FULL PAPER

Scrap Recycling www.steel-research.de

Role of Scrap Recycling for CO2 Emission Reduction

in Steel Plant: A Model Based Approach
Manisha Sahoo, Sidhartha Sarkar, Ajoy C. R. Das, Gour Gopal Roy,
and Prodip Kumar Sen*

use and 31% of industrial direct CO2

Scrap recycling in steel industry plays a crucial role in green technology emissions in 2012.[3] Reducing greenhouse
development by reducing CO2 emissions. Plant scale predictions on gas emissions is a global challenge for the
effectiveness of steel scrap recycle have been rarely attempted. A life cycle steel industry that requires a global solu-
tion. Besides improvement of energy
inventory (LCI)-based methodology for plant CO2 emissions is developed
efficiency in primary production of steel,
using process modeling of different primary stages (blast furnace-basic promoting recycling of steel scrap has
oxygen process (BF-BOF) and directly reduced iron (DRI, coal based) - prominently featured for reducing CO2
electric arc furnace (EAF) process with scrap additions). Emission data from emissions and driving the steel industry
primary stages is used for secondary processing stages for predicting the toward circular economy. Statistical data on
scrap recycling rates is available for several
scope of further reduction. Plant emission reduction through scrap recycle
countries in the literature[4–7] from which it
has shown that primary stage emission values can decrease to 1.79 kg can be observed that the global recycle
CO2/FU (functional unit) and 2.30 kg CO2/FU, respectively, for BF-BOF and content of steel from scrap is not high
DRI-EAF routes, by using 400–420 kg scrap per ton of crude steel. The (35–36%). The necessity of increasing
DRI-EAF route emissions can further decrease if gas-based DRI is used. recycle content for enhancing steel indus-
Secondary processing of scrap has the potential to decrease overall steel try sustainability has been stressed by
World Steel Association.[2,8]
industry emissions to 1.16 kg CO2/FU. Specific country-based data is
Possible scenarios on scrap availability
processed to estimate net emissions with scrap addition to both primary and utilization has been the subject of
and secondary stages leading to net emissions of 2.17 kg CO2/FU from various publications which describe poten-
2.6 kg CO2/FU without scrap addition. tial techniques available for predictions,
such as multi recycling approach, product
environmental footprint and mass flow
analysis.[9,10] For predictions of mitigation
of CO2 emissions,[10] energy saving potential data base and
1. Introduction
emission factors have been used on a sectoral basis without
Over the past few decades, there has been an increasing demand supporting process models, but using IPCC database for
for steel due to development in building, construction, and emission factors. Such studies and other similar studies[11,12]
transportation. Several forecasts indicate that the world’s steel lead to sector-based information on CO2 mitigation which are
consumption will increase by the order of 2500 million tonnes often country specific. Plant scale predictions on use of scraps for
up to the year 2050.[1] The steel industry generates between 7 and emission reduction have been rarely attempted. The potential of
9% of direct emissions from the global use of fossil fuel.[2] In the scrap use for emission reduction purposes for a given plant
industry sector, the iron and steel sector has the second-largest configuration require use of relevant process models for the
energy consumption of all industrial sectors (after chemicals and plant. Such predictions are likely to promote use of scraps for a
petrochemicals), accounting for 22% of total industrial energy given plant configuration. This in turn influences the sectoral
average for emission reduction through use of scraps. Life cycle
M. Sahoo, Prof. P. K. Sen, Prof. G. G. Roy inventory (LCI) for CO2 emissions has been worked out based on
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering use of process models, primary/secondary processing with/
IIT Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India without scrap, as discussed subsequently in a later section.[8,13–
S. Sarkar 17]
Emission reduction is also promoted by diffusion of energy
Flat 1406, Tapti Tower, Godrej Prakriti efficient technologies coupled with scrap availability based on
Barrackpore Trunk Road, Sodepur, Kolkata, West Bengal 700115, India
various governmental panel information,[7,11,12] although model-
A. C. R. Das
based comparative assessment of use of scrap vis-à-vis use of
Ministry of Steel
Government of India energy efficient technology has not been made at plant scale. The
House No A 38, Ramprastha, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201011, India current paper attempts to examine the aspect of emission
E-mail: prodipksen@outlook.com reduction through scrap recycle in a plant which requires
DOI: 10.1002/srin.201900034 process modelling of different steps to assess the possible

