National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for basin onshore coalbed

  1. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, Los Angeles

  2. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, San Joaquin

  3. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  4. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  5. Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production LA, South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  6. Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 LA, South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  7. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed

  8. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 10 7 7 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed

  9. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Cubic Feet) 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 71 47 49 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved

  10. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Cubic Feet) 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves

  11. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Cubic Feet) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 1 2 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of

  12. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 4 Onshore

  13. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  14. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  15. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  16. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  17. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Changes, and Production

  18. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Changes, and Production

  19. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 175 1980's 207 162 103 114 162 185 149 155 158 141 1990's 110 120 100 108 108 115 112 143 153 174 2000's 203

  20. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 235 2010's 257 295 265 255 233 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring

  1. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 255 178 163 1980's 193 154 96 107 156 181 142 148 151 137 1990's 106 115 97 102 103 111 109 141 149 168 2000's 193 187 207 187 174 176 153 144 75 84 2010's 87 97 93 86 80 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  2. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 10 1980's 15 6 6 6 5 6 8 8 7 4 1990's 5 4 5 6 5 4 3 4 5 7 2000's 10 8 10 8 8 9 10 9 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  3. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 176 1980's 207 163 104 115 163 188 149 155 158 141 1990's 110 120 103 108 108 115 112 146 154 174 2000's 204 195 218 196 184 186 161 154 81 91 2010's 92 102 98 90 84 - = No Data

  4. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 2000's 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  5. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 2,095 2010's 2,037 1,950 1,893 1,813 1,838 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  6. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 77 1980's 81 57 124 117 105 120 109 107 101 95 1990's 86 75 83 85 75 80 80 82 58 60 2000's 64 52 68 78 95 112 100 103 97 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  7. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1,784 1980's 1,721 1,566 1,593 1,556 1,538 1,642 1,398 1,196 1,086 972 1990's 901 885 773 749 744 679 560 518 445 336 2000's 748 836

  8. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,253 1980's 2,713 2,664 2,465 2,408 2,270 2,074 2,006 2,033 1,947 1,927 1990's 1,874 1,818 1,738 1,676 1,386

  9. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,784 3,960 3,941 1980's 4,344 4,163 3,901 3,819 3,685 3,574 3,277 3,102 2,912 2,784 1990's 2,670 2,614 2,415 2,327 2,044 1,920 1,768 1,912 1,945 1,951 2000's 2,331 2,232 2,102 2,013 2,185 2,694 2,345 2,309 2,128

  10. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 4,037 1980's 4,434 4,230 4,058 3,964 3,808 3,716 3,404 3,229 3,033 2,899 1990's 2,775 2,703 2,511 2,425 2,130 2,018 1,864 2,012 2,016 2,021 2000's 2,413 2,298 2,190 2,116 2,306

  11. California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Future Production (Million Barrels) Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 9 1980's 11 6 6 6 5 6 7 7 7 4 1990's 5 4 5 6 5 4 3 4 5 7 2000's 10 8 10 8 8 9 8 9 6 6 2010's 5 4 4 4 4

  12. California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Future Production (Million Barrels) San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 74 1980's 74 51 118 111 100 115 104 102 96 91 1990's 82 71 79 81 71 77 77 79 57 59 2000's 63 51 68 78 94 110 100 103 97 113 2010's 98 78 77 85 96

  13. Water Management Strategies for Improved Coalbed Methane Production in the Black Warrior Basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pashin, Jack; McIntyre-Redden, Marcella; Mann, Steven; Merkel, David

    2013-10-31

    The modern coalbed methane industry was born in the Black Warrior Basin of Alabama and has to date produced more than 2.6 trillion cubic feet of gas and 1.6 billion barrels of water. The coalbed gas industry in this area is dependent on instream disposal of co-produced water, which ranges from nearly potable sodium-bicarbonate water to hypersaline sodium-chloride water. This study employed diverse analytical methods to characterize water chemistry in light of the regional geologic framework and to evaluate the full range of water management options for the Black Warrior coalbed methane industry. Results reveal strong interrelationships among regional geology, water chemistry, and gas chemistry. Coalbed methane is produced from multiple coal seams in Pennsylvanian-age strata of the Pottsville Coal Interval, in which water chemistry is influenced by a structurally controlled meteoric recharge area along the southeastern margin of the basin. The most important constituents of concern in the produced water include chlorides, ammonia compounds, and organic substances. Regional mapping and statistical analysis indicate that the concentrations of most ionic compounds, metallic substances, and nonmetallic substances correlate with total dissolved solids and chlorides. Gas is effectively produced at pipeline quality, and the only significant impurity is N{sub 2}. Geochemical analysis indicates that the gas is of mixed thermogenic-biogenic origin. Stable isotopic analysis of produced gas and calcite vein fills indicates that widespread late-stage microbial methanogenesis occurred primarily along a CO{sub 2} reduction metabolic pathway. Organic compounds in the produced water appear to have helped sustain microbial communities. Ammonia and ammonium levels increase with total dissolved solids content and appear to have played a role in late-stage microbial methanogenesis and the generation of N{sub 2}. Gas production tends to decline exponentially, whereas water production tends to decline hyperbolically. Hyperbolic decline indicates that water volume is of greatest concern early in the life of a coalbed methane project. Regional mapping indicates that gas production is controlled primarily by the ability to depressurize permeable coal seams that are natively within the steep part of the adsorption isotherm. Water production is greatest within the freshwater intrusion and below thick Cretaceous cover strata and is least in areas of underpressure. Water management strategies include instream disposal, which can be applied effectively in most parts of the basin. Deep disposal may be applicable locally, particularly where high salinity limits the ability to dispose into streams. Artificial wetlands show promise for the management of saline water, especially where the reservoir yield is limited. Beneficial use options include municipal water supply, agricultural use, and industrial use. The water may be of use to an inland shrimp farming industry, which is active around the southwestern coalbed methane fields. The best opportunities for beneficial use are reuse of water by the coalbed methane industry for drilling and hydraulic fracturing. This research has further highlighted opportunities for additional research on treatment efficiency, the origin of nitrogen compounds, organic geochemistry, biogenic gas generation, flow modeling, and computer simulation. Results of this study are being disseminated through a vigorous technology transfer program that includes web resources, numerous presentations to stakeholders, and a variety of technical publications.

  14. ,"California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  15. ,"California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  16. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 53 56 2000's 68 97 122 117 63 112 149 98 31 29 2010's 66 69 55 60 45 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  18. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  19. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1990's 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  20. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 740 321 2000's 234 233 111 110 158 238 228 168 117 146 2010's 210 163 226 214 216 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  1. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3 1980's 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 1990's 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 1 1 2000's 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2010's 1 1 1 1 14 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  2. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  3. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 6 1980's 4 4 9 9 9 10 10 10 9 8 1990's 8 7 8 8 7 8 8 7 6 7 2000's 7 7 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 2010's 9 9 9 10 9 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  4. Powder River Basin Coalbed Methane Development and Produced Water Management Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Advanced Resources International

    2002-11-30

    Coalbed methane resources throughout the entire Powder River Basin were reviewed in this analysis. The study was conducted at the township level, and as with all assessments conducted at such a broad level, readers must recognize and understand the limitations and appropriate use of the results. Raw and derived data provided in this report will not generally apply to any specific location. The coal geology in the basin is complex, which makes correlation with individual seams difficult at times. Although more than 12,000 wells have been drilled to date, large areas of the Powder River Basin remain relatively undeveloped. The lack of data obviously introduces uncertainty and increases variability. Proxies and analogs were used in the analysis out of necessity, though these were always based on sound reasoning. Future development in the basin will make new data and interpretations available, which will lead to a more complete description of the coals and their fluid flow properties, and refined estimates of natural gas and water production rates and cumulative recoveries. Throughout the course of the study, critical data assumptions and relationships regarding gas content, methane adsorption isotherms, and reservoir pressure were the topics of much discussion with reviewers. A summary of these discussion topics is provided as an appendix. Water influx was not modeled although it is acknowledged that this phenomenon may occur in some settings. As with any resource assessment, technical and economic results are the product of the assumptions and methodology used. In this study, key assumptions as well as cost and price data, and economic parameters are presented to fully inform readers. Note that many quantities shown in various tables have been subject to rounding; therefore, aggregation of basic and intermediate quantities may differ from the values shown.

  5. ,"Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  8. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  9. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  11. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015"

  12. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  13. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  14. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015"

  15. Coalbed Methane

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Coalbed methane is natural gas found in coal deposits. It was once considered a nuisance and mine safety hazard, but today has become a valuable part of the U.S. energy portfolio. A major reason for this is resource characterization and the establishment of efficient recovery methods pioneered by Office of Fossil Energy R&D.

  16. California - Coastal Region Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Coastal Region Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, Coastal Region Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  17. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014

  18. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  19. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014

  20. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  1. Coalbed Methane Estimated Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ,914 1,886 1,763 1,655 1,466 1,404 1989-2014 Federal Offshore U.S. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Pacific (California) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Gulf of Mexico (Louisiana & Alabama) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Gulf of Mexico (Texas) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Lower 48 States 1,914 1,886 1,763 1,655 1,466 1,404 2005-2014 Alabama 105 102 98 91 62 78 1989-2014 Arkansas 3 3 4 2 2 2 2005-2014 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Coastal Region Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Los Angeles Basin

  2. TX, RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    71 47 2005-2013 Adjustments 0 0 0 81 -17 2009-2013 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0...

  3. TX, RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    1 1 2005-2013 Adjustments 0 0 0 1 0 2009-2013 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0...

  4. TX, RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    1 2 2005-2013 Adjustments 0 0 0 1 1 2009-2013 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2013 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0...

