A forecast worth examining
In December 2025, Levercor published an account of an unnamed North East injection moulding business that needed more electricity at its new factory. It reported supplying four 500kW combined heat and power units, with delivery within 16 weeks of order and a 400-metre gas-main extension. The announcement forecast annual energy-cost savings exceeding £1m. (Levercor announcement, 4 December 2025)
That is a supplier's forecast, not a published measurement of a full year's savings. Nor does the announcement establish that Pinion delivered the project. The example raises a worthwhile question for manufacturers, but its forecast cannot be transferred to another factory without examining that factory's demand, tariffs and operating conditions.
A useful proposal should make those assumptions visible. It should explain how the headline was calculated, what could change it and how the result will be checked after commissioning.
Start with the factory's working day
Combined heat and power, or CHP, generates electricity and recovers heat for use on site. The opportunity depends on finding an appropriate use for that heat alongside the electrical demand. Government guidance stresses matching the system to demand and maintaining it properly to achieve planned savings. (GOV.UK CHP guidance)
Begin with the production schedule: shifts, weekends, shutdowns and seasonal changes. Ask which processes need electricity continuously, which need heat and whether those demands occur together. A factory running one shift presents a different design problem from one operating around the clock.
Annual bills help establish scale, but the design brief should also show when energy is used. Ask for interval electricity data and a clear account of heating and process requirements. Record planned production changes, too: a business case based on today's workload needs revisiting if a new line will materially change demand.
The government's finance guide warns that sizing plant around peak electrical demand can leave it operating less efficiently at part load. Useful heat demand matters to the efficiency case. (BEIS CHP Finance)
Our Technology page introduces the generation approach. The practical next step is to establish how that approach fits the factory's actual operating pattern.
Separate the energy saving from the profit claim
A robust comparison meets the same electricity and heat needs with and without CHP. It accounts for fuel and maintenance, then considers investment costs. Government appraisal guidance also distinguishes profit-and-loss effects from cash flow: the two are rarely identical. (BEIS CHP Finance)
This distinction matters when a proposal describes money going back into the business. Ask the author to label each figure clearly: avoided electricity purchases, operating saving, cash benefit or accounting profit. Each answers a different question.
The value of that illustration is its transparency. Both inputs must be demonstrated for a real proposal. Ask for a lower-output scenario and an adverse-price scenario alongside the central estimate, with every changed assumption identified. The factory's decision-makers should be able to see what drives the result without taking a headline on trust.
Give recovered heat a useful job
Heat recovery deserves its own design conversation. Identify the process that will use the heat, the temperature it requires and the periods when it is needed. Ask how the proposal treats times when that demand disappears, including maintenance shutdowns and quieter production periods.
Where suitable cooling demand exists, an absorption chiller can use recovered heat to produce cooling. Its suitability depends on the heat available, its temperature and the cooling requirement. This remains an engineered system with pumps, heat rejection and auxiliary electricity requirements. (US Department of Energy, Absorption Chillers for CHP Systems)
Our Cooling page explores the application. For a factory assessment, bring the required cooling temperatures and operating schedule into the discussion early. Request a comparison with the existing cooling arrangement that shows all equipment and running costs included.
Check delivery, resilience and carbon separately
A delivery date alone does not describe when a factory can rely on its new energy system. Request a programme that distinguishes equipment arrival, installation, commissioning and handover. The scope should identify the connection work, responsibilities and acceptance checks associated with each stage. Use our Deployments page as a starting point for that discussion.
Resilience also needs an explicit brief. CHP can support operation during grid outages when configured with suitable controls, disconnection arrangements and capacity for the selected loads. Fuel availability matters, and black-start capability may be required. Simply installing a generator does not establish those capabilities. (US Department of Energy, CHP in Resilience Planning and Policy)
Name the processes that must continue during an outage and ask how their operation will be demonstrated at handover.
Carbon deserves a separate assessment from cost. Government analysis explains that the emissions advantage of unabated natural-gas CHP over average grid electricity declines as the electricity supply decarbonises. (BEIS, CHP: pathway to decarbonisation)
Our Sustainability page introduces the wider discussion. Request a site-specific comparison with a stated baseline, assumptions and review date, rather than treating a financial saving as proof of an emissions reduction.
Make the result measurable
Before signing off a proposal, agree how the projected saving will be tested. Specify the meters and records needed, the comparison period and how changes in production or energy prices will be handled. Assign responsibility for reviewing the results and investigating any gap between forecast and operation.
A £1m headline can open the conversation. A documented, testable business case makes that conversation useful. Explore How It Works to begin an assessment around your factory's energy demand, operating priorities and evidence.