By Vijay Jayaraj
Steel is essential in modern society, providing us with homes, factories, bridges, vehicles and all manner of other machines and infrastructure. Since 2001, global crude steel production has doubled and the demand will continue to rise in the coming decades.
In the climate obsessed’s rush to “decarbonize” heavy industry, hydrogen-based steel manufacturing is being touted as a “clean” alternative to the traditional coal-based process for steelmaking. With seemingly little thought being applied, policymakers, environmentalists, and some industry leaders are promoting hydrogen-fueled manufacturing with an enthusiasm once reserved for solar panels.
However, a shift towards hydrogen steelmaking risks undoing a century of progress in efficient production. The high costs, technological challenges, and limited scalability of hydrogen-based processes are guaranteed to render it less viable than steelmaking relying on coal.
The Evolution of Steelmaking Efficiency
The steel industry has been a cornerstone of industrial development, and its evolution is a testament to human ingenuity and technological advancement. In the early 20th century, the introduction of the basic oxygen furnace revolutionized steel production.
Over the decades, continuous improvements in blast furnace technology, process control and energy recovery have led to significant gains in productivity and energy efficiency. China continues to dominate in production capacity and exports, with industry giants like Baowu Group at the forefront. Other significant steel producers include Japan’s Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corp., India’s Tata Steel, South Korea’s POSCO and Europe’s ArcelorMittal.
Today’s integrated steel mills are marvels of engineering, capable of producing millions of tons annually with remarkable efficiency. The best-performing blast furnaces can achieve energy efficiencies of up to 70%, a figure that seemed unattainable just a few decades ago. The risk of abandoning this tried-and-true method for a relatively untested hydrogen-based process cannot be overstated.
The Perils of Hydrogen Steelmaking
Hydrogen-based steel production, particularly the direct reduced iron process using hydrogen, is presented as a solution to climate change. But the production of so-called green hydrogen, which is produced with “renewable” energy, can cost twice as much as coal.
Conservative estimates suggest that hydrogen-based steel production could be 20-30% more costly than traditional methods. This cost differential is not trivial in an industry with tight margins and intense global competition.
The increased costs would ripple through the economy, affecting construction, automotive manufacturing, and countless other industries that rely on affordable steel.
Rystad Energy says “green” steel can be made competitive only by imposing heavy taxes on coal-based steel or by allocating huge subsidies to steel makers.
Moreover, hydrogen made through electrolysis is energy intensive. To produce enough to meet the steel industry’s needs would require a massive expansion of renewable energy capacity, far beyond current projections.
While pilot green hydrogen projects exist, it has not been proven at industrial scales. In contrast, one of the most significant advantages of coal-based steelmaking is its ability to operate at massive scales.
Modern blast furnaces can produce up to 400 tons of steel per hour, operating continuously for years between major maintenance periods. This scale of production is crucial for meeting global steel demand, which stood at 1.95 billion tons in 2021 and is projected to grow.
Coal’s abundance and established supply chains make possible this sustained level of production. Capable of supplying the steel sector with the approximately one billion tons of coal annually, the industry’s infrastructure for mining, transporting and utilizing coal in steelmaking has been developed and refined over more than a century.
On the other hand, hydrogen-based steelmaking is one more absurd proposal of those fearmongering about global warming that would have virtually no effect on Earth’s temperature but would slow the economic growth and infrastructure development of our modern world.
This commentary was first published at RealClearMarkets on August 23, 2024.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Research and Science Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K., and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, U.K.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“…fearmongering about global warming that would have virtually no effect on Earth’s temperature but would slow the economic growth and infrastructure development of our modern world.”
That is the entire point of the exercise—limitation of general prosperity to establish elite dominance over humanity. Science and the environment have nothing to do with it.
There’s also a problem if the steel is contaminated with hydrogen, which diffuses through
the steel and makes it brittle. Carbon (coke) has been used as reducing agent up to now
and I don’t see hydrogen replacing it anywhere soon at competitive prices.
It’s called “Hydrogen embrittlement”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement
Then there’s the issue of the byproduct. Steel production with carbon does produce CO2 which does cause some greenhouse heating though in ever decreasing effect with ever increasing concentrations. However, Steel made with Hydrogen produces a far more potent greenhouse gas, H2O…di-hydrogen-monoxide…Water Vapor. Producing as much steel as we need yearly would far overburden the biosphere with huge quantities of water vapor and cause far more heating than CO2 ever could.
Since the hydrogen would come from water- if water is then released from making steel from hydrogen- how will there be a net increase in water vapor? Just wondering as I don’t have a clue about this topic. Not that I like the idea of green steel- sounds absurd to me.
Post says:”…produce CO2 which does cause some greenhouse heating…”.
Nope.
Warming by atmospheric CO2 has never been observed or measured anywhere on the planet.
Swedish steel manufacturer SSAB aims to be the first steel company in the world “to deliver fossil free steel to the market in 2026” in conjunction with Hybrit’s hydrogen reduced iron production from it’s pilot plant at Lulea, Sweden.
