LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY STUDY

2017 data release

Table of contents

Table of contents ............................................................................................................................................... 1

List of figures .............................................................................................................................................. 3
List of tables ................................................................................................................................................ 3
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................... 4
1. Project context ............................................................................................................................................ 5
2. Goal of the study......................................................................................................................................... 5
3. Scope of the study ...................................................................................................................................... 6
3.1 System description overview ............................................................................................................ 6
3.2 Functional unit ................................................................................................................................... 6
3.3 System boundaries ........................................................................................................................... 7
3.3.1 Technology coverage ..................................................................................................................... 7
3.3.2 Geographic coverage ..................................................................................................................... 7
3.3.3 Time coverage ................................................................................................................................ 8
3.4 Application of LCIA categories .......................................................................................................... 8
3.5 Data collection .................................................................................................................................. 9
3.5.1 Exceptions ...................................................................................................................................... 9
3.6 Methodological details ...................................................................................................................... 9
3.6.1 Co-products .................................................................................................................................... 9
3.6.2 Steel scrap .................................................................................................................................... 10
3.7 Interpretation ................................................................................................................................... 10
3.8 Critical review .................................................................................................................................. 10
4. Data quality ............................................................................................................................................... 11
4.1.1 Data quality requirements ............................................................................................................. 11
4.2 Data quality check........................................................................................................................... 11
4.2.1 Raw data ....................................................................................................................................... 12
4.2.2 Process, site and route data. ........................................................................................................ 12
4.2.3 Water emissions ........................................................................................................................... 12
4.3 Data gaps ........................................................................................................................................ 13
5. LCA results and analysis .......................................................................................................................... 13
5.1 LCI value of steel scrap .................................................................................................................. 13
5.2 Energy demand and environmental impact categories .................................................................. 14
5.2.1 Primary energy demand, PED ...................................................................................................... 15
5.2.2 Global warming potential, GWP ................................................................................................... 16
5.2.3 Acidification potential, AP ............................................................................................................. 17
5.2.4 Eutrophication potential, EP ......................................................................................................... 18
5.2.5 Photochemical ozone creation potential, POCP .......................................................................... 19
6. Life cycle interpretation ............................................................................................................................. 20
1
 6.1 Identification of significant issues ................................................................................................... 20
6.2 Completeness, sensitivity and consistency checks ........................................................................ 24
6.2.1 Completeness ............................................................................................................................... 24
6.2.2 Sensitivity...................................................................................................................................... 24
6.2.2.1 Sensitivity analysis on system expansion ................................................................................. 25
6.2.2.2 Sensitivity analysis on internal transport ................................................................................... 25
6.2.2.3 Sensitivity analysis on packaging .............................................................................................. 26
6.2.3 Consistency checks ...................................................................................................................... 26
7. Conclusions, limitations and recommendations ....................................................................................... 26
7.1.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 26
7.1.2 Limitations..................................................................................................................................... 26
7.1.3 Recommendations to uses of the data ......................................................................................... 27
8. Appendices ............................................................................................................................................... 28
APPENDIX 1: DESCRIPTION OF STEEL PRODUCTS COVERED BY THE STUDY ...................................29
APPENDIX 2: REPRESENTATION OF THE BOF PROCESS ....................................................................... 31
APPENDIX 3: LIST OF PARTICIPATING COMPANIES................................................................................. 32
APPENDIX 4: EXAMPLE DATA COLLECTION QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................................... 33
APPENDIX 5: LIST OF UPSTREAM INPUTS AND THEIR DATA SOURCES...............................................35
APPENDIX 6: ELECTRICITY GRID MIX INFORMATION .............................................................................. 40
APPENDIX 7: STEEL LCI DATA EXPLANATION ........................................................................................... 42
A7.1 LCI flows ....................................................................................................................................... 42
A7.1.1 Iron (ore) .................................................................................................................................... 42
A7.1.2 Ferrous scrap (net) .................................................................................................................... 42
A7.1.3 Water consumption ................................................................................................................... 42
A7.1.4 Carbon dioxide emissions ......................................................................................................... 42
A7.1.5 Particulate emissions to air ....................................................................................................... 43
A7.1.6 Waste ........................................................................................................................................ 43
A7.1.7 Primary Energy Demand ........................................................................................................... 43
A7.1.8 Life cycle impacts ...................................................................................................................... 43
A7.1.9 Other articles not reported ........................................................................................................ 43
APPENDIX 8: SYSTEM EXPANSION ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................. 44
APPENDIX 9: UPDATES FROM THE LCI STUDY OUTLINDED IN THE 2010 METHODOLOGY REPORT45
APPENDIX 10: LIST OF ALL AVAILABLE QUESTIONNAIRES FOR DATA COLLECTION .........................46
APPENDIX 11: MATRIX OF USES OF STEEL PRODUCTS ......................................................................... 47
APPENDIX 12: CRITICAL REVIEW STATEMENT ......................................................................................... 48
References ....................................................................................................................................................... 50

2
List of figures

Figure 1: Horizontal averaging and vertical aggregation ............................................................................................ 12

Figure 2: Primary energy demand (MJ) of steel products .......................................................................................... 15
Figure 3: Contributions to primary energy demand of steel products......................................................................... 15
Figure 4: Global warming potential (CO2-e) of steel products .................................................................................... 16
Figure 5: Contributions to global warming potential of steel products ........................................................................ 16
Figure 6: Acidification potential (SO2-e) of steel products .......................................................................................... 17
Figure 7: Contributions to acidification potential of steel products ............................................................................. 17
Figure 8: Eutrophication potential (PO43--e) of steel products .................................................................................... 18
Figure 9: Contributions to eutrophication potential of steel products ......................................................................... 18
Figure 10: Photochemical ozone creation potential (C2H4-e) of steel products .........................................................19
Figure 11: Contributions to POCP of steel products................................................................................................... 19
Figure 12: Life cycle contributions to PED and Impact categories for sections .........................................................21
Figure 13: Life cycle contributions to PED and impact categories for HRC ............................................................... 22
Figure 14: Life cycle contributions to PED and impact categories for HDG ............................................................... 23

List of tables

Table 1: List of products covered by the study ............................................................................................................. 6

Table 2: Number of process stages represented in the study ...................................................................................... 7
Table 3: Countries participating in the worldsteel study ............................................................................................... 8
Table 4: Slag recovery rates and usages ................................................................................................................... 10
Table 5: Example impact categories and primary energy demand for 1 kg steel scrap.............................................14
Table 6: Life cycle impact assessment results of steel products ................................................................................ 14
Table 7: Life cycle significant flows, phases and processes (excluding end-of-life phase)........................................24
Table 8: Sensitivity analysis of system expansion...................................................................................................... 25

3
ACRONYMS

AP Acidification potential
BF Blast furnace
BF Gas Process gas produced in the blast furnace
BOF Basic Oxygen Furnace
BOF Gas Process gas produced in the basic oxygen furnace
CO Gas Process gas produced in the coke ovens
EAF Electric arc furnace
ECCS Electrolytic Chrome Coated Steel (tin-free steel)
EP Eutrophication potential
GWP Global warming potential
HDG Hot-dip galvanized steel
HRC Hot rolled coil
ISSF International Stainless Steel Forum
LCA Life cycle assessment
LCI Life cycle inventory
LCIA Life cycle impact assessment
NCV Net calorific value
PED Primary energy demand
POCP Photochemical oxidant creation potential
worldsteel World Steel Association

4
1. Project context
This report presents a summary of the 4th global World Steel Association (worldsteel) Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)
Study. It provides an explanation of the implementation of the methodology, results and interpretation of the LCI
data for steel products. The study was originally carried out for 1994/1995 steel production data. The first update
was then undertaken for 1999/2000 data, then 2005/2006 1 and as part of worldsteel’s ongoing commitment to
improving data quality, has now been updated for 2012-2015 data.
The main goal of the study is to update the LCI data for steel products on a global and regional basis. Currently
regional data is available for Europe, Asia and Latin America for certain products. It is believed that other datasets
on steel have been derived with limited accuracy or representation and/or contain out of date information.
The data collection and methodology development have been subject to a great amount of quality control in order to
provide a sophisticated database of steel product LCIs for use both internally and externally to the global steel
industry.
Previous worldsteel LCI studies were reported as one main document. The decision was taken to separate this
document into two parts, the methodology report which remains the same for all subsequent LCI studies that will be
conducted and a study report which gives the details that ascertain to the particular study that has been conducted
for each annual data release. Therefore, this report aims to describe the details of the LCI study 2017 and the
methodology followed can be found in the World Steel Association LCI methodology report 2017 2. Further details on
the steel industry production processes are available from other publications (available via the worldsteel website
www.worldsteel.org and steeluniversity.org).

This study report conforms to the World Steel Association LCI methodology report 2017. Throughout the study
report, reference is made to the methodology report, but not all aspects covered in the methodology report are
repeated here for readability purposes. However, all of the requirements documented in the methodology report
still apply for the study presented here.

Although this report features a comprehensive level of detail, it is intended to serve as a basis of dialogue between
steel industry representatives and third parties using the data. Recommendations for improvement concerning both
the documentation and the LCI data are highly welcomed. They will be considered as the worldsteel LCI database is
improved in the future.
Data can be requested from www.wordsteel.org.

The worldsteel LCI study has been undertaken in accordance with ISO14040: 2006 3 and 14044: 2006 4, and has
been critically reviewed by an independent critical review specialist. The reviewer has already reviewed the
separate 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report which had previously been reviewed three times by a panel of
specialists, but on this occasion only one specialist was selected as the methodology has not changed significantly
since the previous reviews. This approach has improved the integrity of the study and helps to establish
transparency. The final critical review report of this study report is included in Appendix 12.

2. Goal of the study

This 2017 release of steel industry data is the 3rd update of worldsteel LCI data, first released in 1995. The industry
has regularly collected data and released updates to ensure that the data remains representative of the current
steelmaking technologies and their associated emissions and impacts.

The LCI results alone shall not be used for comparisons intended to be used in comparative assertions intended to
be disclosed to the public. The LCI data can be used as part of an LCA for comparative studies disclosed to the
public if this is stated in the goals and scope of the LCA study, is done based on a proper functional unit and is
subject to a study specific critical review by an external panel of experts.

The target audience of the study includes the World Steel Association and its members. Furthermore, aggregated
and averaged data will be made available for many different external applications of the data, for technical and
non-technical use, including customers of the steel industry, policy makers, LCA practitioners and academia. The
data will also be made available in public and proprietary databases.

5
The goals of the project are to:
• Produce worldwide LCI data for steel industry products. The LCIs are both cradle-to-gate data and cradle-
to-gate data including end-of-life recycling (end-of-life credits are separately reported).
• Provide data to support communication with industry stakeholders.
• Assist industry benchmarking and environmental improvement programmes.

The changes that have been made to the model and methodology have been made to improve the quality and
representativeness of the data compared to previous versions of the model that have been used to generate the
results. Where appropriate, a conservative approach has been taken.

3. Scope of the study

3.1 System description overview
The scope of the LCA study is defined in ISO 14044: 2006 section 4.2.3.1, and among other things outlines the
function, functional unit, system boundary and cut-off criteria of the study. These are outlined in the following
sections.
Sixteen steel products (Error! Reference source not found.) were included in the study. These products were
chosen as they cover the vast majority of steel products (> 95%). Additional products which have not been included
at this stage are generally processed from one of the products listed below. The detailed specifications of each
steel product, such as size range, gauge and coating thickness, vary from site to site and are a function of the
technology, equipment and product ranges at the sites involved and are detailed in Appendix 1. The range of
specifications within a product category will to some extent influence the regional and global LCI results.

Product category Manufacturing route List of products

Long products Blast furnace route Sections

and Rebar
Electric arc furnace route Wire rod
Engineering steels
Flat products Blast furnace route and Plate
Electric arc furnace route Hot rolled coil
Cold rolled coil
Pickled hot rolled coil
Finished cold rolled coil
Electrogalvanized steel
Hot-dip galvanized steel
Tin-free steel (ECCS)
Tinplated products
Organic coated steel
Welded pipes
UO pipes
Table 1: List of products covered by the study

The study focused on carbon and low alloy steels (with alloy content lower than 2 %). The upstream impact of all
alloys has been included in the study, as detailed in Appendix 5.

Notably stainless steels (with at least 12% chromium) were outside the study scope, but form the basis of another
study via EUROFER and ISSF 5.

3.2 Functional unit

Within the scope of this study, the functional unit is the production of 1kg of a steel product at the factory gate, i.e.
cradle-to-gate data. Where the data is intended to be supplied as cradle-to-gate including end-of-life recycling, the
function includes the upstream burdens of the scrap used in the steelmaking process and the credits associated
with the end-of-life recycling of the steel product. Further functions relating to the generation of co-products from
the steel production system have been considered using the allocation procedure recommended in ISO 14040:
2006 as documented in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, section 3.6.