  5. LA, South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Production

  6. TX, RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Changes, and Production 1 2 4 2005-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 1 1 -5 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 9 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 1 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Estimated Production 0 0 0 0 0 1

  7. TX, RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Changes, and Production 71 47 49 2005-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 81 -17 -37 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 21 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 1 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 26 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Estimated Production 0 0 0 10 7 7

  8. TX, RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Changes, and Production 1 1 1 2005-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 1 0 0 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Estimated Production 0 0 0 0 0 0

  9. CA, Coastal Region Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Changes, and Production

  10. US COALBED METHANE The Past: Production The Present: Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Panel 2 of 2 US COALBED METHANE The Past: Production The Present: Reserves The Future: Resources Annual coalbed methane gas production data through 12/31/2006 was obtained from 17 state oil & gas regulatory entities or geological surv eys and one producing company. Data for 2006 were not yet av ailable for West Virginia and Pennsy lvania so the 2005 v olumes were assumed to repeat in 2006. Produced CBM gas v olumes from each state were clas sified by basin. The cumulative production pie

  11. China United Coalbed Methane Co Ltd | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Coalbed Methane Co Ltd Jump to: navigation, search Name: China United Coalbed Methane Co Ltd Place: Beijing Municipality, China Zip: 100011 Product: Coal bed methane developer in...

  12. Ohio Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  13. Kentucky Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  14. Coalbed Methane (CBM) is natural

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Coalbed Methane (CBM) is natural gas found in coal deposits. It was once considered a nuisance and mine safety hazard, but today has become a valuable part of the U.S. energy portfolio. A major reason for this is resource characterization and the establishment of efficient recovery methods pioneered by Office of Fossil Energy (FE) research and development. CBM proved reserves and production have grown nearly every year since 1989. Today it accounts for 9 percent of total domestic natural gas

  15. GEOLOGIC SCREENING CRITERIA FOR SEQUESTRATION OF CO2 IN COAL: QUANTIFYING POTENTIAL OF THE BLACK WARRIOR COALBED METHANE FAIRWAY, ALABAMA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jack C. Pashin; Richard E. Carroll; Richard H. Groshong Jr.; Dorothy E. Raymond; Marcella McIntyre; J. Wayne Payton

    2004-01-01

    Sequestration of CO{sub 2} in coal has potential benefits for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the highly industrialized Carboniferous coal basins of North America and Europe and for enhancing coalbed methane recovery. Hence, enhanced coalbed methane recovery operations provide a basis for a market-based environmental solution in which the cost of sequestration is offset by the production and sale of natural gas. The Black Warrior foreland basin of west-central Alabama contains the only mature coalbed methane production fairway in eastern North America, and data from this basin provide an excellent basis for quantifying the carbon sequestration potential of coal and for identifying the geologic screening criteria required to select sites for the demonstration and commercialization of carbon sequestration technology. Coalbed methane reservoirs in the upper Pottsville Formation of the Black Warrior basin are extremely heterogeneous, and this heterogeneity must be considered to screen areas for the application of CO{sub 2} sequestration and enhanced coalbed methane recovery technology. Major screening factors include stratigraphy, geologic structure, geothermics, hydrogeology, coal quality, sorption capacity, technology, and infrastructure. Applying the screening model to the Black Warrior basin indicates that geologic structure, water chemistry, and the distribution of coal mines and reserves are the principal determinants of where CO{sub 2} can be sequestered. By comparison, coal thickness, temperature-pressure conditions, and coal quality are the key determinants of sequestration capacity and unswept coalbed methane resources. Results of this investigation indicate that the potential for CO{sub 2} sequestration and enhanced coalbed methane recovery in the Black Warrior basin is substantial and can result in significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions while increasing natural gas reserves. Coal-fired power plants serving the Black Warrior basin in Alabama emit approximately 31 MMst (2.4 Tcf) of CO{sub 2} annually. The total sequestration capacity of the Black Warrior coalbed methane fairway at 350 psi is about 189 MMst (14.9 Tcf), which is equivalent to 6.1 years of greenhouse gas emissions from the coal-fired power plants. Applying the geologic screening model indicates that significant parts of the coalbed methane fairway are not accessible because of fault zones, coal mines, coal reserves, and formation water with TDS content less than 3,000 mg/L. Excluding these areas leaves a sequestration potential of 60 MMst (4.7 Tcf), which is equivalent to 1.9 years of emissions. Therefore, if about10 percent of the flue gas stream from nearby power plants is dedicated to enhanced coalbed methane recovery, a meaningful reduction of CO{sub 2} emissions can be realized for nearly two decades. If the fresh-water restriction were removed for the purposes of CO{sub 2} sequestration, an additional 10 MMst (0.9 Tcf) of CO{sub 2} could feasibly be sequestered. The amount of unswept coalbed methane in the fairway is estimated to be 1.49 Tcf at a pressure of 50 psi. Applying the screening model results in an accessible unswept gas resource of 0.44 Tcf. Removal of the fresh-water restriction would elevate this number to 0.57 Tcf. If a recovery factor of 80 percent can be realized, then enhanced recovery activities can result in an 18 percent expansion of coalbed methane reserves in the Black Warrior basin.

  16. Montana Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 12 12 13 14 12 2010's 10 6 3 1 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  17. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 58 68 82 69 55 2010's 45 39 68 65 61 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  18. Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 3 5 5 11 16 2010's 3 4 15 13 11 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  19. Florida Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Florida Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  20. Kansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 17 25 38 47 43 2010's 41 37 34 30 27 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes,

  1. Michigan Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  2. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 2 3 3 3 3 2010's 3 4 2 2 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  3. Utah Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 74 83 103 97 82 75 66 73 71 71 2010's 66 60 55 50 47 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves,

  4. Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 56 81 85 101 111 2010's 97 100 99 93 108 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  5. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 133 278 302 344 320 336 378 401 573 535 2010's 566 506 426 331 264 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Wyoming Coalbed Methane

  6. European Wind Atlas: Onshore | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    URI: cleanenergysolutions.orgcontenteuropean-wind-atlas-onshore,http:cl Language: English Policies: Deployment Programs DeploymentPrograms: Technical Assistance This...

  7. State-of-the-art in coalbed methane drilling fluids

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baltoiu, L.V.; Warren, B.K.; Natras, T.A.

    2008-09-15

    The production of methane from wet coalbeds is often associated with the production of significant amounts of water. While producing water is necessary to desorb the methane from the coal, the damage from the drilling fluids used is difficult to assess, because the gas production follows weeks to months after the well is drilled. Commonly asked questions include the following: What are the important parameters for drilling an organic reservoir rock that is both the source and the trap for the methane? Has the drilling fluid affected the gas production? Are the cleats plugged? Does the 'filtercake' have an impact on the flow of water and gas? Are stimulation techniques compatible with the drilling fluids used? This paper describes the development of a unique drilling fluid to drill coalbed methane wells with a special emphasis on horizontal applications. The fluid design incorporates products to match the delicate surface chemistry on the coal, a matting system to provide both borehole stability and minimize fluid losses to the cleats, and a breaker method of removing the matting system once drilling is completed. This paper also discusses how coal geology impacts drilling planning, drilling practices, the choice of drilling fluid, and completion/stimulation techniques for Upper Cretaceous Mannville-type coals drilled within the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. A focus on horizontal coalbed methane (CBM) wells is presented. Field results from three horizontal wells are discussed, two of which were drilled with the new drilling fluid system. The wells demonstrated exceptional stability in coal for lengths to 1000 m, controlled drilling rates and ease of running slotted liners. Methods for, and results of, placing the breaker in the horizontal wells are covered in depth.

  8. File:EIA-coalbed-gas.pdf | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    coalbed-gas.pdf Jump to: navigation, search File File history File usage Coalbed Methane Fields, Lower 48 States Size of this preview: 776 600 pixels. Full resolution (1,650...

  9. Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2002 0 0...

  10. Offshore and onshore engineering practices compared

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-01-01

    The comparison between the practices relevant to onshore and offshore developments is the overall theme of this book. It provides help and guidance to people familiar with onshore practices who are venturing offshore for the first time or vice versa. They draw attention to the lessons of experience which benefit future developments and point to future guidelines and regulations. CONTENTS: Project economic evaluation and conceptual planning - the differences between onshore and offshore projects; A comparison of offshore and onshore plant design; Gas compression equipment - design differences between onshore and offshore applications; Experience in reliable pump design for onshore and offshore applications; Operability, reliability and maintenance - the differences onshore and offshore; Risk analysis in layout and safety engineering for platforms and terminals; The design of electrical supplies for equipment operation; Production measurements for a North Sea oil field; Chemical treatment and process equipment for water injection and oily water treatment systems offshore and onshore; Gas desulphurisation - the consequence of moving the process offshore; A comparison of offshore and onshore pipeline construction and commissioning; Pre-commissioning and commissioning of facilities onshore and offshore; Some aspects of revamp work on onshore and offshore plants.

  11. Alabama Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 23 1990's 36 68 89 103 108 109 98 111 123 108 2000's 109 111 117 98 121 113 114 114 107 105 2010's 102 98 91 62 78 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane

  12. Colorado Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 12 1990's 26 48 82 125 179 226 274 312 401 432 2000's 451 490 520 488 520 515 477 519 497 498 2010's 533 516 486 444 412 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed

  13. WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy Workshop WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy Workshop February 8, 2011 - ...

  14. Methane recovery from coalbeds project. Monthly progress report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-11-01

    Progress made on the Methane Recovery from Coalbeds Project (MRCP) is reported in the Raton Mesa Coal Region. The Uinta and Warrior basin reports have been reviewed and will be published and delivered in early December. A cooperative core test with R and P Coal Company on a well in Indiana County, Pennsylvania, was negotiated. In a cooperative effort with the USGS Coal Branch on three wells in the Wind River Basin, desorption of coal samples showed little or no gas. Completed field testing at the Dugan Petroleum well in the San Juan Basin. Coal samples showed minimal gas. Initial desorption of coal samples suggests that at least a moderate amount of gas was obtained from the Coors well test in the Piceance Basin. Field work for the Piceance Basin Detailed Site Investigation was completed. In the Occidental Research Corporation (ORC) project, a higher capacity vacuum pump to increase CH/sub 4/ venting operations has been installed. Drilling of Oxy No. 12 experienced delays caused by mine gas-offs and was eventually terminated at 460 ft after an attempt to drill through a roll which produced a severe dog leg and severely damaged the drill pipe. ORC moved the second drill rig and equipment to a new location in the same panel as Oxy No. 12 and set the stand pipe for Oxy No. 13. Drill rig No. 1 has been moved east of the longwall mining area in anticipation of drilling cross-panel on 500 foot intervals. Waynesburg College project, Equitable Gas Company has received the contract from Waynesburg College and has applied to the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission for a new tariff rate. Waynesburg College has identified a contractor to make the piping connections to the gas line after Equitable establishes their meter and valve requirements.