Meanwhile the World Steel Organisation says 2023 steel production worldwide was 1892 million tonnes.
Another subsidy mining opportunity funded largely by the US taxpayers that will undoubtedly demonstrate what we already know – green hydrogen cannot economically replace coal at scale. The pilot plants mentioned do not currently have any where near adequate sources of “green” hydrogen and will be run using NG derived hydrogen until they ultimately fail to be competitive. Just another boondoggle.
I’d like to see them prove that steel is fossil free.
Did not Sweden exhibit some common sense during the Covid scare?
Anomaly.
Has the climate panic reached “peak madness” yet?
Almost every day, from various sources, I read articles that sound like math-free, cost-contrived, rent-seeking, mass manias from the Middle Ages over witches, hobgoblins, and evil spirits. Climatistas are writing new chapters for the 1841 book, “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.”
There’s no such thing as “green” steel, “green” concrete, or “green” hydrogen, for that matter. Green has degenerated to a buzzword stripped of its original meaning as the color of chlorophyll in vegetation. Tack green onto a phrase, and it fits the quasi-religious posturing of environmentalism, but it means little else.
But the Green Demon is everywhere.
Is that a comic book character? Made of paper? From???
The damage will be done before we reach “peak maddness”. I find it rare to encounter a climate skeptic in the general public. They believe the dogma, and that it’s fixable with enough government money.
Here’s another billion$ down the hole:
“Dofasco misses key milestone in green steel”
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7309360
Having worked at Dofasco’s primary steelmaking and coke plants for many years(now retired) I would bet good money that they never make affordable steel using Hydrogen. I am no expert on the process but people have no idea how just much heat energy is required to make steel and and the ridiculous amount of hydrogen that would be required to reproduce that energy level. The whole idea is foolish. In order to even make the liquid iron from the ore requires using carbon monoxide and the heat of the blast furnace to remove the extra oxygen atom from the iron oxide the ore contains forming CO2. Bunker C oil is emulsified with water and injected into the blast furnace to produce a higher level of CO to facilitate this. further down the stream the change from iron to steel also requires removing a amount of carbon from the iron with an oxygen lance producing CO2. It is hard to remove all the carbon from a process when carbon is an intrical part of the process. 🤷♂️🙄
Thanks for the information.😎
I believe that hydrogen is being touted as feed to a DRI plant. Which can be done. Theoretically! Natural gas is used in virtually every DRI plant I’ve seen. The Port Talbot project will not include a DRI plant because there is not a large enough gas supply there.
I have yet to see any detailed plan for this project. I can’t find out how many arc furnaces there will be (although I suspect 3 * 100te if they want to make 3 million tonnes steel)
Reclaiming the area will be a mega project in itself. Scrap and raw materials deliveries will be a nightmare on the roads, so presumably new roads will have to be built.
The idea of changing the process from BF/BOF to Scrap/EAF and then calling it “Green” is patently absurd.
There is a similar project planned for the Scunthorpe works. British Steel plan an EAF in Scunthorpe and in Teeside.
Most scrap in the UK is exported and these plants will be looking to eat 6 million tonnes or so between them. I may invest in scrap futures as I’m sure the price will rise!
“Green” is just another form of insanity.
gangreen, snot, puke
“gangreen, snot, puke”
pea and ham soup !
oh wait.. same thing.
There’s no such thing as “green” steel, “green” concrete, or “green” hydrogen, for that matter. Green has degenerated to a buzzword stripped of its original meaning
“green” are the dollars that end up in pockets of those exploiting the buzzword
Again, hydrogen is a tail-chasing exercise. More energy is expended in creating hydrogen than will ever be gotten from burning it.
And so-called “green hydrogen” is a joke. All the equipment used (wind and solar) for “renewable” energy (and to provide the REQUIRED backup for it, since wind and solar don’t work more often than they do) requires coal, oil and gas.
Get back to us when you produce the first solar panel or windmill using ONLY energy from the Sun and the wind, at every step including the mining for the required resources.
Until then, STFU.
“Rystad Energy says “green” steel can be made competitive only by imposing…”
In other words, it CANNOT be “made competitive.” 🙄
“including the mining”
Yuh, those monster mining machines- gonna run on green energy? Gigantic batteries?
Large electrically powered excavating machines have been around for over 100 years. These are usually powered through a long cable.
I bet those monster trucks that go down into open pit mines aren’t electrified. But for the machines that are – I hope they can find some green energy or they’ll have to shut down. I’ve seen a lot of excavators and bulldozers and none were electrified. Nor, big logging machines.
Komatsu is working on electric (yes electric with a giant battery) heavy haul truck designs. The reduction in carrying capacity must be unfathomable.
let’s see if they can make an electric version of this truck
Dofasco was thinking about buying one of those excavators when they closed one of their mines. It towed a large 4800 volt generator trailer behind it for power. Dofasco decided against the purchase.
“ These are usually powered through a long cable.” Leading to what, pray tell?
Usually leading to a very large diesel generator on a trailer.
You missed the point of “green energy.” What are those cables connected to in the other end?
A coal-fired power plant.
