Steel industry - D. Valenti

CEN/TC 264/WG 33
“Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in energyintensive industries”
pr EN ISO 19694-2 “Steel”
Brussels, 24 November 2014
Steel is a complex industry
Iron ore route (60%
production share in Europe)
Not in Europe
One single plant
in Europe
Secondary steel
(40%)
EAF steel
Direct reduction
Scrap
BOF steel
Integrated route
Raw material
Raw material
preparation
Lump ore
Coke
Coal
Smelting reduction
Fine ore
Lump ore
Sinter
Lump ore
Fine ore
Fine ore
Scrap
Pellets
Pellets
Pellets
Iron making
Coal, oil or
natural gas
Blast
O2
Scrap
Steel making
HCI
Reducing
gas
Meltergasifier
Hot metal
O2
BOF
Casting
Fluidized
bed
Shaft prereduction
Blast
furnace
Liquid steel
Rolling / processing
Fluidized
bed
Natural gas
Natural
gas
Coal
O2, coal
Hot metal
O2
Shaft
furnace
HBI
Scrap
HBI
Scrap
BOF
Liquid steel
DRI
EAF
Liquid steel
EAF
Liquid steel
Crude steel
Finished products (flat & long)
Source: Steel Institute VDEh; WV Stahl; WSA; BCG
2
Steel is a complex industry
 Steel can be produced through several production routes, using different types of
raw material (iron ore or products derived therefrom, scrap) in isolation or in
combination.
 Steel production is a multi-step/multi-product industry with by-products, by-product
gases (waste gases) which can be recycled internally or outside the industry.
 Intermediate products can be partially or fully procured from outside the site’s
boundaries.
 Steel sites comprise production units with cross-boundary energy and product
flows.
 Energies are substitutable, to some extent (fossil fuels vs electricity in the EAF).
These characteritics make the determination of CO2 performance a complex
exercise which requires clear and transparent rules on e.g.
•
the system boundaries (legal entity, value chain,…)
•
purchases and sales of intermediate products (e.g. coke)
•
the rules used for the allocation of CO2 to by-products, by-product gases
•
…
Steel is a complex industry
Integrated Steel Plant Flow Sheet (source: I&S BREF, p20)
Objectives of the CO2 steel standard
Next to the basic CO2 inventory, the objectives are to
 establish a framework with a specific set of rules and methodologies
enabling the assessment of CO2 performance of specific processes or
production routes in a defined perimeter:
 identify the performance of individual operators
 identify strengths and weaknesses within the value chain (CO2
saving potential)
 events outside the perimeter (i.e. not under the operator’s control)
should not impact this performance
 give directions on the CO2 accounting of limited resources of raw
materials (e. g. scrap), by-products, waste gases used by the
processes
 define a set of core methodologies, each of them conveying a different
kind of information: the methodology chosen must be fit for the
intended purpose
CEN project – process CO2 emission performance
Assessment of performance carried out via a tiered approach
 Determination of CO2 impact at facility level (absolute CO2 emission)
• Straight CO2 balance
• Corrections for GHG avoided (e.g. because of waste gases export)
 Assessment of CO2 emission performance (performance indicators)
• Assessment of performance at facility (site) level (carbon input
performance)
• Assessment of performance at process level
 Performance assessed against ‘Achievable Reference Performance’ (ARP)
 Roll-up of performance assessment of multiple process steps
 Assessment of CO2 saving potential
No connection with the EU ETS’s ‘stack approach ’
CEN project vs ISO 14404-1 and -2
The ISO developed a standard (published in 2013) and based on the
worldsteel methodology:
ISO 14404-1 and -2 “Calculation method of carbon dioxide emission intensity from
iron and steel production”
Part 1: Steel plant with blast furnace
Part 2: Steel plant with electric arc furnace (EAF)
ISO 14404 uses a ‘black box’ approach.
o “The calculation method establishes boundaries for collection of CO2 emissions
data.”
o “The CO2 emission intensity of the steel plant is calculated by the net CO2
emission from the plant using the boundaries divided by the amount of crude
steel production of the plant. With this methodology, the CO2 emission intensity
of steel plants is calculated irrespective of the variance in the type of process
used, products manufactured and geographic characteristics.”
o “It provides a single figure for the plant as a whole.”
CEN project vs ISO 14404-1 and -2
CO2 intensity calculation in
ISO 14404-1
•
Only applicable to BF route
• Activity data at site level
(stock variations disregarded)
• Doesn’t allow the
identification of performance
‘hot spots’
• Use of country specific
values for electricity and derived
parameters (industrial gases)
CEN project vs ISO 14404-1 and -2
CO2 intensity calculation in
ISO 14404-2
•
Only applicable to EAF route
• Activity data at site level
(stock variations disregarded)
• Doesn’t take into
consideration upstream
emissions from iron-bearing
inputs (not compatible with ISO
14404-1)
• Use of standard values for
electricity and derived
parameters (industrial gases)
CEN project – CO2 emission assessment
Determination of CO2 impact at facility level (absolute CO2 emission)
A) Straight CO2 balance
Equation 9– Calculation of direct emissions
Direct CO2 = ∑1 Diri = ∑1 ( EFi ∗ NU i )
n
n
Equation 10 – Calculation of indirect emissions
Indirect CO2 = ∑1 Ind i = ∑1 ( IEeqi ∗ NU i )
n
n
Equation 11 – Calculation of total emissions
Total CO2 = Direct CO2 + Indirect CO2
Carbon streams leaving the perimeter are accounted as negative CO2
“Emission inventory approach” with no corrections
CEN project – CO2 emission assessment
Determination of CO2 impact at facility level (absolute CO2 emission)
B) Actual CO2 impact (Corrections for CO2 avoided)