6
3.3 System boundaries
The study is a cradle-to-gate LCI study with and without the end-of-life recycling of the steel as defined in the 2017
worldsteel LCI methodology report, Figures 1 and 2. That is, it covers all of the production steps from raw materials
in the earth (i.e. the cradle) to finished products ready to be shipped from the steelworks (i.e. the gate). The cradle-
to-gate LCI study, with end-of-life recycling, includes net credits (these are the end-of-life scrap value minus any
scrap consumed in the production of the product) associated with recycling the steel from the final products at the
end-of-life (end-of-life scrap). It does not include the manufacture of the downstream final products or their use. If
the user of steel uses steel datasets including the end-of-life credits on the material level, it has to be checked that
no double-counting occurs when the user models the end-of-life of the downstream product.

A full description of the system boundaries and cut-off criteria is given in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology
report, section 3.3.

For this study, primary data were collected for 23 separate steelmaking process steps (Table 2 shows the break
down and the number of sites contributing to this study), plus boilers, compressors, water intake, effluents,
stockpile emissions and transport. A representation of one of these processes, the basic oxygen furnace module is
given in Appendix 2. Data were also collected regarding the use of steel industry co-products such as process
gases and slags.

Process stage Number of Process stage Number of sites

sites
Coke making 40 Electrogalvanizing 12
Sinter making 37 Hot-dip galvanizing 34
Pellet plant 6 Tin-free mill (ECCS) 4
Blast furnace 44 Tinplate mill 15
Direct reduced iron 7 Organic coating line 13
Basic oxygen furnace 44 Section mill 22
Electric arc furnace 38 Heavy plate mill 18
Hot strip mill 41 Rebar 23
Pickling plant 38 UO pipe 5
Cold rolling mill 38 Welded pipe 9
Annealing & tempering mill 37 Wire rod 22
Engineering Steels 7
Total processes 554
Table 2: Number of process stages represented in the study

The steel product manufacturing flow diagrams via the blast furnace route and the electric arc furnace route are
shown in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, Appendix 1.

3.3.1 Technology coverage

Steel is produced predominantly by two process routes; the blast furnace route and the electric arc furnace route
(the BOF and EAF routes respectively). Typical steel manufacturing flow diagrams are shown in the 2017
worldsteel methodology report, Appendix 1.
Both routes are represented in this data update and the number of sites contributing data for each process is
specified in Table 2.

3.3.2 Geographic coverage

The companies participating in the study produce over 25% of global steel production and the contributing sites
(which cover 15% of global steel production) are among the largest of the principal producer countries. The highest
represented region is Europe: the sites participating represent over 38% of European steel production. The list of
participating companies is shown in Appendix 3.

109 sites located in 28 countries participated in the study. The major steel producing countries and regions are
included. These are listed below in Table 3.
7
 Argentina France Saudi Arabia
Australia Germany Spain
Austria India Sweden
Belgium Italy Taiwan
Bosnia Japan Thailand
Brazil Luxembourg Turkey
Canada Mexico UK
China Morocco USA
Czech Republic Netherlands
Finland Poland
Table 3: Countries participating in the worldsteel study

3.3.3 Time coverage

The data collection is related to one-year operation and the year of the data is indicated by the data provider in the
questionnaire for each data point. The primary data collected from the steel companies in this study relate to one
year’s production in the period from 2012 to 2015 and is believed to be representative of global steel production
during this time frame due to minimal changes in technologies employed during this period Although improvements
are continually being sought for the steelmaking processes, this is more of a gradual process than any major global
change.

Secondary data was sourced from the GaBi database and relates to datasets dated from 2013 to 2017, with the
exceptions of cement from 2006 (which will be updated in the next annual update) and nitrogen and oxygen
production from 2007. These gas processes have limited data inputs but as they are linked directly to the most up-
to-date country specific grid electricity production from 2013, the datasets are therefore representative for this
study. The source of each secondary dataset is listed in Appendix 5.

3.4 Application of LCIA categories

The LCI study set out to include as many inputs and outputs from the steel production route as possible so that any
future studies could consider a range of impact categories. The methodological aspects for key data categories are
discussed in section 3.5.

The goal of the study is to provide the LCI profiles for a number of different steel products and not to analyse the
impact categories as they are not included in an LCI profile. In addition, normalisation, grouping and weighting are
not applied to the worldsteel LCI data. worldsteel does not routinely provide impact category information with the
LCI profiles, except for the following CML impacts, which are given for information purposes only: global warming
potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential and photochemical ozone creation potential. Therefore, the
same selection of LCIA results have been included in this report for illustrative purposes only and is included in
further detail in Section 6. The impact assessment is based on the methods and data compiled by the Centre of
Environmental Science at Leiden University, CML 2001 – Jan. 2016 6.

The following LCIA categories, which have been chosen as examples, will be applied to the LCI data:
• Global warming potential (GWP 100 years): an impact assessment level with global effect; GWP is mainly
caused from CO2 and methane emissions which account for over 98% of GHG emissions from the steel
industry.
• Acidification potential (AP): an impact assessment level with local effect; within the steel industry, AP is
mainly caused by SO2 and NOx.
• Eutrophication potential (EP): an impact assessment level with local effect; within the steel industry, EP is
mainly caused from NOx emissions.
• Photochemical oxidant creation potential (POCP): an impact assessment level with local effect; within the
steel industry, POCP, also known as summer smog, is mainly caused from carbon monoxide emissions.

8
3.5 Data collection
The LCI data for this study has been collected according to the principles set out in ISO 14040: 2006 and ISO
14044: 2006. Further clarification to data collection principles can be found in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology
report, section 3.5.

The worldsteel LCI model used to create the LCIs used GaBi 7.3 which was based on the previous steel industry
model for the 2011 data collection. The initial model was created by a team of experts including worldsteel,
thinkstep and the worldsteel members and represents the steel production and manufacturing processes. Site data
were collected using the internet-based GaBi Web Questionnaire, known as SoFi. The LCA software system GaBi
7.3 communicates with the web-based questionnaire platform via a specific interface. The questionnaires are
uploaded to the web-platform and each company has individual password protected access to their specific
questionnaires. A separate questionnaire was available for each of the process stages for each site (a full list of
questionnaires is shown in Appendix 10), an example of which is shown in Appendix 4, as well as for ancillary
utilities such as boilers/power plants, compressors, alternators etc. Each of the questionnaires contained a list of
input and output flows which fall into the following categories: material and energy inputs, air and water emissions,
wastes, products and co-products, and recovered material that can be processed internally to displace raw material
inputs. Transport data for the raw materials and internal transportation fuel used was also provided in the
questionnaires. The central allocation of access rights by an administrator ensures the confidentiality of all
collected data.

Details of the upstream inputs to the steelmaking process are detailed in Appendix 5 and energy grid mixes for
each country in Appendix 6.

A training manual is available to assist those in providing the data via the GaBi Web Questionnaire. A number of
features are available in the questionnaire in order to facilitate data collection:

• The GaBi Web Questionnaire has an export function which allows data to be collected in excel and
imported into the relevant questionnaire
• In each questionnaire, the amount of each flow per unit product for that process is shown. This gives an
easy way to check that the value of the flow was in the correct range and order of magnitude and helps to
avoid errors with units.
• Iron, carbon and mass balances can be seen at the process and site level to enable verification of data
submission.

The data were collected by worldsteel member companies, i.e. the steel producing companies, on a site-by-site
and process-by-process basis, ensuring a high-quality dataset. The data represents normal or abnormal operation,
but excludes accidents, spills and similar events.

3.5.1 Exceptions
In 2014, 99.5% of crude steel production was produced either via the BOF or EAF route. Open hearth production
and ingot cast steel production, accounting for approximately 0.4% of global steel production, was not included. No
other exceptions to the scope of this study on carbon steel products are given.

3.6 Methodological details

3.6.1 Co-products
With any multi-product system, rules are defined to relate the system inputs and outputs to each of the products.
This is particularly important in the case of the BOF route, which generates important quantities of valuable co-
products, but also applies equally to co-products produced in the EAF route, such as slag.

The allocation methods applied in this study are detailed in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, section
3.6.1.

Significant material co-products such as slags, which are sold to known destinations, replace functionally similar
products. This information is collected from the steel companies participating in the data collection. For example,
BF slags can be used in cement manufacture (in cement making and as a replacement for cement), for road

9
construction or aggregate, or as a fertiliser. On average for this study, 0.28 kg of BF slag is generated per kg of hot
metal. The generation rate, which depends on the quality of the raw materials used, can be as high as 0.53 kg in
some cases. On the sample of participating sites, 99% of the total amount of BF slag produced is recovered of
which 78% is used for cement making. Some slag is used for such things as on-site construction. Details on the
use of slags, for the data collected, is provided in Table 4. Care should be taken in studies where both concrete
(using slag) and steel are used in order to avoid double counting the credits of the slags.

Slag type Total % Percentage use of material

recovered recovered
Cement Roadstone Fertiliser
BF slag >99% 78% 21% <1%
BOF slag >69% 16% 81% <3%
EAF slag >82% 16% 84% 0%
Table 4: Slag recovery rates and usages

System expansion is used to deal with the slags. This method allows discriminating between alternative recovery
routes of steel co-products from an environmental perspective as different “credits” are given for recovery based on
the end use of the co-product. This reinforces the environmental value of using co-products in the industry.
Allocation by mass scenarios do not integrate the actual use of co-products. For example, allocation applied to BF
slags only considers the mass of slag recovered and does not differentiate between the environmental benefits of
replacing cement or replacing aggregates.

System expansion is also used to account for dusts, scales, oils etc. that are produced in the steelmaking
processes and then recovered. Details of the assumptions made for all recovered material are included in
Appendix 8.

With further analysis, the processes linked with the system expansion retain their initial (actual) inventories of the
process (e.g. cement or fertiliser production) and the expanded system processes are also reported separately.
When combined, the result is the overall LCI of the product at the route (cradle-to-gate) level.

3.6.2 Steel scrap

Methods for dealing with steel scrap are outlined in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, section 3.6.2 and
have been followed in this study.

3.7 Interpretation
The results of the LCI/LCIA are interpreted according to the Goal and Scope of the study. The interpretation
addresses the following topics:
• Identification of significant findings such as the main contributors to the overall results or certain impact
categories, see Section 6.
• Evaluation of completeness and sensitivity to justify the inclusion or exclusion of data from the system
boundary or methodological choices, see Section 6.2.2.
• Conclusions, limitations and recommendations, see Section 7.

3.8 Critical review

In order to ensure that this study report correctly follows the methodology for LCA according to ISO 14044: 2006
and the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, a critical review according to ISO TS 14071 (2014) was
conducted by an external expert, Prof. Dr. Matthias Finkbeiner.

The critical review statement is included in Appendix 12.

10
4. Data quality
4.1.1 Data quality requirements
To ensure that worldsteel can provide the most accurate and representative data for steel industry products, the
quality of the data used in the models needs to be high.
Data Quality requirements from the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, section 3.5.7 were followed.
The data that have been used for this study can be classified in three ways:
• Primary data collected from worldsteel member companies, gate-to-gate data.
• Primary data for some upstream inputs, e.g. aluminium and zinc from industry associations or producers,
cradle-to-gate data.
• Cradle-to-gate data, plus background system from the GaBi 7.3 Professional database for upstream inputs
e.g. electricity, iron ore, coal etc.

Due to the extensive checks made of the data provided by each site, the overall quality of the data is considered to
be high and is representative of the systems described in terms of technological coverage. The primary steel data
are collected directly from the steel producers themselves, enabling a thorough analysis and exchange with these
producers. The steel industry is striving to continually improve the quality of its own data and upstream data that
are used in the model.

The data collection was managed in the following way. The project was led by the worldsteel LCA manager,
reporting to the Head of Product Sustainability. Data was provided individually by the worldsteel member
companies and they were supported by worldsteel LCA expert group members, thinkstep and worldsteel LCA
fellows. The data was reviewed by the worldsteel LCA expert group members, thinkstep for GaBi supplied datasets
and external critical review.

Gate-to-gate data
All data on steel production and processing were collected on a site-by-site basis utilising the GaBi Web
Questionnaire. All data submitted were checked as detailed in section 4.2. Companies were provided with a data
collection user guide and was given training on how to use the GaBi Web Questionnaire. worldsteel was available
for web meetings or calls to answer specific questions relating to the data collection exercise.

Cradle-to-gate data from industry associations

For industry supplied datasets such as aluminium or zinc, the datasets were checked to ensure they were
consistent with the goals and scope of the worldsteel study. Expert judgement was used to select the appropriate
datasets and documentation relating to these datasets is given within the dataset or can be obtained directly from
the supplying industry associations.

Upstream GaBi data

All data from the GaBi Professional database were created with consistent system boundaries and upstream data
by thinkstep. Expert judgement and advice was used in selecting appropriate datasets to model the materials and
energy for this study. Detailed database documentation for GaBi datasets can be accessed at
http://documentation.gabi-software.com/.

