This webinar provides comprehensive, evidence-based guidance for local authorities and crematorium operators considering decarbonisation strategies aligned with Net Zero ambitions.
Resource
This webinar, part of the ‘Making Net Zero Happen’ series, focuses on decarbonising crematorium operations as a critical step for local councils and authorities to meet Net Zero targets.
The session gathers experts from bereavement services, energy engineering, and Net Zero Hubs to explore low-carbon technologies in the cremation sector, discuss challenges, and present case studies and technological options.
Background
Crematorium decarbonisation is increasingly important for councils to achieve emission reduction goals, with targets ranging from 2030 to 2050.
Several studies underpin this webinar, including:
- CDS Lancashire study (2023)
- HyCrem hydrogen cremation project
- Preston electrification study
- Greater Southeast Hub decarbonisation toolkit
Key speakers and roles
- Samantha Smith (Crematorium Manager, Huntington Town Council) – Shared practical experience with electric cremators and site operations.
- Abigail Dombey (Energy Engineer and Director, Net Zero Associates) – Led the ‘HyCrem’ hydrogen cremation project and energy analysis.
- John Mullins (Estate Decarbonisation Lead, Northwest Net Zero Hub) – Provided study insights using Preston crematorium case and technology overview.
- Manali Kulkarni (Energy Projects Officer, Greater Southeast Net Zero Hub) – Developed crematorium decarbonisation toolkit and hosted Q&A.
Why decarbonise crematoria?
Crematoria are significant sources of CO2 emissions, primarily from fossil fuel (natural gas) combustion.
Gas emissions from crematoria often represent the largest single source of emissions for some local authorities.
Climate science demands urgent action to reduce fossil fuel use, with electricity grids increasingly decarbonising.
Cremation fuel choice drives emissions more than other factors like coffin materials (largely biogenic).
Technology options for crematoria
| Technology | Description and status | Key points |
|---|---|---|
| Gas Cremators | Current mainstream technology using natural gas; reliable, predictable 90-minute cycles. | High CO2 emissions; new NOx regulations require abatement; gas prices and grid charges rising. |
| Hybrid Cremators | Combine electric heating elements with gas boost; emerging tech with limited performance data. | Can operate on gas or electricity; still emit CO2; cost and gas usage uncertain; offsets required. |
| Electric Cremators | Fully electric cremators; established but gaining mainstream traction. | Use 10-20% of energy compared to gas; longer, less predictable cycles; higher capital costs. |
| Hydrogen Cremation | Tested in ‘HyCreme’ project; 100% hydrogen fuelled cremations. | Technically feasible but costly and logistically complex; no commercial rollout yet. |
| Alternative Tech | Resomation (body dissolution) and microwave cremation. | Niche, early-stage technologies; not widely applicable in UK context. |
Energy and emission comparisons
| Fuel/technology | Annual energy use (UK-wide estimate) | Emissions impact |
|---|---|---|
| Natural gas cremators | 329 GWh gas + 25 GWh electricity | High CO2 emissions; incompatible with Net Zero. |
| Electric cremators | 34 GWh electricity | Only pathway to Net Zero emissions. Electricity grid is rapidly decarbonising, with targets for near-zero carbon electricity by 2030. |
| Hybrid cremators | Mixed (assumed 50% gas/electric) | Emissions reduced but not Net Zero. Hybrid cremators still rely on gas, thus cannot reach Net Zero alone. Gas grid carbon intensity remains stable. Biomethane offers limited offset benefits and has regulatory/offset uncertainties. |
Operational considerations and challenges
Electric cremation cycles are longer (average ~110 minutes) and less predictable compared to gas (90 minutes), due to lack of ‘boost’ capability.
Operators cannot accelerate the process once started; cremation time depends on body/coffin characteristics.
Maintaining cremators at operating temperature (approx. 750°C) continuously is necessary to avoid lengthy warm-up times.
Power demand is relatively steady day and night; warm-up after shutdown may take several days.
Site-specific factors like utilisation rates influence energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness.
Higher upfront capital costs of electric cremators are offset over time by lower fuel and maintenance costs.
Grid connection (DNO) costs can be significant, especially for retrofits or sites distant from substations.
Buffer capacities (e.g., refrigerated coffin storage) help manage schedule variabilities.
Transition requires change management, workforce flexibility, and planning for potential increased cycle times.
Q&A highlights
Q&A is at the end of the webinar with a download of more detailed answers available
- Alternatives to cremation: Burial has lower carbon impact but limited by space; cremation remains culturally preferred (~80% UK preference).
- Capacity concerns: Electric cremators handle typical volume well; longer cycles managed by operational adjustments.
- Capital costs and payback: New builds ~£1.2 million for two cremators; retrofit payback over a 20-year horizon; DNO costs vary widely.
- Heat networks: Currently no known crematoria connected to local heat networks due to geographic and practical challenges.
- Electric cremator power use: Approximately 15 kW average load; comparable to a few domestic 3-kW plugs.
Key insights and conclusions
Electric cremation is currently the only proven pathway to Net Zero crematorium emissions.
- Gas cremation, even with biomethane, cannot fully eliminate CO2 emissions and faces increasing operational costs and regulatory challenges.
- Hybrid systems may reduce emissions but remain dependent on gas and offsets.
- Hydrogen cremation, while technically feasible, is not yet commercially viable due to cost and logistics.
- New electric crematorium builds, such as Huntington, demonstrate operational success, energy savings, and community benefits through heat recovery.
- Transitioning crematoria to electric requires upfront investment, grid infrastructure considerations, and operational adaptations but offers long-term environmental and financial benefits.
- Change management and planning (including buffer storage and workforce flexibility) are essential for effective transition.
- Continuous data monitoring and maintenance optimisation are critical to improving performance and cost-effectiveness.
Guest preview of selected publicly available resources