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (1 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
emission reduction. A related objective is to explore the
preference of scrap addition points against the current backdrop
of available technologies for steel production.
Availability of steel scraps as well as related prediction analysis
is not discussed in this paper; rather, the focus is on optimal
utilization of steel scrap for emission reduction without
consideration of limitation of scrap availability for the plant.
2. Process Model Development for Scrap
Addition: Background
2.1. Scrap Addition: Different Process Routes
Available scrap can be recycled in primary and secondary
processes. Primary stage refers to the product generated primarily
from blast furnace-basic oxygen process (BF-BOF) operations by
using virgin materials. On the other hand secondary stage refers to
the recycling stages, where electric arc furnace (EAF)-based
manufacturing of steel from scrap is used to generate additional
product. Reduction of emission for a product from primary stage
can be achieved by emission reduction during virgin ore
processing using burden replacements (the addition of external
scrap and directly reduced iron (DRI) in BF/BOF so as to
replace iron ore[18–20]) as well as promoting increased use scrap in
DRI/scrap-based EAF process routes.
Although globally the BF-BOF route accounts for 70% of the
total steel production[21] in countries like India, DRI-EAF route
constitutes a substantial part of primary production.[22] Two
predominant process related factors in the steel industry have an
important bearing on scrap recycle, namely, scrap availability
and non-availability of coking coal in a few countries requiring a
switch to non-coking coal DRI-based processes where the DRI is
processed in EAF. Thus, at least three currently used process
configurations are important in the context of scrap usage,
namely, BF-BOF, DRI-EAF, and scrap EAF/IF processes.
Different process weightages have been reported for parallel
processing operations, i.e., BF-BOF and DRI/Scrap-EAF sepa-
rately to produce primary metal. It needs to be mentioned that
the DRI-EAF process routes may be physically located at
different places; however, these can be reported as a weightage of
the primary process route.
2.2. Scrap Availability
Scrap availability is a sector-based information and it depends on
the lifespan of the products as well as the recovery rate of that
scrap after the end of life of the product. Steel scrap used for
recycling can be classified into three broad categories depending
on the lifespan when they become scrap as home scrap, prompt
scrap, and obsolete scrap. Home scrap is generated in steel mills
during production of steel for internal recycling, it does not lead
to any emission reduction for identical steel recovery rates.
Prompt scrap is the scrap generated during processing of end
products. Such scrap is available for recycling within a relatively
short time after its generation. Obsolete scraps, also known as
external scrap are the iron and steel products discarded after the
end of service life and are available after a few years.[6,13a] In
steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (2 of 11)
www.steel-research.de
addition to information available on scrap recycle rates given
earlier,[4–7] data on scrap recycle rates has been published for
third world countries such as JPC Report[23] India which
suggests that the Indian Government is focussing on steps to
increase the recycling of steel scrap in India. The recovery rate of
scrap has an important bearing on the secondary processing
sector which uses steel scrap as the principal input. Also, this
decides the availability of scrap in the primary sector which can
attempt to recycle substantial scrap quantities.
2.3. Scrap Utilization for Emission Reduction: Modeling
Approaches and Limitations
The average CO2 emission and energy consumption per ton
product for primary production via BF route is reported as
2300 kg CO2/tcs and 14.9 GJ/tcs, respectively, without consider-
ing the process of scrap utilization.[24,25] Whereas steel scrap
recycles to primary stage processing has been discussed from the
point of view of energy reduction in plant,[26] the effect on CO2
emission reduction through scrap addition has been examined
based on sector-specific data.[10–12] The analysis is based on
sector specific data on fuel and energy consumption statistics.
Country specific data including mitigation costs were considered
for arriving at the potential of increased scrap use for net
emission including mitigation. Use of scrap has been examined
for various process configurations including DRI-EAF,[12]
leading to different sectoral scenarios. Sector-specific data is a
useful tool for country perspectives, but it does not highlight the
contributions of individual plant configuration to emission
reduction.
As discussed earlier, compared to sectoral statistical data
analysis, single plant level model based data analysis for scrap
addition has been scarcely reported. Such information becomes
valuable in generating insights regarding the optimal scrap use
for a given technology scenario in which different process routes
for scrap addition can be used. Optimization of scrap addition
strategies through process models at plant scale has been
considered in an analysis of the BF-BOF route.[27] Scrap addition
to the blast furnace has been reported in the literature.[18] This
study has also reported substantial reduction of coke rate. Use of
DRI in BF acts as pre-reduced input material[19,20] and decreases
the coke rate, and hence emission. Extensive studies on the effect
of DRI addition in BF produced by MIDREX and Energion
process has been reported.[19] In practice, primary processing
also involve use of directly reduced iron along with scrap using
EAF/IF facilities spread over large number of physical locations
in countries like India.
Recycling of scrap in secondary processing stages in EAF for
scrap smelting and refining leads to the average emission and
energy consumption values of 580 kg CO2/tcs and 5.7 GJ/tcs,
respectively.[24,25] Since these values are substantially lesser than
primary stage product emission, additional product generation
from the same quantity of primary resources leads to a decrease
of overall product emission. These approaches generally have
considered reduction of emission with an assumed primary
emission value. World steel[14] and other investigators[13] have
reported an integrated modelling approach wherein primary
stage emissions depends on use of natural burden, and
© 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
secondary stage emissions are dependent on use of scrap
generated from product recycling.
The model-based approaches considered so far deal with the
effect of scrap addition to primary and/or secondary processing
stages where primary emission value has not been considered
to be variable. Also, primary emission values have been
estimated through consideration of scrap recycle to the BOF
stage for the BF-BOF process route, without considering the
effect of scrap addition to the iron making stage. The possibility
of different primary processing steps (BF-BOF, DRI-EAF)
operating in parallel for emission reduction has not been
studied.
Emission reduction can be obtained in addition to scrap
recycle by adopting alternative breakthrough technologies which
has been described in the literature.[11,28] Such technologies
including top-gas-recycle blast furnaces[28] for emission reduc-
tion have been partly driven by the issue of limited scrap
availability for emission reduction. The alternative emission
reduction technologies are not discussed in this paper, rather the
scope is to examine the emission reduction processes using
conventional technologies/incremental improvements.
3. Model Development
3.1. LCI-Based Modeling Approaches for Emission
Reduction
The subject of external scrap utilization for reducing emission
using the LCI analysis which is a component of life cycle
assessment (LCA) methodology has been discussed in consider-
able details by the World Steel Association[8,14] during evaluation
of the environmental performance of steel scrap recycling.
The LCI associated with the scrap is written[8,14] as the credit
associated with the avoided primary production of steel (Xpr),
minus the burden associated with the recycling of steel scrap to
make new steel (Xre), multiplied by the yield of this process (Y) to
consider losses occurring in the process:


Scrap LCI ¼ X pr  X re  Y ð1Þ
where letter X refers to the LCI parameter (CO2 in this case).
Estimation of LCI with external scrap utilization has been
modeled by other researchers[13] for chosen parameters (energy,
emission) for subsequent use in LCA. Estimation of the
inventory of the chosen parameter (CO2) requires identification
of a given functional unit[14] for which the inventory is broken
down as the part attributed to the production of crude steel and
subsequent processing of the steel to product exiting the
production gate. The functional is taken as 1 kg hot rolled coil
and the inventory of CO2 emission is calculated from cradle to
gate including end-of-life recycling.
Other studies[15] are based on collected plant data processed
through interconnection between the environmental tool (LCA)
and process simulation software (Aspen Plus) for LCI
estimations. The effect of scrap addition has not been specifically
reported in this study.[15] Physicochemical models have been
developed for each unit in an integrated plant and the model
generated data was fed into GaBi software for arriving at impact
steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (3 of 11)
www.steel-research.de
analysis. The total CO2 emission values reported are 1147 kg/FU
(European integrated plant), 937 kg/FU (ULCOS benchmark),
1165 kg/FU (IISI Reference). The functional unit chosen is 1 ton
hot rolled coil. For the same functional unit, different companies
may rapidly assess the environmental impacts with respect to
their own industrial configuration. It is to be noted that LCI
studies without scrap utilization have been performed by
others[16,17] for monitoring major emission sources in an
integrated plant. It is apparent that scrap recycle processes will
require generation of model parameters which are not required
while performing a study without scrap addition.
3.2. Model Parameters for Scrap Recycle to Primary
Processing Stage
World steel[14] and other investigators[13] have reported an
integrated modeling approach wherein primary stage emissions
depends on use of natural burden, and secondary stage
emissions are dependent on use of scrap generated from
product recycling. Equation (2) has been used to calculate the life
cycle CO2 emission of steel from cradle to gate with end-of-life
recycling, excluding the use phase, but including reprocessing of
scrap in unlimited stages to generate additional product with a
given recovery rate of scrap. Part of the scrap generated is used in
the primary processing stage.


