Robots already at work in energy: boiler walls, live transmission lines, solar fields, turbine blades, geothermal rigs, mines, data centers and orbit.
Deployed robots working in the field today · Announced contracted or piloted, not yet operational · Potential early R&D or concept
No entries match your filters.
= also profiled in the Companies dataset. Original inventory checked 2026-06-16; selected additions and corrections through 2026-10-26.
DOE’s Genesis Mission Consortium lists robotics and automation as a working-group area. DOE selected four laboratory robotics testbeds in October 2026; selections are not yet awards.
Featured above, not yet in Companies.
An unofficial concept for a DOE inquiry into which energy tasks justify a robot trial.
Draft concept. Not an official DOE document.
Project Prime Mover: Robotics for Inspection, Production, and Laboratory Work
Proposed purpose: identify tasks where robotics could reduce hazardous exposure, increase accepted production, or shorten experimental turnaround. Ask respondents to document one operating task or failed deployment before recommending a program. The proposed DOE lead would use responses to select mission trials, refer rule-specific barriers to the responsible regulator, and identify research gaps. An RFI response is neither an award application nor a promise of purchase. No submission channel is open for this unofficial draft. DOE selected four autonomous-science robotics testbeds in October 2026; their planned benchmarks and facilities are existing work this inquiry could examine before proposing new capabilities.
Attach a task record to any deployment claim. Use a site alias in a public response. Separate laboratory demonstrations, paid pilots, routine operations, and repeat orders; identify teleoperation and vendor support in each.
Editorial proposal, not a DOE selection. These missions offer a named buying decision and measurable work. Respondents may propose a different task with equivalent evidence.
Tank, pipe, and vessel inspection. DOE documents robotic tank inspection at Hanford. Ask an asset owner for required defect detection, coverage, retrieval method, exposure, and cost per accepted inspection. First test: seeded defects in a representative mock-up. No field trial without a recovery plan.
Weld, finish, or tend machines for a defined part family. Start through MEP automation support. Ask the plant for drawing tolerances, changeover frequency, rework, integration hours, and cost per accepted part. Compare conventional automation with learned control; the buyer sets the acceptance test.
Transfer and prepare samples under a lab's approved protocol. Ask for traceability errors, contamination, human interventions, and reproducible results per shift. Start with nonhazardous surrogates. Retain manual fallback; faster handling matters only if the experiment remains valid.
Within 90 days after the response window closes, proposed: publish a task shortlist, an evidence-gap register, and referrals naming the responsible agency. For each shortlisted task identify a willing host, an acceptance authority, a funding/authority review, and the missing evidence before a trial. Publish reasons for deferring tasks. Missing reliability evidence goes to R&D; proven economics with a financing gap goes to lenders; a citation-specific barrier goes to its regulator.
Agency roles: propose DOE Environmental Management for cleanup inspection and DOE Office of Science for laboratory tasks, subject to office agreement and mission authority. NIST/MEP would support manufacturing assessment; NIST would support measurement. OSTP would coordinate cross-agency referrals. DOE does not control private plants, mines, utility procurement, or other agencies' waivers.
Engagement interest — a checkbox block on the response form
Beyond written responses, the inquiry proposes three tracks so the roadmap is built on observed evidence, not just filings:
Operators and workers review the same task record. Output: disputed baseline assumptions, staffing effects, and conditions for a trial.
Labs and independent evaluators turn proposed tasks into test protocols. Output: acceptance metrics, withheld test cases, data rights, and an estimated test cost.
At consenting sites: inspect logs, observe a full work cycle including recovery, and compare claims with the task record. A demonstration alone cannot establish long-run reliability.
Unofficial draft authored for this tracker as a policy concept — not a Department of Energy document and not affiliated with DOE. Drafted 2026-07-16; revised 2026-09-24. Proposed missions and deadlines are editorial recommendations, not announced programs.
Entries were checked against company case studies or trade press as of August 2026. Deployment status (deployed, announced, potential) is an editorial call.