SDGs in the EU Steel Sector: A Critical Review of Sustainability Initiatives and Approaches

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review of “SDGs in the EU Steel Sector: sustainability initiatives and approaches”

This manuscript is written clearly and logically.

This manuscript may be accepted in its current form (i.e., without minor changes).

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Paper is very timely and represents valuable overview and analysis.

There are few minor remarks:

In some phrases rewording is desirable: Line 1 - increasingly relevant role; Line 20 - applications in the face of a process

Abbreviations: ESTEP, RTO, ASBL, IEA shall be explained at first occurrence.

Line 92: “(OHFs), a technology that is becoming increasingly rare” – it actually became rare long ago with 2-3 shops remaining in operation all over the world.

Line 93: “raw steel” => crude steel

Line 94: “steel making is produced” => steel is produced

Line 96: “BOF/other” – what is meant by other if there is no OHF production in EU according to Worldsteel?

Steel produced in EAF is not necessarily secondary – it might be produced from DRI. This has to be reflected.

Line 107 “mostly” is confusing in the context.

Line 110 – 1.9 is repeated twice in the same para.

Paragraphs on p. 4, 5, 15 are too long and shall be split to ease the reading and comprehension.

Line 246 covers => cover

Figure 4 – injection of what gas to BF is meant?

Ref [11] seems incomplete. In some other references, year of publishing is missing.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The present manuscript is interesting since it discusses the ESTEP Platform within the circular economy to be sustainable - for example steel industry being in the energy-intensive sector. Therefore, the present work is a manuscript that could guide readers in the sustainable area, specifically in the energy demand sector. As a result, I suggest adding the review word in the title.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

SDGs are playing an increasingly relevant role in defining sustainability paths for energy-intensive sectors. This work describes the major focal trends related to the sustainability of steel, presenting the principal EU approaches and initiatives linked with the ESTEP action area. Then the paper presents different areas for SDGs implementation by single organizations in the EU context. Such areas provide an operational path for managing and implementing SDGs. In particular, key areas regard road mapping initiatives with a focus on specific sustainability targets, eco-labelling trends with reference to usage per label typology, and reporting initiatives by single organizations with a focus on specific SDG,s and representative EU Steel RD projects related to specific sustainability targets. As a final outcome, prime emerging barriers are suggested as well as critical issues in implementing sustainability and SDGs. 

This paper is well organized but not well written. This paper provides many useful reasons why the construction sector needs to pay more attention to using steel as a construction material. This work is useful for global researchers working on sustainability in the steel industry. It can be published after addressing the following changes:

1. The title needs to be changed to “Sustainable Development Goals in the European Union Steel Industry: Initiatives and Approaches.”

2. Various terms like SDGs, EU, ESTEP, RD, CIS and EUR need to be abbreviated. 

3. Lines 8-10 can be split into 2 separate sentences.

4. Rewrite sentences 13-14. Its SDGs are towards sustainability and not the other way.

5. (1) How Steel Can Improve Sustainability in Construction; (2) The Sustainability Benefits of Steel; (3) Making steel production more sustainable; (4) Using steel for sustainable construction; (5) Endless recyclability; (6) Community and economy benefits-Must be added in the introduction part separately.

6. Line 17-Which industry are the authors referring to here?

7. Rephrase lines 21-24. Better use a proofreader to rewrite those sentences.

8. Provide the necessary citation in lines 25-37.

9. ESTEP-European Steel Technology Platform is not mentioned anywhere in the introduction.

10. Avoid unnecessary capital letters in lines 42-58.

11. Sections 1.1.-1.5 can be given a separate subheading and not in the introduction sections and needs to shorten with lots of unnecessary points and make to into few lines in a bullet point.

12. Section “1.2. Main sustainability issues in the steel sector” The details can very well be presented in a bar chart for better understanding.

13. In Table 1, the companies with the respective country needs to be mentioned.

14. Lines 264-280 can be cut and shortened. Avoid elaborate sentences.

15. Avoid lengthy citations like the one on lines 360-361.

16. Lines 373-374 and 381 all mention sustainable finance. The authors need to rewrite the entire section 2.1 by segregating (1) The world scenario as of now (2) TRL (3) IEA (4) HSE (5) sustainable finance (6) CSRD etc.

17.  The German steel trade association proposing a classification system for green steel on page 11 can be highlighted in a separate paragraph.

18. ‘Circular Economy’ which is also an integral part of sustainability needs more emphasis on section 2.3.

19. Table 3. Sustainability principles according to word steel. Key SDGs for steel are indicated in bold-Change the title. And what is SDGs mentioned is not clear in the tabulation.

20. Title headings are missing in Figure 2. 

21. Figures 3 &4 need to be clear and precise as they contain many points discussed inside the script.

22. The discussion, and conclusions should be shown with a clear description and more clarity. 

23. The technical writing of this paper needs to be improved for all the sections.

24. The entire conclusion must be written in bullet points consolidating the discussion section alone.

25. Please conduct an extensive literature review. Some of the most relevant references which are not in the literature review section to be included are:

1. A comparative study on the life cycle assessment of New Zealand residential buildings

2. Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof

3.  

4. Delivering Sustainable Housing through Material Choice

5. The Circular Economy of Steel Roofing and Cladding and Its Environmental Impacts—A Case Study for New Zealand

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Thanks for addressing my comments. The paper is ready for publication.