| Technology or Measure | Energy Savings Potential | CO2 Emission Reduction Potential Based on Literature | Costs | Development Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Midrex© Process | Total primary energy demand of the process is around 10.4 GJ/t. The natural gas consumption of eficiency Midrex plants are aruond 9.62GJ/t-DRI. | Some MIDREX plant/EAF facilities emit only one-third of the CO2 per tonne of steel of a BF/BOF complex (IEA, 2009. p.68) | Commercial | |
| HYL III Process | The energy consumption of the process is 10.4 GJ/t-DRI. | IEA reports that CO2 emissions of steel produced from 100% natural gas based DRI is between 0.77 to 0.92 t-CO2/t-steel. | Commercial | |
| FASTMET© & FASTMELT© |
Energy consumption of the technology is 12.3 GJ/t-HM (APP, 2010. p.53). |
Fastmet process reduces CO2 emissions by 1,24 t/t-HM (APP, 2010. p. 53). |
Commercial | |
| ITmk3® Process |
This technology reduces energy consumption by 3 GJ/t-HM and 10 GJ/t-HM as compared to large- and small-scale blast furnaces. No electrictiy is used (Tanaka 2007. p. 10). |
CO2 reduction of 1 tCO2/t-HM is expected. |
Commercial | |
| Midrex with CO2 Removal System |
This process is reported to reduce natural gas consumption. |
According to the information provided by the company, If the removed CO2 is used for enhanced oil recovery, sequestered underground, or sold into a pipeline, stack CO2 emissions per ton of DRI are reduced by 250 kg/t DRI, about 50%. |
Midrex expects that in most cases, the technology will result in a net decrease in operating cost. |
Commercial |
| MXCOAL™ – Midrex© with Coal Gasification |
Not available |
Not available |
Low quality and low cost coal is used. |
Demonstration |
| Coal-Based HYL Process |
This technology does not require coking coal, coke and natural gas. Production of hot DRI that could be charged to EAF to achieve significant energy savings. |
Environmental benefits are comparable to Blast Furnace route. |
Low quality and low cost coal is used. |
Commercial |
| Dust Recylcing in Rotary Hearth Furnace |
Fuel ratio of BF decreases to 0.2kg/t-Pig Iron. JSIM reports the energy saving of 1400 TJ/year achieved by installing 2 units of this system in Japan. |
Lower emissions due to reduced energy consumption. |
This technology results in waste reduction and therefore decreases the disposal costs. |
Commercial |
| SL/RN Process |
Energy consumption decreases because no coke oven and sinter plants are required. Total electricity consumption is 999.74 kWh/metric ton liquid steel. |
Total CO<sub<2< sub=””> emissions are 3.2 t/t-liquid steel. |
Investment and operational costs of the process are reported to be $344.4 and $183.1 per ton of steel, based on a scrap cost of $120/t-scrap (US DOE, 2003. p. 4/4.) |
Commercial |
| Waste Heat Recovery for Rotary Kiln Direct Reduction |
The coal consumption is about 800 kg/t DRI. |
Significant CO2 and particulate matter emissions are the limitations of the process. |
Low capital cost is expected since pelletizing or sinter plants are not required. |
Commercial |
| Finmet |
Finmet process gas usage is 12.4 GJ/t-DRI which is lower than Blast Furnace. |
Installation costs for a 1.0–1.1 Mt/y plant was reported to be ~ €165 million for equipment and ~€35 million for construction (VATech, 2003) Capital cost investments are estimated to be $263.5/t-steel. Operational costs are estimated at $185/t-steel (with a scrap cost of $120/t-scrap) (DOE, 2003. p.21, 25) |
Commercial | |
| Iron Carbide Process |
Energy input to the process is reported to be 12.6 GJ/t-product (IPPC, 2009. p.500). |
Total CO2 emissions from the process are reported to be 2.17 t CO2/t-steel. |
Capital expenses for the process are estimated to be $347.6/t-steel. |
Commercial |
| Circored |
Gas usage of the process is reported to be 11.5 GJ/t which is lower than Blast Furnace (IEA, 2007. p. 133). Electricity consumption per ton of liquid steel produced through Circored-HBI-EAF route is reported to be 901 kWh/t-steel (US DOE, 2003. p.4/24). |
Process related and total (including electricity) CO2 emissions of the process are reported to be 1.2 and 2.02 t/t-steel (US DOE, . |
Capital and operational costs for the process is reported to be $232.4/t-steel and $185.3/t-steel (based on scrap cost of $120/t-scrap) (US DOE, 2003. p.4/4) |
Commercial |
| Redsmelt |
Less energy usage since no coke oven is required. Electricity consumption is estimated to be around 690.3 kWh/t-steel (US DOE, 2003. p.4/4). |
Total CO2 emissions of the process are estimated to be around 1.992 tCO2/t-steel (US DOE, 2003. p.4/4). |
Capital and operational costs are estimated at $334.7 and $190.7/t-steel, respectively (US DOE, 2003. p.4/4). |
Commercial |
| Sustainable Steelmaking using Biomass and Waste Oxides |
Productivity gains as high as 50% could be achieved replacing coal with Wood Charcoal. An Increase of less than 5% in total carbon consumption is achievable. |
If Wood charcoal is used for Iron production net CO2 and sulfur emissions can be significantly reduced. |
Research | |
| Suspended Hydrogen Reduction of Iron Oxide Concentrates |
This technology will require ~ 38% less energy than the blast furnace process or 7.4 GJ/ton of hot metal. |
Even when natural gas or coal is used significant reduction in carbon dioxide emissions 39% and 69% of the Blast Furnace value, respectively are estimated. |
Low cost raw materials can be used. |
Research |
| ULCORED |
This technology will consume less energy than other natural gas based DRI technologies. |
Reduction in emissions will occur when the technology is Used with CCS. |
Cost of reformer are avoided. |
Research |
| Paired Straight Hearth Furnace |
It enables higher productivity smelting operations. When used as a pre-reducer with a smelter,the combine Process is suitable BF/Coke oven replacement with 30% less energy usage. |
In comparison with Blast Furnace route, the total CO2 emissions per ton of hot metal produced is expected to decrease by one third. |
Demonstration |
Middle East Steel Industry 