4.2 Data quality check

The GaBi Web Questionnaires were based on the worldsteel LCA model that had been set up by worldsteel and
thinkstep. In this way, all relevant flows, processes and interconnections between the processes were included in
the model. The data collector was able to specify the data in their preferred units within the data collection system
to avoid human error when entering the data, for the conversion from one unit to another. For example, natural gas
could be entered as kg, MJ, GJ, Nm3, kWh etc.

This data was then extracted by worldsteel for analysis. In addition to the worldsteel LCA Manager and worldsteel
LCA fellows, the worldsteel LCA Expert Group ‘verified’ the process data and LCI results to ensure its validity. This
was carried out by examining the individual processes for all sites and comparing the inputs and outputs. The
experts applied their knowledge of the steelmaking processes to ensure the data was consistent with known
steelmaking practices.

11
4.2.1 Raw data
All completed GaBi Web Questionnaires submitted by the sites were checked individually and systematically by
worldsteel.

The questionnaires were imported directly into the GaBi software on a site by site basis. No manual import was
necessary which therefore avoided errors in conversion or typing mistakes.

4.2.2 Process, site and route data.

Data checks were done at the process, site (gate-to-gate) and route level and at each stage, benchmarking
analysis was carried out to ensure that the data provided were accurate. Data checks included:

• Carbon and iron balance per kg of product for each process

• Energy consumption per process, including the boilers
• Emissions to air and water
• Yields between different process steps and scrap produced / consumed
• Route comparison against 2 standard deviations of data for a range of impact assessments
• Slag balance across the whole site
• Process gas balance across the whole site
• Water balance
• LCIA level checks

The product LCIs were calculated in GaBi, by averaging the available site-specific routes (by setting up individual
plans) for each product included in the study. The steel product LCI average datasets were calculated using a
vertical aggregation approach (see Error! Reference source not found..), i.e. calculating the LCI for product A
from site X and averaging with product A from site Y, based on the weighted average of the production volume of
product A.

Figure 1: Horizontal averaging and vertical aggregation

The final product tonnage LCI results were then distributed to the worldsteel LCA experts in order to check them for
accuracy to ensure that the final LCI results were accurate and robust.

4.2.3 Water emissions

Due to the uncertainty in conducting a water balance that accounts for all water inputs and outputs across a site
boundary which includes evaporation losses and unmeasured water inputs such as rainfall, there is a variability of
data regarding water usage and water emissions. Better metering and monitoring will help to reduce this in future.
For some sites located downstream of urban and industrial areas, the outflow water is purer than the intake, due to

12
discharge regulations, and this could therefore contribute positively to the overall water quality. However, there are
gaps for this category of data for which it is not possible to calculate an estimate. Therefore, the values of
waterborne emissions are potentially overestimated in terms of net emissions.

4.3 Data gaps

Where there were gaps in the data, the data collector was contacted in order to provide any missing data. Where
this was not possible, the average value, based on data collected from other steel production sites, was
incorporated into the dataset where it was missing. For all accounted air and water emissions, this average
approach was taken. This is detailed in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, section 3.5.4.

5. LCA results and analysis

It is not the intention to provide an impact assessment of the steel products considered in this study but they are
considered here as a plausibility check and for illustrative purposes only.

Life cycle inventory data are available for 16 steel products and is freely available from worldsteel, upon request via
www.worldsteel.org. The data are provided using the GaBi Envision tool, which enables the data to be easily
generated directly from the GaBi 7.3 software thus reducing the likelihood of errors in generating datasets. The
data provided are LCI data and are provided as cradle-to-gate data as well as cradle-to-gate including end-of-life
recycling. A description of the data provided can be found in Appendix 7.

Table 6 shows typical impacts for three main steel industry products: steel sections, hot rolled coil and hot-dip
galvanized steel, which cover a wide range of use of steel products. Steel sections are produced both in the EAF
and in the BOF route and are rolled on a hot rolling mill. These include I-beams, H-beams, wide flange beams and
sheet piling and are often found on the market for direct use. Hot rolled coil is one of the first products being
produced from the BOF route and EAF route. The hot rolled coil is generally further processed into finished
products by the manufacturers and can be used in transport, construction, ship-building, pressure vessels,
pipelines etc. Hot-dip galvanized steel is generally hot rolled coil that has been further processed (e.g. rolling,
annealing, tempering, coating) and has a thin layer of zinc to provide corrosion resistance and can be used in a
number of applications for automotive, construction, domestic appliances etc.

The data are based on global average datasets and include:

• Cradle-to-gate
• Cradle-to-gate including recycling, with a typical end-of-life recycling rate (RR) of 85%

This end-of-life recycling rate means that 85% of the steel within the final product will be recycled when the product
reaches the end of its useful life. The end-of-life recycling rate of steel depends on the type of final product and its
use. Typical rates for the automotive sector are above 95%, for construction around 85% and for packaging around
70%. These values are based on expert judgement amongst the worldsteel LCA experts and are meant as
guidance only and they are believed to be conservative values as recycling of products will improve in the future.
When a request for data is received by worldsteel which requests a different end-of-life recycling rate, this specified
value can be used.

5.1 LCI value of steel scrap

The methodology for determining the LCI for steel scrap has been described in the 2017 worldsteel LCI
methodology report, section 3.6.2 and further discussed in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, Appendix
2. A credit is given for the net scrap that is produced at the end of a final products life. The net amount of scrap that
is used is determined as follows:

Net scrap = Amount of steel recycled at end-of-life – Scrap input

The results provided in section 5 include this net credit for scrap recycling. The impact of recycling 1kg steel scrap
is shown in Table 5; this has been calculated using the methodology in the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology
report, section 3.6.2. based on data collected from the sites for this study. The results are illustrative only.

13
 Impact category LCIA for 1kg steel scrap
Primary energy demand, MJ 14.3
Global warming potential (100
years) kg CO2-e 1.63
Acidification potential, kg SO2-e 0.0032
Eutrophication potential, kg
Phosphate-e 2.35E-04
Photochemical ozone creation
potential, kg Ethene -e 0.00075
Table 5: Example impact categories and primary energy demand for 1 kg steel scrap

Thus, for every 1kg scrap consumed in the steelmaking process, and every 1kg of steel recycled from a final
product at the end of its life, the LCIA displayed in Table 5 can be applied. The burden for scrap consumption
would result in adding the steel scrap LCI. The credit for steel recycling at the end of the final products’ life would
result in subtracting the steel scrap LCI from the product LCI.

5.2 Energy demand and environmental impact categories

For the purpose of this study report, the impact assessment is based on the methods and data compiled by the
Centre of Environmental Science at Leiden University as detailed in Section 3.4. Primary energy demand is also
included as an indicator of overall energy demand for the production of the steel products. These data are
illustrative and should not be used for specific studies. The data provided is not the LCI data. For the most up-to-
date regional LCI data for all steel products, visit www.worldsteel.org.

The data for the steel sections comes from both the EAF and the BOF route. Based on the latest worldsteel LCI
data and the sites that have submitted data to generate these averages (production split: BOF 46%, EAF 54%), the
net scrap content is around 0.65 tonnes per tonne steel section. Hot rolled coil and hot-dip galvanized steel are
also produced in the EAF and BOF route, though typically with a higher proportion of BOF route so the amount of
net scrap consumption is generally a lot lower. Based on the sites providing data for this study (production split,
BOF 98%, EAF 2% for both), around 0.07 tonnes of scrap per tonne of hot-dipped galvanized steel and 0.12
tonnes of scrap per tonne of hot rolled coil were used.

PED GWP AP EP POCP

MJ kg CO2-e kg SO2-e kg Phosphate-e kg ethene-e
Cradle-to-gate 18.3 1.5 0.0042 0.00032 0.00064

Sections, 1kg
Net Recycling benefit -2.8 -0.3 -0.0006 -0.00005 -0.00015
Cradle-to-gate
including recycling 15.5 1.2 0.0036 0.00027 0.00049
Cradle-to-gate 23.3 2.2 0.0054 0.00046 0.00091
Hot rolled Net Recycling benefit -10.1 -1.2 -0.0023 -0.00017 -0.00054
coil, 1kg Cradle-to-gate
including recycling 13.2 1.0 0.0031 0.00029 0.00036
Cradle-to-gate 29.5 2.7 0.0065 0.00059 0.00101
Hot-dip
galvanized
Net Recycling benefit -10.7 -1.3 -0.0025 -0.00018 -0.00058
steel, 1kg Cradle-to-gate
including recycling 18.8 1.4 0.0040 0.00041 0.00043
Table 6: Life cycle impact assessment results of steel products

The recycling credit that can be seen in Table 6 and the following charts varies depending on the net recycling
credit level. For sections where the input level of scrap is relatively high, then the net overall scrap credit at end-of-
life is low since the credits are based on recycling rate minus scrap input. For the products that are mainly
produced via the BOF route, then the scrap inputs to the process are low and therefore the net scrap end-of-life
credit is much higher.

14
5.2.1 Primary energy demand, PED
The primary energy demand for the three products described above is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Primary energy demand (MJ) of steel products

This PED is made up of both renewable and non-renewable resources. For the cradle-to-gate data for each of the
three products shown above, between 90% and 97% of the demand is from non-renewable resources, with the
majority being attributable to hard coal consumption, see Figure 3. The consumption of uranium is only associated
with the upstream profiles of electricity consumption.

Figure 3: Contributions to primary energy demand of steel products

15
5.2.2 Global warming potential, GWP
The GWP for the three products described above is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Global warming potential (CO2-e) of steel products

The GWP for steel products is dominated by CO2 and methane emissions, which account for over 98% of all GHG
emissions for the steel industry. Methane emissions come predominantly from the upstream emissions of coal that
is used within the process and for coke making. Figure 5 shows the contributions to the GWP, with the categories
‘renewable resources’ including biomass credits and ‘others’ including nitrous oxide, sulphur hexafluoride,
NMVOCs, and hydrocarbons.

Figure 5: Contributions to global warming potential of steel products

16
5.2.3 Acidification potential, AP
The acidification potential for the three products described above is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Acidification potential (SO2-e) of steel products

The acidification potential for steel products is dominated bySO2 and NOx emissions to air, which contribute over
97% to this impact as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Contributions to acidification potential of steel products

17
5.2.4 Eutrophication potential, EP
The eutrophication potential for the three products described above is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Eutrophication potential (PO43--e) of steel products

The eutrophication potential for steel products is dominated by emissions to air, which contribute over 92% to this
impact. The main contributor is nitrogen oxides. Emissions to water that contribute to this impact are from nitrogen
containing substances, e.g. nitrate, ammonia etc. Contributions are shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Contributions to eutrophication potential of steel products

18
5.2.5 Photochemical ozone creation potential, POCP
The POCP for the three products described above is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Photochemical ozone creation potential (C2H4-e) of steel products

The photochemical ozone creation potential for steel products is dominated by carbon monoxide, which accounts
for over 63% of the contribution to this impact. All other major substances contributing to the POCP are shown in
Figure 11.

Figure 11: Contributions to POCP of steel products

19
6. Life cycle interpretation
This section of the report summarises the key contributors to the life cycle study in terms of the life cycle inventory
data developed, the impact assessment categories and each of the life cycle stages included in the data.

This includes the main energy sources which contribute to the cradle-to-gate values for the primary energy demand
and the main emissions that contribute to the four impact categories: GWP, AP, EP, and POCP.

6.1 Identification of significant issues

Figure 12 to Figure 14 show the life cycle contributions to the PED and the four impact categories discussed
above, for global steel sections. The cradle-to-gate data is the 100% reference data. This is made up from the
gate-to-gate data (as defined in section 3.3 of the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report and shown within the
methodology report Figure 1), the contribution from the upstream inputs (see Appendix 5) to the steelmaking
process, and the contribution from the avoided burden of co-products. Following this, the end-of-life recycling
credits are shown, followed by the overall value which is the cradle-to-gate including end-of-life recycling. For this
report, an example of 85% has been used as the amount of steel that will be recycled at the end-of-life of the steel
product. PED, AP and EP are dominated by the upstream contribution, whereas the GWP and POCP impacts have
a greater influence from the on-site, gate-to-gate, activities.

Credits for avoiding co-product allocation (by system expansion) and end-of-life recycling generally reduce the
overall impact of the products as shown. For GWP this however is not the case as the co-product element of the
impact is a burden rather than a credit. This is because the combustion of process gases from the steel works has
a higher carbon impact than the credit of the fuel that is being replaced. Therefore, the utilisation of system
expansion for the processes gas exports from the steel industry actually increases the GWP. If the end-of-life
recycling rate is less than the amount of scrap input to the product, this will result in a net increase in the final
results.

20
Figure 12: Life cycle contributions to PED and Impact categories for sections

21
Figure 13: Life cycle contributions to PED and impact categories for HRC

22
 Figure 14: Life cycle contributions to PED and impact categories for HDG

Table 7 summarises the main contributors to each of the impact categories and PED. Steel production is an energy
intensive industry and therefore the consumption of energy and electricity are one of the main contributors to the
environmental impact of the steelmaking process. The influence that this has on the LCIA of the product is
therefore very much dependent on the geographical location of the steel works, which determines the source of
electricity and energy consumption.

