Criticism of Sliding Scale Methodology
The Bureau of International Recycling (BIR) has raised concerns about the sliding scale methodology used in some green steel classifications. According to the organisation, recent communications suggesting that this approach incentivises the use of recycled steel do not reflect the underlying calculation method.
Impact on Recycling Incentives
The sliding scale methodology applies a scrap-adjusted framework that allows facilities with comparatively higher emissions to qualify under certain thresholds. Installations with lower shares of recycled steel may therefore meet classification criteria despite higher CO₂ emissions than plants using more recycled input material. This structure alters the relationship between actual emissions and classification outcomes.
Implications for Market Transparency
BIR states that this approach weakens the link between measured emissions and sustainability claims. The organisation notes potential implications for market transparency, including the risk of misinterpretation by policymakers, investors and end users. This may affect confidence in green steel classifications and related regulatory frameworks.
Requirements for Credible Standards
From the perspective of the recycling industry, credible standards for green steel require transparent and comparable emissions data. Methodologies should reflect actual carbon intensity without adjustments that may distort environmental performance. Differentiation between primary and secondary steel production routes is considered necessary to ensure consistency and comparability.
Position on Policy Development
BIR emphasises the importance of clear and consistent frameworks for decarbonising the steel sector. The organisation supports the development of standards that align with circular economy principles and enable reliable assessment of emissions. It also calls for accurate communication in policy and market contexts.