  15. GEOLOGIC SCREENING CRITERIA FOR SEQUESTRATION OF CO2 IN COAL: QUANTIFYING POTENTIAL OF THE BLACK WARRIOR COALBED METHANE FAIRWAY, ALABAMA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jack C. Pashin; Richard E. Carroll; Richard H. Groshong, Jr.; Dorothy E. Raymond; Marcella McIntyre; J. Wayne Payton

    2003-01-01

    Sequestration of CO{sub 2} in coal has potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants while enhancing coalbed methane recovery. Data from more than 4,000 coalbed methane wells in the Black Warrior basin of Alabama provide an opportunity to quantify the carbon sequestration potential of coal and to develop a geologic screening model for the application of carbon sequestration technology. This report summarizes stratigraphy and sedimentation, structural geology, geothermics, hydrology, coal quality, gas capacity, and production characteristics of coal in the Black Warrior coalbed methane fairway and the implications of geology for carbon sequestration and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Coal in the Black Warrior basin is distributed among several fluvial-deltaic coal zones in the Lower Pennsylvanian Pottsville Formation. Most coal zones contain one to three coal beds that are significant targets for coalbed methane production and carbon sequestration, and net coal thickness generally increases southeastward. Pottsville strata have effectively no matrix permeability to water, so virtually all flow is through natural fractures. Faults and folds influence the abundance and openness of fractures and, hence, the performance of coalbed methane wells. Water chemistry in the Pottsville Formation ranges from fresh to saline, and zones with TDS content lower than 10,000 mg/L can be classified as USDW. An aquifer exemption facilitating enhanced recovery in USDW can be obtained where TDS content is higher than 3,000 mg/L. Carbon dioxide becomes a supercritical fluid above a temperature of 88 F and a pressure of 1,074 psi. Reservoir temperature exceeds 88 F in much of the study area. Hydrostatic pressure gradients range from normal to extremely underpressured. A large area of underpressure is developed around closely spaced longwall coal mines, and areas of natural underpressure are distributed among the coalbed methane fields. The mobility and reactivity of supercritical CO{sub 2} in coal-bearing strata is unknown, and potential exists for supercritical conditions to develop below a depth of 2,480 feet following abandonment of the coalbed methane fields. High-pressure adsorption isotherms confirm that coal sorbs approximately twice as much CO{sub 2} as CH{sub 4} and approximately four times as much CO{sub 2} as N{sub 2}. Analysis of isotherm data reveals that the sorption performance of each gas can vary by a factor of two depending on rank and ash content. Gas content data exhibit extreme vertical and lateral variability that is the product of a complex burial history involving an early phase of thermogenic gas generation and an ongoing stage of late biogenic gas generation. Production characteristics of coalbed methane wells are helpful for identifying areas that are candidates for carbon sequestration and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Many geologic and engineering factors, including well construction, well spacing, and regional structure influence well performance. Close fault spacing limits areas where five-spot patterns may be developed for enhanced gas recovery, but large structural panels lacking normal faults are in several gas fields and can be given priority as areas to demonstrate and commercialize carbon sequestration technology in coalbed methane reservoirs.

  16. Eastern States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Eastern States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 58 69 68 71 72 90 24 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane

  17. Western States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Western States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Western States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 4 14 33 51 77 89 108 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Production

  18. ,"U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ame","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production",10,"Annual",2013,"06301989"...

  19. ,"New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"0...

  20. ,"Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana & Alabama Coalbed...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana & Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and...

  1. Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 7 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved

  2. Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 1 1 1 0 2010's 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves,

  3. ,"Louisiana--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves ...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014...

  4. ,"California--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014...

  5. ,"Texas--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014...

  6. SEQUESTERING CARBON DIOXIDE IN COALBEDS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K.A.M. Gasem; R.L. Robinson, Jr.; J.E. Fitzgerald; Z. Pan; M. Sudibandriyo

    2003-04-30

    The authors' long-term goal is to develop accurate prediction methods for describing the adsorption behavior of gas mixtures on solid adsorbents over complete ranges of temperature, pressure, and adsorbent types. The originally-stated, major objectives of the current project are to: (1) measure the adsorption behavior of pure CO{sub 2}, methane, nitrogen, and their binary and ternary mixtures on several selected coals having different properties at temperatures and pressures applicable to the particular coals being studied, (2) generalize the adsorption results in terms of appropriate properties of the coals to facilitate estimation of adsorption behavior for coals other than those studied experimentally, (3) delineate the sensitivity of the competitive adsorption of CO{sub 2}, methane, and nitrogen to the specific characteristics of the coal on which they are adsorbed; establish the major differences (if any) in the nature of this competitive adsorption on different coals, and (4) test and/or develop theoretically-based mathematical models to represent accurately the adsorption behavior of mixtures of the type for which measurements are made. As this project developed, an important additional objective was added to the above original list. Namely, we were encouraged to interact with industry and/or governmental agencies to utilize our expertise to advance the state of the art in coalbed adsorption science and technology. As a result of this additional objective, we participated with the Department of Energy and industry in the measurement and analysis of adsorption behavior as part of two distinct investigations. These include (a) Advanced Resources International (ARI) DOE Project DE-FC26-00NT40924, ''Adsorption of Pure Methane, Nitrogen, and Carbon Dioxide and Their Mixtures on Wet Tiffany Coal'', and (b) the DOE-NETL Project, ''Round Robin: CO{sub 2} Adsorption on Selected Coals''. These activities, contributing directly to the DOE projects listed above, also provided direct synergism with the original goals of our work. Specific accomplishments of this project are summarized below in three broad categories: experimentation, model development, and coal characterization.

  7. Research and Development Concerning Coalbed Natural Gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    William Ruckelshaus

    2008-09-30

    The Powder River Basin in northeastern Wyoming is one of the most active areas of coalbed natural gas (CBNG) development in the western United States. This resource provides clean energy but raises environmental concerns. Primary among these is the disposal of water that is co-produced with the gas during depressurization of the coal seam. Beginning with a few producing wells in Wyoming's Powder River Basin (PRB) in 1987, CBNG well numbers in this area increased to over 13,600 in 2004, with projected growth to 20,900 producing wells in the PRB by 2010. CBNG development is continuing apace since 2004, and CBNG is now being produced or evaluated in four other Wyoming coal basins in addition to the PRB, with roughly 3500-4000 new CBNG wells permitted statewide each year since 2004. This is clearly a very valuable source of clean fuel for the nation, and for Wyoming the economic benefits are substantial. For instance, in 2003 alone the total value of Wyoming CBNG production was about $1.5 billion, with tax and royalty income of about $90 million to counties, $140 million to the state, and $27 million to the federal government. In Wyoming, cumulative CBNG water production from 1987 through December 2004 was just over 380,000 acre-feet (2.9 billion barrels), while producing almost 1.5 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of CBNG gas statewide. Annual Wyoming CBNG water production in 2003 was 74,457 acre-feet (577 million barrels). Total production of CBNG water across all Wyoming coal fields could total roughly 7 million acre-feet (55.5 billion barrels), if all of the recoverable CBNG in the projected reserves of 31.7 tcf were produced over the coming decades. Pumping water from coals to produce CBNG has been designated a beneficial water use by the Wyoming State Engineer's Office (SEO), though recently the SEO has limited this beneficial use designation by requiring a certain gas/water production ratio. In the eastern part of the PRB where CBNG water is generally of good quality, most of it is discharged to surface drainages or to soil (for irrigation). CBNG water quality generally declines when moving from the Cheyenne River drainage northwestward to the Belle Fourche, Little Powder, and Powder River drainages and in the central and western part of the PRB, most CBNG water goes to evaporation-infiltration ponds or is discharged directly to surface drainages. Concerns center on the salinity of the water, usually measured as total dissolved solids (TDS), or electrical conductivity (EC) and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR). Other management options currently in use include injection, managed irrigation (with additives to mitigate the effects of high salinity), atomization, and treatment by reverse osmosis or ion exchange. A key water quality issue is the cumulative effect of numerous CBNG water discharges on the overall water quality of basin streams. This leads to one of the most contentious issues in CBNG development in Wyoming's PRB: Montana's concern about the potential downstream effects of water quality degradation on rivers flowing north into Montana. Many of the benefits and costs associated with CBNG development have been debated, but dealing with CBNG water quantity and quality arguably has been the most difficult of all the issues. Given the importance of these issues for continued development of CBNG resources in Wyoming and elsewhere, the DOE-NETL funded project presented here focuses on CBNG co-produced water management. The research was organized around nine separate, but interrelated, technical project tasks and one administrative task (Task 1). The nine technical project tasks were pursued by separate research teams at the University of Wyoming, but all nine tasks were coordinated to the extent possible in order to maximize information gained about CBNG co-produced waters. In addition to project management in Task 1, the key research tasks included: (2) estimating groundwater recharge rates in the PRB; (3) groundwater contamination of trace elements from CBNG disposal ponds; (4) use of environmental tracers in assessing wate

  8. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    2,010,171 1,916,762 1,779,055 1,539,395 1,425,783 1,285,189 2002-2014 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Alaska Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 California 0...

