Skip to main content

    Buyer guidance by The QHSE Standard · Updated 20 September 2026

    Risk Assessment Software for Energy & Utilities

    The catalog candidates matching both risk assessment and energy & utilities are Emex, SoterAI and SoterCoach, Tekmon, Cority, Enablon, Haz360, Sphera, Datamaran, Ideagen EHS, Protex AI and SafeContractor. This is a documentation-based shortlist, not a performance ranking; verify the exact application, plan and deployment fit with each vendor.

    Identify, score, and control workplace and operational risks.

    For requirements beyond this category, read the Energy & Utilities QHSE buying guide.

    Editorial responsibility: Dimitris Mitsios (Founder of The QHSE Standard; product marketing at Tekmon) · Tekmon pays for sponsored placements on this site (disclosure) · How pages are made · LinkedIn

    What to test before shortlisting

    Use these risk assessment tasks for your Energy & Utilities evaluation. Adapt them to your operations; these are demo requests, not observed vendor results.

    Bring a real workflow

    Assess one task, change a control and send the revised assessment for approval before the next shift.

    Evidence to retain: Show the scoring rules, earlier version, control owner and reason for the residual risk rating.

    Add your operating context

    Use a travelling crew visiting multiple assets and handing an unresolved issue to another team.

    Before proceeding: Check asset identifiers, location context, offline preparation and reassignment across service areas.

    Record demonstrated, partial, unmet and untested requirements separately. Leave a candidate pending if an essential requirement remains untested.

    See filled-in requirements, quote and pilot examples →

    Risk assessment in energy and utilities: explosive atmospheres, electrical work and job briefings

    Energy and utility risk assessment spans very different scales: a formal hazard study for a gas plant, an explosion protection document for a zoned area, and a job briefing before a crew works on a line. Each has its own rule. Where dangerous substances may be present, the assessment must consider the likelihood and persistence of an explosive atmosphere and of ignition sources, and be recorded; in the EU an explosion protection document must be kept up to date. For electrical work in the US, the person in charge holds a job briefing before each job and again when conditions change.

    Decide which level you are buying for, because the products below document different levels. A hazard-study tool needs traceable scenarios and recommendations; a field briefing tool needs speed and a record of who attended.

    Rules that shape this evaluation

    Summarised from the linked official texts, read on 25 September 2026. This is buyer context, not legal advice: have the responsible specialists confirm which requirements apply to your sites.

    How the operating context changes the buying criteria

    Utility assets are dispersed: substations, pipelines, networks and metering points, with crews who start a job in an unfamiliar place under changing weather, traffic and third-party hazards such as buried services or adjacent live equipment. A task assessment written in an office cannot hold all of that, so the buying criterion is how a crew adds site-specific hazards on arrival to a generic task assessment, whether the generic version stays untouched, and whether a hazard found on arrival can change the go or no-go decision and tell someone who is not on site.

    The second criterion is where the tool stops. In energy and utilities the live state of isolation, earthing and permit status usually sits in an operational or permit system, not in the risk tool, so a risk product that asks crews to retype that state creates a second source of truth. Ask what the tool reads and what it duplicates. Then ask about change: a network reconfiguration, a new piece of equipment or a temporary operating arrangement should prompt reassessment, and a zone classification that changes in the explosion protection document should reach the assessments that rely on it. Assets in service for decades also need their assessment history to be exportable.

    Questions to settle for this combination

    1. Which level are you buying for: formal hazard studies, zoned-area documents, or field job briefings?
    2. Can a hazard study's recommendations be tracked to closure with an audit trail of who changed what?
    3. Can an explosion protection document be revised after a plant change while keeping the earlier version?
    4. Can a crew record a job briefing and its attendees on a phone, offline, before work starts?
    5. Does the assessment link to the permit or isolation under which the work will be done?
    6. Can a field assessment be escalated to the formal hazard study when a crew finds a condition the study did not foresee?