LCI f or CO2 ¼ X 0  ðRR  SÞ  X pr  X re  Y ð2Þ
where:
X is the cradle to gate LCI value for CO2 emission (excluding
raw material and energy production) including recycling of
product after its end of life (kg CO2/FU).
Xpr is the cradle to gate LCI value for CO2 emission without
allocation for recycling and scrap recycle to primary stage (kg
CO2/FU).
X 0 is the cradle-to-gate LCI value for CO2 emission of the steel
product using S amount of scrap in primary stage (kg CO2/FU).
Xre is the cradle to gate LCI value for 100% secondary metal
production from scrap in the EAF (assuming scrap ¼ 100%) (kg
CO2/FU).
S is the scrap input to the specific primary steelmaking
process (kg scrap /FU).
RR is the recovery rate of scrap.
Y is the process yield of the EAF (Secondary processing).
(RR  S) is the net amount of scrap produced from the system
(kg scrap /FU) for a specific route.
In the current modeling approach, the functional unit is taken
as 1 kg hot rolled coil, similar to other studies[14,15] and the
inventory of CO2 emission is calculated from cradle to gate
excluding raw material and energy production. Also, system
expansion has not been considered for credits.
As discussed, subsequent to the production of crude steel, it is
necessary to add CO2 emission value attributed to crude steel
production. This enables estimation of both Xpr and X 0 . In the
current study, a downstream value of 0.1 kg CO2/FU (taken from
literature[24]) is added to the emission value obtained from the
process model for crude steel production. This value is
associated with the energy consumed in the hot rolling
© 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.steel-research.de

operation. Figure 1 provides schematically the approach adopted
by WSA.[14]
It was considered necessary to extend the application of
Equation (2) to a specific number of stages of recycling. Such an
approach allows us to foresee the effect of limited recycling of
scrap to the secondary stages. An equation has been derived for
showing the variation of X with the number of recycling stages.
Consider a primary process which yields 1 kg of product using
external scrap S in burden in primary process and the LCI value
of the product (CO2 emission) from cradle to gate, including
recycling, is estimated as X.
After the end-of-life of 1 kg product, the net product generated
after 1st stage of recycling
Equation (5) allows estimation for LCI value depending on the
extent (stages) of recycling. It may be noted that Equation (2) can
be readily arrived at by considering infinite number of recycling
stages from Equation (5) as presented along with Figure 1
represented above.
Equation (5) can be readily applied to individual primary
processes operating in parallel to estimate the value of X (cradle
to gate LCI value for CO2 emission of the steel product including
recycling (kg CO2/FU)) with varying degrees of scrap additions
to the primary stage. For such estimation, we require to provide
inputs pertaining to model parameters Xpr and X0 for the
individual process routes.

¼ ðRR  SÞ  Y 3.3. Estimation of Model Parameters Xpr and X0 for Primary

Stage Scrap Recycles
If (RR  S)  Y kg product is produced from primary stage
then the emission associated For estimation of Xpr and X0 , GaBi[14] or similar software can be
used once the input and output flows are documented. However,
¼ X 0  ðRR  SÞY individual modules such as BF and BOF cannot be used for
predicting the use of scrap addition effects. The present
Hence the net emission associated with 1st stage of recycling approach used for arriving at LCI values is based on model
is given by: generated mass and energy balance flows, similar to the

 approach adopted[15] for estimating process emission. GaBi[14]
1st stage emission ¼ X 0  ðRR  SÞY  X pr  X re software has not been used since raw material and energy
 ðRR  SÞY ð3Þ production has been excluded and fuel based emissions for
principal units are considered.
Using r ¼ (RR  S)Y For the BF-BOF process route, the Xpr values for the flow sheet
The above expression can be written as: adopted are obtained based on earlier work using model

 generated values for the complete plant flow sheet comprising
1st stage emission ¼ X 0  r  X pr  X re  r ð4Þ of sintering, coke oven, blast furnace, and BOF.[29] Xpr values are
arrived at considering upstream, process, and downstream
Similarly, 2nd stage emission ¼X0  r2–(Xpr  Xre)  r2 emissions. Only fuel related emissions are considered. A
Total emission for “n” number of recycling stages per kg of stoichiometric model of coke oven has been used to estimate
product can be written as: the coke oven gas quantity, gross coke, nut coke and breeze coke

 with a given recovery percentage of gross coke in the coke oven.[29]
X ¼ X 0  X pr For addition of scrap to either of the process routes chosen,
" # separate estimations are required as explained subsequently. For

 ð1  ððRR  SÞ  Y ÞÞ the BF-BOF route, the scrap addition point has been considered
þ X pr  X re  þ X re ð5Þ
ð1  ðððRR  SÞ  YÞnþ1 ÞÞ at the blast furnace, since there is greater choice of scrap inputs
with the possibility of elimination of impurities in the iron
where n is the number of recycling stages. making slag. A BF model has been developed for estimation of X0
for the integrated circuit using scrap (S1) in the blast furnace.
Estimation of X0 for DRI-EAF route with scrap addition (S2) is
discussed subsequently. With estimated values of Xpr and X0 for
given values of S1 and S2, plant emission values for both the
primary routes can be estimated.