  9. Texas--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  10. Miscellaneous States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Miscellaneous States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 19 28 29 41 17 2010's 16 17 13 23 11 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  11. Mississippi (with State off) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Mississippi Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  12. Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 73 77 66 75 37 2010's 64 25 11 16 11 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Montana Coalbed Methane Proved

  13. New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 25 26 23 23 26 2010's 27 27 28 26 24 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production NM, East Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves,

  14. New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 489 484 371 420 406 2010's 375 347 327 330 349 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production NM, West Coalbed Methane Proved

  15. New York Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production New York Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  16. North Dakota Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  17. Federal Offshore California Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Offshore California Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Federal Offshore, Pacific (California) Coalbed Methane Proved

  18. Federal Offshore--Texas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Texas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico, Texas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves,

  19. Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 257 234 340 301 163 2010's 258 228 183 189 211 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved

  20. Louisiana (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 1 1 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Louisiana Coalbed Methane Proved

  1. Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 1 1 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production North Louisiana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  2. Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 1 7 9 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 North Louisiana Coalbed Methane Proved

  3. Louisiana--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production LA, State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  4. Lower 48 Federal Offshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Federal Offshore U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  5. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Alaska Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  6. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 30 34 31 31 22 2010's 28 21 10 13 15 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved

  7. California (with State off) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production California Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane Production

  8. California--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  9. Texas (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 11 8 9 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Texas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  10. Texas--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  11. Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells Nebraska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed

  12. West Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 30 18 25 28 31 2010's 17 18 9 8 11 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves,

  13. Texas (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 81 57 61 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  14. New York Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 New York Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

  15. North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

  16. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 568 684 1,265 511 338 2010's 325 274 439 440 602 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Oklahoma

  17. Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 45 50 108 102 131 2010's 129 124 106 161 158 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  18. Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells Kentucky Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed

  19. Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells Maryland Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed

  20. Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,592 1,685 1,725 1,224 934 902 750 922 893 725 2010's 718 679 518 523 538 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as

  1. Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,572 1,813 1,948 1,851 2,261 2010's 1,752 1,623 1,535 1,387 2,233 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of

  2. West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 186 194 255 246 220 2010's 220 139 107 113 76 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 West

  3. Assessment of CO2 Sequestration and ECBM Potential of U.S. Coalbeds

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Scott R. Reeves

    2003-03-31

    In October, 2000, the U.S. Department of Energy, through contractor Advanced Resources International, launched a multi-year government-industry R&D collaboration called the Coal-Seq project. The Coal-Seq project is investigating the feasibility of CO{sub 2} sequestration in deep, unmineable coalseams, by performing detailed reservoir studies of two enhanced coalbed methane recovery (ECBM) field projects in the San Juan basin. The two sites are the Allison Unit, operated by Burlington Resources, and into which CO{sub 2} is being injected, and the Tiffany Unit, operating by BP America, into which N{sub 2} is being injected (the interest in understanding the N{sub 2}-ECBM process has important implications for CO{sub 2} sequestration via flue-gas injection). The purposes of the field studies are to understand the reservoir mechanisms of CO{sub 2} and N{sub 2} injection into coalseams, demonstrate the practical effectiveness of the ECBM and sequestration processes, an engineering capability to simulate them, and to evaluate sequestration economics. In support of these efforts, laboratory and theoretical studies are also being performed to understand and model multi-component isotherm behavior, and coal permeability changes due to swelling with CO{sub 2} injection. This report describes the results of an important component of the overall project, applying the findings from the San Juan Basin to a national scale to develop a preliminary assessment of the CO{sub 2} sequestration and ECBM recovery potential of U.S. coalbeds. Importantly, this assessment improves upon previous investigations by (1) including a more comprehensive list of U.S. coal basins, (2) adopting technical rationale for setting upper-bound limits on the results, and (3) incorporating new information on CO{sub 2}/CH{sub 4} replacement ratios as a function of coal rank. Based on the results of the assessment, the following conclusions have been drawn: (1) The CO{sub 2} sequestration capacity of U.S. coalbeds is estimated to be about 90 Gt. Of this, about 38 Gt is in Alaska (even after accounting for high costs associated with this province), 14 Gt is in the Powder River basin, 10 Gt is in the San Juan basin, and 8 Gt is in the Greater Green River basin. By comparison, total CO{sub 2} emissions from power generation plants is currently about 2.2 Gt/year. (2) The ECBM recovery potential associated with this sequestration is estimated to be over 150 Tcf. Of this, 47 Tcf is in Alaska (even after accounting for high costs associated with this province), 20 Tcf is in the Powder River basin, 19 Tcf is in the Greater Green River basin, and 16 Tcf is in the San Juan basin. By comparison, total CBM recoverable resources are currently estimated to be about 170 Tcf. (3) Between 25 and 30 Gt of CO{sub 2} can be sequestered at a profit, and 80-85 Gt can be sequestered at costs of less than $5/ton. These estimates do not include any costs associated with CO{sub 2} capture and transportation, and only represent geologic sequestration. (4) Several Rocky Mountain basins, including the San Juan, Raton, Powder River and Uinta appear to hold the most favorable conditions for sequestration economics. The Gulf Coast and the Central Appalachian basin also appear to hold promise as economic sequestration targets, depending upon gas prices. (5) In general, the 'non-commercial' areas (those areas outside the main play area that are not expected to produce primary CBM commercially) appear more favorable for sequestration economics than the 'commercial' areas. This is because there is more in-place methane to recover in these settings (the 'commercial' areas having already been largely depleted of methane).

  4. Ownership questions can stymie development of coalbed methane

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Counts, R.A. )

    1990-01-01

    Although the technology exists for commercial recovery of coalbed methane, production has been hindered because of the legal quandary as to ownership. The author discusses how claims to ownership of coalbed methane can and have been made by the coal owner or lessee, the oil and gas owner or lessee, the surface owner, or any combination thereof. The federal perspective on this question of ownership is described and several state rulings are assessed.

  5. ,"CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  6. ,"CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve Changes, and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Late...

  7. ,"CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  8. ,"CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve Changes, and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Late...

  9. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2011 2012 2013 View History Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 855 777 756 2011-2013 Adjustments 1 1 -1 2011-2013 Revision Increases 912 258 68 2011-2013 Revision Decreases 0 248 0...

  10. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 8 9 10 9 6 1979-2008 Adjustments -1 0 0 0 1 2 1979-2008 Revision Increases 1 0 1 0 1 0 1979-2008 Revision Decreases 2 2 1 2 3 5 1979-2008 Sales 1 0 0 2 0 0 2000-2008 Acquisitions 1 0 1 5 0 0 2000-2008 Extensions 0 2

  11. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    78 95 112 100 103 97 1979-2008 Adjustments 11 8 -3 3 6 2 1979-2008 Revision Increases 10 19 28 5 13 11 1979-2008 Revision Decreases 4 4 4 16 10 15 1979-2008 Sales 1 5 8 8 7 0 2000-2008 Acquisitions 1 6 9 7 10 1 2000-2008 Extensions 2 2 5 7 1 4 1979-2008 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2008 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 1 1979-2008 Estimated Production 9 9 10 10 10 1

  12. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    84 87 97 93 86 80 1977-2014 Adjustments 5 5 7 11 -9 9 1977-2014 Revision Increases 35 9 11 8 8 6 1977-2014 Revision Decreases 24 5 4 17 2 16 1977-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 35 6 2000-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 2 0 35 8 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 2 0 1977-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 1977-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 1977-2014 Estimated Production 7 6 6 6 6 7

  13. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Changes, and Production 0 0 0 1 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 1 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0

  14. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas Proved Reserves,

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Wet After Lease Separation 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Estimated Production 0 0 0 0

  15. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Proved Nonproducing Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    29 66 69 55 60 45 1996-2014 Lease Condensate (million bbls) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998-2014 Total Gas (billion cu ft) 12 21 23 16 16 11 1996-2014 Nonassociated Gas (billion cu ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996-2014 Associated Gas (billion cu ft) 12 21 23 16 16 11

  16. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    2,469 2,321 2,590 1,550 1,460 1,690 1977-2014 Adjustments 2 4 902 -574 -55 10 1977-2014 Revision Increases 180 488 1,444 379 223 579 1977-2014 Revision Decreases 148 427 1,854 491 84 200 1977-2014 Sales 4 2 45 284 35 1,083 2000-2014 Acquisitions 78 0 42 92 25 1,074 2000-2014 Extensions 446 8 69 3 1 0 1977-2014 New Field Discoveries 1 1 0 4 0 0 1977-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 9 0 0 1977-2014 Estimated Production 214 220 289 178 165 150

  17. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Changes, and Production 1 1 1 1 14 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 1 0 -1 0 11 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 1 0 4 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 1 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Estimated Production 0 0 0 0 0 1

  18. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas Proved Reserves,

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Wet After Lease Separation 607 498 506 269 245 265 1979-2014 Adjustments 1 -3 -12 58 -20 19 1979-2014 Revision Increases 96 47 116 84 115 112 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 59 84 31 120 73 70 1979-2014 Sales 0 2 47 303 0 164 2000-2014 Acquisitions 25 0 44 93 0 164 2000-2014 Extensions 4 0 1 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Field Discoveries 1 1 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 9 0 0 1979-2014 Estimated Production 78 68 63 58 46 4

  19. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Proved Nonproducing Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    146 210 163 226 214 216 1996-2014 Lease Condensate (million bbls) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998-2014 Total Gas (billion cu ft) 401 359 319 81 96 55 1996-2014 Nonassociated Gas (billion cu ft) 311 253 265 36 61 37 1996-2014 Associated Gas (billion cu ft) 90 106 54 45 35 18

  20. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 855 777 756 15 2011-2014 Adjustments 1 1 -1 -740 2011-2014 Revision Increases 912 258 68 1 2011-2014 Revision...

  1. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Revision Increases 95 467 1,382 319 126 513 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 97 367 1,892 403 18 146 1979-2014 Sales 4 0 0 0 38 1,004 2000-2014 Acquisitions 58 0 0 4 27 995...

  2. Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Global Onshore Wind Speed Distributio...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Title: Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Global Onshore Wind Speed Distribution Wind power, a renewable energy source, can play an important role in electrical energy generation. ...

  3. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation,...

  4. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation,...

  5. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved...

  6. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved...

  7. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves...

  8. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation,...

  9. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves...