Energy
Equivalent
Electricity
GJ ncv
MWh
Straight balance
Gas exports
PPExp+GasExp
to power plants
PPExp
to other activities
OthExp
Global GHG impact
CO2 emissions
(t)
Direct
Indirect
Total
DirCO2
IndCO2
DirCO2+IndCO2
-IEeqElec*EqElec
-IEeqElec*EqElec
-EFNG*OthExp
-EFNG*OthExp
IndCO2IEeqElec*EqElecEFNG*OthExp
DirCO2+IndCO2IEeqElec*EqElecEFNG*OthExp
EqElec=PPExp/9.
8
DirCO2
Gas exports to external power plants are transformed in equivalent electricity on the basis
of a reference energy equivalent (the corresponding electricity is subtracted from the facility
procurements diminishing the indirect emissions)
Gas exports to other activities are accounted for at the level of natural gas chosen as
reference substitution fuel and accounted for as indirect emissions
CEN project – CO2 performance assessment
Assessment of CO2 emission performance (performance indicators)
A) Assessment of performance at facility level (carbon input performance)
Comparison of direct emissions of a site with reference emission levels of
main upstream processes (coke, sinter, BF,BOF, DRI, EAF, smelting
reduction)
“Accounted equivalent direct CO2 input” (carbon input excluding utilities and
downstream) compared to a reference value for the facility.
Facility performance indicator =
Accounted equivalent direct CO2 input
Likely CO2 emission
with
Likely CO2 emission = α ∗ Coke + β ∗ Sinter + γ ∗ Hot metal + δ ∗ Hot rolled
and α, β, γ and δ reflecting good practice.
CEN project – CO2 performance assessment
Assessment of CO2 emission performance (performance indicators)
B) Assessment of performance at process level and roll-up of performance
along the value chain
 Determination of CO2 intensity of each process in a level playing field







Based on generation and use data for the process
Including direct and indirect emissions
Exclusion of factors depending of site location (transport)
Unique indirect (upstream) data for any material involved including electricity
Homogenization of by-product gas at level of natural gas
Introduction of specific rules (optional) for specific materials (scrap, slag, DRI)
Assessment of performance against ARPs (‘Achievable Reference Performance’)
 Comparison of calculated CO2 intensity to a reference (ARP) for determination of
process performance, determination of CO2 saving potential
 Intermediate products are accounted at reference level in subsequent production
steps
 Methodology developed at Eurofer Climate Change Committee in 2005, parallel to
the one developed for Worldsteel Energy reporting
CEN project – CO2 performance roll-up
 Determination of a net use for the roll-up scope
 Calculation of the total accounted CO2 on the basis of net use
including direct and indirect CO2 except for product deliveries
 Product deliveries are credited at their reference CO2 value
 Comparison of accounted and attributed CO2 gives a performance
indicator for the roll-up step
 CO2 saving potentials are accumulated for calculation of total saving
potential without credit from performing processes
CO2 saving potential = Reference production ∗ (CO2 intensity − Reference CO2 intensity )
CEN project – CO2 performance roll-up
Roll-up of performance along the value chain
Reference
Site
Steel
Making
Steel
Steel
Making
Making
Iron
Making
Iron
Making
Coke
Penalty
Bonus
Coke
Making
CEN project – CO2 performance roll-up
BOF shop performance
CEN project – CO2 performance roll-up
CEN project – determination of ARPs
ARP: ‘Achievable Reference Performance’ i.e. reference values
First quartile (25%)
CEN project – determination of ARPs
ARP: ‘Achievable Reference Performance’ i.e. reference values
• Analysis of a set of data for 60 facilities over a period of six years
• Exclusion of data sets with identified important data quality problems
(energy and carbon balance, characteristics of solid fuels, material
efficiency)
• Choice of an Achievable Reference Operation valid for CO2 and
Energy at 25% of the distribution
• Possibility given to attribute a CO2 value to:
 Iron making slag based on analysis of effect of ore quality on
balance of Iron making plant
 Scrap based on a comparison of BOF and EAF steel references
 But consistency required as regards the methodology used in the
assessment and in the determination of the ARPs
CEN project – conclusions
The CEN CO2 steel standard (EN 19694-2) provides a tool to determine CO2
performance:
 at site level (quick evaluation of the operations performance)
 at process level (vs baseline)
 and along the value chain (vs baseline)
The standard:
 allows comparison (e.g. it enables the user to monitor its performance over
time against a reference and identify the processes which are under or
outperforming the reference)
 allows identification of the overall performance of CO2 friendly technologies
 enables the user to assess the CO2 saving potential along the value chain
 quantifies incremental improvement potential for existing facilities
This all rely on a set of rules meant to provide level playing field so as to make
the assessment as transparent and equitable as possible.

Download Report