In the decarbonization of steel, technology is no longer the variable. Hydrogen-based direct reduction (H2-DRI) paired with electric arc furnaces (EAF) has moved past the pilot stage and into commercial-scale demonstration. What remains is scale, and scale requires a visible demand large enough to justify capital at that magnitude. This is the underlying reason Europe’s near-commercial projects keep running into financing gaps and schedule slippage. Without a verified answer to the question “where is the demand for green steel, and how much of it is there,” neither investors nor long-term offtake buyers have grounds to commit money. And so the steel and automotive industries have deferred decisions on the strength of two sentences: the market has not been proven, and consumers are not ready to accept a green premium.
Demand uncertainty is the only thing holding that deadlock in place, which means that making demand measurable is itself an intervention. It changes the sequence of the transition. That is why the automotive market is the decisive point. Of the two major end markets for blast-furnace steel, shipbuilding offers only B2B evidence, while in autos, the individual consumer’s brand choice and willingness to pay are revealed directly at the point of purchase. That signal travels the shortest available path: from production planning to steel purchasing contracts to capital investment decisions.
Yet no study had actually answered the question. KoSIF (2024) surveyed B2B steel buyers; Transition Asia (2025) modeled costs. In the United States, Industrious Labs and Ducker Carlisle surveyed 1,251 consumers in March 2025, finding 65% interest and 62% willingness to pay. But no survey had examined general consumers in Korea, and none had compared the two markets simultaneously using an identical questionnaire. That is why ASL commissioned Kantar to conduct the survey in Korea (n=1,001) and the United States (n=1,000) simultaneously in May 2026.
The findings dismantle both of the industry’s premises. 82% of Korean and 71% of US consumers said they would pay more for a vehicle made with green steel, and when safety, fuel economy, and price were held equal, 67% in Korea and 51% in the US said they would choose the green steel vehicle. Government subsidies drew 77% support in Korea (2% opposed) and 61% in the US (12% opposed). Japan’s existing subsidy of ¥50,000 (roughly $312) would fully cover the added cost per vehicle in both markets ($237 in Korea, $199 in the US). Hyundai Motor’s target of roughly 30% low-carbon steel by 2035, by contrast, falls short of peer benchmarks such as SteelZero (50% by 2030) and the First Movers Coalition (at least 10% near-zero steel by 2030), and commitments at the level of specific models and dates remain absent. Lead the Charge’s 2026 assessment placed Hyundai 9th (12 points on steel) and Kia 11th (7 points) — a gap that speaks for itself. Consumers are not the ones who are unprepared.
