CBAM Compliance Operations for Indian Steel Exporters: MRV and Embedded Emissions Guide | Reclimatize.in
Home › Research › Steel › CBAM Compliance Operations Steel Exporters
Steel · CBAM · Policy AnalysisCBAM Compliance Operations for Indian Steel Exporters: The MRV System, the Embedded Emissions Calculation and the Documentation Chain That Determines Your Certificate Cost
CBAM entered its definitive period on January 1, 2026. From this date, every shipment of iron and steel exported from India to the EU carries an embedded carbon cost obligation for the EU importer — and that obligation depends almost entirely on data that only the Indian producer can supply. If the producer provides verified actual emission data, the importer pays the real carbon cost of their plant. If the producer provides no data, the importer pays based on India’s country-level default value — currently among the highest default values in any major steel-exporting country, and subject to annual mark-ups of 10% in 2026, rising to 30% from 2028 onward. For Indian steel exporters, setting up the MRV infrastructure to produce verified actual emissions data is not a sustainability exercise — it is a customer retention requirement and a direct determinant of their EU market price competitiveness.
CBAM is financially live from January 1, 2026. The first annual CBAM declaration — covering all 2026 EU imports — is due by September 30, 2027. The first CBAM certificate sales begin February 1, 2027. Certificate prices mirror the quarterly average EU ETS allowance price for 2026 imports (~€70–85/tCO₂e range), moving to weekly averages from 2027 onward. Importers of more than 50 tonnes of CBAM-covered goods per year must be authorised CBAM declarants and hold 50% of their projected annual certificate obligation in their CBAM registry account at each quarter-end.
For steel, CBAM covers only direct (Scope 1) emissions — not indirect electricity emissions (Scope 2). This is a critical structural difference from CBAM for fertilisers and cement (which include Scope 2) and from CCTS (which covers both Scope 1 and Scope 2). Steel’s Scope 1 sources include blast furnace and coke oven emissions, BOF converter gas, EAF electrode consumption, auxiliary fuel combustion, and on-site power generation from fossil fuels. Embedded emissions in purchased precursors — pig iron, DRI, hot metal — are also attributed to the finished steel product.
The Specific Embedded Emissions (SEE) calculation follows a mandatory top-down methodology defined in EU Implementing Regulation 2025/2547. Emissions are monitored at installation level, attributed to individual production processes, and then converted to specific embedded emissions per tonne of product using a product-level benchmark approach. The methodology must be documented in a Monitoring Methodology Document (MMD) — essentially a monitoring plan written in English that defines system boundaries, data sources, emission factors, and quality control procedures for every production line at the installation.
From 2026, all embedded emissions data included in annual CBAM declarations must be verified by an EU-accredited CBAM verifier. Indian verification agencies cannot issue valid CBAM verification reports unless accredited under the EU framework (DR 2025/2551). Verification reports for 2026 can be issued from January 2027 via the CBAM Registry. Indian producers must therefore engage with globally operating accredited verifiers early — before year-end data collection is complete — to schedule and scope the verification properly.
Default values for India — if actual verified data is not provided — represent the average emission intensity of Indian steel production, increased by annual mark-ups. These defaults are intentionally punitive: an Indian BF-BOF producer using defaults faces CBAM costs that significantly exceed those of an efficient plant with verified actual data. For 2026 HRC exports from India, pre-publication reports suggested CBAM costs exceeding €200/tonne using default values — compared to roughly €60–100/tonne for an efficient plant providing actual verified data. The financial gap between defaults and actuals is the primary commercial incentive for setting up CBAM MRV.
What CBAM actually requires from an Indian steel plant
The CBAM compliance interface for non-EU steel producers is less well understood than the financial dimension because most commentary focuses on the importer’s obligation — the certificate purchase and surrender. But the importer’s ability to fulfill that obligation cheaply or expensively depends entirely on what the Indian plant provides. The EU importer is the declarant. The Indian producer is the operator. The operator must supply installation-level emissions data in a form that the EU importer can incorporate into their annual CBAM declaration.