All the hoopla over “green” anything is only driving up consumer prices.
That’s the plan.
Inflation is the spending politician’s friend. When everyone is a billionaire, a trillion isn’t so big anymore, is it?
Whats the difference between a 3 bedroom 2 bath single story wood framed house that cost $40,000 when I graduated high school and today’s 3 bedroom 2 bath house that costs $1,500,000 when my granddaughter graduated high school?
It certainly isn’t the house. It’s the money.
The leftists are now even talking loud about “de-growth!”
The goal is to take down western civilization, the last obstacle for a global communist government.
Ever-increasing government regulation.
Wait until the legally mandated interlocks appear on automobiles. I figure that’s good for a $2000 bump in price.
What’s an interlock?
A campaign to dedevelop the UK has just begun. Port Talbot gets 3,000 green jobs… in old parlance that’s redundancies
To paraphrase Johnny Rotten: “and they don’t care”
How they hate us.
Promoters need to provide real cost per ton … or as we used to say in the automobile business, “Out the door … tax, title and plates.”
And don’t forget, government handouts are a cost to every citizen.
“government handouts” must be replaced as “government handouts of TAXPAYER money”
We might remember that 75% of the steel made in the US these days is electric arc steel, not blast furnace steel. So electric arc steel made with electricity from, for example, a nuclear power plant, is already as “green” as steel is ever going to be. The author is entirely correct that green hydrogen is a mare’s nest.
Electric arc furnaces process recycled steel. Coal coke is still used for reducing iron ore (removal of oxygen from Fe2O3) on a massive scale. Coke is derived by heating coal to drive off hydrogen and oxygen. It is then mixed with iron ore heated to high temperature and then supplied with a blast of oxygen to create carbon monoxide (CO) which reacts with the iron-oxide to strip off the oxygen forming CO2 and iron. Importantly, this process involves burning the coke to make the CO and a great deal of heat needed to melt the iron. Blasting air through the molten iron (the Bessemer process) further purifies to iron and produces steel.
Thanks for the further education.😎
Steel is an alloy of carbon and iron. If hydrogen is used to heat iron ore, where does the carbon come from?
That’s why the feedstock is scrap iron and steel, carbon included already. Makes commodity grade steel easily but really hard to make specialised steels for say submarine hulls.
And a whole host of other things.
Hydrogen advocates explain that the cost is minimal because midday moderate temperature days the energy input to electrolyze is negative at high solar grid penetration. No more curtailment payments or paying someone to take it. All milk and honey, minor details are ignored. I report you decide.
And shutting down steel mills for 10 to 12 hours a day has no cost. /sarc
Steel is an alloy of carbon and iron. Without the carbon, you just have iron.
That’s TRUE!
Cam-S,
there is alot of confusion about iron and steel.
Iron has far more carbon in it than steel and is a product in it’s own right. It has to be made from iron ore or scrap iron, not steel.
Machining iron produces black swarf which is due to the very high carbon content.
Steel has much of that carbon removed (even so called high carbon steel), but steel as a material has very many different alloying components dependant on the type of steel you are trying to make.
.
It is all in definition one wants to use. By a purist definition iron is Fe, chemical element with zero carbon. Steels are alloys of iron. The most prevalent set of alloys is known as mild/carbon steel, with variable carbon content. Mild steels usually rust quickly. Stainless steels, also many different alloys, have lower carbon content and other additions such as nickel and others.
Lots of varieties of “steel”.
https://staubmfg.com/resources/ultimate-guide-types-of-steel/
We are not in a climate crisis, CO2 is not the control knob for our climate, we are not going to reach a tipping point and suffer irreversible global warming therefore Net Zero and a carbon free society are not necessary and should not be considered for any policy decision. Coal is so critical for manufacturing things like steel I would prefer alternatives to coal for generating electricity where feasible so we always have lots of coal to burn for things like making steel.
green hydrogen, which is produced with “renewable” energy, can cost twice as much as coal.
=====$%
More like10 to 15 times as much. Blue Hydrogen is double coal.
H2O warms by changing the slope of the lapse rate. CO2 has no such ability.
I attended an iron ore conference in Perth in 2023 and green steel was almost exclusively the topic of the presentations.
A couple of little understood impacts will be the creation of gigantic tailings ponds of iron ore fines created by the ultrafine grinding needed to remove impurities at the mine which help the hydrogen based reduction process. Instead of Direct Shipped Ore (lumps and fines) all iron ore is required to be ground to ultrafine particle size, processed then pelletised. This requires a large increase in energy to create iron ore suitable to make steel.
One point I took away from the conference was how black boxy blast furnaces really are, the overall process is understood incredibly well, but the fine details needed for modelling in detail were not well understood.
I recall that that some coal is still needed when hydrogen is used as a reducing agent
If private investment can’t see it then throw more taxeaters at it-
Australia inks $660 million hydrogen pact with Germany (msn.com)
Trust them they’re from the Gummint and they’re here to help just like Covid with mandates and money.
Sweden has a project former called H2 green steel.
Now the new name is Stegra.
May bee a change to leave H2 behind?