2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2011.04.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Environmental life-cycle comparisons of steel production and recycling: sustainability issues, problems and prospects

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
114
0
13

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 181 publications
(127 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
114
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…Aluminium can recycling is more effective at 67.4% in 2010 [69], presumably due to the high value of the material, the presence of container deposit legislation (CDL) and local reprocessing and refining facilities (that are soon to close). [70], original data from [71]. Copyright 2011 Elsevier).…”
Section: Recovery Ratesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aluminium can recycling is more effective at 67.4% in 2010 [69], presumably due to the high value of the material, the presence of container deposit legislation (CDL) and local reprocessing and refining facilities (that are soon to close). [70], original data from [71]. Copyright 2011 Elsevier).…”
Section: Recovery Ratesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In final disposal stage, steel beams were assumed to be 100% recycled reported [35]. The LCI data for scrap steel recycling was sourced from published literature [30,36]. …”
Section: Lci Of Steel Structural Beammentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the most challenging issue in the scrap recycling operation is the remaining elements [22]. The effort to separate or remove a particular residual element [23] sometimes becomes too expensive and thereby, primary production becomes a preferred option over recycling.…”
Section: Production Of Molten Steelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Primary steel produced in an integrated steel mill (IM), emits 2.1 t of CO 2 per ton of crude steel (TCS) while only 0.6 t/TCS of the steel is produced at EAF [22]. Yellishetty et al [23] has shown that using EAF to generate steel from scraps reduces about 32.14% up to 40.32% of the CO 2 emissions per ton than using BOF. EAF is also far less energy intensive, one ton of steel through the EAF route consumes 9-12.5 GJ/TCS whereas the BOF steel consumes 28-31 GJ/TCS.…”
Section: Electric Arc Furnaces (Eaf)mentioning
confidence: 99%