Hello Carbon Friends,
I’ve been having discussions with some of the Seattle CLF folk about steel manufacturers trying to claim “Green Steel” by using EAF furnaces and RECs or PPAs to offset the carbon associated with the energy used in the steel production. This goes against the EN 15804 standard that EPDs are required to meet, but it seems like the industry is moving towards including credits regardless of the standard. I’d love to hear what other’s in the industry think about this trend? How are you (are you?) using this in your work? Does anyone know of any guidance (existing or upcoming) on this for companies trying to track their emissions?
-Justin
1 Like
Hi Justin,
This discussion came up internally recently so I’m curious to hear thoughts from the group. I know AISC has pushed for recognition of on-site renewable energy generation and purchase of RECs or PPAs but don’t know the details of the discussion from the PCR development.
For steel I’ve seen a lot of dubious carbon reduction claims at the project level on the basis of “increased recycled content” when in reality projects are likely still sourcing from the same domestic EAF mills they always have, but I understand the desire to achieve carbon reductions through procurement so am interested in alternative approaches such as rewarding renewable energy generation.
Other thoughts I had so far was to ask for the steel supplier (mill level) to demonstrate a commitment to a near or net zero decarbonization pathway (e.g., H2-DRI-EAF), which would be a more qualitative evaluation and not achieve reductions yet at the project level but still encourage what we’re after overall. Another option would be to dive more deeply into fabricator emissions - although smaller than mill level, it seems we’d be able to have more of an impact as specifiers in preferring fabricators that are reducing their Scope 1 and 2 emissions.
1 Like