Humanoids: Coming to Food and Beverage Plants Sooner Than You Might Think

Ozaskinli:
Thank you for having us. At Value Gene, we work closely with food manufacturers to improve operational efficiency, reduce waste and capture hidden capacity in plants. Despite significant investments, efficiency is not improving much and is even declining in some subcategories. At the same time, the talent gap is widening. Many manufacturers struggle to attract and retain the workforce needed to run operations efficiently.

We believe humanoids offer a structural solution, and food processing is one of the industries that could benefit the most. There is still a lot of manual handling on shop floors, unlike highly automated industries such as automotive or appliances. Food plants are complex, and that complexity is increasing with product variations and new ingredients. That makes production harder to manage.

Humanoids represent a strong opportunity, and adoption may move faster than expected due to broad investment and U.S. government support. This is a moment for U.S. manufacturers to become more competitive, and it’s the right time to start thinking about it.

Pehlivanoglu:
Adding to that, food and beverage manufacturing involves high variability — SKU changes, changeovers, hygiene requirements, washdowns and significant manual handling. Humanoids could reduce variance and increase consistency in following recipes, quality procedures, food safety and allergen requirements.

While fixed automation and robotics are already present, humanoids bring flexibility. Fixed automation requires high upfront CapEx and retrofitting. Humanoids, by contrast, could be deployed across inbound logistics through outbound delivery without major structural changes, offering consistency and adaptability where human intervention is still required.

What Can Humanoids Actually Do Today?

Hanacek:
We’ve all seen videos of humanoid robots, humanoid dogs — sometimes impressive, sometimes awkward. Realistically, what tasks are they capable of performing in a food and beverage plant today without further technological breakthroughs? Are we close to practical use, or still far off?

Ozaskinli:
Today, humanoids are not fully ready for industrial use. Four engineering spines need improvement: energy efficiency, continuous operation, onboard decision-making and dexterity.

Current robots can operate about 1.5 to 2 hours per battery charge, which is insufficient for continuous 8-hour shifts. Continuous operation is also limited because they actually get tired: Joints heat up over time, forcing slowdowns or stops. Onboard decision-making must improve so robots can act independently without relying on external connectivity, especially for safety-critical situations. Dexterity is particularly important in food environments where tasks involve handling bags, sacks and varied materials.

Onboard decision-making will likely improve fastest due to advances in AI and chip technology. Continuous operation, particularly actuator durability, may lag behind. Despite limitations, we can begin experimenting and piloting in the next couple of years.

Pehlivanoglu:
Initial use cases would involve standardized, repetitive tasks — handling inbound materials, basic segregation per allergen rules and similar controlled environments with safety precautions.

We forecast 2030-2035 as a plausible timeframe for industrial adequacy in food manufacturing, with scaled adoption after 2035. Certain drivers could accelerate this timeline.

How Are Humanoids Different from Fixed Automation?

Hanacek:
Given the rise of standard automation and robotics over the last decade, what do humanoids offer that fixed automation does not?

Ozaskinli:
There are two perspectives: controlling operations and handling the operations. Machines, sensors and AI should continue to manage control functions on lines. Humanoids will add value on the handling side — moving raw materials, assisting in mixing, conducting checks and managing packaging touchpoints.

Turnover in food plants is significantly high, and training new workers repeatedly reduces efficiency. Humanoids would eliminate this cycle, stabilizing handling tasks and improving consistency.

Pehlivanoglu:
Wherever there is human touch today, humanoids can play a role. Fixed automation and PLCs remain essential, but humanoids can interpret line data and optimize operations.

A major advantage is fleet learning. If one humanoid discovers a better way to execute a task, that knowledge can instantly transfer across all units, shifts and lines.

Additionally, older factories could deploy humanoids without heavy retrofitting, provided processes are standardized. Given the variability in food manufacturing, humanoids are well suited to thrive.

What’s Driving Adoption?

Hanacek:
Is workforce challenge the primary driver, or are there other factors?

Ozaskinli:
Talent shortages are the main driver. Plants struggle to scale labor quickly and often maintain excess shifts out of fear they won’t be able to hire if demand rises. Dependency on labor limits operational flexibility.

Operational variability is another issue — performance can differ significantly between shifts, sometimes by 30–40%. Humanoids could reduce this variability and improve efficiency.

Pehlivanoglu:
On the demand side, workforce gaps and efficiency needs drive adoption. On the supply side, investment momentum is strong. Over $5 billion in venture capital has flowed into the space, with robotics startups reaching over $75 billion in enterprise value.

Total cost of ownership will decline with scale. While headline price points attract attention, full analysis includes maintenance, supervision and operational costs. Compared to U.S. labor costs, the long-term economics appear favorable.

More on Fleet Learning Possibilities

Hanacek:
Fleet learning could eliminate training variability. You could program standardized processes, even sanitation routines, ensuring consistency across the board.

Pehlivanoglu:
Washdowns, allergen cleans and even self-maintenance from robot to robot are plausible future applications, though likely after 2035 due to dexterity and environmental constraints. Airtight and hygiene-compliant designs will be required.

Preparing for the Transition

Hanacek:
What should food and beverage companies be doing now to prepare for this?

Ozaskinli:
Companies should begin experimenting as soon as possible. Even if humanoids are not fully ready, the learning curve will be steep, and early pilots are critical.

They must document and standardize processes. Many plants rely heavily on tacit human know-how. To prepare for humanoids, that knowledge must be converted into structured data and standardized procedures.

Finally, change management will be challenging. Unlike previous transformations that improved employee value-added work, humanoids may replace roles. Workforce transition planning will be essential.

Pehlivanoglu:
Honest communication with the workforce is essential. While some oversight roles may be created, overall labor needs will decline. Companies must clearly articulate what the next 3–10 years will look like from a workforce perspective.