23
 Impact category Main input/output Main phase Main processes
Primary energy demand Hard coal (71 – 86%) Upstream (~ 100%)
Natural gas (7 – 12%)

Global warming potential Carbon dioxide (93%) Gate-to-gate (> 50%)

(100 years) Methane (~ 6%) Upstream (35 – 43%)

Acidification potential Sulphur dioxide (66 – 72%) Gate-to-gate (28 – 41%) Upstream energy:
Nitrogen oxides (27 – 33%) Upstream (68 – 83%) electricity and fuels
Others ( ~1%)

Eutrophication potential Nitrogen oxides (>91%) Gate-to-gate (24 - 28%)

Nitrous oxide (~ 1%) Upstream (~ 90%) Gate-to-gate: steel
Chemical Oxygen Demand (~ 1%) production processes
Inorganic emissions to fresh water up to slab production
(4-5%)
Photochemical ozone Carbon monoxide (63 – 67%) Gate-to-gate (> 61%)
creation potential Sulphur dioxide (16 – 19 %) Upstream (~ 40%)
Nitrogen oxides (9-11%)
NMVOCs (3 - 5%)
Methane (~3%)
Table 7: Life cycle significant flows, phases and processes (excluding end-of-life phase)

Including the end-of-life recyclability of the steel products within the LCI gives the overall impact of a steel-
containing product or service excluding the use, reuse, maintenance and dismantling phases.

6.2 Completeness, sensitivity and consistency checks

6.2.1 Completeness
Within the worldsteel LCA model, completeness checks were carried out at the gate-to-gate level in order to
analyse:
• The completeness of data provided for each of the steelmaking processes
• The coverage of relevant energy and material inputs for each steel product
• The coverage of significant outputs (accounted emissions), co-products and wastes

Following these checks, cradle-to-gate completeness checks were then made to ensure coverage of all significant
upstream data. There were no data gaps identified that were not already covered by the cut-off criteria defined in
the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report.

6.2.2 Sensitivity
In any LCA methodology, certain assumptions and methodological choices have to be made. For the worldsteel
methodology, a sensitivity analysis of three of these such decisions has been carried out in the past and is
described below. The three aspects which have been chosen are:
• system expansion: the treatment of co-products is one of the key methodological issues, particularly as the
steel industry co-products are valuable and widely used
• internal transportation: only fuel consumption (e.g. diesel, propane etc) is included
• packaging: packaging materials are excluded from the study except steel strap.

The recycling of steel scrap at the end of a product’s life is another key aspect of the worldsteel methodology. This
has not been included as part of the sensitivity analysis but the impact of including end-of-life recycling can be seen
in the graphs in Section 5 and Section 6. In addition, the recycling methodology has been discussed in detail in the
2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, Appendix 10.

For this analysis, three products have been selected, to cover a wide range of steel products.

24
6.2.2.1 Sensitivity analysis on system expansion
The relevance of applying system expansion to the co-products from the steelmaking process was analysed. The
reasoning behind using system expansion has been described in section 3.6.

Cradle-to-gate data GWP PED

Kg CO2-e MJ
Sections, 1kg Excluding system
1.4 20.5
expansion
Including system
1.5 18.3
expansion
% Difference 5.6% -11.0%
Hot rolled coil, Excluding system
2.1 27.0
1kg expansion
Including system
2.2 23.3
expansion
% Difference 6.6% -13.7%
Hot-dip Excluding system
galvanized expansion 2.6 32.4
steel, 1kg
Including system
2.7 29.5
expansion
% Difference 3.4% -9.0%
Table 8: Sensitivity analysis of system expansion

Table 8 shows the influence that system expansion has on the worldsteel LCI data. This also demonstrates that the
steel industry co-products are valuable, whether in the form of replacing raw materials for cement, road-stone,
fertiliser etc., or as a replacement for energy sources both within or external to the steelmaking site, or for export for
electricity generation.

The contribution of system expansion to the GWP is 3 to 7%. Steel sections are made from both the EAF and BOF
route; the EAF route does not produce (but might use if co-located on a BOF route site) process gases which are
used to replace other forms of energy supply, either on site or replacing energy and electricity off-site.
Due to the relatively high carbon intensity of the process gases, when they are used to replace other energy
sources with a lower carbon intensity, this will result in an additional burden being applied on the steel LCI and not
a credit.

The contribution of system expansion to the PED ranges between -9 and -14%. This is due to the recovery of the
co-products from the carbon intensive processes (coke oven, BF and BOF) that can then be reused on site or
exported off-site. The data already represents the energy consumption describing the production of steel as the
main product and the process gases as co-products.

These process gases have good calorific value and can thus be recovered very effectively. The steel sections see
a lower benefit to PED as the product is made in both the BOF and the EAF, where there are no process gases
being generated and thus recovered. The more complex product HDG has a lower percentage difference because
the more complex processing steps consumes the process gases internally.

The exemplary results presented for PED and GWP represent important aspects to be considered for steelmaking
due to the energy intensity and carbon intensity of the steel industry. Other typical impact categories that are often
considered in LCA studies include AP, POCP and EP which are described further in Section 5.

6.2.2.2 Sensitivity analysis on internal transport

The environmental burden of internal transportation is very small, as a study on a sample of sites in the original
study showed an average of 0.00004 litres of diesel per kg crude steel was used, corresponding to about 0.0014MJ
fuel energy/kg of steel product. However, the combustion of the internal transport fuels such as diesel, for on-site
vehicles has not been included.

25
6.2.2.3 Sensitivity analysis on packaging
In the previous LCI data collection studies, it was shown that the impacts of packaging materials were negligible
(<1% of all impacts studied) 7. In this study, the packaging of materials supplied to the steelworks is therefore also
not included. However, steel strap, which is used to hold a coil together, has been requested and supplied, when
available, in the questionnaires, as this material is a steel product and data are often readily available. An upstream
burden for hot rolled coil is assigned to the steel strap. The contribution of the steel strap is around 0.1% for the
impacts studied.

6.2.3 Consistency checks

Details of the consistency checks are covered in Section 4.

A check of the previous data compared to the new data for three products, sections, hot rolled coil and hot-dip-
galvanized steel is given in Appendix 9.

Differences in results can be explained by two main changes.

• the companies submitting data between the two data collections are different and therefore the location of
the sites and the country specific impacts and the sites tonnage weighted impacts are different between the
two studies and will result in differences in results.
• All upstream data utilised has been updated a number of times between the two studies to the most up-to-
date data in GaBi. All upstream data and their sources are listed in Appendix 5 and Appendix 6.

As the primary data quality is high and data gaps were dealt with as detailed in Section 4, there is only a small
number of inconsistencies that have been identified in the study. These are detailed below:
• As already detailed in Section 3.3.3, a small number of secondary datasets were older than the target time
frame of 2013 – 2017. This, however was found not to be critical to the overall result and in fact gives a
more accurate reflection of country specific impacts in relation to the process gases consumed.
• A list of all of the upstream processes utilised within the worldsteel model is given in Appendix 5. Within
this list is the geographic location of where the dataset has been derived from. A number of these datasets
are confined to a specific country (e.g. Germany) as these datasets were seen to have a higher data
quality than the other limited datasets available.

7. Conclusions, limitations and recommendations

A critical review has been carried out to ensure that the changes made to the methodology (Appendix 9) are
conform to ISO 14040: 2006 and ISO 14044: 2006, in line with the goal and scope of this study.

This study is representative of over 99% of steel technologies worldwide and covers over 25% of the steel
production by company on a global basis.

The completeness and accuracy of the data have been vigorously checked to ensure that the data provided are of
the highest quality for the global steel industry.

7.1.1 Conclusions
This study provides LCI data for 16 steel industry products on a global level, of which a number of products are
also represented on a regional level (EU, Asia and Latin America, see Error! Reference source not found.). The
addition of new sites is an ongoing process in order to increase the geographical spread and representativeness of
the data. These will be added in due course.

In an LCA study, end-of-life scenarios should always be considered. The worldsteel methodology considers the
end-of-life recycling of steel products and recommends this method to be used in LCA studies.

7.1.2 Limitations
The data provided by the steel producers currently ranges from 2012 to 2015. With continuing measures to
improve the environmental performance of these companies, it should be noted that some minor improvements will
occur over the coming years and these will need to be incorporated into the steel product LCI data.

26
In addition, there are a number of companies and regions not fully represented in this study. Nevertheless, efforts
are continually ongoing to incorporate these sites within the worldsteel LCI data collection project.

The data and methodology is therefore appropriate for the products that have been listed in the report and for the
steelmaking processes via the BOF steelmaking route and the EAF steelmaking route. It is not appropriate for
other approaches such as open-hearth furnace steelmaking. The data should not be used for stainless steel
products.

7.1.3 Recommendations to uses of the data

When an LCA study is to be conducted including steel LCI data, it is preferable that the practitioner contacts the
worldsteel LCA Manager to ensure that the appropriate steel product is used and that the methodological
conditions are understood, in particular with respect to the end-of-life recycling of steel products.

A detailed description of the products available from worldsteel is provided in Appendix 1 and a matrix of possible
uses for each product is provided in Appendix 11. As steel is a globally traded commodity, using global average
data is appropriate for many studies. Regional data is also provided where a preference for regional production is
made.

The results from the study reflect global steel production from 2012 to 2015 and new sites are continually joining
the worldsteel data collection project. It will therefore be necessary to update the worldsteel steel LCI datasets on a
timely basis, which will contribute changes to the data. The latest LCI data is available via worldsteel.org.

The World Steel Association endeavours to provide the datasets to LCA software tools and databases in order that
they can be used as easily as possible. Care should be taken to ensure that the correct steel product is selected
and the methodology fully understood.

27
8. Appendices

APPENDIX 1: DESCRIPTION OF STEEL PRODUCTS COVERED BY THE STUDY

APPENDIX 2: REPRESENTATION OF THE BOF PROCESS

APPENDIX 3: LIST OF PARTICIPATING COMPANIES

APPENDIX 4: EXAMPLE DATA COLLECTION QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX 5: LIST OF UPSTREAM INPUTS AND THEIR SOURCES

APPENDIX 6: ELECTRICITY GRID MIX INFORMATION

APPENDIX 7: STEEL LCI DATA EXPLANATION

APPENDIX 8: SYSTEM EXPANSION ASSUMPTIONS

APPENDIX 9: UPDATES FROM THE STUDY OUTLINDED IN THE 2010 METHODOLOGY REPORT

APPENDIX 10: LIST OF ALL AVAILABLE QUESTIONNAIRES

APPENDIX 11: MATRIX OF USES OF STEEL PRODUCTS

APPENDIX 12: CRITICAL REVIEW: WORLD STEEL ASSOCIATION LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY STUDY FOR

STEEL PRODUCTS

28
APPENDIX 1: DESCRIPTION OF STEEL PRODUCTS COVERED BY THE
STUDY

Product Product Description

Plate A flat steel sheet rolled on a hot rolling mill; can be further processed.
Includes use in the following sectors: structural steels, shipbuilding, pipes, pressure
vessels, boilers, heavy metal structures, offshore structures etc.
Typical thickness between 2 to 20 mm. The maximum width is 1860 mm.
Hot rolled coil Steel coil rolled on a hot-strip mill; can be further processed.
Applications in virtually all sectors of industry: transport, construction, shipbuilding,
gas containers, pressure vessels, energy pipelines, etc.
Typical thickness between 2 - 7 mm. Typical width between 600 - 2100 mm
Pickled hot rolled Hot rolled steel from which the iron oxides present at the surface have been
coil removed in a pickling process; can be further processed.
Applications in virtually all sectors of industry: transport, construction, shipbuilding,
gas containers, pressure vessels, energy pipelines, etc.
Typical thickness between 2 - 7 mm. Typical width between 600 - 2100 mm
Cold rolled coil Obtained by a further thickness reduction of a pickled hot rolled coil. This step is
achieved at low temperature in a cold-reduction mill; can be further processed.
Used as primary material for finished cold rolled coils and coated coils.
Typical thickness between 0.15 - 3 mm. Typical width between 600 - 2100 mm
Finished cold Obtained by heat treatment (annealing) and strain-hardening of cold rolled steel in
rolled coil a way to achieve final mechanical properties making the steel suitable for further
uses (forming and bending); can be further processed.
Classified into the following: formable steels, high strength formable steels,
weathering structural steels, structural steels, hardenable steels.
They have excellent forming properties, electromagnetic properties, paintability,
weldability, and are suitable for fabrication by forming, pressing and bending.
Applications include domestic applications, automotive applications, lighting
fixtures, electrical components (stators, rotors) and various kinds of sections
roofing applications, profiled sheets, wall elements, etc.
Typical thickness between 0.3 - 3 mm. Typical width between 600 - 2100 mm.
Hot-dip Obtained by passing cold rolled coil through a molten zinc bath, in order to coat the
galvanized steel steel with a thin layer of zinc to provide corrosion resistance; can be further
processed.
They have excellent forming properties, paintability, weldability, and are suitable
for fabrication by forming, pressing and bending.
Applications include domestic applications, building applications (e.g. wall
elements, roofing applications), automotive applications (e.g. body in white for
vehicles underbody auto parts), lighting fixtures, drums and various kinds of
sections applications, profiled sheets, etc.
Typical thickness between 0.3 - 3 mm. Typical width between 600 - 2100 mm.
Electrogalvanized Obtained by electro plating finished cold rolled steel with a thin layer of zinc or zinc-
steel nickel to provide corrosion resistance; can be further processed.
They have excellent forming properties, paintability, weldability, and are suitable
for fabrication by forming, pressing and bending.
Applications include domestic applications, building applications (e.g. wall
elements, roofing applications), automotive applications (e.g. body in white for
vehicles underbody auto parts), lighting fixtures, drums and various kinds of
sections applications, profiled sheets, etc.
Typical thickness between 0.3 - 3 mm. Typical width between 600 - 2100 mm.
Rebar A steel reinforcing bar is rolled on a hot rolling mill; can be further processed.
This product is used to strengthen concrete in highway and building construction
also as primary product for the wire rod process.
Engineering steel Engineering Steel is rolled on a Hot Rolling mill. It can be found on the market and
(Tool steel) is further processed into finished products by the manufacturers This steel is used
in the manufacture of tools, dies, components for engines, drives, equipment,
transmissions, etc.
Sections A steel section rolled on a hot rolling mill. Steel Sections include I-beams, H-beams,
wide-flange beams, and sheet piling.
This product is used in construction, multi-story buildings, industrial buildings,
bridge trusses, vertical highway supports, and riverbank reinforcement.

29
UO pipe UO pipe is usually large in diameter and produced one piece at a time by forming
plates. The plate is first pressed into a U shape by the U-press, and then into an O
shape by the O-press.
Because relatively thick material is used for making UO pipes, submerged arc
welding is used for joining. UO pipe is mainly used as line pipe for transporting
petroleum and natural gas in large quantity over long distances.
Welded pipe A flat plate steel coil that is bended and welded into a tube. It can be found on the
market for final use.
A heavy-wall pipe is technically used to transport fluids (e.g. oil, gases, water,
chemicals)
Wire rod Wire rod is a rolled steel product, produced from a semi and having a round,
rectangular or other cross-section. Particularly fine cross-sections may be achieved
by subsequent cold forming (drawing). Wire rod is wound into coils and transported
in this form.
Tinplate Obtained by electro plating a thin finished cold rolled coil with a thin layer of tin. It
can be found on the market in coil or in sheets and is further processed into finished
products by the manufacturers.
Tin plated steel is used primarily in food cans, industrial packaging (e.g. small
drums)
Typical thickness between 0.13 - 0.49 mm. Typical width between 600 - 1100 mm.
Tin-free (ECCS) Also known as Electrolytic Chrome Coated Steel (ECCS).
Obtained by electro plating a thin finished cold rolled coil with a thin layer of chrome.
It can be found on the market in coil or in sheets and is further processed into
finished products by the manufacturers.
ECCS is used primarily in food cans, industrial packaging (e.g. small drums).
Typical thickness between 0.13 - 0.49 mm. Typical width between 600 - 1100 mm
Organic coated Obtained by coating a steel substrate with organic layers such as paint or laminated
film. The substrate is mainly hot-dip galvanized coil but may also be
electrogalvanized coil, finished cold rolled coil or tin-free steel. It can be found on
the market in coil or in sheets and is further processed into finished products by the
manufacturers.
Used in all activity sectors e.g. construction (roof, wall and ceiling claddings,
lighting, radiators etc.), general industry (e.g. office furniture, heating, ventilating,
air conditioning), domestic appliances (refrigerators, washing machines, small
kitchen appliances, computer casings & DVD casings, etc.) and packaging.
Typical thickness between 0.15 - 1.5 mm. Typical width between 600 - 1300 mm

30
APPENDIX 2: REPRESENTATION OF THE BOF PROCESS

Scales Nitrogen (N 2), Argon (Ar)

Coke Making Iron Scraps Sulphur (S)
Synthetic Slag Fluorspar (CaF2, fluorite)
Coke Recarbiding Agent Carbone Dioxide (CO2)
Petroleum Coke Sodium Carbonate (Na2CO3)
Refractories Liquified Petroleum Gas
Blast Furnace Sodium Bicarbonate (NaHCO3)
Calcium Carbide (CaC2) Casting Powder Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)
Magnesium (Mg) Calcium Chloride (CaCl2)
Oil
Manganese Ore (Mn, ore) Hot Metal Calcium Sulphate (CaSO4)
Dolomite (CaCO 3-MgCO3, crude) Pig Iron Lime (CaO)
Waste Water
Waste Water
Power Plant Electricity (site) G1 BOF STEEL MAKING Treatment Plant

Other Fuels Desulf. - Dephosph.- Desilic. Slags

Desulphurisation
Dephosphoration Hot Metal Treatment Gas
Power Plant Steam
Desiliconisation De-Dustings Hot Metal Treatment Dust
Power Plant Pressure Air Waste Refractories
Scraps
Scraps
Sintered Iron Secondary BOF
Secondary Dedusting Coke Making
Moltered Iron Dust
Iron Ore Blast Furnace
Other BF Gas BOF Gas Dust Other process stages
Coke Making COG Gas De-Dustings
(primary, dry) BOF Gas (2) Flare
Blast Furnace BF Gas
Gas Wet Gas De-
Oxygen (O 2) Dusting (tertiary) Cleaned Gas BOF Gas (1) Power Plant
Oxygen Making Basic Oxygen
Nitrogen (N 2) Furnace
Aluminium External
Water
Copper Electrodes Released Water
Lead
Scraps Decantation & Recirculated Water
Nickel
Predecantation Purge Treatment BOF Gas Fine Sludge
Ferro Manganese
Metallic Additives
Ferro Boron Metallurgy BOF Gas Coarse Sludge
Ferro Calcium Light Fuel Oil
Ferro Chromium BOF Slag Processing BOF Slag
Propane
Ferro Molybdenium Ingot Casting BOF Dust
Water
Ferro Niobium
Crylene (C 20H33NO6) Metallurgy Sludge
Ferro Phosphorous
Ferro Silicium Acetylene (C 2H2) Metallurgy Dust
Ferro Titanium Continuous Casting Metallurgy Slag
Silico manganese Recirculated Water Sludge Clarification
Scales Continuous Casting Scales
Unspecified Water
Water Softening Soft Water Cutting Continuous Casting Sludge

Water Demineralising Demineralised Water Air (a) Carbon Dioxide (CO 2, fossil)
Emissions (a) Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Slabs-Blooms-Billets (a) Nitrous Oxides (N 2O)
Ingots Steam (a) Dust
(a) Sulphur Oxides (SO x as SO2)
(a) Nitrogen Oxid (NO x as NO2)
Hot Strip Mill
(a) Zn
Rod and Bar Rolling (a) Lead
Section Rolling (a) VOC
Heavy Plate Rolling

31
APPENDIX 3: LIST OF PARTICIPATING COMPANIES
The companies that contributed to the data released in September 2017 are listed below:

Acciaierie Bertoli Safau Nisshin Steel

Aichi Steel Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corporation (NSSMC)
ArcelorMittal Osaka Steel (part of NSSMC)
Baosteel now part of China Baowu Steel Group Salzgitter
BlueScope Sanyo Special Steel
British Steel Shimizu Steel Tomakomai
China Steel Corporation SSAB
Daido Steel Sahaviriya Steel Industries (SSI)
Erdemir Tata Steel Europe
Sidenor Tata Steel India
Godo Steel Tenaris
Hadeed Ternium
HBIS thyssenkrupp Steel Europe
Isdemir (part of Erdemir Group) Tokyo Kohtetsu
Itoh Ironworks Corp Tokyotekko
JFE Steel Topy Industries
Kobe Steel voestalpine
Kyoei Steel

32
APPENDIX 4: EXAMPLE DATA COLLECTION QUESTIONNAIRE

Fiscal period 2017

Site Example BF, 2017
Questionnaire (H) Hot Strip Mill (new)
Tab Input
Name Unit Value Quality Source Year
of data
Flows - - - - -
Production residues in life cycle - - - - -
Waste for recovery - - - - -
Scarfing dust kg n.a. Factory
Used oil kg n.a. Factory
Waste water treatment sludge kg n.a. Factory
Resources - - - - -
Material resources - - - - -
Renewable resources - - - - -
Water - - - - -
Fresh water kg n.a. Factory
Sea water kg n.a. Factory
Water (softened, deionized) kg n.a. Factory
Water Cooling fresh kg n.a. Factory
Water Cooling sea kg n.a. Factory
Valuable substances - - - - -
Energy carrier - - - - -
Electric power - - - - -
Electricity MJ n.a. Factory
Fuels - - - - -
Crude oil products - - - - -
Heavy fuel oil kg n.a. Factory
Liquefied petroleum gas kg n.a. Factory
Refinery products - - - - -
Light fuel oil kg n.a. Factory
Natural gas products - - - - -
Natural gas, at production - - - - -
Natural gas kg n.a. Factory
Other fuels - - - - -
Basic Oxygen Furnace Gas (MJ) (Copy) MJ n.a. Factory
Blast furnace gas (MJ) MJ n.a. Factory
Coke oven gas (MJ) (Copy) MJ n.a. Factory
Mechanical energy - - - - -
Compressed air for process m³ n.a. Factory
Thermal energy - - - - -
Hot water (MJ) MJ n.a. Factory
steam - - - - -
Steam (MJ) MJ n.a. Factory
Materials - - - - -
Intermediate products - - - - -
Inorganic intermediate products - - - - -
Ferric chloride kg n.a. Factory
Nitrogen gaseous kg n.a. Factory
Oxygen gaseous kg n.a. Factory
Sodium hydroxide (100%; caustic kg n.a. Factory
Sulphuric acid (100%) kg n.a. Factory
Organic intermediate products - - - - -
Lubricant kg n.a. Factory
Propane kg n.a. Factory
Metals - - - - -
Cold rolled coil (from DSP) kg n.a. Factory
Slab (from BOF) kg n.a. Factory
Slab (from EAF) kg n.a. Factory
Slab (from external supply) kg n.a. Factory
Steel strap kg n.a. Factory
Minerals - - - - -
Lime quicklime (lumpy) kg n.a. Factory
Refractories (magnesia, alumina, kg n.a. Factory
Refractories (silica, alumina) kg n.a. Factory
Operating materials - - - - -
Grease kg n.a. Factory
Water for industrial use kg n.a. Factory

33
Date 2018-02-20T07:46:45
Fiscal period 2017
Site Example BF, 2017
Questionnaire (H) Hot Strip Mill (new)
Tab Output
Name Unit Value Quality Source Year
of data
Flows - - - - -
Emissions to air - - - - -
Heavy metals to air - - - - -
Arsenic (+V) kg n.a. Factory
Copper kg n.a. Factory
Iron kg n.a. Factory
Zinc kg n.a. Factory
Inorganic emissions to air - - - - -
Ammonia kg n.a. Factory
Carbon dioxide kg n.a. Factory
Carbon monoxide kg n.a. Factory
Nitrogen oxides kg n.a. Factory
Sulphur oxides (as SO2) kg n.a. Factory
Organic emissions to air (group VOC) - - - - -
Group NMVOC to air - - - - -
Group PAH to air - - - - -
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons kg n.a. Factory
Halogenated organic emissions to air - - - - -
Dioxins (unspec.) kg n.a. Factory
Methane kg n.a. Factory
VOC (unspecified) kg n.a. Factory
Particles to air - - - - -
Dust (PM10) kg n.a. Factory
Dust (unspecified) kg n.a. Factory
Emissions to fresh water - - - - -
Analytical measures to fresh water - - - - -
Biological oxygen demand (BOD) kg n.a. Factory
Heavy metals to fresh water - - - - -
Arsenic (+V) kg n.a. Factory
Cadmium kg n.a. Factory
Iron kg n.a. Factory
Tin kg n.a. Factory
Zinc kg n.a. Factory
Inorganic emissions to fresh water - - - - -
Acid (calculated as H+) kg n.a. Factory
Aluminium kg n.a. Factory
Ammonia (NH4+, NH3, as N) kg n.a. Factory
Barium kg n.a. Factory
Nitrogen dioxide kg n.a. Factory
Organic emissions to fresh water - - - - -
Carbon, organically bound kg n.a. Factory
Hydrocarbons to fresh water - - - - -
Oil (unspecified) kg n.a. Factory
Phenol (hydroxy benzene) kg n.a. Factory
Thiocyanates (CNS-) kg n.a. Factory
Other emissions to fresh water - - - - -
Waste water kg n.a. Factory
Particles to fresh water - - - - -
Solids (suspended) kg n.a. Factory
Emissions to sea water - - - - -
Analytical measures to sea water - - - - -
Biological oxygen demand (BOD) kg n.a. Factory
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) kg n.a. Factory
Heavy metals to sea water - - - - -
Copper kg n.a. Factory
Iron kg n.a. Factory
Manganese kg n.a. Factory
Zinc kg n.a. Factory
Production residues in life cycle - - - - -
Hazardous waste for disposal - - - - -
Hazardous non organic waste for - - - - -
Hazardous Waste kg n.a. Factory
Hot Rolling Sludge kg n.a. Factory
Refractories (silica, alumina) kg n.a. Factory
Scale internal kg n.a. Factory
Waste from steel works kg n.a. Factory
Hazardous organic waste for disposal - - - - -
Waste water treatment sludge kg n.a. Factory
Waste for disposal - - - - -
Non hazardous non organic waste for - - - - -
Hot Rolling Sludge kg n.a. Factory
Scale internal kg n.a. Factory
Waste from steel works kg n.a. Factory
Non hazardous organic waste for - - - - -
Waste water treatment sludge kg n.a. Factory
Waste for recovery - - - - -
Refractories kg n.a. Factory
Scales internal (Copy) kg n.a. Factory
Steel scrap (external supply) kg n.a. Factory
Steel scrap (Home scrap) kg n.a. Factory
Used oil kg n.a. Factory
Waste water treatment sludge kg n.a. Factory
Resources - - - - -
Material resources - - - - -
Renewable resources - - - - -
Water - - - - -
Fresh water kg n.a. Factory
Sea water kg n.a. Factory
Valuable substances - - - - -
Energy carrier - - - - -
Thermal energy - - - - -
Hot water from process stages (MJ) MJ n.a. Factory
Steam (from process stages, in MJ) MJ n.a. Factory
Materials - - - - -
Metals - - - - -
Steel hot rolled coil kg n.a. Factory
Operating materials - - - - -
Water for industrial use kg n.a. Factory

34
APPENDIX 5: LIST OF UPSTREAM INPUTS AND THEIR DATA SOURCES

Item Process Information Country Year Source

Acetylene Ethine (acetylene), SACHSSE-BARTHOLOME process DE 2016 thinkstep
Activated carbon Activated carbon is the collective name for a group of porous carbons. They all have small DE 2016 thinkstep
amounts of chemically bonded oxygen and hydrogen and contain up to 20 % mineral
matter
Aluminium Cradle-to-gate, Aluminium ingot production based on data from the International Aluminium GLO 2013 IAI
Institute (IAI).
Aluminium chloride Aluminium chloride hexahydrate DE 2016 thinkstep
Aluminium foil Data is primarily from 2005 sources with energy mixes and ingot imports from 2009. The foil EU-28 2016 thinkstep
production process itself is based on European production and corresponds to a foil
thickness of 5-200 micrometers.
Aluminium sulphate Aluminium sulphate DE 2016 thinkstep
Ammonia Ammonia is produced almost exclusively by the well-known HABER-BOSCH process. EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Ammonium sulphate Ammonium sulphate mix (by-product) DE 2016 thinkstep
Anthracite Country specific data, based on hard coal mix for each country Country specific 2013 thinkstep
Argon Gaseous, LINDE process DE 2016 thinkstep
Bauxite Opencast and underground mining EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Benzene technology mix, from pyrolysis gasoline, reformate and toluene dealkylation EU-28 2016 thinkstep
BOF slab 1kg global slab, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel
Calcium chloride (from epichlorohydrine synthesis) DE 2016 thinkstep
Carbon dioxide From HABER-BOSCH process (ammonia synthesis, NH3/CO2) DE 2016 thinkstep
Catalyst Ethylene glycol EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Cement Portland cement (CEM I) EU-28 2006 CEMBUREAU
Charcoal Site data for production GLO 2015 worldsteel
Coal Country specific data, based on hard coal mix for each country Country specific 2013 thinkstep
Coal for coke making Coking coal global consumption mix including transport to border of country of production GLO 2013 thinkstep
Coal for injection Country specific data, based on hard coal mix for each country Country specific 2013 thinkstep
Coke 1kg global coke, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel
Copper Global copper mix: electrolyte copper 99,99%. Outokumpu was modelled for Chile, ISA smelt GLO 2016 thinkstep
for Australia and the Mitsubishi process for Indonesia.

35
Item Process Information Country Year Source
Corrugated board EU-27: Corrugated board including paper production, average composition 2015 EU-27 2014 thinkstep
thinkstep/FEFCO
Diesel Country/region specific Country/region 2013 thinkstep
specific
Diesel (high Sulphur) Country/region specific Country/region 2013 thinkstep
specific
Diesel (low Sulphur) Country/region specific Country/region 2013 thinkstep
specific
Direct Reduced Iron 1kg global DRI, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel
Dolomite Decarboxylation process by burning mined dolomite EU-27 2016 thinkstep
Dolomite (crude) Dolomite extraction DE 2016 thinkstep
Electricity See Appendix 6 – country specific Country specific 2013 thinkstep
Electrode baking petrol coke, pitch and hard coal tar ZA 2016 thinkstep
Ferric chloride Ferric (III) chloride (hexahydrate) DE 2016 thinkstep
Ferro chrome Ferro Chromium (high carbon) GLO 2016 thinkstep
Ferro manganese Production of ferro-manganese (77% Mn) with high carbon content. ZA 2016 thinkstep
The direct process chain includes the mining and the beneficiation of the ore (South African
specific and mining and beneficiation are at the same operation site), a sinter and melting
process (electric furnace), the transportation to the port of transhipment (Rotterdam) and the
subsequent 300 km transportation to the German trade market.

Ferro molybdenum Ferro molybdenum (67% Mo) GLO 2016 thinkstep

Ferro nickel Ferro nickel (29% Ni) GLO 2016 thinkstep
Ferro silicum Ferro silicon mix (91%) GLO 2016 thinkstep
Ferro vanadium Ferro vanadium (FeV 80%) ZA 2016 thinkstep
Ferrous sulphate Ferrous (II) sulphate EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Gasket (seal) EPDM gaskets for aluminium profile (EN15804 A1-A3) DE 2016 thinkstep
Gasoline From crude oil EU-28 2013 thinkstep
Glass wool For glass wool production, the pure mineral primary glass is melted in a melting vat at approx. EU-28 2016 thinkstep
1400°C
Glue Mixer of Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate ( (p)MDI) and Aromatic Polyester Polyols (APP) EU-27 2014 thinkstep
production mix
Heavy fuel oil Country/region specific Country/region 2013 thinkstep
specific
Hot metal 1kg global hot metal, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel
Hydrochloric acid 100% hydrochloric acid mix. The 'mix' process considers the technologies involved in the DE 2016 thinkstep
production of hydrochloric acid, based on the technology distribution of the respective
technology for the country.

36
Item Process Information Country Year Source
Hydrogen Steam reforming - natural gas EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Hydrogen peroxide 50% H2O2. Anthraquinone process DE 2016 thinkstep
Iron Ore worldsteel production mix of 4 thinkstep datasets GLO 2016 thinkstep
Kerosene From crude oil EU-28 2013 thinkstep
Lead Lead (99.995%), primary lead produced on the traditional process route. Does not include RNA 2016 thinkstep
lead and zinc recovery.
Light fuel oil Country/region specific Country/region 2013 thinkstep
specific
Lime Calcination of limestone DE 2016 thinkstep

Limestone Mining and beneficiation DE 2016 thinkstep

Liquefied petroleum Liquefied gas (LPG; 70% Propane; 30% Butane), refining process DE 2013 thinkstep
Lubricants The data set covers the entire supply chain of the refinery products. EU-28 2013 thinkstep
Magnesium Magnesium Pidgeon process CN 2016 thinkstep

Manganese South Africa and Australia cover 90% of the world manganese production (International ZA 2016 thinkstep
Manganese Institute).
80% of the mining takes place underground and 20% in open cast operations. The
beneficiation is done at the mining site. The manganese ore is crushed and processed.
The concentrate is then reduced by intense heating in a calcination process. Manganese
metal is produced during electrolysis by addition of ammonia and sulphuric acid.
The end product is manganese 99%.
MDI (Isocyanate) Phosgenation of methylenedianiline DE 2016 thinkstep

Mineral rock wool Rock wool flat roof plate (120 mm) DE 2016 thinkstep
Natural gas Country specific data, based on natural gas mix for each country Country specific 2013 thinkstep
Nickel Global Nickel mix. The data set represents the global situation, focusing on the main GLO 2016 thinkstep
technologies, the region specific characteristics and / or import statistics. The data set is a
mix of South Africa, Canada, Norway, Australia and Russia.
Nitric acid 98%. Two-step oxidation of ammonia to nitrogen monoxide and further to nitrogen dioxide DE 2016 thinkstep
and the absorption of the latter in water.

Nitrogen Air and power to produce gaseous nitrogen NA 2007 thinkstep

37
Item Process Information Country Year Source
Olivine Silica sand (Excavation and processing) DE 2016 thinkstep
Oxygen Air, cooling water and power to produce gaseous oxygen NA 2007 thinkstep
Paint (epoxy, Mix of three powder coating upstreams, red, black and white DE 2016 thinkstep
melamine)
Paint (epoxy, Mix of three powder coating upstreams, red, black and white DE 2016 thinkstep
phenolic)
Paint (polyester, Mix of three powder coating upstreams, red, black and white DE 2016 thinkstep
melamine)
Paint (polyurethane) Mix of water and solvent based primer DE 2016 thinkstep
Paint (polyvinyl Underbody protection PVC DE 2016 thinkstep
chloride)
Paint (silicon Mix of Coating water-based red, black and white DE 2016 thinkstep
modified polyester)
Paint (PVDF, acrylic) Mix of Coating solvent-based red, black and white DE 2016 thinkstep
Pellet 1kg global pellet, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel
Pentane Estimated via Butane EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Petroleum coke Country / region specific data, based on hard coal mix for each country Country / region 2013 thinkstep
specific
Phosphoric acid 100%, wet process DE 2016 thinkstep
PMDI Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate ( (p)MDI) EU-27 2010 thinkstep
Polyethylene Polyethylene low density granulate (PE-LD) EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Polyol Aromatic Polyester Polyols (APP) production mix EU-27 2014 PU Europe
Polyvinyl Chloride PVC is produced by polymerization of vinyl chloride monomer to polyvinyl chloride PVC DE 2016 thinkstep
Propane Regional specific Region specific 2013 thinkstep
Protection Foil (PE- Polyethylene Film (PE-LD) without additives EU-27 2016 thinkstep
LD)
Quartz sand Silica sand is mined together with kaolin and feldspar using bucket excavators or bucket DE 2016 thinkstep
chain dredgers. The material is elutriated and the sand sieved in a multi-step process.

Refractories (all) Sand-lime insulation brick EU-28 2016 thinkstep

Sand Silica sand is mined together with kaolin and feldspar using bucket excavators or bucket DE 2016 thinkstep
chain dredgers. The material is elutriated and the sand sieved in a multi-step process.
Serpentine Mined, as kaolin, normally together with silica sand and feldspar using bucket excavators DE 2016 thinkstep
or bucket chain dredgers.
Silicon mix Purified, electric arc furnace process, from quartz sand GLO 2016 thinkstep
Sinter 1kg global sinter, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel

Sinter/pellet fines 1kg global sinter, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel

38
Item Process Information Country Year Source
Sodium carbonate Soda (Na2CO3), produced by the Solvay process DE 2016 thinkstep
Sodium chloride Rock salt is obtained from salt mines by use of machines or leaching techniques. EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Sodium hydroxide 100% caustic soda from brine extraction, electrolysis and purification EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Sodium hypochlorite 50% solution DE 2016 thinkstep
Sodium sulphate Sodium sulfate is a by-product in the production of boric acid. GLO 2016 thinkstep
Steam Process steam from natural gas 85% EU-28 2013 thinkstep
Steel scrap See section 3.6.2. GLO 2017 worldsteel
Steel scrap Steel allocation of shredder process inputs and wastes GLO 2009 worldsteel
processing
Steel strap 1 kg global hot rolled coil, weighted average GLO 2017 worldsteel
Sulphur From Crude Oil EU-28 2013 thinkstep
Sulphur dioxide Sulphur dioxide estimation from oxygen and sulphur production GLO 2013 thinkstep
Sulphuric acid Oxidation of sulphur over sulphur dioxide to sulphur trioxide (contact procedure in several EU-28 2016 thinkstep
reactors with different catalysts), loosened in concentrated sulphuric acid in several columns
and forms thereby a still higher concentrated sulphuric acid.
Surface cleaning Non-ionic surfactant (fatty acid derivative) GLO 2016 thinkstep
agent
Synthetic gas Synthesis gas (H2:CO = 3:1). Produced from water (steam) and methane (natural gas). The DE 2016 thinkstep
latter can be replaced with other hydrocarbons and mixtures thereof, e.g. naphtha or fuel
oils.
Tar Based on hydro-skimming and more complex refineries including hydro treatment, EU-28 2013 thinkstep
conversion (e.g. cracking) and refining processes
Thermal energy Mix of thermal energy from peat and biomass FI 2013 thinkstep
Timber Timber pine (12% moisture; 10.7% H2O content) (EN15804 A1-A3) DE 2016 thinkstep
Tin The dataset represents the 6 largest tin producing countries: Indonesia, Peru, Malaysia, GLO 2016 thinkstep
Brazil, China, Belgium and Thailand focusing on the main technologies, the region-specific
characteristics and / or import statistics.
Titanium dioxide Chloride process EU-28 2016 thinkstep
Zinc Global zinc mix GLO 2012 IZA

39
APPENDIX 6: ELECTRICITY GRID MIX INFORMATION
The power grid mix that is used for each site is relevant to the location of each steelmaking site, by country. All
data has been taken from the GaBi 7.3 software and is listed in more detail below. The data is a cradle-to-gate
inventory and is in conformity with ISO 14040: 2006 and 14044: 2006.

Country Age Grid

Argentina 2013 54.33% Natural gas, 22.49% Hydro,14.23% Heavy fuel oil, 4.47%
Nuclear, 1.92% Hard coal, 1.77% Biomass, 0.44% Coal gases,
0.34% Wind, 0.01% Photovoltaic,
Australia 2013 46.35% Hard coal, 21.32% Natural gas, 18.25% Lignite, 7.34%
Hydro, 2.94% Wind, 1.53% Photovoltaic, 1.37% Heavy fuel oil,
0.44% Biogas, 0.34% Biomass, 0.13% Coal gases
Austria 2013 66.98% Hydro, 9.75% Natural gas, 6.15% Hard coal, 5.51%
Biomass, 4.61% Wind, 2.77% Coal gases, 1.43% Waste, 1.01%
Heavy fuel oil, 0.92% Biogas, 0.85% Photovoltaic.
Belgium 2013 51.29% Nuclear, 25.16% Natural gas, 4.37% Wind, 4.04%
Biomass, 3.62% Hard coal, 3.18% Photovoltaic, 2.59% Coal gases,
2.42% Waste, 2.07% Hydro, 1.08% Biogas, 0.19% Heavy fuel oil
Bosnia and 2013 41.46% Hydro, 33.9% Hard coal, 24.14% Lignite, 0.24% Heavy fuel
Herzegovina oil, 0.22% Natural gas
Brazil 2013 68.60% Hydro, 12.11% Natural gas, 7.02% Biomass, 4.66% Heavy
fuel oil, 2.57% Nuclear, 1.56% Lignite, 1.22% Coal gases, 1.15%
Wind, 1.04% Hard coal, 0.08% Biogas
Canada 2013 60.11% Hydro, 15.77% Nuclear, 10.30% Natural gas, 8.36%
Lignite, 1.78% Wind, 1.64% Hard coal, 1.15% Heavy fuel oil,
0.67% Biomass, 0.14% Biogas, 0.06% Photovoltaic, 0.04% Waste
China 2013 74.23% Hard coal, 16.90% Hydro, 2.59% Wind, 2.05% Nuclear,
1.66% Natural gas, 1.24% Coal gases, 0.70% Biomass, 0.28%
Photovoltaic, 0.23% Waste, 0.12% Heavy fuel oil
Czech Republic 2013 41.86% Lignite, 35.31% Nuclear, 6.04% Hard coal, 4.18% Hydro,
4.16% Natural gas, 2.63% Biogas, 2.34% Photovoltaic, 1.93%
Biomass, 0.77% Coal gases, 0.55% Wind, 0.17% Waste, 0.05%
Heavy fuel oil
Finland 2013 33.27% Nuclear, 18.1% Hydro, 16.15% Biomass, 15.07% Hard
coal, 9.57% Natural gas, 4.46% Peat, 1.09% Wind, 1.04% Waste,
0.72% Coal gases, 0.33% Heavy fuel oil, 0.20% Biogas, 0.01%
Photovoltaic
France 2013 74.09% Nuclear, 13.30% Hydro, 3.84% Hard coal, 3.00% Natural
gas, 2.80% Wind, 0.82% Photovoltaic, 0.67% Waste, 0.50% Coal
gases, 0.43% Heavy fuel oil, 0.28% Biomass, 0.26% Biogas
Germany 2013 25.49% Lignite, 19.28% Hard coal, 15.41% Nuclear, 10.89%
Natural gas, 8.19% Wind, 4.91% Photovoltaic, 4.67% Biogas,
4.56% Hydro, 1.90% Waste, 1.84% Biomass, 1.71% Coal gases,
1.14% Heavy fuel oil, 0.01% Geothermal
India 2013 58.42% Hard coal, 14.27% Lignite, 11.87% Hydro, 5.45% Natural
gas, 2.87% Nuclear, 2.81% Wind, 1.94% Heavy fuel oil, 1.75%
Biomass, 0.29% Photovoltaic, 0.13% Coal gases, 0.11% Waste,
0.08% Biogas
Italy 2013 37.67% Natural gas, 18.91% Hydro, 15.26% Hard coal, 7.47%
Photovoltaic, 5.36% Heavy fuel oil, 5.15% Wind, 3.88% Biogas,
1.96% Geothermal. 1.56% Waste, 1.27% Biomass, 1.17% Coal
gases, 0.34% Lignite
Japan 2013 38.43% Natural gas, 28.53% Hard coal, 14.34% Heavy fuel oil,
8.12% Hydro, 3.69% Coal gases, 3.07% Biomass, 1.37%
Photovoltaic, 0.89% Nuclear, 0.82% Waste, 0.50% Wind, 0.25%
Geothermal

40
 Luxembourg 2013 49.19% Natural gas, 40.10% Hydro, 3.29% Waste, 2.87% Wind,
2.56% Photovoltaic, 1.94% Biogas, 0.07% Biomass
Mexico 2013 55.79% Natural gas, 16.12% Heavy fuel oil, 10.32% Hard coal,
9.43% Hydro, 3.97% Nuclear, 2.04% Geothermal, 1.41% Wind,
0.34% Biomass, 0.33% Lignite, 0.11% Coal gases, 0.05% Biogas,
0.05% Waste
Morocco 2013 42.76% Hard coal, 20.70% Natural gas, 20.65% Heavy fuel oil,
10.63% Hydro, 5.26% Wind
Netherlands 2013 54.75% Natural gas, 24.43% Hard coal, 5.59% Wind, 3.75%
Waste, 2.90% Coal gases, 2.88% Biomass, 2.87% Nuclear, 1.24%
Heavy fuel oil, 0.97% Biogas, 0.51% Photovoltaic, 0.11% Hydro
Poland 2013 49.60% Hard coal, 34.15% Lignite, 4.82% Biomass, 3.65% Wind,
3.19% Natural gas, 1.82% Hydro, 1.24% Coal gases, 1.08% Heavy
fuel oil, 0.42% Biogas, 0.03% Waste
Saudi Arabia 2013 52.75% Natural gas, 47.25% Heavy fuel oil
Spain 2013 20.13% Natural gas, 20.01 Nuclear, 19.01% Wind, 14.48% Hydro,
13.60% Hard coal, 4.85% Heavy fuel oil, 2.93% Photovoltaic,
1.55% Solar thermal, 1.34% Biomass, 0.87% Lignite, 0.49% Coal
gases, 0.42% Waste, 0.32% Biogas
Sweden 2013 43.39% Nuclear, 40.15% Hydro, 6.43% Wind, 6.27% Biomass,
1.96% Waste, 0.55% Natural gas, 0.43% Hard coal, 0.27% Heavy
fuel oil, 0.24% Coal gases, 0.21% Peat, 0.09 Biogas, 0.02%
Photovoltaic
Taiwan 2013 39.49% Hard coal, 26.18% Natural gas, 16.52% Nuclear, 8.03%
Lignite, 3.42% Hydro, 2.98% Heavy fuel oil, 1.33% Coal gases,
1.28% Waste, 0.53% Wind, 0.13% Photovoltaic, 0.11% Biomass,
0.01% Biogas
Turkey 2013 43.81% Natural gas, 24.76% Hydro, 12.92% Lignite, 12.89% Hard
coal, 3.15% Wind, 0.78% Coal gases, 0.72% Heavy fuel oil, 0.57%
Geothermal, 0.35% Biogas, 0.04% Waste, 0.01% Biomass
United Kingdom 2013 36.41% Hard coal, 26.62% Natural gas, 19.66% Nuclear, 7.92%
Wind, 2.94% Biomass, 2.12% Hydro, 1.65% Biogas, 1.19% Waste,
0.60% Heavy fuel oil, 0.57% Photovoltaic, 0.32% Coal gases
United States of 2013 37.57% Hard coal, 26.93% Natural gas, 19.11% Nuclear, 6.74%
America Hydro, 3.95% Wind, 2.14% Lignite, 1.06% Biomass, 0.86% Heavy
fuel oil, 0.46% Waste, 0.43% Geothermal, 0.34% Photovoltaic,
0.30% Biogas, 0.10% Coal gases, 0.02% Solar thermal

Full documentation for GaBi 7.3 can be found at:

http://www.gabi-software.com/support/gabi/gabi-6-lci-documentation

41
APPENDIX 7: STEEL LCI DATA EXPLANATION
The function of this section is to explain some of the main features of the datasets and clarify potential ambiguities.
LCI datasets have been produced for all products both globally and regionally, whenever more than three sites
contributed. This is necessary to maintain confidentiality between companies and to ensure a minimum level of
representativeness.

The datasets are provided as a static report created in the basis of an Envision report which has been generated
using the GaBi 7.3 software, and are distributed from a web based platform via rtf format to enable ease of use of
the data. The data is also available in the GaBi software or in Excel.

Cradle-to-gate data is given as standard. Data can also be provided including the credits and burdens of steel
recycling. This means that a burden is given for the steel scrap that is used in the steelmaking process and a credit
for the steel that will be recycled from the final product when it reaches the end of its life. In this case the net
recycling credits are also provided separately. The scrap LCI is also given.

A7.1 LCI flows

Only major flows are provided in the data sheets, namely the major raw materials and the “accounted” emissions
(see the 2017 worldsteel LCI methodology report, section 3.5.4). Information on other flows is also available on
request. Where end-of-life recycling has been taken into consideration, the material resource list does not add up
to 1 tonne of resources per tonne of steel product due to the credits applied for end-of-life recycling.

The following sections provide more information on some of the flows provided in the data sheets.

A7.1.1 Iron (ore)

The mass of iron ore in ground is reported in kg of iron oxides (mainly FeO, Fe3O4, Fe2O3) and excludes the mass of
overburden.

A7.1.2 Ferrous scrap (net)

The net ferrous scrap takes into account imports and exports from the system. It includes both steel and iron scrap
(although iron scrap generation and usage is generally small). When the recycling credits and burdens are
included, the scrap input is not listed as the associated upstream burden has been included instead.

Ferrous scrap includes:

• Scrap input to the steelmaking process – this is the net scrap consumed in the steelmaking process and
does not include internally generated scrap.
• Home scrap is considered when the scrap comes from a process which occurs on the steelmaking site, but
does not contribute to any of the production stages of the product.

A7.1.3 Water consumption

The net fresh water consumption per kg of steel product is listed in the datasets. In addition to the water used
directly on site, the water used in the upstream processes is also included. Fresh water used by the steel plants
has several origins: namely surface water (river and lake), deep water (e.g. mine water) or “technosphere” sources
(other industrial plants, waste water treatment plants, etc.).

The quantity of salt water used by the steel plants is recorded. It is mainly used for indirect cooling and therefore it
is not contaminated with pollutants coming from the processes.

The full list of water flows is available on request.

A7.1.4 Carbon dioxide emissions

This flow indicates both fossil and mineral sources of CO2 (e.g. combustion of natural gas, oil, lime calcinations,
and the oxidation of coal). In addition to providing CO2 data, the environmental indicator for global warming

42
potential is also provided, for information only, as this is one of the most common indicators currently being
requested.

A7.1.5 Particulate emissions to air

This flow includes all types of airborne particulate emissions, including PM 10 and PM 2.5. In the extended list of
flows, the emission of particles to air is split into a number of sources including PM 10, PM 2.5, fugitive emissions
etc. However, as the data are not always reported in the same format, this split is not always complete.

A7.1.6 Waste
During the steelmaking process, there are a number of materials and gases that are produced that have a useful
role either within or external to the steelmaking site. These materials that are recovered are referred to as
recovered material or co-products and are listed in Appendix 8. Due to the demand in these markets, it may arise
that these materials are no longer recovered but sent to landfill, incinerated, flared etc. In these circumstances, the
material is classified as waste. In order to comply with ILCD viii, any wastes or recovered materials where the final
process step is unknown, have been modelled as connected to a landfill process and the associated impacts
included in the overall LCI.

A7.1.7 Primary Energy Demand

Certain material inputs, (e.g. coal, oil etc.) constitute energy as well as mass inputs, which can be calculated based
on calorific value. Within the LCI data sheets, the total primary energy demand (including renewable and non-
renewable resources) is provided, based on the net (low) calorific value. This information is provided for information
only and should not be used in addition to the data provided in the material inputs section of the datasheet.