  10. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved...

  11. Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    2,010,171 1,916,762 1,779,055 1,539,395 1,425,783 1,285,189 2002-2014 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Alaska Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006-2014 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Colorado 544,215 529,891 514,531 376,543 449,281 419,132 2002-2014 Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Kansas 43,661 38,869 35,924 31,689 28,244 25,365 2002-2014 Louisiana 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002-2014 Louisiana Onshore 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Montana 12,376 9,920 6,691 3,731 1,623 5,766

  12. Dewatering of coalbed methane wells with hydraulic gas pump

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Amani, M.; Juvkam-Wold, H.C.

    1995-12-31

    The coalbed methane industry has become an important source of natural gas production. Proper dewatering of coalbed methane (CBM) wells is the key to efficient gas production from these reservoirs. This paper presents the Hydraulic Gas Pump as a new alternative dewatering system for CBM wells. The Hydraulic Gas Pump (HGP) concept offers several operational advantages for CBM wells. Gas interference does not affect its operation. It resists solids damage by eliminating the lift mechanism and reducing the number of moving parts. The HGP has a flexible production rate and is suitable for all production phases of CBM wells. It can also be designed as a wireline retrievable system. We conclude that the Hydraulic Gas Pump is a suitable dewatering system for coalbed methane wells.

  13. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,540 2,297 2,371 2,759 2,085 2,446 2,448 2,738 2,781 2,328 2010's 2,683 2,539 1,736 1,810 1,572 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed

  14. Enhancement of Biogenic Coalbed Methane Production and Back Injection of Coalbed Methane Co-Produced Water

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Song Jin

    2007-05-31

    Biogenic methane is a common constituent in deep subsurface environments such as coalbeds and oil shale beds. Coalbed methane (CBM) makes significant contributions to world natural gas industry and CBM production continues to increase. With increasing CBM production, the production of CBM co-produced water increases, which is an environmental concern. This study investigated the feasibility in re-using CBM co-produced water and other high sodic/saline water to enhance biogenic methane production from coal and other unconventional sources, such as oil shale. Microcosms were established with the selected carbon sources which included coal, oil shale, lignite, peat, and diesel-contaminated soil. Each microcosm contained either CBM coproduced water or groundwater with various enhancement and inhibitor combinations. Results indicated that the addition of nutrients and nutrients with additional carbon can enhance biogenic methane production from coal and oil shale. Methane production from oil shale was much greater than that from coal, which is possibly due to the greater amount of available Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) from oil shale. Inconclusive results were observed from the other sources since the incubation period was too low. WRI is continuing studies with biogenic methane production from oil shale.

  15. Mississippi (with State off) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Mississippi Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

  16. Other States Natural Gas Coalbed Methane, Reserves Based Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Coalbed Methane, Reserves Based Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Coalbed Methane, Reserves Based Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 1990's 1 3 10 18 34 47 56 70 99 130 2000's 0 -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  17. Florida Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Florida Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

  18. Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore - Louisiana and Alabama Coalbed Methane

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore - Louisiana and Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec.

  19. Louisiana (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 1 7 9 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Louisiana

  20. Louisiana--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 LA, State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  1. Lower 48 Federal Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Federal Offshore U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  2. Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,732 1,758 1,753 1,966 1,914 2010's 1,886 1,763 1,655 1,466 1,404 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production Lower 48 States

  3. Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 19,892 19,620 21,874 20,798 18,578 2010's 17,508 16,817 13,591 12,392 15,696 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of

  4. Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

  5. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Alaska Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

  6. California (with State off) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 California Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

  7. Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Coalbed Wells (Million...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Wells (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009...

  8. Louisiana--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 2,849,980 1,884,566 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and

  9. Alabama--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 125,180 106,903 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Alabama Onshore

  10. Alaska--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 294,212 286,627 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Alaska Onshore

  11. Calif--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 201,754 205,320 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production California Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and

  12. Property:PotentialOnshoreWindGeneration | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    onshore wind in a place. Use this type to express a quantity of energy. The default unit for energy on OpenEI is the Kilowatt hour (kWh), which is 3,600,000 Joules. http:...

  13. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in New Mexico (Million Cubic...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  14. Texas--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  15. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  16. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5...

  17. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  18. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's...

  19. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  20. Texas--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  1. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  2. Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Global Onshore Wind Speed Distribution

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    (Journal Article) | SciTech Connect Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Global Onshore Wind Speed Distribution Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Global Onshore Wind Speed Distribution Wind power, a renewable energy source, can play an important role in electrical energy generation. Information regarding wind energy potential is important both for energy related modeling and for decision-making in the policy community. While wind speed datasets with high

  3. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2,022 1990's 2,510 4,206 4,724 4,775 4,137 4,299 4,180 4,351 4,232 4,080 2000's 4,278 4,324 4,380 4,396 5,166 5,249 4,894 4,169 3,991 3,646 2010's 3,532 3,358 2,772 2,856 4,120 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  4. Independent focuses Philippines exploration on Visayan basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rillera, F.G.

    1995-08-21

    Cophil Exploration Corp., a Filipino public company, spearheaded 1995 Philippine oil and gas exploration activity with the start of its gas delineation drilling operations in Libertad, northern Cebu. Cophil and its Australian partners, Coplex Resources NL and PacRim Energy NL, have set out to complete a seven well onshore drilling program within this block this year. The companies are testing two modest shallow gas plays, Libertad and Dalingding, and a small oil play, Maya, all in northern Cebu about 500 km southeast of Manila. Following a short discussion on the geology and exploration history of the Visayan basin, this article briefly summarizes Cophil`s ongoing Cebu onshore drilling program. Afterwards, discussion focuses on identified exploration opportunities in the basin`s offshore sector.

  5. Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    (Million Cubic Feet) Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 325 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Louisiana Onshore-Texas

  6. Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 938,635 822,216 818,942 724,016 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Louisiana Onshore-Louisiana

  7. Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 5,020 4,583 4,920 4,936 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Louisiana Onshore-Texas

  8. Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 1 22 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production LA, South Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  9. Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 0 10 181 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 LA, South Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  10. California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Future Production (Million Barrels) Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 22 1980's 23 14 16 17 14 15 15 13 13 11 1990's 12 11 9 10 9 7 9 9 9 31 2000's 27 16 17 15 19 16 22 14 10 10 2010's 11 12 18 13 12

  11. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 57,971 63,053 144,573 112,694 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Texas Onshore-Kansas

  12. Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA) Jump to: navigation, search Statute Name Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA) Year 1987 Url...

  13. U.S. Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S. Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Seismic Surveying...

  14. New Mexico Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 56 1990's 133 229 358 486 530 574 575 597 571 582 2000's 550 517 471 451 528 514 510 394 443 432 2010's 402 374 355 356 373 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  15. Vertical borehole design and completion practices used to remove methane gas from mineable coalbeds

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lambert, S.W.; Trevits, M.A.; Steidl, P.F.

    1980-08-01

    Coalbed gas drainage from the surface in advance of mining has long been the goal of researchers in mine safety. Bureau of Mines efforts to achieve this goal started about 1965 with the initiation of an applied research program designed to test drilling, completion, and production techniques for vertical boreholes. Under this program, over 100 boreholes were completed in 16 different coalbeds. The field methods derived from these tests, together with a basic understanding of the coalbed reservoir, represent an available technology applicable to any gas drainage program whether designed primarily for mine safety or for gas recovery, or both.

  16. Texas--RRC District 1 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 1 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  17. Texas--RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves,

  18. Texas--RRC District 6 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 6 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  19. Texas--RRC District 7B Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 7B Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  20. Texas--RRC District 7C Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 7C Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  1. Texas--RRC District 8 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 8 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  2. Texas--RRC District 8A Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 8A Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  3. Texas--RRC District 9 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 9 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Coalbed Methane

  4. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves New Field Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane New Field Discoveries U.S. Coalbed Methane

  5. Texas--RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 8 7 7 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District

  6. New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 335 322 389 530 474 2010's 523 507 362 5 273 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of

  7. New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 4,914 4,572 3,780 3,461 3,172 2010's 3,009 2,851 2,410 2,851 3,847 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved

  8. Texas--RRC District 5 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5 Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Estimated Production TX, RRC District 5

  9. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 724 2010's 497 736 166 278 395 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Extensions

  10. Geohydrologic feasibility study of the greater Green River Basin for the potential applicability of Jack W. McIntyre`s patented tool

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reed, P.D.

    1994-02-01

    Geraghty & Miller, Inc, of Midland, Texas conducted geologic and hydrologic feasibility studies of the potential applicability of Jack McIntyre`s patented tool for the recovery of natural gas from coalbed/sand formations in the Greater Green River Basin through literature surveys.

  11. Deep subsurface drip irrigation using coal-bed sodic water: Part I. Water and solute movement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bern, Carleton R.; Breit, George N.; Healy, Richard W.; Zupancic, John W.; Hammack, Richard

    2013-02-01

    Water co-produced with coal-bed methane (CBM) in the semi-arid Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana commonly has relatively low salinity and high sodium adsorption ratios that can degrade soil permeability where used for irrigation. Nevertheless, a desire to derive beneficial use from the water and a need to dispose of large volumes of it have motivated the design of a deep subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) system capable of utilizing that water. Drip tubing is buried 92 cm deep and irrigates at a relatively constant rate year-round, while evapotranspiration by the alfalfa and grass crops grown is seasonal. We use field data from two sites and computer simulations of unsaturated flow to understand water and solute movements in the SDI fields. Combined irrigation and precipitation exceed potential evapotranspiration by 300480 mm annually. Initially, excess water contributes to increased storage in the unsaturated zone, and then drainage causes cyclical rises in the water table beneath the fields. Native chloride and nitrate below 200 cm depth are leached by the drainage. Some CBM water moves upward from the drip tubing, drawn by drier conditions above. Chloride from CBM water accumulates there as root uptake removes the water. Year over year accumulations indicated by computer simulations illustrate that infiltration of precipitation water from the surface only partially leaches such accumulations away. Field data show that 7% and 27% of added chloride has accumulated above the drip tubing in an alfalfa and grass field, respectively, following 6 years of irrigation. Maximum chloride concentrations in the alfalfa field are around 45 cm depth but reach the surface in parts of the grass field, illustrating differences driven by crop physiology. Deep SDI offers a means of utilizing marginal quality irrigation waters and managing the accumulation of their associated solutes in the crop rooting zone.

