The integrated route makes steel from iron ore with coke — carbon is the chemical reductant, so ~90% of emissions are locked into the blast furnace/BOF process until the route itself changes (scrap-EAF or hydrogen DRI). That makes BF-BOF the single largest CBAM-exposed product category by volume. For the reporting desk that means: which frameworks bite, which KPI to disclose, and which completed measure to show. Here is the steel profile.
| Framework | Applies to steel? |
|---|---|
| EU ETS (if EU site) | Yes — full free-allocation phase-out applies |
| CBAM (if exporting to EU) | Yes |
| SECR (if large UK company) | Yes — energy, Scope 1+2, intensity ratio, efficiency actions |
| ESOS (if large UK undertaking) | Yes — audit by 5 Dec 2027 (Phase 4) + public action plan |
| CSRD / ESRS E1 (if large EU company) | Yes — actions (E1-3), targets (E1-4), energy (E1-5), Scope 1-3 (E1-6) |
| Customer SBTi / CDP requests | Sector-independent — arrives with the RFQ |
The intensity ratio your sector benchmarks against: ≈1.9 t CO2/t steel (worldsteel/IEA integrated route 1.8–2.2). SECR requires an intensity metric of your choice; ESRS E1-5 wants energy per net revenue; CBAM (where in scope) uses exactly t CO2 per tonne of product. Reporting the same physical KPI everywhere keeps the numbers reconcilable — and auditors happy.
~90% of steel CO2 is fuel-side — the share efficiency measures can touch. Heat-loss surveys typically recover 2–5% of fuel use, i.e. 1.8–4.5% of this sector's total CO2, at up to-2-year payback. Worked example at a 1,000,000 t steel/yr site (≈1,900,000 t CO2/yr at the benchmark intensity): an insulation programme is worth 34,200–85,500 t CO2e/yr — a complete, verifiable entry for SECR disclosure 4, an ESOS progress update, ESRS E1-3 and the tender CRP, plus €2,647,080+ off the carbon bill where ETS/CBAM applies.
Generate exact figures for your own kW finding: Carbon Savings Certificate → · sector decarbonization pathway: Steel — BF-BOF (integrated) →