3.3.1. Blast Furnace Model Development for Estimating Xpr

and X0

Scrap addition to the blast furnace is expected to result in the

Figure 1. Flowsheet for the estimation of Life cycle CO2 emission
considering scrap recycling.
decrease of virgin material consumption, the coke rate and thus
also reduce the CO2 emission of blast furnace. Scrap addition to
a primary iron making stage rather than steel making stage is of
interest due to reasons discussed earlier. A BF model has been
developed to study the effect of external scrap/DRI addition in
blast furnace for estimating the CO2 emissions from the blast

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (4 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.steel-research.de

furnace and upstream/downstream units. The model used in the Table 1. Blast furnace input parameters taken from the literature.[18]
present study described by Sarkar[29] is somewhat similar to
the one-dimensional static blast furnace model, “Masmod”, Input parameters Value
described by Hooey et. al[30] with a difference of solution PCI [kg/THM] 57.3
procedure. The blast furnace (as described in the literature) is
Humidification [gm Nm3] 40
divided into 2 major parts, upper zone and bottom zone.[28,30,31] 
Blast temperature [ C] 1177
In the upper zone reduction of higher phase oxides occurs
whereas in the bottom zone direct and indirect reduction of only Split zone temperature [ C] 1000
Wustite is considered. The use of two zone model does not O2 enrichment [%] 1.5
require the assumption of the furnace state parameters like Heat loss [GJ/THM] 1
kinetic and mass transfer parameters. The general approach for
solution is based on the mass and heat balance for the assumed
zones[29] for a given set of burden inputs which also includes cold
scrap if this is used. The heat balance for the bottom zone Q ¼ D  MDRI  Y ð7Þ
computes enthalpy of the output hot metal which includes total
enthalpy of metallic iron from all sources. In a 2 zone model, So, net emission due to addition of scrap to DRI-EAF route is
additional heat requirement before carburization of Fe (solid) is given by:
released after carburization. Thus there is no additional heating
 
requirement. We have assumed this process is a lower zone D
phenomenon. Each of these zones when combined at the end e¼ eDRI  þ eEAF ð8Þ
1000
gives us the output value predictions of parameters such as top
gas volume, Blast rate, coke rate, top gas composition, slag where e refers to emission values
composition, and amount of direct and indirect reductions. The DRI-EAF route CO2 emission value without scrap
addition (Xpr) is taken from the literature as 2.5 kg CO2 per kg
Validation of the Blast Furnace Model: The model validation is crude steel(kgcs).[32] Emission value associated with power
done by using the data from two different sources and consumption in the EAF is taken as 0.8 kg CO2/kWh[32] at
comparing it with the literature output values. 750 kWh/tcs and additional downstream processing emission
The validation of the model is done for without and with scrap (0.1 kg CO2/FU) to product leads to 3.2 kg CO2/FU.
addition in blast furnace for fuel rate from literature,[18] where
the input parameter is variation in scrap/ore ratio with other
parameters are described in Table 1 and output values are 4. Computation Results for Scrap Addition in
compared in Table 2. Primary Stage
The validation for addition of scrap in blast furnace with
literature shows maximum error of 6–10%.[18] Similarly for 4.1. Computation Results for scrap and DRI Addition to
addition of DRI in blast furnace the validation is done for CO2 Blast Furnace
emission from DRI processing to hot metal with literature which
shows maximum error of 3–4%.[19] The validated model can The effect of scrap and DRI addition as an input material in blast
predict fuel rate to the blast furnace which leads to estimation of furnace on CO2 emission for estimating X0 are estimated using
the input coal rate to the plant circuit.[29] With the estimated the inputs provided in Table 3 are based on the literature data.[18]
input coal rate, the value Xpr and X0 can be computed. The solution is subjected to two constraints of minimum input
coke rate (300 kg/THM) for burden support and limiting
raceway adiabatic flame temperature (RAFT) set at 1900  C
3.3.2. DRI-EAF Model Development for Scrap Addition for
Estimation of Xpr and X0
Table 2. Output values comparison of model and literature.
A DRI-EAF model has been developed for the computation of
0
CO2 emission value (X ) based on iron balance and the upstream Fuel rate (kg/THM) Fuel rate
emission associated with production of coal-based DRI. Scrap/ore literature[18] (kg/THM) Difference
Let the amount of DRI to be added to EAF be D with Scrap ratio (approx. values) model [%]
metallization MDRI and the scrap amount be S with metallization 0 0 507.3 489.92 3.43
M S.
100 0.07 470 455.77 3.03
The following expression is obtained from mass balance
150 0.11 448 438.77 2.06
consideration in DRI-EAF circuit:
200 0.15 408 421.62 3.34
ððS  MS Þ þ ðD  MDRI ÞÞ  Y ¼ 1000 ð6Þ 250 0.21 380 404.55 6.46
300 0.27 360 387.47 7.63
From Equation (6), the value of D is obtained for known
350 0.34 340 370.39 8.94
amount of scrap addition in EAF. The amount of steel (Q)
400 0.42 320 353.31 10.41
produced from DRI is given by:

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (5 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.steel-research.de

Table 3. Input parameters for blast furnace model. The effect of addition of both the types of DRI in varying
amounts (400 kg/THM) on the CO2 emission have also been
Input parameters Value tabulated in Table 4. Although predicted coke rates are similar,
PCI [kg/THM] 57.3 the effects of upstream emissions demonstrate that scrap
addition in the blast furnace is the preferred option.
Humidification [gm Nm3] 40

Blast temperature [ C] 1200
Split zone temperature [ C] 1000
4.2. Computation Results for Scrap Addition for DRI-EAF
O2 enrichment [%] 1.5
Route
Heat loss [GJ/THM] 1.5