    Further questions for each vendor

    • How does a crew record hazards found on arrival, such as buried services, adjacent live equipment or weather, on top of a generic task assessment, and is the generic version left unchanged?
    • Can assessments be held against assets or network locations, and can all open risks for one asset be shown before work starts?
    • Which system owns isolation, earthing and permit status, and does the risk tool read that state or ask the crew to retype it?
    • How does a management-of-change record raise a reassessment, and who is told when a zone classification changes?
    • Can hazard-study recommendations be exported with their status and owners for a regulator or insurer review?
    • Can control-room and field staff work from the same assessment version while an update is in progress?

    What an inspector or auditor typically asks to see

    • The assessment for the specific task or area, dated and tied to the version of the procedure used, including the zone classification where an explosive atmosphere is possible.
    • Evidence that the crew was briefed before work and again when conditions changed, including who attended.
    • Where the rules require it, the explosion protection document with its revision history after plant changes.
    • Competence and authorisation records for those who did live or near-live work.
    • Follow-up of recommendations from earlier hazard studies and incident reviews, with owners and dates.

    Which documented capabilities matter most here

    Two lines carry most of the signal. The offline classification matters because crews work outside coverage, and a job briefing that can only be completed online will be completed afterwards, from memory. The category line matters because risk assessment products range from hazard-study tools to field briefing apps. Read a price signal only after you have decided which of the three levels you are buying for, because the products named here do not all serve the same one.

    Signals in the researched records of the listed products:

    • Matched through a sourced tag or a documented capability rather than the primary category: Emex, SoterAI and SoterCoach, Cority, Enablon, Haz360, Sphera, Datamaran, Ideagen EHS and Protex AI.
    • On this list for another reason, such as an industry tag, with no sourced match to the category: SafeContractor.
    • Offline use, as classified in the records: a documented offline workflow: Emex, Cority, Enablon and Sphera; a partial offline workflow: Ideagen EHS. No classification yet for 5 of the 10.
    • A published price amount is on record for Emex, SoterAI and SoterCoach, Haz360 and SafeContractor; the other 6 need a quote.
    • A free trial is documented for SoterAI and SoterCoach.

    Vendor-material signals, not test results; the commercial partner is not counted; no signal means not established.

    A demo script for this combination

    Ask each vendor to run these steps with synthetic data. They are demo requests, not observed vendor results.

    1. Import a synthetic hazard study node and track one recommendation to closure with an audit trail.
    2. Revise the explosion protection document for a zoned area after an equipment change and keep the earlier version.
    3. Record a crew job briefing on a phone offline, with attendees, before a line job.
    4. Link the briefing to the permit for the same job.

    11 platforms for energy & utilities risk assessment

    Tekmon pays for a sponsored placement (above); its place in this list follows the same rule as every entry. How lists are ordered

    Emex

    QHSE Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 11 Oct 2026

    Emex documents configurable risk templates and matrices with actions for identified risks. A utility can build a template per asset class; permit and isolation controls are not established in the reviewed pages. Vendor source, profile checked 11 October 2026.

    SoterAI and SoterCoach

    Occupational Health

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 12 Oct 2026

    SoterAI and SoterCoach documents phone-video ergonomic assessment connected to a control owner and a reassessment. Manual handling of meters, valves and cable drums is a utility risk; offline assessment is not established. Vendor source, profile checked 12 October 2026.

    Tekmon

    EHS Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 28 Sep 2026

    Tekmon documents configurable risk assessments and matrices (the full description is on its profile). Vendor source, profile checked 28 September 2026.

    Cority

    EHS Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 14 Oct 2026

    Cority documents electronic permit requests with configurable approvals and monitoring of conflicting active permits. A risk assessment for high-hazard work is only as good as the permit that enforces it; demonstrate suspension and reauthorisation. Vendor source, profile checked 14 October 2026.

    Enablon

    QHSE Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 14 Oct 2026

    Enablon documents Operational Risk Assessment within its Control of Work portfolio, next to Permit to Work and Isolation Management. Linking the assessment to the permit is the point; demonstrate approval responsibilities for each application. Vendor source, profile checked 14 October 2026.

    Haz360

    Process Safety

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 14 Oct 2026

    Haz360 documents HAZID, HAZOP, SIL and LOPA templates, concurrent browser editing and an audit log of every change with date and time. For a gas or power plant's formal studies that traceability is central; offline editing is not documented. Vendor source, profile checked 14 October 2026.

    Sphera

    EHS Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 11 Oct 2026

    Sphera documents a management-of-change application with predefined workflows, centralised reviews, approvals and process history. Plant modifications that alter an explosion protection document should pass through that review; confirm inclusion and approval gates. Vendor source, profile checked 11 October 2026.

    Datamaran

    ESG & Sustainability

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 2 sources, checked 14 Oct 2026

    Datamaran documents double materiality analysis with value streams, weights and AI-suggested impacts, risks and opportunities that users review. That is enterprise ESG risk, not operational risk assessment; a utility's sustainability team might use it, its safety team would not. Vendor source, source 2, profile checked 14 October 2026.

    Ideagen EHS

    EHS Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 11 Oct 2026

    Ideagen EHS documents risk assessment tools and compliance tracking in its EHS product. Those support the process rather than guarantee consistency across older installations, so test with one of your own electrical assessments. Vendor source, profile checked 11 October 2026.

    Protex AI

    EHS Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 3 sources, checked 10 Oct 2026

    Protex AI documents vehicle event rules by zone with distance, direction, speed and count settings on existing CCTV. At a depot or plant yard that turns a traffic risk assessment into monitored rules; it is not proof of zero personal-data processing. Vendor source, source 2, source 3, profile checked 10 October 2026.

    SafeContractor

    Contractor Safety Management

    What the evidence covers hereVendor's own material, not a test · 1 source, checked 11 Oct 2026

    SafeContractor documents UK contractor company document assessment. For utilities that depend on contractors for network work, this addresses the contractor's paperwork; it is not an operational risk-assessment tool. Vendor source, profile checked 11 October 2026.

    How this shortlist is assembled

    Products match the catalog's category and industry tags and are ordered by how closely our sources document each product for the category: primary category first, then a sourced tag or documented capability, then how complete the researched profile is and whether it documents a price, a free trial and offline use, then name. Stars appear only where we hold review data for the product and never affect the order. Position in the list is not an assessment of fit or quality.

    A catalog tag does not establish a verified deployment or suitability for your workflow. Product profiles identify available vendor sources and review dates. This page does not report customer interviews or hands-on comparative testing. A labelled sponsored placement is additional to the list. The commercial partner also appears organically when it meets the same inclusion rule, with the same ordering and styling as every entry; see how lists are ordered.

    Each card's evidence row comes from the sources recorded in the product's profile. "Documents" means the vendor's own material describes the capability; it is not a test result or an assessment of fit.

    Read the editorial methodology, compare quote scope, or use the demo scorecard to record your own evidence.

    Risk Assessment software for other industries

    Other software categories for Energy & Utilities

    Frequently Asked Questions

    How should Energy & Utilities buyers choose risk assessment software?
    Use a travelling crew visiting multiple assets and handing an unresolved issue to another team. Check asset identifiers, location context, offline preparation and reassignment across service areas. Use these tasks to assess the candidates below; catalog order does not establish the best fit for your organisation.
    What is included in the price?
    Request the same scope from each vendor: applications, users and external participants, sites, implementation, migration, integrations, training and support. Record recurring charges, minimum commitments and renewal terms. Use the linked product profiles for sourced pricing conditions and the worked quote example to compare totals.
    What determines the implementation schedule?
    Identify who prepares the data, configures workflows, approves access and tests integrations. Ask for milestones and acceptance criteria tied to those dependencies. Company size alone does not establish a delivery date; agree any pilot's access, duration and cost separately.
    How are the platforms selected and ordered?
    The list matches the catalog's category and industry tags and is ordered by how closely our sources document each product for the category, then by name; ratings, reviews and payments play no part. It is a discovery list, not a ranking or a scored comparative trial. Open each profile to inspect its sources and research coverage.
    What evidence should security and IT reviewers request?
    Have the responsible reviewers specify access controls, identity integration, hosting, retention, export and assurance requirements for the intended records. Ask for current documentation with scope and exceptions, and test your required roles. A catalog tag or certification logo does not prove the proposed configuration is suitable.