If the operator provides no data, the importer must use default values — which are set punitively high and subject to increasing annual mark-ups. If the operator provides verified actual data, the importer pays the real carbon cost of that plant’s production, which — for an efficient Indian mill — may be substantially lower than the default. The savings flow from importer to supplier through pricing: EU buyers will pay more for steel from suppliers with low verified emissions (because their CBAM obligation is lower) and less — or refuse to buy at all — from suppliers with no verified data.
This dynamic is already playing out in the market. Eurometal and Fastmarkets reported in December 2025 that EU buyers were factoring CBAM costs of over €200/tonne for Indian HRC using default values, commenting that the “final price doesn’t look so sexy anymore” against comparable domestic EU steel. Indian exporters without verified MRV data are being priced out of EU markets before CBAM certificates have even been sold.
The CBAM MRV compliance cycle — five steps for the Indian operator
Non-EU operators whose steel products are imported into the EU must register their installation in the CBAM Registry via the O3CI (Operator in Third Country Interface) portal. Registration establishes the installation’s identity in the EU system and allows verified emissions data to be linked to specific consignments. Registration also controls which EU importers can access your verified emissions values — providing a degree of data sovereignty for the producer. Without registration, your EU importer cannot use your actual data in their declaration, regardless of what you send them.
Article 14 of EU Implementing Regulation 2025/2547 requires every operator providing actual emissions data to have a formal Monitoring Methodology Document. The MMD is the equivalent of a monitoring plan under the EU ETS — it defines: the system boundary of the installation (which processes, furnaces, and energy sources are included); the data sources for each emission-relevant activity (fuel meters, production logs, fuel quality sampling); the emission factors to be applied (plant-specific preferred; IPCC defaults if plant-specific not available); procedures for handling data gaps; and quality control checks. The MMD must be written in English and must be provided to the CBAM verifier as part of the verification process.
Following the top-down methodology in IR 2025/2547, the operator collects activity data at installation level — fuel consumption by type, production volumes per product, electricity consumption (for other purposes, not for embedding in SEE for steel), and precursor inputs with their own embedded emissions. The SEE is then calculated bottom-up:
Step 1: Calculate total installation-level direct GHG emissions (Scope 1 sources)
Step 2: Attribute emissions to production processes (blast furnace, coke oven, BOF, EAF, rolling mill, etc.)
Step 3: Add embedded emissions from purchased precursors (pig iron, DRI, purchased semi-finished steel)
Step 4: Divide total attributed emissions by the quantity of relevant product produced
Result: SEE in tCO₂e per tonne of finished product (e.g., HRC, rebar, wire rod)
The calculation must be carried out for each CN code of product exported — different product categories may have different SEE values from the same installation.
From 2026, all actual emissions data used in annual CBAM declarations must be verified by an EU-accredited CBAM verifier — an independent body accredited under DR 2025/2551 by an EU-recognised accreditation body. Indian verification agencies (including ACVAs accredited by BEE for CCTS purposes) cannot issue valid CBAM verification reports unless specifically accredited under this EU framework. The principal accredited verifiers operating globally include international certification bodies such as Bureau Veritas, DNV, SGS, TÜV Rheinland, and Lloyd’s Register — all of which are active in India and have been preparing for CBAM verification since 2023. Engage your verifier by Q1 2026 at the latest: schedule the scope review and on-site inspection, agree on the documentation format, and confirm the timeline for issuing the verification report via the CBAM Registry from January 2027 onward.
Once the verification report is issued, the operator transmits the verified SEE values to their EU importer — either via the CBAM Registry (if the importer is linked to the operator’s installation record) or through direct documentation (if registry linkage is not yet in place). The EU importer then incorporates the verified SEE into their annual CBAM declaration covering all 2026 imports. The declaration is due September 30, 2027. A summary version of the technical report can be provided to importers while reserving the full documentation for EU verifiers — protecting commercially sensitive process information.