Estimated values of primary emission with addition of scrap in

this process route are shown in Table 5. It can be clearly observed
for smooth operation. Scrap additions beyond 400 kg/THM that the CO2 emission value decreases progressively from 3.2 kg
leads to constraint violation related to minimum coke rate. CO2/FU to 2.30 kg CO2/FU with increasing scrap input from
Predicted values of X0 using shredded scrap (400 kg/THM) 0 kg/tcs to 400 kg/tcs.
and DRI (coal based/gas based) used in the charge and its effect
on the coke rate, CO2 emission and other results are tabulated in
Table 4. The scrap composition is reported from literature: 4.3. Effect of Scrap Additions to Both BF-BOF and DRI-EAF
Fe-98.5%, C-1%, Si-0.5%[18] and the data for both the types of Routes
DRI were taken from literature: both having metallization of
87.3% containing 4 wt% carbon.[19] The energy requirement for Different quantities of scrap can be used for both BF-BOF and
the production of gas based DRI is 400 KWh/tcs which is DRI-EAF routes. Since both routes are used for a number of
considerably lower compared to coal based DRI (700–750 KWh/ countries, the production weightages of these routes are
tcs).[29,32] important with country-specific values. With scrap additions
of 422 kg/tcs (S1, 400 kg scrap/THM) to BF-BOF and 400 kg/tcs
Estimated LCI Values for BF-BOF Process: The CO2 emission (S2) to DRI-EAF circuits, the first two rows in the following table
values are estimated for the flow sheet configuration incorpo- (Table 6 column A) shows estimated values of emission for the
rating the blast furnace model developed without/with scrap. integrated plant without secondary stage scrap recycling using
LCI values for the various units in the integrated flow sheet have the models developed for the BF-BOF route and the DRI-EAF
been considered in arriving at the CO2 emission value for two routes when individual process routes are operating (1.79 kg
cases (a) without addition of scrap and (b) with addition scrap CO2/FU and 2.3 kg CO2/FU). When both routes are operating,
(400 kg/THM) as shown in Figure 2. the optimal amount of scrap to be added in each circuit of
Using the developed blast furnace model, the input coal rate to primary steel production is dependent on the share of BF-BOF
the plant circuit is computed,[29] as explained earlier. The input and coal based DRI-EAF in primary steel for a given amount of
coal rate leads to estimated stage LCI values (Figure 2a and b) scrap (400 kg/tcs) amount of scrap available for use in the total
and overall LCI of 2.41 kg CO2/FU (Xpr) without scrap addition primary circuit. Rows 3–6 show that the primary emission values
and 1.79 kg CO2/FU (X0 ) with 400 kg scrap addition per ton of hot vary between the limits of individual route emission values given
metal. Emission reduction with scrap addition occurs as a result above. The emission values with additional product recycling in
decrease of carbon rate (Table 4) and also coke rate decrease with secondary stages is also shown in Table 6 with recovery rates of
associated decrease of coke oven emissions. It can be concluded 0.85,[14] column marked B, using Equation (2).
that addition of scrap leads to decrease of virgin materials In the BF-BOF route, an additional scrap amount of 200 kg/tcs
resulting in reduced coke rate and subsequent emission may be foreseen as per usual practice leading to scrap usage of
reduction of up to 0.6 kg CO2/FU emission. 600 kg/tcs and a net emission of 1.5 kg CO2/FU. For the
DRI-EAF route, use of an identical amount of scrap leads to an
emission of 1.85 kg CO2/FU if coal based DRI is used. The
emission limits considered in Table 6 (first two rows) are thus
Table 4. Output values for scrap and DRI addition in blast furnace.
altered to 1.5 kg CO2/FU and 1.85 kg CO2/FU. This value can be
further decreased if additional scrap is available for use. For gas-
Gas-based Coal-based Without
Scrap DRI DRI scrap/DRI
based DRI, the emission with 600 kg scrap/tcs is estimated as
1.10 kg CO2/FU.
Amount [kg/THM] 400 400 400 0
In both these cases, 575.0 kg DRI/tcs have been used (87.3%
Coke rate [kg/THM] 344.75 341.56 341.56 485.17 metallization) with 600 kg/tcs scrap. If higher quantity of scrap is
Carbon rate [kg/THM] 333.12 346.46 346.47 450.13 made available and the DRI is gas based, emission values lower
BF emission [kg CO2/THM] 1221.43 1270.37 1270.37 1650.47 than 1.10 kg CO2/FU can be reached if BF-BOF route is not used.
Total emission [kg CO2/FU] 1.79 2.25 2.73 2.41
Higher amounts of scrap used in DRI-EAF routes (say, 900 kg)
would reduce DRI-EAF emission to 1.3 kg CO2/FU. This is lower
Slag [kg/THM] 172.75 201.29 201.29 364.05
than the BF-BOF emission attainable for 600 kg scrap (1.5 kg
RAFT [ C] 2126.65 2127.01 2127.01 2129.17 CO2/FU). Thus the optimal emission in the primary circuit will

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (6 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.steel-research.de

Figure 2. a) Flowsheet of carbon balance from coke oven to blast furnace without addition of scrap to blast furnace. b) Flowsheet of carbon balance from
coke oven to blast furnace with addition of scrap (400 kg/THM) in blast furnace.

Table 5. Output values for different amount of scrap addition in scrap recycle is required as compared to BF-BOF process route
DRI-EAF route. for the secondary stages to decrease the emissions effectively.

Sl. No. Scrap [kg/tcs] CO2 emission [kg CO2/FU)

1 400 2.3
2 350 2.41
3 300 2.52
4 250 2.64
5 0 3.2
depend on (a) share of the different process routes in the making
of steel and (b) the type of DRI used in this share.
A further comparison on the relative emission reductions
possible with scrap addition (both in primary and secondary
stages of processing) is shown for the BF-BOF route and
DRI-EAF routes in Table 7 and 8 separately. For secondary
processing, a recovery rate of 0.85 has been assumed. The table
shows that maximum reduction attainable (1.79 kg CO2/FU) in
the primary stage BF-BOF with 400 kg scrap/THM can be
further decreased in secondary processing to (1.16 kg CO2/FU) if
scrap addition in secondary processing is not limiting. For
DRI-EAF route with identical scrap addition to primary, the
primary emission can be decreased to (2.30 kg CO2/FU) with
possibility of emission decrease to (1.32 kg CO2/FU). Thus larger
5. Estimation of Theoretical Emission
Reduction Limits: Secondary Processing Stages
5.1. Recovery Rates
The theoretical reduction limits of emission reduction attained is
defined by Equation (5), wherein the importance of primary
0
processing parameters (Xpr, X ) have been brought out. It is
considered useful to estimate the theoretical emission reduction
limits which can be achieved in secondary processing stage
using primary processing stages emission with/without scrap
addition. In addition, the recovery rate designated by RR in
Equation (5) is also necessary to be used. For an estimated
primary stage emission value, additional emission in the
secondary stages is dependent on the recovery rate of scrap.
UNEP Report[5] highlights the various factors associated with
recovery rate which differentiates between functional and non-
functional recycling rates. For purposes of analysis in the context
of the present paper, the recovery rate (RR) in Equation (5)
pertains to functional recovery rate only. In addition to losses
pertaining to old scrap recycle rate, a non-functional end of life
recovery rate is applicable. This is an additional source of loss of
steel recyclability. The efficiency of the EAF assumed during

Table 6. Life cycle CO2 emission values without and with secondary recycling for different process weightages of the two routes.

