11 Hidden Gas Risks You Can’t Afford To Miss In 2026

How shifts in operations, technology and people are quietly reshaping gas risk across industry.

Expectations around gas safety are rising fast. Across the UK, Europe and global industrial markets, regulators are no longer satisfied with the existence of policies or equipment alone. What they increasingly want to see is clear evidence of understanding, competence, monitoring and control.

At the same time, the way organisations operate is changing. Energy systems are evolving, processes are becoming more complex, infrastructure is ageing, and workforce capability is under pressure. Many of these changes happen gradually, which means emerging gas hazards can remain unnoticed until an incident, inspection or enforcement action brings them into sharp focus.

As we look towards 2026, inspectors and safety leaders are paying closer attention to a set of risks that often sit below the surface. This blog explores 11 gas-related exposures that are attracting growing regulatory interest, explains why they are becoming more significant, and highlights what organisations should be considering to stay in control.

1. Hydrogen Expansion in Oil, Gas and the Energy Transition

Hydrogen is rapidly moving beyond pilot projects and into mainstream industrial use. From oil and gas facilities to power generation and wider decarbonisation initiatives, its presence is increasing, along with expectations that risks are managed to the same standard as traditional fuels.

The challenge is that hydrogen behaves very differently. It leaks more readily, ignites easily and has a far wider flammable range than natural gas or hydrocarbons. These characteristics can undermine long-standing design assumptions.

Regulators are increasingly asking whether existing safety cases, hazardous area classifications and detection strategies remain valid once hydrogen is introduced. Organisations that fail to revisit these fundamentals risk both compliance gaps and elevated incident potential.

2. The Overlooked Gas Risks in Battery Energy Storage Systems

Battery energy storage systems (BESS) are being deployed rapidly across energy, utilities and infrastructure. While the focus often sits on electrical and fire hazards, lithium-ion battery failures can also release flammable and toxic gases.

During thermal runaway, gases such as hydrogen and carbon monoxide may be generated, sometimes before visible signs of fire. In enclosed or containerised systems, this creates a risk of explosive atmospheres and delayed ignition.

Regulators increasingly expect organisations operating BESS to demonstrate that gas release scenarios have been assessed, monitored and integrated into emergency response planning. Treating battery installations as low-occupancy or low-risk environments can leave significant gaps in control.

3. Rising Biogas and Methane Risks in Wastewater Treatment

Wastewater treatment plants are under growing scrutiny as anaerobic digestion and biogas recovery become more common. While these processes bring environmental and efficiency benefits, they also introduce higher and more variable methane levels, often in confined or partially enclosed environments.

Inspectors are paying closer attention to how methane hazards are assessed, monitored and controlled, particularly during non-routine activities such as maintenance or cleaning. Static or historic risk assessments can be difficult to defend when gas generation fluctuates with process conditions.

Being able to demonstrate an up-to-date, site-specific understanding of methane behaviour is becoming a baseline expectation.

4. Carbon Dioxide Exposure in Packaging and Fermentation

Despite being widely used, carbon dioxide continues to feature in enforcement notices across food, beverage and pharmaceutical manufacturing. The reason is simple. In enclosed or poorly ventilated spaces, CO₂ is a high-consequence asphyxiant.

As production environments become more automated and enclosed, regulators expect organisations to show that CO₂ risks are clearly identified, continuously monitored and well understood by everyone on site, including contractors and temporary staff.

Where monitoring or alarm strategies are unclear or absent, CO₂ can quickly move from an accepted process gas to a serious compliance concern.

5. Gas Control Gaps During Shutdowns and Turnarounds

Major maintenance events consistently appear in post-incident investigations involving gas exposure. Shutdowns and turnarounds introduce unfamiliar plant states, altered process conditions and large numbers of third-party workers, all at once.

Authorities increasingly expect gas risk controls during these periods to be planned and governed with the same rigour as day-to-day operations. Temporary blind spots in detection, unclear responsibilities or reduced oversight are difficult to justify after an incident.

How well an organisation manages abnormal operations is now seen as a clear indicator of the maturity of its risk management systems.

6. Workforce Competence and Experience Gaps

Competence remains a cornerstone of effective gas safety. Skills shortages, workforce turnover and greater reliance on contractors all make it harder to demonstrate that people understand the hazards they face.

Regulators are less willing to accept assumptions based on experience alone. Inconsistent understanding of alarms, gas behaviour or emergency response can quickly undermine even well-designed systems.

Clear, repeatable ways of supporting decision-making, especially under pressure, are increasingly important from a compliance perspective.

7. Environmental Conditions That Undermine Detection

Environmental factors are receiving greater regulatory attention, particularly in outdoor, utility and infrastructure settings. Temperature extremes, humidity, dust and contamination can all affect sensor performance.

Where gas detection data underpins permits to work, confined space entry or safety cases, inspectors may question whether equipment is operating reliably under real-world conditions. Ignoring environmental effects can weaken confidence in both systems and decisions.

Demonstrating awareness and mitigation of these influences is becoming an essential part of defensible risk control.

8. Ageing Infrastructure and Legacy Systems

Ageing assets remain a persistent concern, especially at sites that have evolved incrementally over decades. Legacy pipework, seals and detection systems do not always align with current operating conditions or hazards.

Investigations frequently uncover mismatches between documented risks and actual site realities. Where detection strategies have not kept pace with physical or process changes, organisations can struggle to demonstrate effective control.

Keeping infrastructure, processes and safety systems aligned is an increasingly complex but unavoidable challenge.

9. Confined Space Pre-Entry Failures

Confined space incidents continue to attract enforcement action, often due to inadequate pre-entry checks. Regulators consistently emphasise that risks must be controlled before entry begins, not assumed away.

Reliance on previous readings, routine familiarity or “it was fine last time” arguments rarely stands up to scrutiny. Changes elsewhere in a system can rapidly invalidate earlier assessments.

Robust, repeatable pre-entry testing remains one of the most critical safeguards in confined space work.

10. Refrigerant Change and Unfamiliar Hazards

The move towards low global warming potential refrigerants is accelerating, driven by environmental regulation. Many of these alternatives introduce different flammability or toxicity characteristics compared to the gases they replace.

Authorities expect organisations to understand these new hazards and adapt detection, training and emergency planning accordingly. Strategies designed for legacy refrigerants may no longer be sufficient.

Failing to revisit risk assessments as refrigerants change can expose organisations to both safety and regulatory failure.

11. Evidence-Based and Connected Compliance

Across industries, compliance expectations are shifting from simply having controls in place to being able to prove how and when they were used. Inspectors increasingly want evidence, not assumptions.

Manual logs, disconnected systems and limited visibility make it harder to demonstrate confidence during audits or investigations. By contrast, connected and transparent approaches support faster decisions and stronger assurance.

As regulatory expectations evolve, connected gas safety is becoming less of a future aspiration and more of a practical necessity.

Looking Ahead to 2026

Operational change and regulatory pressure are not slowing down. Understanding how emerging gas risks intersect with compliance obligations is essential for maintaining control and confidence.

Crowcon can support informed conversations around readiness, risk assessment and gas safety strategy as organisations prepare for 2026 and beyond.

Get in touch to start the conversation.