Carbon Limiting Technologies (CLT) has been deeply engaged with industrial heat innovation, particularly in Food & Beverage (F&B). We recognise that decarbonising Scope 1 process heat (the on-site heat used for cooking, boiling, drying, pasteurising, distilling, sterilising, and cleaning) is one of the most intractable challenges facing F&B manufacturers on the journey to Net Zero, as well as decoupling from operational and financial risks associated with fossil fuel reliance, exacerbated today by the geopolitical climate.
Engineers responsible for steam systems and process heat are intimately aware of where decarbonisation (or, often first, electrification) is not yet viable at their sites: many core F&B processes require heat at temperatures where electrification is still technically or economically impractical. CLT’s experience in industrial heat has shown that solving these “heat gaps” will be critical for F&B companies to meet their carbon targets while sustaining operational performance and product quality.
Technologies exist today that can meet that challenge, but are often not commercially available. CLT’s mission is to enable these technologies by working across engineering, R&D, and finance teams to identify, structure, and activate collaborations with innovation—at the right level of maturity and through the right commercial model—to create mutual value through decarbonisation.
What are the hard-to-abate processes in Food & Beverage?
According to the Renewable Thermal Collaborative (RTC), 97% of the heat in the F&B sector is considered to be low-temperature (<130°C).[1] Despite this, in major economies around the world, F&B is a significant source of industrial heat emissions. In the US, per the RTC, only refineries, chemicals, and iron & steel have higher industrial heat emissions. In the EU, F&B process heat is third in heat consumption by sector, behind chemicals/petrochemicals and non-metallic minerals.[2] Of the ~160 TWh/annum of heat consumption in the EU, 65% of that heat is yet to be decarbonised, and contributes over 90 million tonnes of CO2-equivalent per year in the EU.[3]
The good news is that electrification and efficiency solutions exist for much of the low- and mid-temperature heat. Electric heat pumps can, commercially, supply hot water up to ~80-100°C with COP 3–6, drastically reducing carbon as the grid continues to decarbonise. Mechanical vapor recompression (MVR) systems can efficiently recover and re-compress low-pressure steam (e.g. from evaporators) into useful heat. Heat integration and waste-heat recovery measures can further cut new heat demand. Thermal energy storage (TES) can further improve the economics and carbon case of these technologies as the grid goes green by adding in the potential for enabling flexible energy use.
However, at temperatures beyond the 100°C range – where critical processes like drying, pasteurisation, and evaporation sit – heat pumps are not commercially available to displace gas boilers or CHP systems as the main heat generator.
As temperature requirements rise above ~100°C, the efficiency (COP) of available heat pumps falls, and fewer fully mature options exist. Other generation options face challenges. Electric boilers can provide steam up to ~180 °C+ (saturated steam at 10–12 bar) and are proven technology (TRL 9), but they operate at COP ~1 (1:1 conversion of electricity to heat), making them expensive to run unless renewable power is extremely cheap; as such, they are suited more for backup generation. Direct electric heaters (resistance elements) can generate higher-temperature air or fluid heat directly (even 200 °C+), but face similar cost and power supply hurdles.
Why has electrification stalled, and where are the breakthroughs?
In short, cost and capacity are stalling electrification.
The spark gap (the difference in price per kWh between electricity and natural gas) has historically been large in many markets (especially in the UK) making electric heat more costly. To break even on operating costs, a heat pump’s COP (coefficient of performance) must exceed the ratio of electricity-to-gas price (per kWh) multiplied by a gas boiler’s efficiency (often ~0.8–0.9). For example, if electricity is four times the gas price per kWh, a heat pump needs COP ≈ 4×0.9 ≈ 3.6 just to match fuel costs. In practice, industrial heat pumps achieve COP 2–4; at the higher end they beat gas on cost, but only when providing lower-temperature heat. At ~150–180 °C, current next-generation, lab-proven heat pumps drop to COP ~2 (or below), so gas boilers still win on cost in those “high-heat” processes unless power tariffs or carbon costs change.
Successful trials of heat pumps that were able to electrify intensive F&B processes, as identified by the IEA’s Project 68, have reached those COPs on occasion, and under the right market conditions, and through the right commercial partnerships to navigate CapEx hurdles, can become viable alternatives to legacy gas boilers and CHP systems.
