Powering Britain's
Battery Revolution
Powering Britain's
Battery Revolution
On 8 May 2025, the Faraday Institution held a roundtable at the Institute of Physics to explore how the UK can strengthen its electrochemical engineering skills base in support of the UK’s industrial strategy and net zero ambitions. The meeting was convened in response to concern about the ability to supply the electrochemical engineering expertise needed to support the UK’s industrial strategy.
The global energy transition and the UK’s ambitions for electrification in key sectors such as energy storage, electric vehicles and hydrogen technologies, is increasing demand for electrochemical engineering expertise. However, the talent pipeline appears to be slowing in some areas, with chemistry undergraduate numbers, for example, falling by 21% since a peak in 2017. There is also a concern that undergraduate programmes lack practical and industry-focused training, with course content remaining rooted in traditional industries rather than the interdisciplinary needs of emerging energy systems.
The session brought together senior representatives from:
The group focused on identifying practical interventions to address the growing mismatch between the UK’s strategic ambitions in clean energy and its ability to supply the necessary workforce. Key messages from the roundtable:
The following sections provide a more detailed summary of the discussion, structured around the key issues discussed and the areas for action identified.
The roundtable opened with the UK context and policy landscape. Batteries and electrochemical engineering are central to the UK’s industrial strategy, but the infrastructure to develop relevant skills at scale needs to be strengthened.
Participants highlighted a lack of alignment between university curricula and the future needs of the energy sector. In particular, electrochemical engineering often enters the curriculum too late and is viewed through the lens of examples from legacy energy industries such as oil and gas. University students interested in careers in the energy transition also have fairly limited exposure to battery or energy storage technologies during their degrees.
Participants noted that electrochemistry and electrochemical engineering are often used interchangeably but are distinct disciplines. This lack of clarity, both in academia and industrial recruitment contributes to confusion around professional identity. Clearer definitions would support curriculum development and improve career visibility. At the same time, the interdisciplinary nature of electrochemical engineering, which covers chemical, electrical, mechanical and systems disciplines adds complexity to course design but also offers a strength for engaging broader engineering talent.
Curriculum reform is piecemeal and limited in scope. While many institutions are motivated to modernise, they face challenges around staff expertise, crowded course structures and inflexible accreditation requirements. Institutional change is also constrained by administrative and regulatory hurdles such as student contract obligations and compliance with the Competition and Markets Authority rules, which can limit mid-cycle curriculum reform.
Participants highlighted that 85% of the 2035 workforce is already in employment. Addressing the skills gap will therefore require not only training new entrants but also practical and flexible approaches for upskilling and reskilling mid-career professionals.
The skills challenge was described as both a capacity problem and a capability problem. This applies across the full talent pipeline from apprentices and technicians to engineers and PhD-level researchers. Participants noted the need to understand how many roles in the sector require training at each level, from Level 1 through to PhD. While a significant number are suited to Level 3 or undergraduate training, specialist positions in electrochemistry often require advanced MSc or PhD qualifications. Participants also highlighted the need to recognise personal qualities such as agility, aptitude and passion during hiring, particularly in a fast-evolving sector where such qualities may matter as much as formal credentials.
Despite strong interest in the sector, hands-on training opportunities remain limited. Undergraduate internship schemes such as the Faraday Undergraduate Summer Experience (FUSE) scheme are seen as valuable but too limited in scale to meet demand. Training provision is available, but uptake is often constrained by low visibility, limited recognition of qualifications, and a lack of clear entry routes for career changers. A common feature of the current landscape is also a reliance on a small pool of experienced professionals who move between organisations, while many others face barriers to entry due to unclear or inaccessible pathways.
The traditional model of higher education that is based on linear and full-time degree programmes is not aligned with the needs of mid-career professionals looking to move into the energy or battery sector. Accessible approaches to reskilling are also required as most of the 2035 workforce is already in employment. Participants stressed that flexible training must be not only modular but also interoperable across institutions with shared quality standards to ensure portability and employer recognition. Soft skills such as teamwork, communication and adaptability were also raised as lacking and not embedded in current programmes.
Participants advocated for modular training options such as short courses, CPD, and micro-credentials that are recognised and valued by employers and professional bodies, including during recruitment. This would require collaboration across sectors to ensure alignment with workforce needs, consistency in quality standards and accessibility for learners entering through varied pathways.
Practical experience was described as important for developing relevant skills. However, it was felt that many students have limited early exposure to battery systems, electrochemical processes or applied design tasks. Standard laboratory classes often also lacked content aligned with current energy transition needs.
Participants noted that many engineering and chemistry degrees still reflect outdated content and teaching styles. Greater interdisciplinarity and earlier inclusion of electrochemical topics, particularly in laboratory modules, were viewed as important for updating curricula and strengthening industry-relevant skills.
Access to internships, placements and applied project work was also seen as a critical part of building practical capability. Participants noted the existing schemes were oversubscribed and that national provision remains fragmented. Suggestions included increasing cross-institutional placements and using challenge-based learning formats such as student competitions or design challenges to build both technical competencies and broader transferable skills.
Participants highlighted the value of neutral coordination platforms, such as the Faraday Institution, in collating training resources, supporting cross-institutional delivery and reducing duplication of effort. They also noted the absence of a dedicated trade body for the battery or electrochemical sectors in contrast to sectors such as aerospace or nuclear, which benefit from more structured representation that advocates for workforce needs.
Although various initiatives are underway, provision remains fragmented. Institutions often develop similar courses independently resulting in duplication and inconsistent coverage. A ‘buffet model’ was proposed in which institutions contribute specialist content to a shared national framework that is coordinated through a neutral body.
Visibility and awareness were identified as major barriers to entry. Career routes into electrochemical engineering are not well defined, particularly outside specialist academic or industrial settings. Participants highlighted the potential value of accredited undergraduate or master’s programmes in electrochemical engineering to establish clearer competencies and support structured career pathways. A sector-wide information campaign modelled on ‘Destination Nuclear’ was also proposed to improve understanding of battery and energy careers, particularly among students, educators and prospective jobseekers.
Participants also noted the cultural challenge. Electrochemical careers are often linked with legacy industries and are not widely visible to young people considering career options. Outdated school curricula and limited coverage of energy-related engineering were cited as contributing factors. Updating curriculum content, improving early-stage outreach and increasing exposure to positive role models were seen as critical to shifting perceptions and broadening participation.
Four strategic enablers emerged as critical to addressing the skills gap: understanding workforce demand; strengthening professional coordination; using policy frameworks and funding levers more strategically; and supporting collaborative delivery.
(1) Understanding workforce demand emerged as a foundational priority
A clearer view of the skills needed across the electrochemical and broader energy sector, by level, region and time horizon is essential to inform the business case for new courses. Without this information, universities and training providers will struggle to justify curriculum reform or develop viable and targeted delivery models.
Key activities could include:
(2) Learned societies and professional institutions have a critical role to play in accelerating progress
Learned societies and professional institutions are well-positioned to define expectations, coordinate efforts and support the education sector through shared resources and advocacy. Key activities could include:
Professional institutions also have the mandate and networks to convene cross-sector collaboration and promote consistent standards that are essential for improving coherence and delivery across the training system.
(3) Policy frameworks and funding levers must be used more strategically to support skills development
Existing mechanisms such as REF (Research Excellence Framework), KEF (Knowledge Exchange Framework) and TEF (Teaching Excellence Framework) already emphasise societal impact and alignment with national priorities. These should be used more fully to encourage skills-focused reform and workforce reform. Key activities could include:
Better coordination of policy tools and funding incentives can help align institutional activity with national skills priorities and reduce entry barriers.
(4) Collaboration on delivery models will be essential to expand provision without overburdening individual Higher Education institutions
Institutions face real capacity constraints. Coordinating delivery across regional and institutional networks can help address demand without unnecessary duplication. Key activities could include:
The roundtable concluded with a shared recognition of the need for coordinated follow-through. With the industrial strategy expected shortly, this was seen as a timely opportunity to align skills provision with national priorities. The electrochemical engineering skills gap is significant but addressable through sustained, collaborative action across the sector. The challenge is national in scope, but the opportunity extends globally.
Posted on June 3, 2025