Cited by 83Iron and Steelmaking ProcessesMetallurgical Processes and ThermodynamicsRecycling and Waste Management Techniques

Influence of Input‐Scrap Quality on the Environmental Impact of Secondary Steel Production

Haupt, Melanie, Vadenbo, Carl, Zeltner, Christoph, Hellweg, Stefanie·2017·Journal of Industrial Ecology

Abstract

Summary: In electric arc furnaces (EAFs), different grades of steel scrap are combined to produce the targeted carbon steel quality. The goal of this study is to assess the influence of scrap quality on the recycling process and on the final product by investigating the effect of the scrap mix composition, and other inputs, for example, preheating energy, on the electricity demand of the melting process. A large industrial data set (empirical data set of ∼20,000 individual heats recorded during 2.5 years at a Swiss EAF site) is analyzed using linear regression. The influence of scrap grades on electricity demand are found to correlate strongly with their respective quality; specific electricity demand is up to 45% higher for low‐quality scrap than for high‐quality scrap. Given that chemical compositions of scrap grades are highly variable and often unknown, average concentrations are determined using linear regression with scrap input as the predictors and the amounts of the investigated elements in liquid steel as the dependent variable. The lowest quality (highest copper and tin concentrations) and the highest electricity demand in the EAF are found for scrap recovered from bottom ashes of municipal solid waste incineration. Although even with low‐quality scrap input steel recycling is environmentally superior to primary steel production, the optimization potential in terms of energy efficiency and resource recovery, for example, through pretreatment, seems to be substantial.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jiec.12439

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haupt, M., Vadenbo, C., Zeltner, C., & Hellweg, S.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Venue
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Published
2016-05-19
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
391-401
ISSN
  • 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-9290
OpenAlex
W2400588323
Cited by
83
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3
FWCI
6.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Industrial Ecology (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
  • Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Iron and Steelmaking Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Metallurgical Processes and Thermodynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
Keywords
electric arc furnace, electricity demand, municipal solid waste incineration bottom ash, steel recycling, energy efficiency, environmental impact of steel production

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review