Weightage from Weightage from (A) LCI for CO2 emission per 1 kg of product (B) LCI for CO2 emission per 1 kg of product
Case studies BF/BOF route (W1) DRI/EAF route (W2) without secondary recycling with secondary recycling
CASE 1 1 0 1.79 1.16
CASE 2 0 1 2.3 1.31
CASE 3 0.9 0.1 1.84 1.18
CASE 4 0.8 0.2 1.89 1.19
CASE 5 0.7 0.3 1.94 1.2
CASE 6 0.6 0.4 1.99 1.22

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (7 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.steel-research.de

Table 7. LCI CO2 values for different amount of scrap addition in BF-BOF route.

(A) LCI for CO2 emission per 1 kg of (B) LCI for CO2 emission per 1 kg of product with
Sl.no Scrap (kg/tcs) product without secondary recycling X0 (kg CO2/FU) Xpr (kg CO2/FU) secondary recycling X (kg CO2/ FU)
1 422 1.79 2.41 1.16
2 318 1.95 2.41 1.16
3 212 2.1 2.41 1.16
4 106 2.25 2.41 1.16
5 0 2.41 2.41 1.16

Table 8. LCI CO2 values for different amount of scrap addition in DRI-EAF route.

(A) LCI for CO2 emission per 1 kg of product (B) LCI for CO2 emission per 1 kg of product
Sl.no Scrap(kg/tcs) without secondary recycling X0 (kg CO2/FU) Xpr (kg CO2/FU) with secondary recycling X (kg CO2/ FU)
1 400 2.3 3.2 1.31
2 300 2.52 3.2 1.31
3 200 2.75 3.2 1.32
4 100 2.97 3.2 1.32
5 0 3.2 3.2 1.33

calculation is 91.5%.[14] The generation of cumulative product
with recycling for different recovery rates is estimated, as shown
in Figure 3.
The achievable emission reduction is related to the amount of
additional product generated and the net emission from the
system, considering the secondary stage emission for the
production of 1 kg of product as 0.8 kg CO2/FU for use in
Equation (5) for 0.97 kg CO2/kWh.[29] It can be seen that that
lower the recovery rate, lower is the cumulative mass limiting
further emission reduction by using secondary processing.
Different cases of emission reduction achievable with varying
scrap recovery rates are discussed below.
The life cycle CO2 emission values with increasing number of
cycles have been estimated for different recovery rates for the
cases without addition of any of external scrap in primary stage,
(BF-BOF Route) as well as with addition of external scrap
(400 kg/THM). It can also be observed from the Figure 4 that the
recovery rate plays an important role in reducing the emission as
higher recovery rates results in greater degree of emission
reduction.
Similar inferences for DRI-EAF as the primary route and
variable scrap additions in secondary processing stages at high
recovery rates (0.85) can be drawn from the projected results
after secondary processing (Table 8). In conclusion, Figure 4 and
Table 8 demonstrate that marked reduction of emission values
are achievable through secondary processing. A lower value of
primary stage emission coupled with higher scrap recovery rates
from the product is the most desirable option for emission
reduction.
6. Indian Scenario Analysis
The earlier discussions have brought out the relevance of scrap
utilization in the primary stage of processing in BF-BOF route

Figure 4. Variation of life cycle CO2 emission with number of recycling

stages for different recovery rates (without scrap addition and with scrap
Figure 3. Variation of cumulative mass with number of recycling stages. addition) for BF-BOF route.

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (8 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Table 9. Different routes of steel production in Indian steel industry.
Route INPUT Product
BOF (43%) 38.7 Mt (43%)
EAF (27%) Coal based DRI ¼ 3.45 Mt 3 Mt (3.33%)
Hot Metal ¼ 8.7 Mt 8 Mt (8.9%)
Gas Base DRI ¼ 3.45 Mt 3 Mt (3.33%)
Scrap ¼ 11.18 Mt 10.3 Mt (11.44%))
IF (30%) Coal-based DRI ¼ 18 Mt 15.65 Mt (17.39%)
Scrap ¼ 12.32 Mt 11.35 Mt (12.61%)
and/or DRI-EAF route and the possible effect of further
emission reduction scrap utilization in the secondary stage.
In certain countries like India, enough scrap is not available at a
specific point of time to foster scrap based EAF route in
secondary processing and also increase steel production. The
scrap availability has been statistically reported through
government initiatives (Table 9).[33] Considering a specific year
of steel production (2015), the large production potential of DRI
(20–23 Mt) demonstrates the extensive use of DRI as a scrap
substitute in DRI-EAF and DRI-IF process routes. For achieving
increased steel production, DRI produced has been used not
only with available hot metal to produce crude steel, but also with
scrap. DRI being produced by integrated plants is typically used
with hot metal instead of external scrap.
The DRI production for use with scrap is distributed in
medium scale sectors of production.
It is of interest to analyze the issue of scrap recycling with
respect to the Indian situation for emission reduction. For
purposes of emission estimation, all values of recycling are
reported per kg of hot rolled coil (the assumed FU in the absence
of detailed data). Typical values of the process route based
production are provided in report[33] as per national data, as
percentage share of BF-BOF, EAF, and IF routes with respect to
total production (Table 9).
A base emission value of BF-BOF route is estimated as 2.4 kg
CO2/FU as per the available model.[29] The EAF route is further
subdivided into those employing large EAF associated with
integrated steel plants and small EAF in the small and medium
scale sectors. For large EAF, typically HM is used along with DRI
for conserving electrical energy. For DRI, the upstream emission
is source based: a value of 2.7 kg CO2/kgcs for coal-based DRI[32]
and 0.88 kg CO2/kgcs[29] for gas-based DRI. With the weightages
of the products shown in Table 9 for DRI-HM combination, the
net emission is 2.38 kg CO2/kgcs. With the downstream steel
processing emission, the total emission is 2.48 CO2/FU. For Hot
metal the emission from upstream to process is 2.14 kg
CO2/kgcs.[29] The electricity emission of EAF using HM is
0.39 kg CO2/kgcs (App. 400 kWh/crude steel),[29] as compared to
0.8 kg CO2/kgcs when HM is not used. This leads to a value of
3.2 kg CO2/FU is used[32] of the total emission base for DRI
without using HM (vide Table 9).
The table data provided considers (a) EAF-based production in
large plants use DRI and HM quantities as shown in the Table 9.
(b) The scrap used in smaller EAF leads to around 10 Mt of scrap
based product.[34] (c) The scrap and DRI used in induction
steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (9 of 11)
www.steel-research.de
Emission (Base) Total product[33]
[27]
2.4 kg CO2/FU (BF-BOF, Model value) 38.7 Mt (43%)
2.48 kg CO2/FU 24.3 Mt (27%) (14.0 þ 10.3)
0.8 kg CO2/FU
3.2 kg CO2/FU 27 Mt (30%)
0.8 kg CO2/FU
furnace (IF) conforms to a total of 27 Mt of IF-based product as
per report.[32] (d) The total DRI used is about 24 Mt.[35] The total
scrap used is 23.5 Mt which is higher than the scrap available.
The excess scrap is assumed to be met through imports.
The net emission through scrap recycle is estimated as 2.17 kg
CO2/FU.
Total product ¼ 90 Mt (2015).
Primary product ¼ 68.35 Mt (75.94%).
Total scrap used ¼ 23.5 Mt.
Scrap-based product ¼ 10.3 þ 11.35 ¼ 21.65 Mt (24.05%).
Xpr (Primary product emission works out to be 2.6 kg CO2/FU
based on the emission bases provided in Table 9.
Xre ¼ 0.8 kg CO2/FU (secondary emission).
Total emission of primary and secondary sectors ¼ 0.7594 
2.6 þ 0.2405  0.8 ¼ 2.17 kg CO2/FU.
On further examination of the data provided in the table, the
specific emissions of the BF-BOF route, EAF route, and IF routes
are 2.4, 1.78, and 2.19 kg CO2/FU.
The additional emission reduction through recycling (both
primary and secondary sectors) can be estimated if the recovery
rate of scrap is known. An assumed value (0.6) is used here.
For the net scrap generated (0.6–0.261 ¼ 0.339 kg scrap/kg
product), the net emission reduction possible is ¼ (2.6–0.8) 
0.935  0.339 ¼ 0.57 kg CO2/FU. Thus the net emission after
further secondary recycling is 1.60 kg CO2/FU.
Closer examination of Table 9 shows that an obvious method
to reduce the current emission in Indian scenario (estimated as
2.17 kg CO2/FU) is to reduce the component of the high
emission primary DRI production (coal based DRI) for primary
product emission estimation (Xpr). Also, increasing the available
the recovery rate of scrap will allow increasing the amount of
scrap-based product, thus increasing the share of secondary
processing and decreasing current emissions.
The methodology developed can be readily applied to any
specific country data for estimating current emission levels
based on scrap recycling as well as the potential to reduce this
further through additional secondary processing.
7. Conclusions
1) A model-based approach has been developed for analysing
the effect of scrap recycle to primary and secondary stages on
integral CO2 emission values based on functional unit
© 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.steel-research.de