The embedded emissions formula for steel
Understanding the mathematics of the SEE calculation is essential for any plant engineering team setting up CBAM MRV. The key distinction from CCTS is that CBAM for steel covers only direct (Scope 1) emissions — the EU’s rationale being that indirect electricity emissions are more difficult to verify consistently across different electricity market structures globally, and that the primary carbon cost of steel production resides in fuel combustion and process chemistry rather than electricity.
| Emission source | CBAM coverage (steel) | CCTS coverage | Practical implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blast furnace process emissions (CO₂ from iron ore reduction) | Included (Scope 1) | Included (Scope 1) | Largest single Scope 1 source for integrated BF-BOF producers; approximately 1.4–1.7 tCO₂/t hot metal |
| Coke oven combustion | Included (Scope 1) | Included (Scope 1) | Requires careful metering of coke oven gas production and use; emission factor from GCV measurement |
| Natural gas combustion at steel plant | Included (Scope 1) | Included (Scope 1) | Standard fuel consumption measurement; NCV data needed |
| EAF electrode consumption | Included (Scope 1) | Included (Scope 1) | Graphite electrodes oxidise in EAF; typically 1.5–2.5 kg electrode/t steel = ~5.5–9.0 kg CO₂/t |
| Grid electricity consumption | NOT included (Scope 2 excluded for steel) | Included (Scope 2) | Critical divergence: green electricity investment reduces CCTS GEI but does NOT reduce CBAM steel SEE |
| On-site captive power generation (fossil) | Included (Scope 1 — captive thermal) | Included (Scope 1) | A coal-fired CPP within the plant boundary generates Scope 1 emissions that must be included in CBAM SEE |
| Embedded emissions in purchased pig iron / DRI | Included (attributed from precursor SEE) | NOT separately attributed (within own boundary only) | CBAM requires tracking precursor origin and SEE; creates supply chain data requirement not present in CCTS |
Default values vs actual values — the financial case in numbers
The financial case for investing in CBAM MRV infrastructure is straightforward and computable. EU buyers are already making procurement decisions based on CBAM cost — and the gap between default and actual values for Indian steel is very large.
The difference between defaults and actual verified data — approximately €40–50/tonne of HRC for BF-BOF steel — is the direct return on CBAM MRV investment per tonne of exports. For a plant exporting 500,000 tonnes of steel products to the EU annually, this represents approximately €20–25 million in cost reduction for the EU importer per year. EU buyers will expect Indian suppliers to pass on most of this saving through lower prices or more competitive quotes. Plants without MRV infrastructure will lose export contracts; plants with verified low-emission data will gain market share.
The EAF scrap-based steel scenario is the most commercially compelling: verified Scope 1 direct emissions of approximately 0.5 tCO₂/t translate to a CBAM cost of roughly €20–30 per tonne — a fraction of the cost for BF-BOF steel and a fraction of the EU domestic equivalent. Indian scrap-EAF producers with verified emissions data are in a structurally advantageous position for EU export market growth in 2026 and beyond.
The documentation chain — six records that must exist
Written in English. Defines system boundary, data sources, emission factors, measurement equipment, quality controls, and gap-filling procedures for every production line.
Full-year fuel consumption by type and process; production volume logs per product; energy inputs; auxiliary process records. Maintained per the MMD protocols. 6-year retention required.
Plant-specific emission factors from fuel testing (preferred over IPCC defaults). Lab analysis certificates for GCV, NCV, carbon content. Calibration records for measuring instruments.
For each tonne of pig iron, DRI, HBI, or purchased semi-finished steel used: the verified SEE value from the precursor’s installation. If precursor SEE is unavailable, default values for precursors apply.
Issued by EU-accredited verifier. Confirms correctness of SEE calculation, adequacy of MMD, and completeness of data. Available via CBAM Registry from January 2027 for 2026 data.
If CCTS carbon prices were paid in India on the same installation and period, documentation showing the scope, amount, and mapping to the CBAM-declared goods — for deduction from the net CBAM obligation.
