CCS Workshop IEA / VDEh Düsseldorf, 8. and 9. November 2011

1. CCS Workshop IEA / VDEhDüsseldorf, 8. and 9. November 2011 Prof. Dr. Gunnar Still Corporate Adviserfor Environment

2. Anthropogenic part of Greenhouse gas concentration* in the atmosphere in dependence of content of water vapour anthropogenic part Sum: 0,28 % with water vapour total anthropogenic part Sum: 5,57 % without water vapour total % *Calculation in dependance of the substance-specific CO2-aequivalent Other atmospheric gases Methane Water vapour Carbondioxid Nitrous oxide Source: U.S. Department of Energy, 10. Januar 2003

3. > 5 billion t 1 - 5 billion t 1990 2005 0.3 - 1 billion t 0.1 – 0.3 billion t < 0.1 billion t Source: World Resource Institute Russia Japan 2007 India EU27 Iron and Steel Others 2.3 % 5% China Agriculture 8% Housing, etc. Germany 8 % NF-Metals 4% 13 % 3% 9 % 0.3 % 21% Chemical 12% remaining EU-25 3.5 % Transport Paper Industry 20 % 0.6 % (Energy and direct) 18 % Food 21% 26% USA 0.9 % rest of world Electrcity and other Others Minerals(Cement, Lime, etc.) Energy generation 7,0 % 32 % 3.1 % total: 30.9 billion t CO2 Climate Change is a global issue in all walks of life Source: Deutsches Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie, BP

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions originate from all areas of lifeGHG (CO2 u. a.) in the EU 2007: 5,054 *109 t CO2-Equivalents Iron and steel others(waste,diffuse emissions 2,3 % living etc NF-Metalls agriculture 13 % 0,3 % 9 % 8 % chemical industry 3,5 % transportation paper industry 20 % 0,6 % (energy and direct) 18 % food 0,9 % electricity and other other minerals(cement, lime, etc.) kinds of energy 7,0 % 32 % 3,1 %

5. Power station has only one source of CO2Mass balance for 1.000 MWh /100 pers per year 1000 MWh 3,0 Mio. m3 waste gas (source of CO2) 1.400 m3 cooling water 3,0 mio. m3 air 8,5 t lime 2,1 t ammonia boiler de- dusting de- sulphurization de- nitrification 61 MWh generator turbine waste water treatment 17 t gypsum 28 t 340 t coal 36 t ash 460 m3 discharge 3,1 t 2.000 m3 intake

6. Coal Power plants: Ecological balance sheet for CO2, with and without CCS CO2-emission to air CO2- storage Powerplant without CCS real CO2-abatement Additional CO2-production Powerplant with CCS Remark: additional CO2-production ≙ Energy demand for capture, transport and storage

7. An integrated steel mill is composed by numerous facilitiesFrom iron ore to steel products 2 coking plant batts 4 Blast furnaces coal sinter plant ores hot metal 5 BOF 2 continuous annealing scrap + additives crude steel 3 cold strip rolling 3 casting line + hot strip rolling or continuous casting line skin pass rolling 3 batch annealing 3 pickling Zn slab 3 hot strip finishing shop Zn 3 coating line 2 cold rolling finishing shop 1 heavy plate mill 4 hot-dip coating line electrolytic coated sheets heavy plate hot strip coated / organic coated sheets uncoated sheets

8. BF Top Gas ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe – Main CO2-Emitters (schematically)up to 20 mio t CO2 p.a. x% CO2-emissions Absolut Part /t-CO2 48% 11% 30% y% CO2-source % Carbon Input CO2 CO2 CO2 6 Power Plants Coke 2 Coke Plant Batt 4 Blast Furnaces 0,1% 74% 4% Coal- injection ~2% ~9% external CO2 CO2 Carbon in liquid phase 2 BOF Shops 3 Hot Rolling, 3 Cold Rolling, div. Annealing etc. Coal 9% 1% BOFgas <0-1% Cokeovengas

9. Consumption of reducing agents of the blast furnaces in GermanyClose to theoretical borderlines Source: 10th CO2 monitoring report of the steel industry in Germany

10. TKSE is managing 3 waste heat network pipes in the North of Duisburg to heat own houses, public and other houses in the neighbarhood total length more than 200 km Water 80/60°C and 6 bar Sources: 70% from direct wasteheat and 30% BOF-steam Even usage of waste heat from processes has a long history

11. Emissions trading: The hot metal benchmark of the EU Commission is not even reached by the best blast furnaces in the EUkg CO2 / t hot metal CO2-emissions in EU blast furnaces Benchmark on the basis of the 10 % best blast furnaces in the EU Average of the EU-steel industry: 1,630 1.475 1.328 Benchmark of EU Commission Source: Stahl-Zentrum