chosen. Earlier approaches based on LCI analysis have not S Scrap input to the specific primary steelmaking process
explicitly considered the points of addition of scrap during (kg scrap /FU)
recycling in primary stage. S1 Scrap input to the BF-BOF process (kg scrap /FU)
2) Scrap recycle to front end iron producing units of primary S2 Scrap input to the DRI-EAF circuit (kg scrap /FU)
processing (blast furnace) has been considered because of its RR Recovery rate of scrap
advantages offered in choice of quality of scrap as compared n Number of recycling stages
to the BOF. A blast furnace model has been developed for DRI Direct reduce iron
scrap /DRI input. A flow sheet based approach based on HM Hot metal
physicochemical modelling with interconnection of units for EAF Electric arc furnace
an integrated steel has been used for arriving at LCI values IF Induction furnace
for CO2 emissions. Emission reduction unto 0.6 kg CO2/FU BOF Basic oxygen furnace
with 400 kg/per ton of hot metal is indicated. Addition of BF Blast furnace
coal-based DRI/gas-based DRI to blast furnace is not an FU Functional unit
effective replacement of scrap for emission reduction. THM Ton hot metal
3) Scrap addition for DRI-EAF route using coal based DRI along tcs Ton crude steel
with 400 kg scrap/tcs leads to a predicted decrease of 0.9 kg kgcs kg crude steel
CO2/FU. However, the net LCI CO2 emission (2.30 kg CO2/ LCI Life cycle inventory
FU) is higher than BF-BOF route (1.79 kg CO2 /FU) for an LCA Life cycle assessment
identical value of scrap addition. MS Metallization of scrap
4) Emission reduction using secondary processing is critically MDRI Metallization of DRI
dependant on the primary process emission, the amount of D Amount of DRI added in DRI-EAF circuit
available scrap recycled to primary processing stages, scrap Q Amount of steel produced from DRI
recovery rates, and the number of stages of recycling. For eDRI Emission due to DRI production (kg CO2 per kg DRI)
different weightages of BOF-BOF route and DRI-EAF route, eEAF Power Emission of EAF (kg CO2/kgcs)
LCI CO2 varies from 1.16 to 1.31 kg/FU for addition of scrap e Net Emission of DRI-EAF circuit (kg CO2/kgcs)
of 422 and 400 kg in the primary stages. The achievable value
of CO2 will be higher after secondary processing if limited
scraps are available for such stages.
5) A methodology has been developed to estimate country Keywords
specific emission data based on data supplied on primary carbon dioxide emission, LCI, process model, scrap recycle, steel plant
(BF-BOF and DRI-scrap-EAF) routes and the scrap inventory
data available. Data provided for the specific case leads to
Received: January 16, 2019
emissions of the BF-BOF route, EAF route, and IF routes are
Revised: May 3, 2019
2.4, 1.78, and 2.19 kg CO2/FU, thus bringing out the Published online: June 21, 2019
importance of scrap recycling to EAF and IF processes.
6) Reducing primary emission levels by using low emission
DRI processes (1.8 kg CO2/FU) as compared to coal based
[1] Environmental evaluation of Steel and Steel Structures, Jernkon-
DRI (3.2 kg CO2/FU) while recirculating available scrap is an toret, Stockholm, 2013, 8, https://www.jernkontoret.se/global
option which needs to be optimized. assets/publicerat/handbocker/stalkretsloppet_slutrapport_miljo
handbok_engelsk_web.pdf, (accessed: November 2018).
[2] Steel Contribution to a low Carbon Future, 2018, 4, www.worldsteel.
org/en/dam/jcr:66fed386-fd0b-485e-aa23-b8a5e7533435/Position_
Conflict of Interest paper_climate_2018.pdf (accessed: November 2018).
[3] Energy Technology Perspectives 2015, International Energy Agency,
The authors declare no conflict of interest. 2015, 94.
[4] a) BIR Global facts & figures-World steel Recycling in Figures
2009–2013, 2014, 4 http://www.bir.org/assets/Documents/publica
List of Symbols tions/brochures/Ferrous-report-2014-LightWeb.pdf (accessed:
X Cradle to gate LCI value for CO2 emission (excluding November 2018); b) J. Oda, K. Akimoto, T. Tomoda, Resource
raw material and energy production) including recy- Conserv. Recycl. 2013, 81, 81; c) J. Wübbeke, T. Heroth, Resource
cling of product after its end of life (kg CO2/FU) Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 87, 1.
Xpr Cradle to gate LCI value for CO2 emission without [5] T. E. Graedel, J. Allwood, J. P. Birat, B. K. Reck, S. F. Sibley,
allocation for recycling and scrap recycle to primary G. Sonnemann, M. Buchert, C. Hageluken, UNEP(2011) Recycling
stage (kg CO2/FU) Rates of Metals-A status Report, A Report of the Working
Group on the Global Metal Flows to the International Resource
X0 Cradle-to-gate LCI value for CO2 emission of the steel
Panel.
product using S amount of scrap in primary stage (kg [6] J. Bowyer, Understanding Steel Recovery Rates and Limitation to
CO2/FU) Recycling (Eds: S. Bratkovich, K. Ferholz, M. rank, H. Groot, J. Howe,
Xre Cradle to gate LCI value for 100% secondary metal E. D. Pepke), Dovetail Partners Inc., Minneapolis 2015.
production from scrap in the EAF (assuming scrap ¼ [7] Assessment of Steelmaking Raw Materials Supply and Demand
100%) (kg CO2/FU) Balance, 2014, www.oecd.org/sti/ind/Item%207.%20OECD%20Steel

steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (10 of 11) © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
%20Secretariat%20-%20%20Laurent%20Daniel%20-%20July%20
2013.pdf (accessed: February 2019).
[8] C. Broadbent, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2016, 21, 1658.
[9] M. Mengarelli, S. Neugebauer, M. Finkbeiner, M. Germani, P. Buttol,
F. Reale, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2017, 22, 1288.
[10] Q. Zhang, J. Xu, Y. Wang, A. Hasanbeigi, W. Zhang, H. Lu, M. Arens,
Appl. Energy 2018, 209, 251.
[11] T. Kuramochi, J. Clean. Pro. 2016, 132, 81.
[12] M. Arens, E. Worrell, W. Eichhammer, A. Hasanbegi, Q. Zhang,
J. Clean. Pro. 2017, 163, 84.
[13] a) Recycling, reuse and the sustainability of steel, 2005, http://
millennium-steel.com/wp-content/uploads/articles/pdf/2005/pp
31-36%20MS05.pdf (accessed: December 2018); b) A. Amato,
L. Brimacombe, N. Howard, Iron Steelmak. 1996, 23, 236; c) Method
to take into account material recycling and end of life in LCA, 2007, http://
www.lcaforum.ch/Portals/0/DF_Archive/DF33/Thomas%20-%20
ArcelorMittal%20-%20LCA%20DF33.pdf (accessed: December 2018).
[14] Life Cycle Assessment methodology report, World Steel Association,
2011.
[15] A-M. Iosif, F. Hanrot, J-P. Birat, D. Ablitzer, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.
2010, 15, 304.
[16] P. A. Renzyulli, B. Notarnicoia, G. Tassielli, G. Arcese, R. D. Capua,
Life Cycle Assessment of Steel Produced in an Italian Integrated Steel
Mill (Eds: A. Ruggieri, S. P. Sebhatu, Z. Foltynowicz), MDPI, Basel,
Switzerland 2016.
[17] V. Thakkar, A. Modi, N. Dharaiya, C. A. Moghe, H. T. Kela, J. Environ.
Res. Dev. 2010, 2, 773.
[18] P. R. Austin, H. Nogami, J. Yagi, ISIJ Int. 1998, 38, 697.
[19] C. Yilmaz, T. Turek, J. Clean. Pro. 2017, 164, 1519.
[20] K. Kunitono, Y. Takamoto, Y. Fujiwara, T. Onuma, NIPPON steel
Technical Report No. 94, July, 2006.
steel research int. 2019, 90, 1900034 1900034 (11 of 11)
www.steel-research.de
[21] Steel Industry co products, FACT SHEET, World Steel Association,
2018.
[22] MOS Report DRI. Joint Plant Committee Report on Indian Sponge
Iron Production, Government of India, 2015, 85.
[23] A study on the Indian Scrap market prepared by Joint Plant
Committee, Ministry of Steel, Government of India, 2015.
[24] CO2 data collection 2015 report, World Steel Association, December
2016: (a) p. 4 (b) p. 33.
[25] D. Janke, L. Savov, M. E. Vogel, Secondary Materials in Steel
Production and Recycling, Sustainable Metals & Management,
Springer, Netherlands 2006, pp. 313–334.
[26] J. D. Beer, E. Worrell, K. Blok, Annu. Rev. Environ. 1998 23, 123.
[27] C. Ryman, M. Larsson, ISIJ Int. 2006, 46, 1752.
[28] R. K. Sahu, S. K. Roy, P. K. Sen, Steel Res. Int. 2015, 86, 502.
[29] S. Sarkar, M. Tech. Thesis, Metallurgical & Material Engineering, IIT
Kharagpur, May, 2018.
[30] P. L. Hooey, A. Boden, C. Wang, C-E. GRIP, B. Jansson, ISIJ Int. 2010,
50, 924.
[31] M. Larsson, J. Dahl, ISIJ Int. 2003, 43, 1664.
[32] Personal communication from Tata Sponge Iron Limited, Odisha,
India.
[33] Action plan Steel Sector on India’s Intended Nationally Determined
Contributions, Internal publication, Ministry of Steel, Government of
India, December 2016.
[34] FICCI Indian Secondary Steel Industry Opportunities and Chal-
lenges, 2015, http://ficci.in/spdocument/20782/ficci-steel-report.
pdf (accessed: December 2018).
[35] Indian Sponge Industry Performance, Steel, 2017, https://www.
steelmint.com/downloads_rpt.php?path=reports&download_file=
Sponge_Special_Report_26_05_2017.pdf (accessed: December
2018).
© 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim