U.S. Steel

US Steel has fully met its past emissions targets and is on track to meeting its existing emissions reduction targets. The company has significantly reduced its scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity at a rate aligned with its 1.5°C pathway.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

US Steel has set a target to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity by 20% by 2030 based on a 2018 baseline. However, the company still lacks an adequate commitment and horizon for this goal. Further, no evidence was found that the company discloses the emissions intensity of its ore-based crude steel production and scrap electric arc furnace (EAF) crude steel production.

US Steel should disclose its board members’ climate-related expertise or experience. Even though the company has a low-carbon transition plan aligned with a 1.5°C scenario, it does not disclose its process to review and update its transition plan, nor a commitment to report progress against the plan. Additionally, though the company has incorporated decarbonisation actions in its business model, it should describe detailed information about these actions, including their scope.

No evidence was found that US Steel’s projected scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity is expected to decrease in alignment with the sectoral-level expectations for emissions reduction. Furthermore, the company has not publicly disclosed its R&D expenditure for the past three years. Also, it does not detail the extent or the maturity of its existing interventions for reducing emissions for purchased products.

US Steel does not publicly disclose its supplier and client engagement strategies. Although the company publicly supports a net-zero ambition and the Paris Agreement, it retains memberships in several key industry associations that oppose climate policy. Furthermore, there is no publicly available evidence that US Steel has an action plan detailing its response when associations that it is a member of take a climate-negative stance, nor a process to review its memberships. Though US Steel has evaluated that its business engagement is aligned with the Paris Agreement goals, no evidence was found of the company having a process to ensure its policy positions are consistent with the Paris Agreement.

US Steel discloses its scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions data starting from 2018 and has a target to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 20% by 2030. It also has a net-zero target for 2050. However, it does not have specific targets for scope 3 emissions originating from its supply chain.

US Steel has a goal to achieve net zero by 2050 with an interim target for 2030. However, it is unclear if the company actively invests in low-carbon R&D as it does not disclose related data. Also, it aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions through mini-mill technology, recycling scrap steel and by-products, and exploring renewable energy. Regardless, it doesn’t disclose its low-carbon capital expenditure.

US Steel has achieved almost 70% of its 2030 emissions target. The company has tried to reduce carbon dioxide emissions through mini-mill technology and recycling scrap steel and by-products. It has a USD 3 billion steelmaking facility featuring two EAFs currently under construction. However, to align with a 1.5°C pathway, the company should actively invest in new low-carbon technologies beyond mini-mill technology.

US Steel has been investing in a USD 3 billion steelmaking facility featuring two EAFs and mini-mill technology. However, it doesn’t report its R&D expenditure for the past three years. The company should clearly disclose its total R&D expenditure and respective investments in mature and non-mature climate technologies.

US Steel has a low-carbon transition plan, which sets out targets for 2030 and 2050 and includes the company’s planned reliance on mini-mill technology, recycling scrap steel and by-products, and exploring renewable energy. It also describes actions that the company plans to initiate to achieve its targets. However, the company should also disclose the financial implications of its transition plan and its processes for reviewing and updating the transition plan and reporting progress.

No evidence was found of the company’s commitment to social dialogue or of the categories of stakeholders the company engages with on a just transition. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s ongoing social dialogue and meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders.

No evidence was found of the company undertaking low-carbon transition planning to mitigate the social impacts of the transition on workers, affected stakeholders and its business relationships. Additionally, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s engagement in social dialogue and with stakeholders in its just transition planning.

The company discloses the actions it takes to create 900 high-paying jobs and advance lower-carbon production methods as a part of its advanced flat-roll mini mill in Arkansas. It also discloses the measures it takes to ensure that these jobs embed equality of opportunity for women and vulnerable groups. In particular, it organised 55 recruiting events in 2022 to encourage women to explore science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) and vocational careers in 2022. However, no evidence was found of the company committing to create and support access to green and decent jobs as part of the low-carbon transition.

No relevant disclosure was found of the company’s assessment of employment dislocation risks. Further, no public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to reskill and upskill workers displaced by the transition to a low-carbon economy. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company reskills and upskills workers in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

No relevant disclosure was found to show if the company identifies the impacts of the low-carbon transition on social protection for workers and affected stakeholders, nor how it contributes to their social protection. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company expects its business relationships to contribute to the social protection of their workers and affected stakeholders.

No relevant disclosure was found to show how the company identifies any misalignment of its lobbying activities with policies and regulations that support the just transition, nor of the measures it takes to address misalignment. Furthermore, no evidence was found that the company lobbies for policies and regulations for green and decent job creation; retention, education and reskilling; and social protection for workers.

The company commits to respecting human rights and the ILO fundamental rights at work. However, no evidence was found that the company expects its business relationships to respect the ILO fundamental rights at work. No evidence was found of the company’s process to identify, assess and mitigate salient human rights risks in its own operations and supply chain, or of the company disclosing the stakeholders whose human rights have been affected by its activities. The company does, however, have a grievance mechanism available to workers and external stakeholders.

The company commits to respecting the health and safety of its workers and expects the same commitment from its business relationships. No evidence was found of the company having a time-bound target for paying all workers a living wage. No evidence was found that the company discloses the proportion of its direct workforce covered by collective bargaining agreements or its required working hours. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company discloses indicators of workforce diversity, or has a commitment to promote gender equality and women’s empowerment.

No evidence was found that the company commits to protecting personal data and that it has a privacy statement regarding the collection, sharing and access to personal data. No relevant disclosure was found of the company’s global tax strategy and the corporate income tax it pays in each relevant jurisdiction. The company does have a policy prohibiting bribery and corruption, and it includes corresponding clauses in its business relationship contracts. The company also has a lobbying and political engagement policy. However, no evidence was found that it specifies that it does not make political contributions. No relevant disclosure was found of the company’s expenditure on lobbying activities.