Why bio-based coatings aren't yet commercially competitive, and what would change that

The path to net zero for industrial coatings runs through some of the most complex economics in chemicals. The technology is moving faster than the markets that need to absorb it. The regulations are designed for complete systems above the coatings layer rather than for coatings themselves. And the value chain incentives that would close the cost gap between fossil-based and bio-based raw materials are not yet in place.

This is the substance of the argument that Thomas Lüder, Global Director Sustainability Partnerships at Beckers, brought to the Biobased Coatings Europe conference in Düsseldorf earlier this month, with a particular focus on bio-based raw materials in the construction value chain. It's worth setting out plainly, because the economics are clearer than they're sometimes presented, and it's crucial to be clear-sighted about them.

The economics, as they stand

Bio-based coatings are technically viable. Beckers has pilot products in the European market today. But at current cost, most bio-based options sit above what the wider value chain values carbon abatement at. Without changes to feedstock economics or regulation, they cannot yet scale. The green premium for cold rolled steel in the EU is around 125 EUR per ton, implying a value of carbon abatement in coil coating of slightly below 100 EUR per ton of CO₂ equivalent. Customers will pay for abatement, but within a limit set by what the broader steel value chain has established.

Bio-based raw materials are technically attractive for reducing the carbon footprint of industrial coatings. However, all bio-based raw materials Beckers has evaluated so far sit above 100 EUR per ton CO₂e on carbon abatement cost. That puts them outside the value zone customers are willing to pay for today.

Cost of carbon abatement with bio-based raw materials are high today

The regulatory landscape

Several new EU regulations are shaping the path to decarbonization in construction. The Construction Products Regulation (CPR), the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD), and the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) all carry implications for the materials used in building construction. But they regulate construction elements rather than the coatings on them. The regulatory incentive structure for coating-level defossilization does not yet exist. This matters because regulatory mechanisms have historically been one of the most effective ways to close cost gaps for sustainable alternatives. The growth of renewable energy, the transition to electric vehicles, the move to recycled plastics – each of these has been accelerated by regulatory mechanisms that translated environmental priority into market pricing. The absence of a similar mechanism for coatings means the cost gap closes more slowly than the technology develops.

New EU regulation in construction on the way, but not specifically for coatings

What it would take

Closing the cost gap depends on factors that sit beyond any single company: feedstock economics, regulatory mechanisms like renewable content quotas, and collaboration across the value chain. Each of these is moving, but none on a timeline that brings bio-based coatings into commercial competitiveness at scale in the near term. Feedstock economics will shift as bio-based production capacity grows and unit costs fall. This is happening, though more slowly in chemicals than in some adjacent sectors. Regulatory mechanisms specifically targeting coatings would be the most direct intervention. A renewable content quota for chemical products, for example, would change the value calculation for bio-based raw materials by guaranteeing demand at a defined level. Value chain collaboration is where companies like Beckers can act now. Building integrated partnerships across suppliers, customers, and downstream applications is how the conditions for scale get created in practice, even before the regulatory and economic levers move.

Growing market for low-carbon steel

The bigger picture

Our 2025 Sustainability Report set out that the largest share of Beckers' carbon footprint sits in the value chain (Scope 3) rather than in our direct operations. The bio-based raw material search is part of our work to reduce this Scope 3 carbon footprint, alongside parallel work on the mass balance approach as an alternative defossilization route.

This is work at the boundary between raw material suppliers, our customers' applications, and the regulations that shape both. Colleagues across Beckers' R&D, Procurement, and Sales teams contribute to it. The technology, the economics, and the regulatory landscape will all keep developing. Being honest about where they stand now is the starting point for the work that brings them into alignment.