ICCT: fossil fuel-free technologies can slash 95% of steel related emissions from vehicles
01 August 2024
The auto industry can eliminate more than 95% of greenhouse gas emissions from producing the steel for passenger vehicles by switching to fossil fuel-free steel, according to a new report released by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT).
Primary steel, a critical component of today’s auto sector supply chain, is a global driver of greenhouse gas emissions and a danger for the health of local communities, due to the industry’s heavy reliance on coal. Already, steelmakers are piloting fossil fuel-free technologies that can eliminate 95% of the emissions from producing steel in the average vehicle. As automakers invest in strategies to meet ambitious climate goals, prioritizing fossil-free steel would slash emissions and create a powerful market signal.
—Anh Bui, a researcher at the ICCT
The report, Technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automotive steel in the United States and the European Union, compares strategies for automakers to reduce steel-related emissions from vehicles.
US and EU steel-only vehicle manufacturing GHG emissions for internal combustion engine and battery electric vehicles by steel production pathway. ICCT.
The research arrives at the following key results:
The auto industry can eliminate more than 95% of greenhouse gas emissions from producing steel for passenger vehicles by switching to fossil fuel-free steel. Doing so would reduce overall vehicle manufacturing emissions by up to 27%.
Using fossil fuel-free steel in vehicle production increases cost by $100–$200, or less than 1% of the price of an average new vehicle.
Fossil fuel-free primary steel production technologies already exist, and production capacity can increase, but not without commitments from buyers.
Most of the greenhouse gas emissions from the lifetime of vehicles comes from the gasoline and diesel they burn. However, vehicle manufacturing causes significant emissions too, and as we make progress in leading countries switch over to electric vehicles running on an increasingly decarbonized grid, those manufacturing emissions grow in importance.
To achieve a fully net zero GHG transportation sector by 2050, it will be necessary to reduce the embodied emissions in key materials such as steel and batteries drastically.
Procuring primary steel without fossil fuels is the strongest possible pathway to reduce steel-related emissions from vehicles, and this could be done at scale in the US by the end of the decade, according to the ICCT.
Collectively, automakers are among the largest buyers in the steel market in both the US and EU. In 2022, the auto industry consumed 26% of the 82 million metric tons of steel produced in the U.S., and 60% of all domestic primary steel. In the same year, 17% of the 136 million metric tons of steel produced in Europe went to the auto industry, and 24% of all domestic primary steel.
Due to the primary steel industry’s heavy reliance on coal, steel is responsible for up to 27% of embodied emissions in a typical internal combustion engine vehicle.
Procuring primary steel made with green hydrogen and renewable electricity instead of fossil fuels takes a big chunk out of supply chain emissions—but it’s also very cost-effective for automakers. For less than 1% of vehicle costs, automakers can help transition one of the dirtiest industries on the planet toward clean energy, provide clean air to local communities, and meet their climate goals.
—Marta Negri, an associate researcher at the ICCT
This can help, and taxation is the right tool.
Unfortunately taxation does not reflect climate and resource impact, so that vehicles are getting ever bigger, which nullifies progress.
France is starting to change that, with some charges to reflect size and weight.
My view is that such taxation would also encourage more advanced, lighter weight materials.
Basalt fiber and flax have the potential to reduce the weight of vehicles, as well as being low carbon alternative.
Posted by: Davemart | 01 August 2024 at 01:51 AM
As always, ICCT articles are polarizing against the mobility of private individuals with automobiles!
I drive a lot of old cars (I collect old cars - no SUVs) and these were definitely produced locally in my immediate area!
So why a BEV and batteries from China as well as solar cells - no thanks!!!
Do you actually know that cobalt, copper, silicon and aluminum are also produced dirty, but BEVs are always eco-friendly at ICCT!
Well, as we know, the production of STEEL has always been dirty, but the ICCT people only mark automobile production negatively! Russia is waging war against Ukraine and their weapons are probably not made of steel, does that mean ICCT??? China is threatening Taiwan with war but the ICCT does not rate their "war maneuvers with Russia" negatively!
The ICCT again states that no trucks, BUSES, TRAINS or ships need the dirty steel for their production - what ICCT madness!
The battery cells and batteries for BEVs are probably also delivered ecologically from the despotic country of China to the EU?
This is a fact about the environmental pollution that is subsidized by the STATE to harm citizens.
When I look out of the window of my house in the EU, Germany, Bavaria, Regensburg Land, I see the following traffic:
-100% heavy buses that pointlessly speed past empty every 30 minutes - subsidized by the state.
-99% automobiles - SAV & SUV - that are subsidized by the state.
-100% heavy trucks that pointlessly drive around my village to legalize toll fraud - subsidized by the state.
-100% huge tractors and other agricultural vehicles that like to race through villages - subsidized by the state!
DO YOU know that only automobiles with a total weight of up to 3.5 tons have to meet emissions and safety standards??? All vehicles over 3.5 tons are exempt! So why did the alleged politically desired dieselgate only happen for cars to promote BEV??? Why are ICE trains banned for cars, but not for heavy vehicles? Where do the materials come from for production and how many kilometers do these cars drive every day - who really burns more fossil diesel and gasoline?
Mr. Davemart the tax fan!
So you think we private citizens should pay taxes so that the state can subsidize dirty steel with profit? Don't you know that in the EU and especially in Germany 90% of vehicles are commercial and are therefore 100% tax-free subsidized for their users! I don't like it when PEOPLE think they can impose more and more taxes on us private citizens!
Do you know the German word "company car privilege"? That is the privileging of certain population groups and that is antisocial state activity against international law!!!
Posted by: Herman | 02 August 2024 at 01:17 AM
Please correct this sentence:
Why are ICE trains banned for cars ...
Correct:
I mean ICE engines for cars, which politicians only want to ban for cars from 2030.
That's pointless world politics!
Thanks or DANKE!
Posted by: Herman | 02 August 2024 at 01:28 AM
@Herman said:
' Mr. Davemart the tax fan!
So you think we private citizens should pay taxes so that the state can subsidize dirty steel with profit? Don't you know that in the EU and especially in Germany 90% of vehicles are commercial and are therefore 100% tax-free subsidized for their users! '
:-0 How on earth you have come to the conclusion that I advocate tax breaks for supposedly commercial cars is mysterious!
And you confuse increasing taxes with redistribution to reflect true costs otherwise externalised, ie real costs shoved on to someone else, for instance pollution hitting health.
Posted by: Davemart | 02 August 2024 at 02:57 AM
They don't say how many tons of CO2 is saved they talk about this and that since the world produces 30 billion tons of CO2 a year and this might save 30 million tons just to guess that's 0.1%
Posted by: SJC | 04 August 2024 at 09:24 PM
@SJC:
https://www.theclimategroup.org/our-work/events/steelzero-green-steel-automotive-industry
' As major consumers of steel, the automotive industry must transition to clean steel. Steel production accounts for around 12% of global carbon emissions and over one tenth of global steel production by volume goes into the automotive sector. That’s 225 million tonnes of steel – producing 427.5 million tonnes of CO2.'
Half a billion tons saved here, half a billion there, can add up! ;-)
One of the other major uses outside of the automative sector is rebar, which uses some serious quantities of iron.
I fancy basalt fiber in the application.
Not only does it emit less CO2 in production, but structures using it last decades longer, and it is totally reclable.
Posted by: Davemart | 05 August 2024 at 05:47 AM
They're not talking about converting all steel production only steel production for cars, if you look at their graph they might save less than 0.1% of our overall global carbon emissions, one power plant with carbon capture does the equivalent of all the cars in the world made with this steel.
Posted by: SJC | 05 August 2024 at 08:58 PM
@SJC
Either you are misreading my link, or I am.
It says:
' Steel production accounts for around 12% of global carbon emissions and over one tenth of global steel production by volume goes into the automotive sector. That’s 225 million tonnes of steel – producing 427.5 million tonnes of CO2. '
Cross check for my reading taking global CO2 emissions at around 30 billion tons:
12% = 3.6 billion tons
10% of 3.6 billion = 360 million tons
Close enough for government work to the 427.5 million tons of CO2 for the automotive industry that I have cited.
Shipbuilding and rebar present further massive opportunities to the savings I have cited for cars alone.
Posted by: Davemart | 06 August 2024 at 08:56 AM