12. What are the concepts for way out? New processes? CO2-capture??

13. Europe is worldwide the strongest driver with the ULCOS processesULCOS brand process families Coal & Coal & sustainable biomass sustainable biomass Natural gas Natural gas Electricity Electricity Revamping BF Revamping BF Brownfield Brownfield Revamping DR Revamping DR Greenfield Greenfield TGR TGR - - BF BF HIsarna HIsarna ULCORED ULCORED ULCOWIN ULCOWIN ULCOLYSIS ULCOLYSIS Not before 2050 Pilot tests (1.5 Pilot tests (1.5 t/h t/h ) ) Pilot plant (8 Pilot plant (8 t/h t/h ) ) Pilot plant (1 Pilot plant (1 t/h t/h ) ) Laboratory Laboratory Demo phase Demo phase start start - - up 2010 up 2010 to be erected in to be erected in pilot pilot launch in 2015 2011? 2011? Depend critically on CCS

14. Additional Energy for • CCS • loss of efficiency • converting losses Reduction of energy use on basis carbon e. g. steelmaking CO2 Primary energy Energy CO2 Decoupling of CO2 mitigation and energy savingPositive combination turns into conflicting goals needs CO2-free energy t Steel

15. ULCOS-Technologies for huge BF`s are not availablebefore 2030-40 ULCOS I 2003-2009 ULCOS IIa 2014- 2016 ULCOS II b 2016-2020 (?)

16. 2004 - Hamborn Cokeplants 2003 - ??? Schwelgern 1964 1964 - - ??? ??? Sinterplants 1970 1970 - - ??? ??? 1979 - ??? 1979 - ??? Blast HO 4 1964 - 2008 Furnaces HO 8 2007 – ??? HO 9 1987 – ??? - 1962 1987 Schwelgern I 1973 - 1996 96 - 08 Schwelgern II - - 1993 1993 ??? ??? Steelplant 1962 - ??? Beeckerwerth Bruckhausen 1969 - ??? GWA 1999 - ??? WBW 1 Hot Rolling 1964 - ??? WBW 2 1966 - ??? WBW 3 (Bo) 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 ETS 3 Timeframe of Operations much longer than ETS phases Availability of ULCOS, etc Schwelgern 2 Schwelgern 3 Schwelgern 4 ??? 2008 - 1993 - ??? 74 - 85 85 - 98 1998 - ??? CC1 80 - 90 90 - 01 2001 - ??? CC2 CC1 79 - 96 1996 - ??? Stopped Stopped Stopped Operations Operations Operations Current Current Current Operations Operations Operations Decisions Decisions Decisions shortly shortly shortly Decisions Decisions Decisions later later later

17. Interacting Chain: Capture – Transport – StorageCommon task cannot be mastered without dedicated political support Capture Transport Storage • Industry/site specific: • Processes • Energy use • Independent of source: • Transport routes and means • Transportability • Energy consumption Defined by geology and political decision CAPEX ↑OPEX↑ CAPEX ↑↑ OPEX ↔ CAPEX ↔ OPEX↓↓ Industry Government

18. Summary Results of the economic assessment of CCS technologiesLevelized Production Cost (2010) Unit Blast furnacesteel production Cementproduction Without CCS [US$2010 / tsteel or cement] 570 - 800 66 - 88 Additional • With CCS (First Operation) [US$ (€)/t CO2 ] 82 (59*) 34 (24*) • With CCS (Next Operation) [US$ (€)/t CO2)] 74 (53*) 31 (22*) * € (1,40 US-$ = 1 €) Source IEA

19. 100 99 96 87 83 79 75 100 Remarkable cost disadvantage by CCSCash-costs slab, BOF-route, 2010/11 (% costs / t ) possible Szenario Calculation: 1,40 US-Dollar is 1,00 Euro 1) Western Europe 2) Exporting Producer 125 25 25 WE1) CCS WE incl. CCS GUS Japan China2) India LAM NAM

20. Summary and Conclusion • Is CCS indispensable to reach ambitious CO2-mitigation for steel industry? • As long as carbon based processes (e. g. blast furnace process or even ULCOS technology) exists it is a potential bridge technology. • What is the result of a cost-benefit analysis of CCS for steel industry today? • It is unaffordable expensive in view of competitivness and so not „solving“ the problem of CO2. • What are the political aspects of CCS for steel industry? • Obstacles for CCS are gaps in economic efficiency and acceptance in society meaning thus : • Without a special solution for steel as long as no worldwide regime for CO2-ETS exists, compulsory CCS is the end of steel production in Central Europe

21. Is that the end of European BF production? -Remarkable cost disadvantage by CCS -

22. But without Steel the Danger of Climate Change could never be overcomed! Many thanks for your kind attention!