For food and beverage producers, how you manage water and cleaning‑in‑place (CIP) chemicals can make or break your efficiency, help you stay competitive, and prepare your business for challenges ahead. Though not new, reverse osmosis (RO) and nanofiltration (NF) have evolved significantly over the decades, delivering increased performance and creating new opportunities.
Learn about the drivers for adopting membrane filtration and reverse osmosis technologies, gain practical insights, and discover proven approaches for managing CIP chemicals and water more efficiently – with opportunities also emerging for beverage categories that haven’t traditionally embraced these technologies.
Key drivers for reducing water and CIP chemical use
Water and CIP chemicals are essential resources for any food and beverage producer. There are many financial incentives for reducing the use of these resources, including cost savings, improved or diversified revenue streams, and lower energy consumption. These are vital contributors to continuous business success, and we’ll explore them more in depth later in this article. However, there are also less obvious drivers worth considering. One is the growing global concern about water scarcity.
The stress on freshwater resources is increasing1. In regions that have historically experienced water scarcity, there’s higher awareness of this issue and quicker adoption of new resource-efficient technologies.
“If you look at Arabia, for example, producers are very aware of water scarcity. They’ve been using desalination of seawater on a large scale for quite a while,” says Nicole Uvenbeck, Director of Factory Sustainable Solutions and OEM components.
“But in other regions, such as Europe and North America, water has been relatively inexpensive and plentiful, so the incentive hasn’t been there until more recently.”
In a small number of regions, the stress on the freshwater supply has significantly increased the cost of water use in operations. In these areas, cost is the main driver to invest in water-saving technologies.
In most regions today, tighter water regulations are the main reason producers turn to these technologies.
Another driver for producers to adopt water- and CIP chemical-saving solutions is public opinion. Resource management continues to be a growing and significant consumer concern.
“We’re seeing companies internalise these external drivers because they know it’s vital to their compliance, profitability, and brand perception", says Uvenbeck.
“This is reflected in sustainability positioning strategies, performance goals, and pledges to consumers, such as promising a certain amount of water use for every litre of product created.”
Today, the complexity of regulations around water use is a significant barrier for food and beverage producers. Around the world, lawmakers are moving quickly to protect freshwater and the communities that depend on it — and that means more rules for producers to navigate2,3. This has led to increased regulation and the overall complexity of the compliance landscape.
“It can be a jungle,” says Uvenbeck. “Directives vary widely across regions and the requirements around quality or volumes vary depending on the processing step, including what water may or may not be reused after certain processes.”
Thankfully, relief for food and beverage producers is likely on the horizon. Experts like Uvenbeck and others in her field expect regulation complexity to ease in the coming years, as legislative bodies align and adopt best practices.
The concept of water neutrality has been gaining traction across academia, non-profits and even businesses. While it shares similarities with carbon neutrality principles, the nature of water demands that efforts are more localised.
“Unlike CO2, you can’t save water in one part of the world and have it count as credits to your water use in another part of the world,” explains Uvenbeck.
“If water is drawn in a municipality, it must be returned to that same municipality,” she adds.
This unique constraint is inspiring innovative solutions, such as credit systems where businesses offset water use by supporting water-saving initiatives or projects in specific locations.
“We can’t accurately predict if these ideas or other water-use trends will gain momentum and influence legislation,” says Uvenbeck. “But we monitor these movements and are genuinely inspired by the ingenuity and commitment to improving water stewardship.”
Applications for reverse osmosis and nanofiltration
RO and NF have helped us reduce water and chemical use for decades. Both are types of membrane filtration technologies first adapted for the dairy industry in the early 1970s4. Membranes and their elements themselves have continuously improved in performance and durability. Today’s versions are more reliable, efficient, and suitable for a broader range of applications.
From dairy to juice to a wide range of beverage applications, RO and NF can unlock untapped efficiencies across production. Choosing the right solution begins with understanding your process and requirements, both internal and external.
“It’s essential to speak with operators and stakeholders to understand their specific needs before recommending the best filtration solution,” says Carsten Vigen Hansen, water quality specialist.
“We draw on our extensive knowledge of minerals and compounds in water to develop the right solution, and we conduct pilot tests at dairy and beverage production sites to validate performance.”