The CBAM Omnibus (Regulation 2025/2083) explicitly provides for deduction of carbon prices paid in the country of production from the CBAM certificate obligation — this is the mechanism through which the CCTS-CBAM offset deduction operates. However, the deduction requires rigorous documentation: the scope of the carbon pricing scheme in India (CCTS), the period covered, how the carbon price maps to the CBAM-declared installation and goods, and verification that the price was genuinely paid. As discussed in the companion article on CCTS-CBAM offset mechanics, the Omnibus requires the Commission to publish default carbon price values for third countries from 2027, which will simplify the deduction for countries with transparent carbon pricing. Until then, exporters must build their own carbon price documentation trail — which requires the CCTS compliance infrastructure (GHG report, ACVA verification, BEE registration) to be operating in parallel with CBAM MRV.
Indian EAF steelmakers investing in green open access renewable electricity to reduce their CCTS Scope 2 emission intensity need to understand a structural asymmetry: that renewable electricity investment does not reduce their CBAM SEE for steel. CBAM for steel excludes Scope 2 entirely — only Scope 1 direct emissions count. An EAF plant that switches from 100% grid coal-fired electricity to 100% captive solar loses approximately 0.5–1.0 tCO₂e/t of CCTS GEI (substantial compliance benefit) but zero from its CBAM SEE. The CBAM benefit for EAF producers comes from the absence of a blast furnace and coke oven — which is a Scope 1 structural advantage — not from electricity source. For CBAM purposes, the argument for EAF investment is the process route change, not the grid decarbonisation. This distinction is important for correctly attributing the value of different decarbonisation investments across the two compliance frameworks.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does CBAM for steel include indirect electricity emissions?
No. CBAM covers only direct (Scope 1) emissions for steel and aluminium products. Indirect electricity emissions (Scope 2) are excluded for these sectors. This is different from CBAM for fertilisers and cement, which do include Scope 2 indirect emissions. It is also different from the CCTS, which covers both Scope 1 and Scope 2 for all obligated entities. For an EAF producer, this means that switching to renewable electricity reduces the CCTS GEI but does not reduce the CBAM SEE — the CBAM benefit for EAF steel comes from the absence of blast furnace and coke oven Scope 1 emissions, not from the electricity source.
Do embedded emissions from purchased pig iron or DRI need to be tracked separately?
Yes — this is one of the most demanding aspects of CBAM compliance for producers that purchase precursors from external suppliers. The SEE for finished steel includes the embedded emissions of purchased precursor materials (pig iron, DRI, HBI, hot metal) attributed per tonne of input. If the precursor supplier provides verified SEE data, that value is used. If the precursor supplier does not provide verified data, the plant must apply default values for precursors — which are likely to be higher and less reflective of actual production conditions. For integrated producers who make their own pig iron, this is not an issue. For standalone EAF and secondary steel producers that purchase DRI or pig iron externally, obtaining verified precursor SEE data from their suppliers is a critical compliance requirement.
Can an Indian verification agency (e.g. BEE-accredited ACVA) issue the CBAM verification report?
No — not unless that agency is also separately accredited under the EU CBAM verification framework (Delegated Regulation 2025/2551). BEE accreditation under CCTS is a separate national certification that does not confer CBAM verification authority. The principal internationally accredited CBAM verifiers active in India include Bureau Veritas, DNV, SGS, TÜV Rheinland, and Lloyd’s Register. These organisations have been active in India since the CDM era and have been preparing for CBAM verification assignments. Producers should engage one of these internationally accredited bodies, not their domestic CCTS ACVA, for CBAM verification.
What if my plant exports to both EU and non-EU markets — do I need separate CBAM monitoring?
No. The CBAM verification covers the entire installation’s production — not just the portion exported to the EU. The SEE values produced apply to all tonnes of a given product from a given installation. There is no requirement to separate EU-bound production from non-EU-bound production for monitoring purposes. The verified SEE value per tonne of HRC, rebar, or other product from your installation applies uniformly to all your exports. This means the MRV investment is amortised across all production — reducing the per-tonne cost of compliance setup.