  12. Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 537 1990's 1,224 1,714 1,968 1,237 976 972 823 1,077 1,029 1,060 2000's 1,241 1,162 1,283 1,665 1,900 1,773 2,068 2,126 1,727 1,342 2010's 1,298 1,210 1,006 413 978 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  13. Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,117 1990's 1,320 2,076 2,716 3,107 2,913 3,461 3,711 3,890 4,211 4,826 2000's 5,617 6,252 6,691 6,473 5,787 6,772 6,344 7,869 8,238 7,348 2010's 6,485 6,580 5,074 4,391 5,103 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  14. U.S. Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 91 1990's 196 348 539 752 851 956 1,003 1,090 1,194 1,252 2000's 1,379 1,562 1,614 1,600 1,720 1,732 1,758 1,753 1,966 1,914 2010's 1,886 1,763 1,655 1,466 1,404 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  15. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,676 1990's 5,087 8,163 10,034 10,184 9,712 10,499 10,566 11,462 12,179 13,229 2000's 15,708 17,531 18,491 18,743 18,390 19,892 19,620 21,874 20,798 18,578 2010's 17,508 16,817 13,591 12,392 15,696 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  16. Alaska Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 2,811,384 2,735,783 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  17. WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Workshop | Department of Energy WASHINGTON, DC --- On Wednesday, February 9th the Department of Interior will host an onshore renewable energy workshop. The two-day conference will bring together stakeholders from across the government, renewable energy industry, and conservation community to discuss the administration's efforts to rapidly and responsibly stand-up renewable energy projects on our nation's public lands. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar,

  18. Evaluation of Phytoremediation of Coal Bed Methane Product Water and Waters of Quality Similar to that Associated with Coal Bed Methane Reserves of the Powder River Basin, Montana and Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James Bauder

    2008-09-30

    U.S. emphasis on domestic energy independence, along with advances in knowledge of vast biogenically sourced coalbed methane reserves at relatively shallow sub-surface depths with the Powder River Basin, has resulted in rapid expansion of the coalbed methane industry in Wyoming and Montana. Techniques have recently been developed which constitute relatively efficient drilling and methane gas recovery and extraction techniques. However, this relatively efficient recovery requires aggressive reduction of hydrostatic pressure within water-saturated coal formations where the methane is trapped. Water removed from the coal formation during pumping is typically moderately saline and sodium-bicarbonate rich, and managed as an industrial waste product. Current approaches to coalbed methane product water management include: surface spreading on rangeland landscapes, managed irrigation of agricultural crop lands, direct discharge to ephermeral channels, permitted discharge of treated and untreated water to perennial streams, evaporation, subsurface injection at either shallow or deep depths. A Department of Energy-National Energy Technology Laboratory funded research award involved the investigation and assessment of: (1) phytoremediation as a water management technique for waste water produced in association with coalbed methane gas extraction; (2) feasibility of commercial-scale, low-impact industrial water treatment technologies for the reduction of salinity and sodicity in coalbed methane gas extraction by-product water; and (3) interactions of coalbed methane extraction by-product water with landscapes, vegetation, and water resources of the Powder River Basin. Prospective, greenhouse studies of salt tolerance and water use potential of indigenous, riparian vegetation species in saline-sodic environments confirmed the hypothesis that species such as Prairie cordgrass, Baltic rush, American bulrush, and Nuttall's alkaligrass will thrive in saline-sodic environments when water supplies sourced from coalbed methane extraction are plentiful. Constructed wetlands, planted to native, salt tolerant species demonstrated potential to utilize substantial volumes of coalbed methane product water, although plant community transitions to mono-culture and limited diversity communities is a likely consequence over time. Additionally, selected, cultured forage quality barley varieties and native plant species such as Quail bush, 4-wing saltbush, and seaside barley are capable of sustainable, high quality livestock forage production, when irrigated with coalbed methane product water sourced from the Powder River Basin. A consequence of long-term plant water use which was enumerated is elevated salinity and sodicity concentrations within soil and shallow alluvial groundwater into which coalbed methane product water might drain. The most significant conclusion of these investigations was the understanding that phytoremediation is not a viable, effective technique for management of coalbed methane product water under the present circumstances of produced water within the Powder River Basin. Phytoremediation is likely an effective approach to sodium and salt removal from salt-impaired sites after product water discharges are discontinued and site reclamation is desired. Coalbed methane product water of the Powder River Basin is most frequently impaired with respect to beneficial use quality by elevated sodicity, a water quality constituent which can cause swelling, slaking, and dispersion of smectite-dominated clay soils, such as commonly occurring within the Powder River Basin. To address this issue, a commercial-scale fluid-bed, cationic resin exchange treatment process and prototype operating treatment plant was developed and beta-tested by Drake Water Technologies under subcontract to this award. Drake Water Technologies secured U.S. Patent No. 7,368,059-B2, 'Method for removal of benevolent cations from contaminated water', a beta Drake Process Unit (DPU) was developed and deployed for operation in the Powder River Basin. First year operatio

  19. Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    46,751 139,215 134,305 128,312 120,666 110,226 1992-2014 From Gas Wells 33,294 29,961 32,602 27,009 27,182 24,726 1992-2014 From Oil Wells 5,758 6,195 5,975 10,978 8,794 7,937 1992-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 2012-2014 From Coalbed Wells 107,699 103,060 95,727 90,325 84,690 77,563 2007-2014 Repressuring 783 736 531 NA NA NA 1992-2014 Vented and Flared 1,972 2,085 3,012 NA NA NA 1992-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed 9,239 8,200 13,830 NA NA NA 1992-2014 Marketed Production 134,757 128,194

  20. Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and Production

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    1,482,252 2,148,447 2,969,297 2,882,193 2,289,193 1,925,968 1992-2014 From Gas Wells 1,027,728 848,745 819,264 707,705 710,608 682,684 1992-2014 From Oil Wells 53,930 57,024 61,727 43,936 44,213 43,477 1992-2014 From Shale Gas Wells 2,130,551 1,199,807 2012-2014 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007-2014 Repressuring 5,409 3,490 4,895 NA 2,829 3,199 1992-2014 Vented and Flared 4,121 4,432 6,153 NA 3,912 4,143 1992-2014 Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed NA NA NA NA NA NA 2003-2014 Marketed Production

  1. Carbon dioxide storage potential in coalbeds: A near-term consideration for the fossil energy industry

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Byrer, C.W.; Guthrie, H.D.

    1998-07-01

    The concept of using gassy unminable coalbeds for carbon dioxide (CO2) storage while concurrently initiating and enhancing coalbed methane production may be a viable near-term system for industry consideration. Coal is the most abundant and cheapest fossil fuel resource, and it has played a vital role in the stability and growth of the US economy. With the burning of coal in power plants, the energy source is also one of the fuel causing large CO2 emissions. In the near future, coal may also have a role in solving environmental greenhouse gas concerns with increasing CO2 emissions throughout the world. Coal resources may be an acceptable and significant geological sink for storing CO2 emissions in amenable unminable coalbeds while at the same time producing natural gas from gassy coalbeds. Industry proprietary research has shown that the recovery of coalbed methane can be enhanced by the injection of CO2 via well bores into coal deposits. Gassy coals generally have shown a 2:1 coal-absorption selectivity for CO2 over methane which could allow for the potential of targeting unminable coals near fossil fueled power plants to be utilized for storing stack gas CO2. Preliminary technical and economic assessments of this concept appear to merit further research leading to pilot demonstrations in selected regions of the US.

  2. Carbon dioxide storage potential in coalbeds: A near-term consideration for the fossil energy industry

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Byrer, C.W.; Guthrie, H.D.

    1998-04-01

    The concept of using gassy unminable coalbeds for carbon dioxide (CO2) storage while concurrently initiating and enhancing coalbed methane production may be a viable near-term system for industry consideration. Coal is our most abundant and cheapest fossil fuel resource, and it has played a vital role in the stability and growth of the US economy. With the burning of coal in power plants, the energy source is also one of the fuels causing large CO2 emissions. In the near future, coal may also have a role in solving environmental greenhouse gas concerns with increasing CO2 emissions throughout the world. Coal resources may be an acceptable and significant {open_quotes}geological sink{close_quotes} for storing CO2 emissions in amenable unminable coalbeds while at the same time producing natural gas from gassy coalbeds. Industry proprietary research has shown that the recovery of coalbed methane can be enhanced by the injection of CO2 via well bores into coal deposits. Gassy coals generally have shown a 2:1 coal-absorption selectivity for CO2 over methane which could allow for the potential of targeting unminable coals near fossil fueled power plants to be utilized for storing stack gas CO2. Preliminary technical and economic assessments of this concept appear to merit further research leading to pilot demonstrations in selected re ions of the US.

  3. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  4. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)...

  5. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  6. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million...

  7. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  8. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)...

  9. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)...

  10. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million...

  11. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million...

  12. Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in the Atlantic and their onshore impacts. Atlantic summary report, July 1, 1983-December 31, 1984

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rudolph, R.W.; Havran, K.J.

    1984-12-01

    The search for oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf in the Atlantic continues. Hydrocarbon exploration efforts have been and probably will continue to be concentrated on four major sedimentary basins: the Georges Bank Basin, the Baltimore Canyon Trough, the Carolina Trough, and the Blake Plateau Basin. To date, 46 exploratory wells have been drilled in these areas, most of them in the Mid-Atlantic Planning Area where resource estimates indicate the hydrocarbon potential is the greatest of the three Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf planning areas. Currently, no operators are involved in exploration efforts in the Atlantic. No commercial discoveries have been announced. Since the first and most successful sale of Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf blocks in Lease Sale 40 in August 1976, there have been eight other sales bringing total revenues of almost $3 billion to the Federal Treasury. The current tentative milestone chart for the 5-year offshore leasing schedule calls for four additional lease sales to be held in the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf. Although no firm plans have been made for the transportation of potential offshore hydrocarbons to onshore processing facilities, it is believed that oil would be transported by tanker or tug-barge system to existing refineries on the Raritan and Delaware Bays. Gas probably would be transported by pipeline to one of several onshore landfalls identifed by Atlantic Coast States and in Federal environmental impact documents. Recent onshore support for Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf exploration came from Davisville, Rhode Island, the only shore support base for the Atlantic that was active during 1984. Three maps are provided in the back pocket of this report for the North Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic planning areas. 29 refs., 8 figs., 6 tabs.

