IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v249y2019icp109-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction in the iron and steel sector: A UK perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Griffin, Paul W.
  • Hammond, Geoffrey P.

Abstract

The opportunities and challenges to reducing industrial energy demand and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the iron & steel sector are evaluated with a focus is on the situation in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK), although the lessons learned are applicable across much of the industrialised world. It is the largest industrial sector in the UK in terms of energy demand and ‘greenhouse gas’ (GHG) emissions, and accounts for some 26% of GHG emissions from British industry. Current Best Available Technologies (BAT) will lead to short-term energy and CO2 emissions savings in iron & steel processing, but the prospects for the commercial exploitation of innovative technologies by mid-21st century are far more speculative. The attainment of significant falls in carbon emissions over the period to 2050 will depend critically on the adoption of a small number of key technologies [e.g., energy efficiency techniques, fuel switching towards bioenergy, and carbon capture and storage (CCS)], alongside the decarbonisation of national electricity supply. The blast furnace is the most efficient energy conversion process in the sector, but also the largest energy user and consequently a priority target for energy demand reduction. Many existing technologies could reduce a significant proportion of process energy loss, e.g., heat recovery at the coke ovens, sinter plant, and electric arc furnace, and further heat and gas recovery from the basic oxygen furnace. The uptake of key BAT technologies for hot-rolling could reduce sector primary energy by 18% and GHG emissions by 12%. Further potential may be available for blast furnace operation by optimising chemical transfer to minimise blast furnace gas (BFG) production. Nevertheless, there are a number of non-technological barriers to the take-up of such technologies going forward. Other radical process technological innovations (such as the ‘electrowinning’ or so-called HISARNA process) are likely to be available in the longer term.

