Author
Abstract
To reach the goals of the Paris Agreement, global emissions should be reduced to net zero by mid-century. The steel sector is an emission-intensive industrial subsector where low-carbon production routes are emerging, and recent studies have shown that rapid decarbonization of the sector is technically possible. However, several barriers block the sector-wide diffusion of low-carbon steelmaking. Inertia and barriers to exit inhibit the closure of emission-intensive plants, thus driving overcapacity and trade conflicts which in turn risk undermining the global steel transition. Drawing on the industrial transitions literature, we find that phase-out policy has a key role to play in overcoming inertia and barriers to exit, increasing the pace of exits in the steel sector, and enabling market space for low-emission steelmaking. Still, reviewing policy mixes in the top four steelmaking jurisdictions, we observe that these are primarily oriented towards phasing-in low-emission capacity rather than phasing-out emission-intensive capacity. In an analysis of low-emission steel projects in the LeadIT Green Steel Tracker, we find that almost half of these projects are financially backed by government, revealing that support for phase-ins is sparking a renaissance for subsidies in the steel sector. At the same time, we find that green steel projects, in aggregate, are increasing total steelmaking capacity. To minimize overcapacity and trade conflicts in the steel transition, policymakers should develop new corresponding phase-out policies that support and increase the pace of closures, to enable a rapid sector-wide diffusion of low-emission steelmaking.While rapid emission reductions are technically possible in the steel sector, frictions such as overcapacity and trade conflicts risk impeding the transition.The steel sector’s inertia and barriers to exit are exacerbating these frictions, and targeted phase-out policies are needed to overcome these blockages.Steel decarbonization policies in top steelmaking jurisdictions are oriented towards phasing-in green steel, not on phasing-out emission-intensive steelmaking.Green steel projects are increasing total steelmaking capacity, and to a high degree are financially supported by governments.
Suggested Citation
Jonas Algers & Max Åhman, 2024.
"Phase-in and phase-out policies in the global steel transition,"
Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(9), pages 1163-1176, October.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:24:y:2024:i:9:p:1163-1176
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2024.2353127
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:tcpoxx:v:24:y:2024:i:9:p:1163-1176. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.