Infrared heating vs heat pumps
Infrared heating vs heat pumps?
A heat pump uses roughly three times less electricity than infrared for the same heat (COP ~3.2 vs 1.0), so it is cheaper to run for whole-home heating. Infrared wins on upfront cost, zonal on-demand heat, zero maintenance and easy retrofit — which is why it suits single rooms, intermittent spaces and hard-to-treat buildings rather than replacing a heat pump.
Side by side
| Infrared | Air-source heat pump | |
|---|---|---|
| Upfront cost | Low — typically £7–10k for a house, less per room | High — median ~£13k before the £7,500 grant |
| Government grant | None currently | £7,500 Boiler Upgrade Scheme (England & Wales) |
| Running cost (same heat) | Higher — resistive, ~1 kWh in per 1 kWh out | Lower — COP ~3.2, so ~1 kWh in per ~3 kWh out |
| Install disruption | Minimal — electrical only, no wet system | Significant — outdoor unit, cylinder, pipework |
| Maintenance | Effectively none | Annual service recommended |
| Best for | Rooms, intermittent spaces, retrofit, listed buildings | Whole-home heating in reasonably insulated homes |
Our honest verdict
If you're heating a whole, reasonably insulated home and can access the grant, a heat pump usually wins on lifetime running cost. If you're heating specific rooms, an intermittently used space, or a building that's expensive or impossible to fit a wet system into, infrared's low upfront cost and zonal control make it the better fit.
Frequently asked questions
Reviewed by the Infrared Heat Solutions technical team · Last updated July 2026 · Data sources: Energy Saving Trust, Ofgem, gov.uk Boiler Upgrade Scheme