  13. Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 32,212 33,735 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent

  14. Louisiana - South Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Louisiana - South Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 343 2010's 342 328 370 396 405 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus

  15. Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 676 1980's 540 544 501 527 454 442 428 429 421 411 1990's 431 417 380 334 337 495 411 333 325 364 2000's 337 269 226 182 153 168 159 168 142 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  16. Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 143 146 2000's 123 134 139 150 115 148 162 164 122 129 2010's 126 113 125 155 188 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  17. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 263 1980's 267 253 243 238 229 220 208 194 193 196 1990's 182 175 151 133 123 136 127 134 138 142 2000's 159 141 107 82 66 65 65 71 64 74 2010's 68 64 70 68 56 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  18. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Based Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 32 1980's 34 33 32 30 35 28 28 25 27 27 1990's 25 24 24 22 21 20 23 22 24 26 2000's 25 26 27 23 19 18 17 14 14 12 2010's 10 9 9 8 7 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  19. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 413 1980's 273 291 258 289 225 222 220 235 228 215 1990's 249 242 229 201 214 359 284 199 187 222 2000's 178 128 119 100 87 103 94 97 78 90 2010's 113 94 134 144 145 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  20. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 59 1980's 39 38 32 33 29 28 29 30 30 28 1990's 33 33 36 34 34 58 48 31 29 37 2000's 32 23 23 20 20 20 19 18 15 15 2010's 15 14 16 20 17 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  1. Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 100,491 33,921 35,487 31,116 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  2. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  3. California - Coastal Region Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 307 1980's 265 265 325 344 256 254 261 243 220 233 1990's 228 220 196 135 145 109 120 129 116 233 2000's 244 185 197

  4. California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 341 2010's 478 564 620 599 587 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring

  5. California - Coastal Region Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 334 350 365 1980's 299 306 362 381 265 256 255 238 215 222 1990's 217 216 203 189 194 153 156 164 106 192 2000's 234 177 190 167 189 268 206 205 146 163 2010's 173 165 290 266 261 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  6. California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 22 1980's 23 14 16 17 15 16 15 13 13 11 1990's 12 12 10 12 11 8 9 9 9 31 2000's 27 16 17 15 19 16 22 14 10 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  7. California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 395 1980's 330 325 384 405 284 277 275 255 232 238 1990's 232 231 215 201 205 163 168 176 118 233 2000's 244 185 197 174 196 277 214 212 151 169 2010's 180 173 305 284 277 - = No Data Reported;

  8. California - Coastal Region Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 88 1980's 65 60 59 61 28 23 14 12 12 5 1990's 4 11 19 66 60 54 48 47 2 0 2000's 0 0 0 1 8 8 6 1 1 1 2010's 2 1 2 2 8 - = No Data

  9. California Onshore Natural Gas Processed in California (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in California (Million Cubic Feet) California Onshore Natural Gas Processed in California (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 180,648 169,203 164,401 162,413 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  10. California Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    California (Million Cubic Feet) Plant Liquids Production Extracted in California (Million Cubic Feet) California Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in California (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 12,755 13,192 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  11. Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alabama

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 3,132 3,323 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production,

  12. Alaska Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alaska

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 18,434 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous

  13. ,"New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--East Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico--West Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"New York Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2010 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"Texas (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  2. ,"Texas--RRC District 1 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 1 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Texas--RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 10 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  4. ,"Texas--RRC District 5 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 5 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"Texas--RRC District 6 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 6 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Texas--RRC District 7B Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7B Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  7. ,"Texas--RRC District 7C Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 7C Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  8. ,"Texas--RRC District 8 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Texas--RRC District 8A Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 8A Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  10. ,"Texas--RRC District 9 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 9 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 24 2010's 226 1,710 36 42 680 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Acquisitions

  16. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's -14 2010's 784 -15 1,327 -309 1,796 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Adjustments

  17. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves New Reservoir Discoveries in Old

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Fields (Billion Cubic Feet) New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 91 2010's 0 13 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed

  18. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 2,486 2010's 2,914 1,668 3,871 1,998 1,020 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Revision Decreases

  19. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Feet) Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,563 2010's 2,589 2,071 971 3,123 3,299 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Revision Increases

  20. U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 208 2010's 366 1,775 200 869 442 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Reserves Sales

  1. Texas--RRC District 1 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    1 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 1

  2. Texas--RRC District 5 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    5 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 5

  3. Texas--RRC District 6 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    6 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 6

  4. Texas--RRC District 7B Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    B Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 7B

  5. Texas--RRC District 7C Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    C Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 7C

  6. Texas--RRC District 8 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 8

  7. Texas--RRC District 8A Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    A Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 8A

  8. Texas--RRC District 9 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    9 Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 9

  9. Texas--State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    State Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, State Offshore

  10. ,"Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Alaska (with Total Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska (with Total Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  12. ,"Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"California - Coastal Region Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  14. ,"Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Federal Offshore California Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore California Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  16. ,"Federal Offshore--Texas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Federal Offshore--Texas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  17. ,"Florida Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Louisiana (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana (with State Offshore) Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  1. ,"Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--North Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Lower 48 Federal Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Lower 48 Federal Offshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  3. ,"Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Lower 48 States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"Miscellaneous States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Miscellaneous States Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. Southwestern Regional Partnership For Carbon Sequestration (Phase 2) Pump Canyon CO2- ECBM/Sequestration Demonstration, San Juan Basin, New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Advanced Resources International

    2010-01-31

    Within the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP), three demonstrations of geologic CO{sub 2} sequestration are being performed -- one in an oilfield (the SACROC Unit in the Permian basin of west Texas), one in a deep, unmineable coalbed (the Pump Canyon site in the San Juan basin of northern New Mexico), and one in a deep, saline reservoir (underlying the Aneth oilfield in the Paradox basin of southeast Utah). The Pump Canyon CO{sub 2}-enhanced coalbed methane (CO{sub 2}/ECBM) sequestration demonstration project plans to demonstrate the effectiveness of CO{sub 2} sequestration in deep, unmineable coal seams via a small-scale geologic sequestration project. The site is located in San Juan County, northern New Mexico, just within the limits of the high-permeability fairway of prolific coalbed methane production. The study area for the SWP project consists of 31 coalbed methane production wells located in a nine section area. CO{sub 2} was injected continuously for a year and different monitoring, verification and accounting (MVA) techniques were implemented to track the CO{sub 2} movement inside and outside the reservoir. Some of the MVA methods include continuous measurement of injection volumes, pressures and temperatures within the injection well, coalbed methane production rates, pressures and gas compositions collected at the offset production wells, and tracers in the injected CO{sub 2}. In addition, time-lapse vertical seismic profiling (VSP), surface tiltmeter arrays, a series of shallow monitoring wells with a regular fluid sampling program, surface measurements of soil composition, CO{sub 2} fluxes, and tracers were used to help in tracking the injected CO{sub 2}. Finally, a detailed reservoir model was constructed to help reproduce and understand the behavior of the reservoir under production and injection operation. This report summarizes the different phases of the project, from permitting through site closure, and gives the results of the different MVA techniques.

  8. Table 16. Coalbed methane proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 201

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed methane proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014" "billion cubic feet" ,,"Changes in Reserves During 2014" ,"Published",,,,,,,,"New Reservoir" ,"Proved",,"Revision","Revision",,,,"New Field","Discoveries","Estimated","Proved"

  9. Louisiana - South Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 18,580 17,755 13,994 1980's 13,026 12,645 11,801 11,142 10,331 9,808 9,103 8,693 8,654 8,645 1990's 8,171 7,504 6,693 5,932 6,251 5,648 5,704 5,855 5,698 5,535 2000's 5,245 5,185 4,224 3,745 3,436 3,334 3,335 3,323 2,799 2,844 2010's

  10. Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 14,580 1980's 13,407 13,049 12,153 11,553 10,650 10,120 9,416 9,024 8,969 8,934 1990's 8,492 7,846 7,019 6,219 6,558 6,166 6,105 6,137 5,966 5,858 2000's 5,447 5,341 4,395 3,874 3,557 3,478 3,473 3,463 2,916

  11. Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 12,276 1980's 11,273 11,178 10,364 9,971 9,162 8,328 7,843 7,644 7,631 7,661 1990's 7,386 6,851 6,166 5,570 5,880 5,446 5,478 5,538 5,336 5,259 2000's

  12. Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,535,033 1,538,511 1,552,603 1,608,633 1,469,698 1,357,155 1,386,478 1,434,389 2000's 1,342,963 1,370,802 1,245,270 1,244,672 1,248,050 1,202,328 1,280,758 1,309,960 1,301,523 1,482,252 2010's 2,148,447 2,969,297 2,882,193 2,289,193 1,925,968 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available;

