Replacing fossil fuels in industrial processes with zero or low-carbon electricity has the potential to make a significant contribution to industrial decarbonisation. The generation of electricity from renewable and low or zero carbon sources continues to increase. In the UK, the carbon intensity of grid electricity reached a record low of 125 gCO₂/kWh in 2024, with 51% of generation from zero carbon sources. The UK government has an ambitious target of ‘clean power’ by 2030, with an expansion of renewable generation capacity of at least 70 GW, bringing carbon intensity to less than 50 gCO₂/kWh. Whether or not these precise targets are met, the trend of reducing the carbon intensity of electricity is sure to continue.

At the same time, evidence is growing that many industrial processes can be electrified. A study by ERM for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) found that ‘the vast majority of [industrial] emissions were associated with combustion of fossil fuels for heat generation’, with established technologies that can meet the requirements, and that ‘[f]or most UK industrial heating processes, an electrification alternative can be identified as under development’.

Despite this opportunity for electrification, there are barriers to implementation. The barriers are both technical, in terms of functionality and grid constraints that limit increasing electrical demand, and non-technical, including capital and operational costs and lack of long-term policy stability. Electrification also ‘competes’ with other decarbonisation routes, such as the use of hydrogen to substitute for natural gas, or carbon capture. These alternatives have received more attention in recent years, but may not be appropriate according to the context, especially at dispersed sites which are responsible for over 50% of industrial emissions.

Electrification findings
Some projects assessed decarbonisation options for specific processes and found electrification to be a viable and appropriate solution in certain cases. In Durham University research, electrification of steam production using electric boilers running on surplus power generated on site achieved 50% reduction in carbon emissions while reducing fuel costs by 40%. Alternatives achieved similar carbon reductions but with 90% higher capital costs compared to electric boilers powered from on-site generation.

A techno-economic analysis in a Teesside University project led by Dawid Hawak found that, in a process for food production, carbonate looping for carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS), using electricity generated on site, was the most cost-effective option (at £112.7/tCO₂). In another example from the food industry, another Teesside University project led by Kumar Patchigolla showed the viability of high temperature processes (frying in oil at 160°C) that could be electrified using electricity generated from solar PV. A high temperature heat pump (up to 300°C) concept was developed through that project for industrial decarbonisation.

Research by Energy Systems Catapult concluded that electrification is likely to be attractive at smaller scales, such as within dispersed industrial sites or less energy-intense industrial sectors, especially when combined with energy efficiency measures. The complexity of alternative decarbonisation options, including CO₂ removal and, possibly, hydrogen distribution infrastructure, can make electrification more appealing for such smaller sites. However, the project also described that zero emission options at point of final energy use, including electrification, may not be universally available or, in some cases, desirable. In such cases, deploying CCS and the associated infrastructure could then be exploited more widely.

At a more general level, the technology review in a University of Birmingham project showed that electrification is viable for low temperature process heat, and potentially others but, as also noted in the ERM report, research and development is needed as ‘the applications of [electrification] techniques to specific industrial processes are limited.’

Which one?
Electrification is one option for decarbonisation, and it is important to consider multiple approaches systematically. Many projects used rigorous analyses to compare the options rather than assume and implement a preferred solution. Site-specific technological models were used in some projects, while scenario-based modelling played a key role in others. Techno-economic and environmental impact analyses were conducted in both Teesside University research projects; in fact, the model used by the Patchigolla research has been adopted by the industrial partner being studied to enhance its sustainability and efficiency measures.

Meanwhile, a ‘smart decision modelling’ toolset developed in a third Teesside University project led by Nashwan Dawood has been well-received in industry. The tool is composed of four main components: prediction, to forecast the future trend of power consumption and generation; optimisation, to find the ideal capacity combination of wind, PV and hydrogen to achieve a CO₂ reduction target; an energy system dynamic model to evaluate the social, economic and environmental impacts of the optimised solution; and a user interface to present the results of what-if-scenarios.

The findings highlight the importance of integrated modelling, scenario analysis, comparing alternatives, and industry collaboration in developing robust and adaptable decarbonisation strategies. By leveraging advanced decision-support tools, industries can make more informed, data-driven choices, optimising their transition towards a low-carbon future.

Challenges
A number of challenges to electrification emerged during the course of the research. For example, the Durham University project found that although industrial clusters are able to assess their energy needs, they struggle with more complex interactions between heat, power, gas and water. The project identified the absence of ‘dynamic energy utilisation simulation tools’ which are essential for assessing the impact and feasibility criteria such as return of investment and total carbon reduction effectiveness. To address this, that project developed a new tool to predict the operation and performance of future industrial systems and offered insights into energy use, financial metrics, such as return of investment, and carbon emissions.

The Dawood research at Teesside University developed a decarbonisation framework for the Teesside industrial cluster, which highlighted the needs for decarbonisation planning strategies associated with reducing CO₂ and finding a near optimal solution between cost, CO₂ reduction and skills to satisfy the environmental, economic and social aspects in terms of job creation/losses in transitioning. This framework should assist companies to de-risk future investment through the use of more scientific methodologies to identify decarbonisation pathways, and will lead to the deployment of new technologies to utilise new renewable energy.

Enabling decarbonisation options to be taken up by industry needs infrastructure to be in place, which could include strengthened electricity networks to provide increased power, equipment to extract and transport CO₂, or supplies of hydrogen-based fuels. A dedicated policy roundtable undertaken as part of this work found there to be a ‘chicken and egg’ situation, wherein it is impossible for industry to secure investment funding without an electricity connection agreement for the delivery of the network required to support their investment within a reasonable timescale.

Access to accurate, timely and granular data limits the ability to assess options, including for electrification. Local data on energy use by industry is not widely available, and whilst the University of Birmingham project estimated these levels, the accuracy of results in determining decarbonisation options is limited partly by this lack of granularity. The Patchigolla project at Teesside University installed sensors on site to measure heating, cooling and energy consumption patterns, but encountered specific challenges related to data acquisition.

The Policy Roundtable highlighted financial barriers as a key challenge to electrification from the high costs of electricity and equipment, with a lack of support for investment. Electricity prices in the UK are high compared to other options such as natural gas, and compared to competitor countries where industrial users may receive government support. Wholesale prices, network charges and policy costs all act against electrification. Participants called for a long-term commitment to policy direction, and providing structures to guarantee return on investment.

As with many decarbonisation options, electrification requires a skilled workforce to deliver. Participants at the Policy Roundtable noted that the requirement for skills extends beyond specialist skills, to a general lack of availability of contractors for digging and construction, due to competition for limited workforce between large scale infrastructure projects.

The tool developed in the Dawood Teesside University project has the capabilities of predicting the skills needed for different decarbonisation pathways, for example the skills needed to deploy solar PV or hydrogen. This is an important factor in deciding on the strategy for the cluster and how skills will be nurtured and provided.

Conclusion
Moving forward, focused action in five areas is needed to demonstrate viable technologies at scale, develop supportive policy frameworks and financial incentives, improve access to high-quality data, and equip industry with the tools and skills necessary for decision-making. 

• Demonstration: where the electrification of industrial processes is viable but not yet widespread, technologies should be demonstrated and assessed, technically and economically.
• Policy and regulation: developing policies and regulation to recognise that the overall objective of reducing atmospheric emissions is compatible with, and strengthened by, retaining industry in the UK.
• Economics: how to reform electricity markets and provide financial incentives for industry to decarbonise efficiently and sustainably, with electrification properly valued at a system level.
• Data: how to collect energy consumption data from industry applications at more granular levels, in terms of time, geography and end-use, and make them available for analysis. 
• Tools: trialling and further developing tools that can inform decision-making in industry, with regard to decarbonisation options.

Since its launch in 2021, IDRIC has funded 100 projects exploring the key dimensions of the whole system of industrial decarbonisation. That work is brought together in the 2025 Frontiers Report series. This article is an edited and abridged version of the full IDRIC Industrial Decarbonisation Frontiers Report: Electrification .

• Further reading: ‘Decarbonising UK industry: IDRIC’s transformative impact’. Since its launch in 2021, the UK Industrial Decarbonisation Research and Innovation Centre (IDRIC) has developed an influential network of over 700 industries, trade associations, governmental/public bodies and research institutions, to accelerate the pace and scale of industrial decarbonisation. As the organisation nears the end of its current phase of work, its Director, Professor Mercedes Maroto-Valer, also the Robert Buchan Chair in Sustainable Energy Engineering at Heriot-Watt University, looks back over four busy years.
• The energy transition is not only about technological innovation; the ways in which public policy incentivises and regulates decarbonisation initiatives bear greatly upon society, writes Benjamin Sovacool, Professor of Energy Policy, University of Sussex. Read an edited and abridged synthesis of UK research on these topics commissioned by IDRIC over the last few years.