Suggested Citation

  • Griffin, Paul W. & Hammond, Geoffrey P., 2019. "Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction in the iron and steel sector: A UK perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 249(C), pages 109-125.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:249:y:2019:i:c:p:109-125
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261919308098
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.148?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Napp, T.A. & Gambhir, A. & Hills, T.P. & Florin, N. & Fennell, P.S, 2014. "A review of the technologies, economics and policy instruments for decarbonising energy-intensive manufacturing industries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 616-640.
    2. Hammond, G.P. & Norman, J.B., 2012. "Decomposition analysis of energy-related carbon emissions from UK manufacturing," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 220-227.
    3. Griffin, Paul W. & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Norman, Jonathan B., 2018. "Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction in the chemicals sector: A UK perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 587-602.
    4. Paul W. Griffin & Geoffrey P. Hammond & Jonathan B. Norman, 2016. "Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction: a UK perspective," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(6), pages 684-714, November.
    5. Rootzén, Johan & Johnsson, Filip, 2015. "CO2 emissions abatement in the Nordic carbon-intensive industry – An end-game in sight?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 715-730.
    6. Dyer, Caroline H. & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Jones, Craig I. & McKenna, Russell C., 2008. "Enabling technologies for industrial energy demand management," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4434-4443, December.
    7. Wesseling, J.H. & Lechtenböhmer, S. & Åhman, M. & Nilsson, L.J. & Worrell, E. & Coenen, L., 2017. "The transition of energy intensive processing industries towards deep decarbonization: Characteristics and implications for future research," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1303-1313.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fitzpatrick, John J. & Dooley, Paul, 2017. "Holistic view of CO2 reduction potential from energy use by an individual processing company," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 336-343.
    2. Konstantinos Koasidis & Alexandros Nikas & Hera Neofytou & Anastasios Karamaneas & Ajay Gambhir & Jakob Wachsmuth & Haris Doukas, 2020. "The UK and German Low-Carbon Industry Transitions from a Sectoral Innovation and System Failures Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-34, September.
    3. Griffin, Paul W. & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Norman, Jonathan B., 2018. "Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction in the chemicals sector: A UK perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 587-602.
    4. Wang, Qiang & Song, Xiaoxin, 2021. "How UK farewell to coal – Insight from multi-regional input-output and logarithmic mean divisia index analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    5. Fernández González, P. & Presno, M.J. & Landajo, M., 2015. "Regional and sectoral attribution to percentage changes in the European Divisia carbonization index," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1437-1452.
    6. Skoczkowski, Tadeusz & Verdolini, Elena & Bielecki, Sławomir & Kochański, Max & Korczak, Katarzyna & Węglarz, Arkadiusz, 2020. "Technology innovation system analysis of decarbonisation options in the EU steel industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    7. Furszyfer Del Rio, Dylan D. & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Foley, Aoife M. & Griffiths, Steve & Bazilian, Morgan & Kim, Jinsoo & Rooney, David, 2022. "Decarbonizing the glass industry: A critical and systematic review of developments, sociotechnical systems and policy options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Norman Hendrik Riedel & Miroslav Špaček, 2022. "Challenges of Renewable Energy Sourcing in the Process Industries: The Example of the German Chemical Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-19, October.
    9. Ida Karlsson & Johan Rootzén & Alla Toktarova & Mikael Odenberger & Filip Johnsson & Lisa Göransson, 2020. "Roadmap for Decarbonization of the Building and Construction Industry—A Supply Chain Analysis Including Primary Production of Steel and Cement," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-40, August.
    10. Xianrui Liao & Wei Yang & Yichen Wang & Junnian Song, 2019. "Uncovering Variations, Determinants, and Disparities of Multisector-Level Final Energy Use of Industries Across Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Paul W. Griffin & Geoffrey P. Hammond & Jonathan B. Norman, 2016. "Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction: a UK perspective," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(6), pages 684-714, November.
    12. Wang, Yanxia & Li, Kang & Gan, Shaojun & Cameron, Ché, 2019. "Analysis of energy saving potentials in intelligent manufacturing: A case study of bakery plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 477-486.
    13. Yoro, Kelvin O. & Daramola, Michael O. & Sekoai, Patrick T. & Armah, Edward K. & Wilson, Uwemedimo N., 2021. "Advances and emerging techniques for energy recovery during absorptive CO2 capture: A review of process and non-process integration-based strategies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    14. Malico, Isabel & Nepomuceno Pereira, Ricardo & Gonçalves, Ana Cristina & Sousa, Adélia M.O., 2019. "Current status and future perspectives for energy production from solid biomass in the European industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 960-977.
    15. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Umeki, Kentaro & Mousa, Elsayed & Hedayati, Ali & Romar, Henrik & Kemppainen, Antti & Wang, Chuan & Phounglamcheik, Aekjuthon & Tuomikoski, Sari & Norberg, Nicklas & Andefors, Alf , 2018. "Use of biomass in integrated steelmaking – Status quo, future needs and comparison to other low-CO2 steel production technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 384-407.
    16. Thollander, Patrik & Kimura, Osamu & Wakabayashi, Masayo & Rohdin, Patrik, 2015. "A review of industrial energy and climate policies in Japan and Sweden with emphasis towards SMEs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 504-512.
    17. Yang, Honghua & Ma, Linwei & Li, Zheng, 2023. "Tracing China's steel use from steel flows in the production system to steel footprints in the consumption system," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    18. Hellsmark, Hans & Hansen, Teis, 2020. "A new dawn for (oil) incumbents within the bioeconomy? Trade-offs and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    19. Verrier, Brunilde & Strachan, Neil, 2024. "Sunset and sunrise business strategies shaping national energy transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    20. Kaivo-oja, J. & Luukkanen, J. & Panula-Ontto, J. & Vehmas, J. & Chen, Y. & Mikkonen, S. & Auffermann, B., 2014. "Are structural change and modernisation leading to convergence in the CO2 economy? Decomposition analysis of China, EU and USA," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 115-125.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:249:y:2019:i:c:p:109-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.