| Supplier | Process | Source (°C) | Sink (°C) | Fluid | COP | Capacity |
| AGO | Brewing | 90°C water | 120°C water | R717/R718 | 6.1 | 1.23 MW |
| Heaten | Sugar feed | 102–100°C steam | 128–130°C steam | R1233zd(E) | 6.0 | 4 MW |
| GEA | Dairy spray drying | 5→3°C water | 35→130°C water | R744 | 2.5 | 0.85 MW |
| Olvondo | Dairy | 85/31°C water | 105→155°C steam | R704 | 2.0 | 5.4 MW |
| Mayekawa | Shrimp processing | 12→7°C ammonia | 140→145°C steam | R717/R601 | 1.8 | 0.8 MW |
| AtmosZero | Food & beverage | -20→40°C air | →165°C steam | R513a/R1233zd | 1.3–2.04 | 0.65 MW |
| Olon/Astatine | Whisky distillation | 60°C water | →115°C water | HT refrigerant | 5.0 | 1 MW |
| Skala Fabrikk | Dairy | 5/20°C water | 95→115°C water | R290/R600 | 2.5–3.4 | 0.3 MW |
The economic barrier posed by the spark gap is exacerbated by electrical capacity constraints. Replacing large gas boilers with electric units can materially increase a site’s peak power demand, which may trigger costly connection upgrades, on-site electrical works, or reinforcement of local network infrastructure. It can also increase exposure to demand charges and other non-energy costs, meaning the economics are shaped not just by the unit price of electricity, but by how electrification changes the site’s overall load profile. This is becoming a more material issue in the UK: a UK Energy Research Centre briefing published in 2025 found that, without further network investment, 42% of large industrial sites could face power constraints by 2030, rising to 77% by 2050, with food and drink identified among the most affected sub-sectors alongside glass, iron and steal, and non-ferrous metals.[6] This corresponds directly to the UK’s largest consumers of heat (by sector).
Other non-technical barriers also slow progress. Operational risk aversion looms large: few F&B plants want to be first movers for new heat technology without robust track records. Integration and downtime concerns are real – adding sophisticated heat pumps into existing processes can be complex. Site-specific constraints (space for equipment, electrical supply limits, regulatory/hygiene considerations) further complicate retrofits. High-value processes (like food sterilisation or product quality-critical steps) leave no margin for error, making reliability paramount. These challenges mean some process heat needs – especially the final high-temperature or continuous-use steps – remain largely fossil-fueled even where others have been electrified.
What are the technologies and innovation pathways that will close the gap?
Food & beverage, with it’s relatively low temperature requirements but high heat demands and emissions, sits in a prime position to take advantage of promising solutions that are entering maturity. Today, electrification is the primary method by which F&B can decarbonise. To achieve this, sites must look at heat generation, process-specific heating methods, and enabling technologies.
Much of these methods are achievable, with the right partnerships and commercial models, by 2030, when most corporates have set their Scope 1 decarbonisation targets. The primary challenge by 2030 will be enabling the higher-temperature processes and high-temperature heat pumps, with portfolios of heat generation, process-specific, and enabling technologies acting in harmony to deliver zero or low carbon heat.
Beyond 2030, manufacturers will turn to novel R&D pathways to focus on the hardest 10-15% of heat demand, where decarbonisation may be achievable through direct electrification, hydrogen, or zero carbon heat sources. These pathways are outlined by Thiel & Stark (2021).[7] Even today, in some scenarios, low carbon fuels have been made commercial to decarbonise process heating, as evidenced by AstraZeneca’s partnership with biogas innovator Future Biogas to fund their scale-up and secure offtakes.[8]
With that in mind, when it comes to innovation, there is no shortage of innovators seeking to commercialise their technologies. In the UK alone, industrial process heat is well represented by the innovation landscape across temperature ranges.
CLT can help Food & Beverage manufacturers convert industrial heat innovation into targeted R&D, partnership and growth opportunities
CLT’s role is to help F&B companies navigate these options and accelerate real-world solutions. We combine technical insight and innovation partnering to bridge the gap between ambitious net-zero heat goals and the practical reality on the factory floor. CLT supports engineering and sustainability teams by:
- Detailing the state of mature vs emerging technologies relevant to their specific process needs.
- Pinpointing “hard heat” challenges (e.g. where COP or integration is problematic) and the R&D partnerships or pilot projects that could unlock solutions.
- Structuring innovation collaborations – from technology scouting and startup partnerships to joint trials, consortia and demonstrators – that enable corporate engineering teams to de-risk and implement novel heat solutions.
By translating heat innovation into credible deployment pathways, CLT helps F&B companies move from insight to action – bridging today’s gaps so that decarbonising process heat becomes an opportunity for improved efficiency, resilience and sustainability, rather than an insurmountable technical problem.
We would welcome the opportunity to discuss how CLT could support your industrial heat and wider cleantech innovation priorities.
Contact
Ben Lynch, Chief Commercial Officer
Ben.lynch@carbonlimitingtechnologies.com
+44 (0) 7980 285393
[1] RTC (2023). Playbook for Decarbonizing Process Heat in the Food & Beverage Sector.
[2] Arhur D. Little (2024). Decarbonizing industrial heat to face climate change
[3] Decarbonising the European Food and Drink Sector: A Net Zero Roadmap
[4] Elwardany et al. (2026). High-temperature heat pumps for industrial decarbonization: Technologies, integration strategies, and future perspectives
[5] Project 68 – Industrial High-Temperature Heat Pumps, Task 1: Technologies, 2025 – HPT – Heat Pumping Technologies
[6] UK Energy Research Centre (2025). Electrifying Industry and Distribution Networks: Considerations for Policymakers
[7] Thiel & Stark (2021). To decarbonize industry, we must decarbonize heat
Written by