Turkey’s electric arc furnace-dominated steel industry is well-positioned to benefit from reduced emissions requirements under the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), says Çolakoğlu chief executive Uğur Dalbeler. However, Scope 3 emissions, tied to the transportation of raw materials and finished products, remain a challenge.

“Turkey is in a stronger position, not only because 75% of its steel production is EAF-based but also due to its over 15 million tonnes of HRC production capacity from EAF, with very low emissions and good experience and good [quality steel production] expertise, Dalbeler tells Kallanish.

The Turkish government has eased regulations for manufacturers to establish renewable energy capacities, aligning Turkey’s renewable energy ratio with that of Germany and Italy. This progress positions Turkey to achieve climate neutrality in Scope 2 emissions.

Although Scope 3 emissions remain a challenge, Turkey still holds a competitive advantage over countries like China, Japan, and Korea.

The primary hurdle to decarbonising the steel industry is securing funding for net-zero projects, Dalbeler says. Experts argue that while funding exists, the projects themselves are often not compelling enough. Wood Mackenzie estimates that achieving the 1.5-degree temperature reduction scenario globally will require $78 trillion, with 90% of energy derived from renewables – a target that seems improbable.

Furthermore, unresolved issues around clean hydrogen availability, storage, and CCUS utilisation persist. The IEA has downgraded CCUS’s role in achieving net-zero from 53% to 37% by 2050, though reaching the target remains feasible for the steel industry.

Dalbeler advocates a more pragmatic approach, emphasising efficiency improvements in production and processing to reduce CO2 intensity. “If we can increase yield in every step, we can significantly lower the CO2 intensity of the final product,” he explains.

He highlights the need to focus on the BF/BOF production route, as creating new EAF capacities is not a comprehensive solution due to limited scrap availability and the scarcity of high-quality ore for direct reduction.

“We need to concentrate on [decarbonising] the BF/BOF route of steel because creating new EAF capacities will not solve the problem. Availability of scrap is limited and the majority is only good for long products. High quality ore for direct reduction is also limited; therefore, we need to reduce BF/BOF emissions, especially as this type of steel production grows in India and Southeast Asia,” he notes.

Setting global CO2 emission limits per tonne of steel, akin to emissions standards for cars, could address both excess capacity and emissions issues. “There’s a significant difference between old and new-generation BFs. We need a global consensus on permissible CO2 emissions per tonne of steel. Anything exceeding this limit should not be produced or traded,” he emphasises.

Dalbeler also stresses the importance of global standards for measuring and standardising greenhouse gas emissions.

Rather than investing in new steelmaking capacities, he suggests prioritising the optimisation of existing facilities. This would enable funds allocated for new EAF projects to be redirected to more impactful areas.