Economy
Bell: Carbon Rules Must Not Penalize U.S. Steelmakers
Written by David Schollaert
February 1, 2022
While the United States and the European Union have been working to resolve their dispute over punitive tariffs on steel and aluminum and re-establish historical transatlantic trade flows, their focus has shifted away from Section 232 duties and towards a carbon-based sectoral arrangement.
The plan: to negotiate a global agreement to address carbon intensity and steel overcapacity. Though still in its early stages, the idea is that both jurisdictions will align on ways to measure the life-cycle emissions from the steel and aluminum sector and place restrictions on high-emitting imports from other nations.
While the two sides have found mutual ground on tariffs – replacing Section 232 with a tariff rate quota on European exports to the United States – they remain divided on how to regulate carbon intensity. The U.S. steel industry is strongly opposed to a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) that would penalize U.S. producers.
Philip Bell, president of the Steel Manufacturers Association, said he doesn’t have a lot of information from Commerce or the United States Trade Representative (USTR) regarding their progress – noting it’s very early in the process – but was adamant that U.S. steelmakers and manufacturers should not have to pay a penalty when it comes to carbon. “Whatever we do on carbon, we must realize that we should not penalize American steelmakers or American manufacturers because of our superior environmental stewardship and our already low CO2 intensity,” he said.
Though he wasn’t clear on what the trade policy should look like, he did argue that it’s the countries producing “dirty” steel that should pay a premium for access to the marketplace.
“We shouldn’t tax domestic steel producers on carbon,” said Bell. “In fact, a lot of the burdensome regulations that you see already serve as a tax on steelmakers and manufacturers. We just need to look for ways to level the playing field.”
Bell expects this to be an uphill battle, as there’s little political will in the U.S. for any kind of carbon tax or border adjustment. “This is going to be hard, and we don’t have a lot of data yet, but we need to enter into these discussions very carefully, because we shouldn’t penalize domestic steel producers,” he said.
By David Schollaert, David@SteelMarketUpdate.com
David Schollaert
Read more from David SchollaertLatest in Economy
New York state manufacturing falls back into contraction
After a brief pickup in September, manufacturing activity in New York state retreated into contraction, according to the October Empire State Manufacturing Survey.
Dodge Momentum drops on moderating data center growth
Slowing growth in data center planning caused the Dodge Momentum Index (DMI) to pull back in September. The decline followed five months of growth after the index hit a two-year low in March.
US construction spending drops again in August
Construction spending in the US declined for a third month in August but showed an increase year over year (y/y). The US Census Bureau estimated construction spending to be $2.131 trillion in August on a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR). While this was 0.1% below July’s revised spending rate, it was 4.1% higher than spending […]
ISM: Manufacturing contracts again in September
US manufacturing activity contracted for the sixth consecutive month in September, according to the latest report from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM). The index has indicated a contracting industrial sector for 22 of the past 23 months.
Chicago Business Barometer remains gloomy in September
The Chicago Business Barometer increased marginally in September but continues to indicate deteriorating business conditions.