Proven solutions for responsible resource management
The conversation around water and CIP chemicals in food and beverage production goes beyond cost reduction. It’s a holistic dialogue that considers long-term resilience, regulatory compliance, and evolving consumer expectations.
RO and NF technologies are proven and practical solutions that deliver multifaceted benefits to your operations.
“Every customer is very different – the regulations they face, the products they create, the volumes they work with – each case is unique,” says Hansen. “Yet in every scenario where RO and NF technologies are absent, implementing them improves operational efficiency.”
As global interest in water stewardship grows, the value of resource-saving industrial solutions like these will continue to rise.
Interested in learning more about how RO and NF solutions can save resources and reveal efficiency opportunities in your production? Get in touch.
Although the dairy industry has used RO and NF technologies for a long time, other food and beverage sectors are less familiar with some of the potential benefits. Producers of carbonated soft drinks, for example, are well positioned to benefit from water-reduction filtration because of the nature of their business. They manage a high number of stock-keeping units (SKUs) which means they need to clean production lines for product changeovers often.
“That rinsing process between each SKU consumes a significant amount of water,” says Uvenbeck. “Many producers in this segment are only beginning to discover the water-saving potential of RO solutions. Part of our work is reaching out and sharing our knowledge about the untapped value within their production lines.”
| Membrane filtration recovery potential within the dairy segment |
|---|
| White water recovery in liquid dairy processing |
| Water and whey recovery in cheese production |
| Water recovery and caustic detergent recovery in evaporation and drying for powders, such as whole milk powder etc. |
| Caustic detergent recovery in ultra-high temperature (UHT) CIP (best pay back is with at least 5 UHT of 15,000 l/h each cycle and a minimum 20,000 l/day of caustic liquid). |
| Membrane filtration recovery potential within the beverage segment |
|---|
| Water recovery for juice and carbonated soft drink producers (different membranes can be used depending on application). |
Case Mammen Mejerierne
Mammen Mejerierne, an established cheese producer in Northern Europe, implemented an RO solution that enabled more efficient processing of their white water. 75% of the white water is recovered as water and reused for cleaning, reducing overall operational water use. The remaining 25% becomes concentrated whey5. Previously, they sold whey to beverage producers, but it was less concentrated and so required more transport resources. By reducing transportation, they improved profitability of this by-product.
Using NF to process caustic liquid in CIP solutions reduces the need for caustic, energy, and water.
Energy savings are achieved because caustic liquid must be heated to a specific temperature to be effective. When recovered and kept in the system, it retains heat – reducing the energy needed to reheat it.
An NF filter can recover about 90% of spent caustic liquid5. This minimises the need for fresh caustic and water in subsequent cleaning cycles.
Case Dairygold
Dairygold, in Ireland, has an annual production of 1.4 billion litres and is now using NF for CIP recovery. This recovers up to 90% of the caustic liquid used for cleaning their evaporators. Before installing an NF solution for CIP recovery, they discharged 30,000 litres of caustic wastewater every day. Today, they discharge just 10% of that volume.
In addition to reducing caustic use and wastewater, Dairygold also saves on the amount of neutralising chemicals they added to wastewater to balance the pH before discharging it.
“This potential saving shouldn’t be overlooked if it applies to your operations,” says Vigen Hansen. “The value of it is nearly the same as the value of saving caustics,” he explains.
Savings scenario
Another dairy customer of ours is saving on water, caustic, and neutraliser since implementing an NF solution for CIP recovery. In total, according to current market prices, they save an estimated €46,776.16 every operational day6.
1. “Change over time of indicator 6.4.2 Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as a proportion of available freshwater resources”, UN Water, https://www.sdg6data.org
2. “MEPs call for bolder EU action on water resilience”, EU Parliament News, 07-05-2025
3. “Water is in the spotlight at the UN climate summit. Here’s why it matters”, UN Environment Programme, 21-10-24
4. “The Dairy Processing Handbook”, Tetra Pak, 2025
5. “Resource-saving filtration solutions”, Tetra Pak Global Source: https://www.tetrapak.com/insights/cases-articles/resource-saving-filtration-solutions
6. Calculated savings based on 30,000 litres of caustic liquid use per day, at the following prices: water (€1.66/l), caustic (€0.43/kg), and neutraliser (€0.36/kg).