Metallurgist

, Volume 55, Issue 11–12, pp 867–872 | Cite as

Improving methodological approaches to the systematic evaluation of greenhouse-gas emissions in ferrous metallurgy

  • R. A. Kazakov
  • V. P. Zvolinskii
  • P. I. Chernousov
Article
  • 47 Downloads

A survey is made of the main methodological approaches used to evaluate greenhouse-gas emissions in ferrous metallurgy. The concept of the carbon content of products is formulated as a comprehensive index of the aggregate greenhouse-gas emissions associated with each conversion in the manufacture of a given type of product and its processing and use beyond the metallurgical plant. A method is proposed for calculating the carbon content of products. Use of the proposed approach makes it possible to solve a range of problems encountered in monitoring and predicting emissions and performing environmental-economic analyses of the efficiency of metallurgical plants and the industry as a whole.

Keywords

greenhouse gases ferrous metallurgy carbon content environmental-economic analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, www.carbonunitsregistry.ru/docs/UNFCCC%20rus.htm.
  2. 2.
    Yu. A. Izrael, A. I. Nakhutin, M. L. Gitarskii, et al., National Policy of the Russian Federation on Cadastral Survey of the Anthropogenic Emission and Absorption of Greenhouse Gases Not Regulated by the Montreal Protocol During the Period 1990–2009. Part 1, IGKE Rosgidromet and RAN, Moscow (2011).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    The Kyoto Protocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, www.carbonunitsregistry.ru/docs/Kyoto%20Protocol%20rus.htm.
  4. 4.
    Declaration of the President of the Russian Federation from October 28, 2009, No. 843, On Measures to Implement Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    GOST R ISO 14064-1–2007, Greenhouse Gases. Part 1. Requirements and Directions for Quantitative Determination and Monitoring of Emissions and the Elimination of Greenhouse Gases at the Organizational Level, Standartinform, Moscow (2010).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carbon Disclosure Project 2010. Russia 50, Carbon Disclosure Project (2011).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A Global Sector Approach to CO 2 Emissions Reduction for the Steel Industry: A Position Paper Issued by the World Steel Association, World Steel Association (2007).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Commission Decision of 24 December 2009 Determining, Pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, a List of Sectors and Subsectors Which Are Deemed to be Exposed to a Significant Risk of Carbon Leakage.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Issues Behind Competitiveness and Carbon Leakage. Focus on Heavy Industry: IEA Information Paper, International Energy Agency (2008).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stenographic Record of the 25th Meeting of the Commission on Modernization and Technological Growth of the Russian Economy, from 06.27.2011, www.i-russia.ru/sessions/reports/752.html.
  11. 11.
    Steel’s Contribution to a Low Carbon Future: Worldsteel Climate Change Position Paper, World Steel Association (2010).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kh. S. Iggleston, L. Bundia, K. Miva, et al. (eds.), IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006), IGES, Japan (2007).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, International Meteorological Association, Switzerland (2003).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. T. Houghton, L. G. Meirafilho, B. Lim, et al. (eds.), Revised IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006), Vol. 2: Workbook for Inventorying Greenhouse Gases, IPCC, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), International Energy Agency (IEA), Great Britain (1997).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (revised edition), World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development, World Resources Institute, USA (2004).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    H. M. Eichinger, K. Muhlheims, H. B. Lungren, et al., “Assessment of and possibilities for reductions in CO2 emissions in the blast-furnace – converter production cycle,” Chern. Metally, No. 10, 66–73 (2001).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. Ameling and G. Endemann, “Efficient use of resources – a good argument for steel,” ibid., No. 1, 73–81 (2008).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yu. S. Yusfin, L. I. Leontiev, and P. I. Chernousov, Industry and the Environment [in Russian], Akademkniga, Moscow (2002).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. I. Chernousov, Recycling. Technologies for Processing and Utilizing Technogenic Materials and Waste Products in Ferrous Metallurgy: Monograph [in Russian], ID MISiS, Moscow (2011).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    V. G. Lisienko, Improving and Increasing the Efficiency of Energy Technologies and Production Processes (integrated environmental-energy analysis: theory and practice) [in Russian], Teplotekhnik, Moscow (2008).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    V. G. Lisienko, A. V. Lapteva, and Yu. N. Chesnokov, “Comparative ecological and greenhouse analysis of alternative coke-free processes for making pig iron and steel,” Metallurg, No. 7, 40–45 (2011).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    L. N. Shevelev, “Evaluating greenhouse-gas emissions at factories in the metallurgical industry,” Metallurg, No. 7, pp. 9–15 (2007).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    L. N. Shevelev, “Methodological principles for inventorying greenhouse gases in Russian ferrous metallurgy,” Metallurg, No. 3, 29–37 (2007).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. A. Kazakov
    • 1
  • V. P. Zvolinskii
    • 1
  • P. I. Chernousov
    • 2
  1. 1.Peoples’ Friendship University of RussiaMoscowRussia
  2. 2.National Research Technological University – Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys (NITU MISiS)MoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations