We repeatedly review submittals from steel manufacturer's that claim the recycled content of their products are based the Steel Recycling Institute's averages for recycled content steel = 25.5% post-consumer and 6.8% pre-consumer. Our response has always been that GBCI does not recognize the SRI as a reference standard and to use the 25% post-consumer default. I have not seen an addenda in support of the SRI's claims. Can anyone confirm or deny either approach?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11477 thumbs up
December 21, 2010 - 1:40 pm
My colleague Nadav Malin outlines a good alternative approach to this problem in this article, "Recycled Content in Steel."
Linda Davisson
Senior Sustainability StrategistJacobs Engineering
225 thumbs up
December 21, 2010 - 1:55 pm
So, are you saying that GBCI recognizes the SRI averages as a valid approach for calculations when the steel manufacturer can identify whether they produce BOF or EAF? The last statement of the article stating "...by referencing the SRI report and using the numbers and formula shown above, you can claim a recycled-content value of 28.9% for BOF steel (typically hollow sections, steel studs, and decks) and 72.6% for EAF steel (typically beams, columns, and angles)." Although I don't necessarily disagree with Nadav, that is news to me, as GBCI has not published anything that I am aware of that supports this approach.
Keith Lindemulder
Environmental Business Development- LEED AP BD&CNucor Corporation
193 thumbs up
December 21, 2010 - 3:51 pm
A couple clarifications/amplifications - First, in the US there are some products which are made exclusively by the EAF process - rebar & beams most notably. Others, galvanized sheet used for items like steel studs or steel roofing/siding, can be manufactured by either process. Point is you may not even need a manufacturer to identify the process.
Second, every steel producer has some kind of "recycled content" information available. That information should be available either on their website or from the steel producer. So if you can identify where the steel was sourced, you can generally get more accurate information.
The SRI publication is best described as an "industry average" where all the steel production information is reduced down to production process. I've never seen anything that indicates that GBCI doesn't recognize SRI. Since SRI is the industry organization that deals with recycled content in the steel industry I don't know who better to recognize.
Finally, if at all possible, it's always best to get the recycled content (and regional material) information directly from the steel producer. It will always be the most accurate.
Nadav Malin
CEOBuildingGreen, Inc.
LEEDuser Moderator
844 thumbs up
December 23, 2010 - 9:17 am
Hi Linda, That information came from an NC 2.2 CIR (question on 1/13/2003, ruling on 2/4/2003). Our friends at Fore-Solutions who consult on a lot of LEED projects say that they intend to continue invoking this rule in LEED 2009, even though, as you say, it isn't officially documented. Sounds like one of those things that isn't a sure thing--let's hope it gets clarified soon!Keith, the question is not whether or not SRI data is reliable. It's whether this approach of using national average data in lieu of product-specific data on recycled content is allowed. Steel is the only material for which this has been allowed in the past.