  13. Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 222,009 228,298 229,483 223,527 221,233 220,674 212,470 207,863 2000's 200,255 191,119 184,500 176,571 173,106 164,304 160,381 155,167 152,051 146,751 2010's 139,215 134,305 128,312 120,666 110,226 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  14. Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 169,220 176,208 174,537 173,399 180,277 185,574 182,641 179,227 2000's 171,917 165,622 162,613 162,524 159,924 153,179 149,415 144,579 140,401 134,757 2010's 128,194 116,932 128,312 120,666 110,226 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  15. Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,409,336 2,545,144 2,861,599 3,256,352 3,247,533 3,257,096 3,245,736 3,236,241 2000's 3,265,436 3,164,843 3,183,857 3,256,295 3,309,960 3,262,379 2,850,934 3,105,086 3,027,696 2,954,896 2010's 2,826,952 2,798,220 2,857,485 2,882,956 2,803,429 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  16. Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 316,456 308,512 335,608 357,629 355,905 346,325 335,426 338,806 2000's 324,577 339,311 358,936 423,366 365,100 376,892 380,221 368,344 337,359 349,457 2010's 316,546 294,728 315,682 280,101 305,061 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  17. Calif--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 386,382 346,733 334,987 322,544 326,919 317,137 315,701 347,667 2000's 334,983 336,629 322,138 303,480 287,205 291,271 301,921 286,584 281,088 258,983 2010's 273,136 237,388 214,509 219,386 218,512 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  18. Calif--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 306,829 260,560 251,390 232,005 231,640 236,725 264,610 330,370 2000's 323,864 328,778 309,399 290,212 273,232 274,817 278,933 264,838 259,988 239,037 2010's 251,559 218,638 214,509 219,386 218,512 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  19. Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) No Data Available For This Series - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  20. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas Proved

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves, Wet After Lease Separation 91 92 102 98 90 84 1979-2014 Adjustments 4 3 6 12 -9 10 1979-2014 Revision Increases 38 9 12 9 9 6 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 25 5 4 18 3 17 1979-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 37 6 2000-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 3 0 37 8 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 2 0 1979-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Estimated Production 7 6 7 7 7 7

  1. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves 35 257 295 265 255 233 2009-2014 Adjustments 10 15 19 -8 -7 4 2009-2014 Revision Increases 98 22 23 20 15 5 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 47 2 2 36 9 27 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 2 0 75 21 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 1 9 1 75 27 2009-2014 Extensions 1 1 6 8 1 1 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 5 4 2009-2014 Estimated Production 15 15 15 15 15 15

  2. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Reserves Summary as of Dec. 31

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    91 92 102 98 90 84 1979-2014 Natural Gas Nonassociated, Wet After Lease Separation 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Natural Gas Associated-Dissolved, Wet After Lease Separation 91 92 102 98 90 84 1979-2014 Dry Natural Gas 84 87 97 93 86 8

  3. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves ,095 2,037 1,950 1,893 1,813 1,838 2009-2014 Adjustments -30 1 16 14 -39 16 2009-2014 Revision Increases 192 204 229 382 172 328 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 68 125 217 318 79 188 2009-2014 Sales 3 0 0 0 208 419 2009-2014 Acquisitions 18 1 16 5 206 426 2009-2014 Extensions 22 13 18 6 15 11 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 2 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 2 2009-2014 Estimated Production 161 152 149 148 147 151

  4. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Reserves Summary as of Dec. 31

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    2,609 2,447 2,685 1,650 1,574 1,823 1979-2014 Natural Gas Nonassociated, Wet After Lease Separation 607 498 506 269 245 265 1979-2014 Natural Gas Associated-Dissolved, Wet After Lease Separation 2,002 1,949 2,179 1,381 1,329 1,558 1979-2014 Dry Natural Gas 2,469 2,321 2,590 1,550 1,460 1,69

  5. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  6. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  7. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

  8. U.S. Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 435 512...

  9. Reducing Onshore Natural Gas and Oil Exploration and Production Impacts Using a Broad-Based Stakeholder Approach

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Amy Childers

    2011-03-30

    Never before has the reduction of oil and gas exploration and production impacts been as important as it is today for operators, regulators, non-governmental organizations and individual landowners. Collectively, these stakeholders are keenly interested in the potential benefits from implementing effective environmental impact reducing technologies and practices. This research project strived to gain input and insight from such a broad array of stakeholders in order to identify approaches with the potential to satisfy their diverse objectives. The research team examined three of the most vital issue categories facing onshore domestic production today: (1) surface damages including development in urbanized areas, (2) impacts to wildlife (specifically greater sage grouse), and (3) air pollution, including its potential contribution to global climate change. The result of the research project is a LINGO (Low Impact Natural Gas and Oil) handbook outlining approaches aimed at avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating environmental impacts. The handbook identifies technical solutions and approaches which can be implemented in a practical and feasible manner to simultaneously achieve a legitimate balance between environmental protection and fluid mineral development. It is anticipated that the results of this research will facilitate informed planning and decision making by management agencies as well as producers of oil and natural gas. In 2008, a supplemental task was added for the researchers to undertake a 'Basin Initiative Study' that examines undeveloped and/or underdeveloped oil and natural gas resources on a regional or geologic basin scope to stimulate more widespread awareness and development of domestic resources. Researchers assessed multi-state basins (or plays), exploring state initiatives, state-industry partnerships and developing strategies to increase U.S. oil and gas supplies while accomplishing regional economic and environmental goals.

  10. Evaluation of Global Onshore Wind Energy Potential and Generation Costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhou, Yuyu; Luckow, Patrick; Smith, Steven J.; Clarke, Leon E.

    2012-06-20

    In this study, we develop an updated global estimate of onshore wind energy potential using reanalysis wind speed data, along with updated wind turbine technology performance and cost assumptions as well as explicit consideration of transmission distance in the calculation of transmission costs. We find that wind has the potential to supply a significant portion of world energy needs, although this potential varies substantially by region as well as with assumptions such as on what types of land can be used to site wind farms. Total global wind potential under central assumptions is estimated to be approximately 89 petawatt hours per year at less than 9 cents/kWh with substantial regional variations. One limitation of global wind analyses is that the resolution of current global wind speed reanalysis data can result in an underestimate of high wind areas. A sensitivity analysis of eight key parameters is presented. Wind potential is sensitive to a number of input parameters, particularly those related to land suitability and turbine density as well as cost and financing assumptions which have important policy implications. Transmission cost has a relatively small impact on total wind costs, changing the potential at a given cost by 20-30%. As a result of sensitivities studied here we suggest that further research intended to inform wind supply curve development focus not purely on physical science, such as better resolved wind maps, but also on these less well-defined factors, such as land-suitability, that will also have an impact on the long-term role of wind power.

  11. Tidal Energy System for On-Shore Power Generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bruce, Allan J

    2012-06-26

    Addressing the urgent need to develop LCOE competitive renewable energy solutions for US energy security and to replace fossil-fuel generation with the associated benefits to environment impacts including a reduction in CO2 emissions, this Project focused on the advantages of using hydraulic energy transfer (HET) in large-scale Marine Hydrokinetic (MHK) systems for harvesting off-shore tidal energy in US waters. A recent DOE resource assessment, identifies water power resources have a potential to meet 15% of the US electric supply by 2030, with MHK technologies being a major component. The work covered a TRL-4 laboratory proof-in-concept demonstration plus modeling of a 15MW full scale system based on an approach patented by NASA-JPL, in which submerged high-ratio gearboxes and electrical generators in conventional MHK turbine systems are replaced by a submerged hydraulic radial pump coupled to on-shore hydraulic motors driving a generator. The advantages are; first, the mean-time-between-failure (MTBF), or maintenance, can be extended from approximately 1 to 5 years and second, the range of tidal flow speeds which can be efficiently harvested can be extended beyond that of a conventional submerged generator. The approach uses scalable, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components, facilitating scale-up and commercialization. All the objectives of the Project have been successfully met (1) A TRL4 system was designed, constructed and tested. It simulates a tidal energy turbine, with a 2-m diameter blade in up to a 2.9 m/sec flow. The system consists of a drive motor assembly providing appropriate torque and RPM, attached to a radial piston pump. The pump circulates pressurized, environmentally-friendly, HEES hydraulic fluid in a closed loop to an axial piston motor which drives an electrical generator, with a resistive load. The performance of the components, subsystems and system were evaluated during simulated tidal cycles. The pump is contained in a tank for immersion testing. The COTS pump and motor were selected to scale to MW size and were oversized for the TRL-4 demonstration, operating at only 1-6% of rated values. Nevertheless, in for 2-18 kW drive power, in agreement with manufacturer performance data, we measured efficiencies of 85-90% and 75-80% for the pump and motor, respectively. These efficiencies being 95-96% at higher operating powers. (2) Two follow-on paths were identified. In both cases conventional turbine systems can be modified, replacing existing gear box and generator with a hydraulic pump and on-shore components. On a conventional path, a TRL5/6 15kW turbine system can be engineered and tested on a barge at an existing site in Maine. Alternatively, on an accelerated path, a TRL-8 100kW system can be engineered and tested by modifying a team member's existing MHK turbines, with barge and grid-connected test sites in-place. On both paths the work can be expedited and cost effective by reusing TRL-4 components, modifying existing turbines and using established test sites. (3) Sizing, performance modeling and costing of a scaled 15MW system, suitable for operation in Maine's Western Passage, was performed. COTS components are identified and the performance projections are favorable. The estimated LCOE is comparable to wind generation with peak production at high demand times. (4) We determined that a similar HET approach can be extended to on-shore and off-shore wind turbine systems. These are very large energy resources which can be addressed in parallel for even great National benefit. (5) Preliminary results on this project were presented at two International Conferences on renewable energy in 2012, providing a timely dissemination of information. We have thus demonstrated a proof-in-concept of a novel, tidal HET system that eliminates all submerged gears and electronics to improve reliability. Hydraulic pump efficiencies of 90% have been confirmed in simulated tidal flows between 1 and 3 m/s, and at only 1-6% of rated power. Total system efficiencies have also been modeled, up to MW-scale, for tidal, and wind, systems. Projected efficiencies are between 81% (full rated flow) and 86% (1/3 rated flow). This high efficiency in a wide operating range compares favorably with conventional systems having a performance range of 87% (full rated flow) to 0% (1/3 rated flow) efficiency. An accelerated path to commercialization is identified, leveraging conventional MHK system technology and COTS components to meet the urgent need for renewable energy generation.

  12. Expansion and Enhacement of the Wyoming Coalbed Methane Clearinghouse Website to the Wyoming Energy Resources Information Clearinghouse.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hulme, Diana; Hamerlinck, Jeffrey; Bergman, Harold; