There has been a rise in greenhouse gas emissions since the industrial revolution. Today the steel industry is one of the industries with the highest emissions of greenhouse gas and impact on the climate. To identify and handle the environmental impact from products and processes, industries can adapt a life cycle perspective, which enables the use of the life cycle assessment method. The purpose of this study was to examine how the result of a life cycle assessment can be used, communicated, and affect future decisions in a steel company, furthermore, to identify challenges and strengths with the method life cycle assessment.     This study was performed as a case study. The purpose of the study was answered by a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. The study's scientific approach was abductive which enabled the writers to go back and forth between theoretical and empirical research. Sources for data collection consisted of primary and secondary data. The primary data collection consisted of mapping the processes for two bars and one hollow bar, identification of product recipe for all products, gathering of data from the computer program GaBi, interviews and observations. Secondary data was collected from scientific articles and other published literature, which was used in the theoretical framework to support discussions and analysis regarding the study's research questions.     The results of the life cycle assessments showed that mining and processing of raw materials contributed with the greatest emissions of greenhouse gases. In the study's chapter for analysis and discussion the theory was set against the result, to examine which areas of uses, communication opportunities, challenges and strengths that were linked to the method life cycle assessment. The analysis of the theoretical framework and the result of the study showed that a life cycle assessment has many areas of use, the respondents, however, did not have knowledge of all of them. Regarding communication of a life cycle assessment, scientifical sources, other publications and the results from the interviews showed that life cycle assessments should be communicated, however, difficulties arose in finding sources that dealt with how the results should be communicated. It was evident from the study that the biggest challenge with the method life cycle assessment were the data collection phase and choice of demarcation. Strengths with the method were, among other, the opportunity to identify what measures to prioritize to lower greenhouse gas emissions and to strengthen the marketing credibility. The conclusion ends with a presentation of suggestions for improvements, the study’s restrictions and suggestions for future studies.