrated mills and mini-mills to employ lower-emissions technologies

- Balance supply, strengthen supply chain resilience, and protect health

- Explore demand generation opportunities

- Uphold strong labor standards and train workers to make the steel of the future

- Prioritise projects using domestic content, including all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials from US manufacturers

Learn more about the Modern Steel Act here.

Image credit: Shutterstock

By Dave Knight, Convenor, the Roundtable for the Responsible Recycling of Metals

Recycling delivers key socio-economic and environmental benefits but unknown to most are the risks involved when it is not done responsibly.

The Roundtable for the Responsible Recycling of Metals (RRRM), a multi-stakeholder, multi-metal initiative, was set up to support the development of responsible scrap sourcing standards, systems, and tools. For the last 18 months, RRRM overseen by a Steering Group of which ResponsibleSteel is a member, has collaborated with stakeholders across the metals sector to understand and make recommendations to improve ESG management and performance. This process involved running working groups, conducting extensive research, and mapping existing voluntary standards, legislation and industry guidance on metals recycling.

In May, RRRM launched its findings, demonstrating that current approaches are insufficient to ensure recycled metals do not harm people or the environment. The roundtable also published its recommendations and ResponsibleSteel plans to incorporate these into the review of the ResponsibleSteel International Production Standard in 2025.

Steel recycling

Steel has one of the highest recycling rates in the metals industry. Approximately 650 million tonnes of steel scrap feed about 30% of global steel production.

Carbon emissions from secondary steel production using scrap are less than a third of those from primary steel production, which is why companies are increasingly investing in secondary production as part of their decarbonisation strategies. But there are limits to scrap availability. We need to ensure that the scrap available is being responsibly sourced and isn't being displaced to meet the decarbonisation needs of one producer to the detriment of others.

Findings and recommendations

Widely used OECD ‘Due Diligence’ guidance relies on traceability and risk assessment. But traceability in diverse and distributed value chains can be extremely challenging due to the number of actors in the collection and pre-processing sectors. Reaching informal and subsistence collectors and recyclers, where some of the highest risks exist, is particularly hard and traders can be reluctant to disclose sources to maintain commercial interests.

For example, there are hundreds of thousands of people, mainly women and vulnerable groups, working at a subsistence level in the hinterlands of ship recycling facilities, notably in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Knowledge of these groups is poor and often overlooked in the downstream value chain. For more distributed post-consumer sources, like white goods or steel within electronics, the International Labour Organisation estimates that approximately 20 million informal workers work as waste collectors and sorters, often in poor conditions. Guidance on labour and human rights needs to be improved and post- and pre-consumer recycled content should be further broken down to help inform scrap sourcing risk profiles.

Improving assurance

The inclusion of recycled metal value chains in assurance processes is the starting point and metal producers should expect increasing focus on the ESG management and performance of these inputs. Legislation and voluntary approaches should be enhanced to include requirements relating to ‘untraceable’ parts of supply chains, recognising the high numbers of smaller-scale formal, informal, and subsistence recyclers. Worker and community engagement and grievance mechanisms, app-based accessible reporting, site sampling in third-party audits, commissioned research and independent surveying of high-risk locations can also be considered.

Policy and market opportunities

Extending producer responsibility legislation across nations would better reach high-risk parts of diverse supply chains. Market platforms and exchanges can strengthen ESG disclosure requirements and differentiate products which demonstrate higher ESG performance.

Furthermore, not all recycling of metals is economic and losses of materials lead to higher ESG risks. For example, the shipbreaking and steel working group found that shipowners get better prices for end-of-life (EOL) vessels broken in poorer conditions. The last beneficial shipowners have a key role to play in recognising this and metal producers should understand the risks associated with these inputs.

Metal Producers and recyclers

Recyclers should work to improve collection, segregation and sorting practices and the development and transfer of recycling technologies to higher-risk locations. This would help reduce contamination and exposure to hazardous materials as well as help maintain the alloy or grade quality maximising profitability. Producers and recyclers should also collaborate with brands and manufacturers to optimise efficiency and reduce ESG risks across the value chain considering new business models such as metals leasing and service delivery.

Labour, human rights and biodiversity risks are less well covered by industry requirements, guidance and common practice. Third-party audits will place more emphasis on recyclates, on analysing sources from an ESG perspective and will expect metal producers to be able to clearly communicate the boundaries of traceability.

Brands and manufacturers

As responsible sourcing becomes more sophisticated, brands and manufacturers should invest in improved performance at higher-risk locations that represent the ‘untraceable’ part of their supply chains. ‘Book and claim’ systems enable appropriate responsible sourcing claims to be made and can support action in areas which are currently overlooked. Brands and manufacturers should also publish data to better educate consumers, build opportunities for products with higher ESG performance, and improve the transparency of secondary scrap supply chains.

Further information and next steps

ResponsibleSteel recently ran a webinar on the outcomes of the Roundtable, the slides of which can be accessed here. A summary report, a 1-page route map, a risk profile, and three background reports with detailed findings and recommendations are all available on RRRM's website.

Parties interested in collaborating to take forward some of these recommendations should contact Dave Knight.

Images: Shutterstock

Leading steelmakers globally are beginning to take steps to decarbonise and low emissions steel options are emerging on the market. But new analysis from ResponsibleSteel demonstrates that radical shifts to reduce emissions by a select number of industry leaders or “first movers” will not be sufficient. The entire steel industry needs to take immediate action to make progress on the journey to net zero. And this progress needs to be mapped out in a universal language.

Today, ResponsibleSteel unveils a landmark report, "Charting Progress to 1.5°C through Certification." Using two base scenarios – the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Net Zero Emissions by 2050, and the Mission Possible Partnership’s (MPP) Carbon Cost – the report offers a detailed mapping of the progress needed for the global steel industry to achieve climate commitments under the Paris Agreement. The report was reviewed in-depth by representatives from the IEA, the Energy Transitions Commission and Systemiq, and has been endorsed by industry, civil society and intergovernmental organisations including the OECD, Baowu Group, the Climate Group, and Lendlease.

According to the analysis, for the industry to meet its Paris Agreement obligations every steel plant in the world needs to be emitting less than today’s average emissions intensity by 2030. In other words, following a 1.5°C trajectory, today’s average emitters will become the industry’s worst offenders by 2030 if they do not take steps now to improve.

Annie Heaton, ResponsibleSteel’s CEO stated, “Transforming the steel industry will require bold and universal action. No one can sit on the sidelines. Our analysis shows how certification can be used both to plan and to track the progress of every site on an equitable basis. Those who are not certified cannot be tracked.”

The ResponsibleSteel International Production Standard is a powerful tool for steelmakers, policymakers, financial institutions, trade organisations, and campaigners, to track and drive the industry’s transition at pace and scale. The Production Standard’s Decarbonisation Progress Levels provide an internationally consistent framework that enables a like-for-like comparison of steel plants globally and incentivises all steelmakers to invest in decarbonised production processes whilst operating in a socially and environmentally responsible way at the same time.

ResponsibleSteel’s analysis of six key steelmaking regions clearly illustrates that there is a pathway for every part of the industry. Regional conditions such as scrap availability, natural resource endowments, climate policies, and available finance will likely impact the speed and nature of industrial change, but there is no room for inaction.

Furthermore, steelmakers must start to look beyond their physical site boundaries. Indirect supply chain-related emissions could make up about one-third of total average sectoral emissions by 2050, so reducing these will prove critical to the steel industry’s transition.

Ms Heaton continued, “ResponsibleSteel provides a trusted apparatus for measuring, comparing, and certifying progress in driving down emissions that steelmakers, buyers, investors, and policymakers can all get behind.”

Read the full report and interactive summary here.