Does Japan’s metallurgy industry overwhelmingly outperform those of China, the U.S., and Russia? Is it true that Japan’s metallurgical equipment is outdated and that ‘surrounding China cannot save Japan’?

Later, Japan dispatched a large delegation to Beijing to discuss this matter. As I speak Japanese, I served as interpreter for Mr. Zhao Dongwan, then Deputy Director of the State Planning Commission, who was in charge of this project. The Japanese side apologized to us and requested an opportunity to redeem themselves. After comprehensive consideration, the central government ordered a 1900-mm slab continuous caster from Kobe Steel of Japan; however, the 2050-mm hot strip mill and the 2030-mm cold rolling mill were both supplied by German manufacturers. The Baosteel construction project provided an excellent platform for the localization of China’s iron and steel equipment. In Phase I of Baosteel, nearly all core equipment was imported, with only about 12% of peripheral structural components sourced domestically. In Phase II, cooperative manufacturing was adopted, significantly raising the domestication rate. By Phase III, the domestication rate of equipment had reached 80%. Subsequent projects—including the renovations of Baotou Iron and Steel (Baogang), Panzhihua Iron and Steel (Pangang), and the Caofeidian development—saw China’s iron and steel equipment become almost entirely domestically produced. Overall, China’s iron and steel industry has caught up with international advanced levels. Additionally, let me clarify one point: Baorihua Automobile Sheet Co., Ltd. is actually a joint venture established by Baosteel Group, Nippon Steel Corporation, and France’s Arcelor—not merely a Sino-Japanese partnership. Baorihua Automobile Sheet is just one of three automobile sheet production facilities operated by Baosteel. Besides the 1800-mm cold rolling mill jointly invested in by Baosteel, Nippon Steel, and Arcelor, Baosteel also operates the 2030-mm and 1550-mm cold rolling mills, both of which produce automobile sheet steel. The main mechanical and electrical equipment for the 1800-mm cold rolling mill was imported from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Hitachi, Nippon Steel, Kawasaki Steel, and Germany’s Jürgens GmbH. The principal equipment for the 2030-mm cold rolling mill was imported as complete sets from Germany, Japan, and the United States. That for the 1550-mm cold rolling mill was imported from Japan, Germany, and Austria. When Japanese equipment suppliers demanded compensation from China, it became evident that Japan’s involvement in Baosteel’s construction was not aid-driven but purely profit-motivated—and that, during the project’s suspension, Japan even attempted to extract further financial gain from China. Baorihua Automobile Sheet is merely one of Baosteel’s three automobile sheet plants; its founding partners also included France’s Arcelor, and its production line incorporates equipment from Germany, the United States, and Austria—clearly demonstrating that Baosteel’s automobile sheet production does not rely solely on Japanese technology. Next, let’s compare global metallurgical equipment suppliers. In terms of global market share: Italy’s Danieli accounts for 15%; Germany’s Siemens combined with Austria’s voestalpine holds 18%; Germany’s SMS group also commands 18%; while all Japanese companies collectively hold only 9%. Metallurgical equipment is already advancing toward artificial intelligence. For instance, the most modern and cutting-edge steel plant globally—the Big River Steel Mill in Osceola, Arkansas—is the world’s first steel plant to employ AI in production. It is also the only steel enterprise worldwide certified under LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). Moreover, it ranks highest globally in per-capita steel output among electric-arc furnace (EAF) steel mills. Its intelligent EAF steel plant (Phase I) has an annual capacity of 1.6 million tons, staffed by only 430 employees—yielding an impressive per-capita output of 3,720 tons/year. Thanks to full-process intelligence, upon completion and commissioning of Phase II, the entire facility will require only over 600 employees to achieve an annual output of 3.3 million tons—raising per-capita output further to 5,000 tons/year. The plant’s high degree of automation and intelligence greatly reduces labor requirements.

How should we view Trump’s announced $15-billion steel plant plan—the largest ever claimed?

The steel plant is to be built in Iowa, primarily for political reasons; from industrial and economic perspectives, it offers no clear advantages. 1. Let’s review the current geographical distribution of the U.S. steel industry. Historically, the U.S. steel industry was concentrated along the Great Lakes region in the Northeast, where Pittsburgh was once dubbed the ‘Steel Capital of the World.’ This regional concentration stemmed from proximity to Appalachian coal mines and Great Lakes iron ore deposits, plus convenient water transportation. However, as domestic iron ore extraction costs rose and technological changes occurred, steel production capacity began shifting. One direction was toward coastal ports—facilitating imports of low-cost iron ore. Another was toward the South and West—where the shift mainly involved scrap-based steelmaking, since electric arc furnaces (EAFs), the core equipment for scrap recycling, consume large amounts of electricity and thus favor regions with cheap power. Today, Osceola in Arkansas has developed into a scrap-reutilization–focused steel hub. This illustrates several prerequisites for developing a steel industry: low energy prices and low transportation costs. Only locations satisfying both conditions are truly suitable for steel industry development. 2. Iowa lacks advantages for steel industry development. Applying these two criteria to Iowa (see map below), does the state possess favorable conditions for steel industry development? Regarding energy costs: steel production relies on either coal (primarily for iron ore processing) or electricity (primarily for scrap processing). Iowa is not a major coal-producing state, nor does it enjoy convenient bulk transportation infrastructure. Although its renewable energy sector is relatively advanced—with approximately two-fifths of its electricity generated from renewables—it still falls short in meeting the massive, stable, and cost-effective energy demands essential for steelmaking.

US Steel breaks ground on Arkansas DRI plant

7 hours ago

U.S. Steel has broken ground on a $1.9 billion direct-reduced iron (DRI) plant in Arkansas. The facility will supply DRI to the Big River electric arc furnace mill, strengthening the company's supply chain and steelmaking capabilities.

Recycling Today

2026-11-02

US Steel breaks ground on Arkansas DRI plant

US Steel breaks ground on Arkansas DRI plant

FAQ