Total primary energy is the sum of all energy sources which are drawn directly from the earth, such as natural gas,
oil, coal, biomass or hydropower energy, and includes non-renewable and renewable energy. Non-renewable
energy includes all fossil and mineral primary energy sources, such as natural gas, oil, coal and nuclear energy.
Renewable energy includes all other primary energy sources, such as hydropower and biomass.

A full breakdown of energy is available on request.

A7.1.8 Life cycle impacts

Four Life Cycle Impact Assessment Indicators are reported for informational purposes only, based on CML 2001 –
Dec 07. These are: global warming potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential and photochemical
ozone creation potential.

A7.1.9 Other articles not reported

Within the data sheets, only the major raw materials are shown for simplification reasons. Concerning the air and
water emissions, all ‘accounted’ emissions (see Section 4.3.) are reported in the data sheets.

The full list of flows is available on request. Depending on the product, a wide variety of other alloy metals such as
copper, manganese and molybdenum can also be used but always in low quantity. These are included in the full
list of flows. Lead can be incorporated in higher quantity in some special products called “free cutting” steels which
were not included in the study due to lack of data. Other natural resources used for the production of crude steel
are abundant materials such as sand, sodium chloride and clay.

43
APPENDIX 8: SYSTEM EXPANSION ASSUMPTIONS

Steel co-product Co-product function Avoided production Data Source

Blast furnace slag, Cement or clinker 0.9 tonne per tonne of GaBi 7.3 (RER)
basic oxygen furnace production cement. Portland cement
slag, electric arc (CEM I)
furnace slag Aggregate or roadstone Gravel production GaBi 7.3 (DE)
Fertiliser Lime production GaBi 7.3 (DE)
Process gas (coke Heat production for Coal, heavy fuel oil, light GaBi 7.3 (Country
oven, blast furnace, internal or external use fuel oil or natural gas specific)
basic oxygen furnace, Electricity production 1MJ gas = 0.365 MJ GaBi 7.3 (Country
off gas) electricity specific)
Electric arc furnace Zinc production 1 kg dust = 0.5 kg Zinc GaBi 7.3 (Global)
dust
Electricity from energy Electricity production Electricity production GaBi 7.3 (Country
recovery specific)
Steam from energy Heat generation Steam production from GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
recovery natural gas 85%
efficiency
Hot water from energy Heat generation Steam production from GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
recovery natural gas 85%
efficiency
Ammonia Any ammonia Ammonia production GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
application
Ammonium sulphate Any ammonium Ammonium sulphate GaBi 7.3 (DE)
sulphate application production
Benzene Any benzene Benzene production GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
application based on different
technologies
BTX Any BTX application Benzene production GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
based on different
technologies
Scales Metallurgical input to Iron ore extraction worldsteel
steelmaking
Sulphuric acid Any sulphuric acid Sulphuric acid production GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
application
Tar Any tar application Bitumen production GaBi 7.3 (EU-28)
Used oil Heat generation Coal, heavy fuel oil, light GaBi 7.3 (Country
fuel oil or natural gas specific)
Zinc Any zinc application Zinc production GaBi 7.3 (GLO)
Zinc dust Any zinc application Zinc production GaBi 7.3 (GLO)
Electrode Electrode making Electrode mix GaBi 7.3 (ZA)

44
APPENDIX 9: UPDATES FROM THE LCI STUDY OUTLINDED IN THE 2010
METHODOLOGY REPORT
This study report covers an update of the global steel industry LCI data and follows the 2017 LCI methodology
report. During this update, a number of changes and updates have been made (compared to the 2010 study), and
for ease of comparison, these differences are summarised here. Further information can be found in relevant
sections of the report.
• The modelling software used for this update is GaBi 7.3 SP33. All upstream data which have not been
collected by worldsteel from industry associations are based on GaBi 7.3 upstream data. The previous
study used an earlier version of GaBi 4.
• For some energy related inputs, more country specific data has been implemented.
• Scrap processing is now included as an input to the boundary of the steel works. This impact is based on
the shredding process, which is likely to be a conservative estimate of other steel scrap processing (such
as baling and shearing)
• New upstream processes have been included, including charcoal production and new paint formulations for
organic coated steels.
• Due to naming issues of some emission flows in GaBi 4, they were not picked up by impact assessments.
These have been corrected to ensure all emission flows are correctly named. Currently this is done through
a manual process using a flow name modification plan.
• To ensure the data is ILCD compliant, recovered material and wastes that had no final fate have now been
modelled to be landfilled which will result in impacts that are higher than reality but is a conservative
approach.
• Global iron ore upstream data is calculated using a 4-region-specific mix of iron ore production for 2014.

Below is a summary table which compares the 2017 data release with the previous 2010 release for steel sections,
hot rolled coil and hot-dip galvanized steel.

The changes in the results can be explained by the changes that have been implemented above as well as the fact
that the two data collection periods contain different companies and sites providing data. These different data
points affect the results as shown below. While for some impacts the results have increased, for others there has
been a decrease, demonstrating that looking at a range of impacts is important to understand the overall impact of
a product LCI.

GWP kg AP kg EP kg POCP kg
Cradle to Gate Impacts PED MJ
CO2-e SO2-e Phosphate-e ethene-e

2010 19.6 1.6 0.0045 0.00036 0.0008

Sections, 1kg
2017 18.3 1.5 0.0042 0.00032 0.00064

2010 21.6 2 0.0052 0.00035 0.00094

Hot rolled coil,
1kg
2017 23.3 2.2 0.0054 0.00046 0.00091

Hot-dip 2010 27.5 2.5 0.0074 0.00048 0.0012

galvanized
steel, 1kg 2017 29.5 2.7 0.0065 0.00059 0.00101

45
APPENDIX 10: LIST OF ALL AVAILABLE QUESTIONNAIRES FOR DATA
COLLECTION

• Coke oven
• Sinter plant
• Blast furnace
• Alternative iron making
• Basic oxygen furnace
• Electric arc furnace
• Direct sheet plant
• Plate mill
• Hot strip mill
• Pickling plant
• Cold rolling mill
• Annealing and tempering
• Section rolling
• Rebar
• Engineering steel
• Wire rod
• Seamless pipe making
• UO pipe making
• Welded pipe making and tube making
• Electrogalvanizing
• Hot-dip galvanizing
• Electrolytic chrome coating (ECCS or tin-free steel)
• Tinplating
• Organic coating
• Softening / deionising water
• Application of co-products (slags and used oil)
• Boilers (power plants)
• External power supply
• Destination of process gases (coke oven, blast furnace, basic oxygen furnace, off gas)
• Flaring of process gases (coke oven, blast furnace, basic oxygen furnace)
• Fresh water supply
• Sea water supply
• Isolated blast air compressor
• Isolated compressed air compressor
• Isolated turbo alternator
• Stockpile emissions
• Additional information
• Transport

46
APPENDIX 11: MATRIX OF USES OF STEEL PRODUCTS

Electrolytic Chromed
Finished Cold Rolled

Hot-Dip Galvanized
Electro-Galvanized
Pickled Hot Rolled

Engineering Steel
Cold Rolled Coil

Organic Coated
Hot Rolled Coil

Section Rolling
Coated Steel

Wire Rod
Tin Plate

Rebar
Plate

Pipe

Coil

Coil
Application
1 = preferable 2 = possible
Profiles 1 1 2 2 1 1
Frame-Work
Framing 1
Body in white 2 1 1 1 2
Structural parts 1 1 1 1 2
Engine 1
Automotives drives equipements 1
transmissions 1
wheels 1
tyres 1
Structural parts 1 1 1 2 1 1
walls elements 1 1 1
Basement 1 1
Concreete reinforcement 1
Cladding 2 1 1 1
Roofing 1 1
Farm building walls 2 1
Gutter system (ducts) 1 1
Chimney ducts 2
construstion components 2 2 1 1 1
Construction Farm building components 2 1
Doors and garages 2 1
Fences 2
Stairs 1 2
Tiles 2 1
Ceilings components 1 1 1
Floor components 1 2 1
Inside decoration panels 1
partition walls 2 1 1
inside panels food industry 1
security rails on roads 1
furnnitures 2 1 1
Home appliances white goods 1 1 1 1
heating, ventilation and air conditionin 1 1 1 1
Steel Food & General Line Cans 1 1 1
Pails 1
Packaging
Beverage cans 1 1 1
Drums 1 1
Rail 1
Machinery Machines 2 1 1
Pipes 1
tubes 1 2 1
pools 2 2
water tanks 1
greennhouses 2 2
Others
signs 2
tools 1
dies 1
wires 1 1

47
APPENDIX 12: CRITICAL REVIEW STATEMENT

Commissioned by: World Steel Association (worldsteel), Brussels, Belgium

Reviewer: Prof. Dr. Matthias Finkbeiner, Berlin, Germany

References:
• ISO 14040 (2006): Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework
• ISO 14044 (2006): Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment – Requirements and Guidelines
• ISO/TS 14071 (2014): Environmental management -Life cycle assessment - Critical review processes and
reviewer competencies: Additional requirements and guidelines to ISO 14044:2006

Scope of the Critical Review

The reviewer had the task to assess whether:

• the methods used to carry out the LCA are consistent with the international standards ISO 14040 and ISO
14044
• the methods used to carry out the LCA are scientifically and technically valid,
• the data used are appropriate and reasonable in relation to the goal of the study,
• the technological coverage of the steel industry in the prevalent LCA study is representative of current
practice,
• the interpretations reflect the limitations identified and the goal of the study, and
• the study report is transparent and consistent.

The review was performed at the end of the study according to paragraph 6.2 of ISO 14044, because the study as
such is not intended to be used for comparative assertions intended to be disclosed to the public. This does not
preclude that the data may be used in studies where comparative assertions are made, provided a separate panel
review of that study is carried out. This review statement is only valid for this specific report in its final version dated
May 2018 received on 30.05.2018.

The analysis of LCI models or the verification of individual datasets are outside the scope of this review.

Review process

The review process was coordinated between worldsteel and the reviewer. The first draft of the study report was
submitted to the reviewer on 26.04.2018. The reviewer provided 36 comments of general, technical and editorial
nature to the commissioner by 7th of May 2018. After personal and email communication to clarify some of the
comments, worldsteel provided the final version of the study report addressing all comments on 30.05.2018. The
feedback provided and the agreements on the treatment of the review comments were properly adopted in this
version of the report. All critical issues and the majority of recommendations of the reviewer were addressed in a
comprehensive manner.

The reviewer acknowledges the unrestricted access to all requested information as well as the open and
constructive dialogue during the critical review process.

General evaluation

This study report is the result of a cooperative effort of the leading steel producers in the world organized by its
global industry association, worldsteel. The current study report is the third update of the previous publications from
1995/96, 2000/01 and 2011. As a result, the methodology and its application has reached a high level of maturity.
This study report conforms to the World Steel Association LCI methodology report from 2017, which is available as
a separate document and has undergone a separate critical review.

48
The outstanding feature of this study is the large amount of primary data collected to reach representative results
for global steel production. Primary data were collected for 23 separate steelmaking process steps at a total of 109
sites operated by 28 companies. The companies participating in the study produce over 25% of global steel
production and the contributing sites (which cover 15% of global steel production) are among the largest of the
principal producer countries.

Because the focus of the study is the production of a material that can be used in a variety of products with very
different use profiles, the chosen cradle-to-gate-approach is appropriate. Several assumptions as well as the
differences to the previous report were addressed and checked by sensitivity respectively consistency analyses. As
a result, the report is deemed to be representative for the global production of steel. The defined and achieved
scope for this LCI study was found to be appropriate to achieve the stated goals.

Conclusion

The study has been carried out in conformity with ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. The reviewer found the overall
quality of the methodology to be mature and of a high standard for the intended application. The methodology
documentation in the study and methodology reports is comprehensive including a transparent description of its
scope and methodological choices.

Matthias Finkbeiner

31st May 2018

d Steel Association
49
References
1 World Steel Association Life cycle assessment methodology report, Brussels, 2011
1 World Steel Association Life Cycle Inventory Methodology Report, 2017
1 ISO 14040: 2006 – Environmental management – Life cycle assessment- Principles and framework
1 ISO 14044: 2006 – Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines
1 ISSF LCI data for stainless steel products, www.worldstainless.org
1 The Centre of Environmental Science at Leiden University, CML 2001 – Dec 07
1 International Iron and Steel Institute, Worldwide LCI Database for Steel Industry Products, Technical Report 1,

Brussels, 1998
1 The International Reference Life Cycle Data System – Compliance rules and entry-level requirements, EU JRC,

2012

50
World Steel Association

Rue Colonel Bourg 120

B-1140 Brussels
Belgium

T : +32 (0) 2 702 89 00

F : +32 (0) 2 702 88 99
E : [email protected]

C413 Office Building

Beijing Lufthansa Center
50 Liangmaqiao Road
Chaoyang District
Beijing 100125
China

T : +86 10 6464 6733

F : +86 10 6468 0728
E : [email protected]

worldsteel.org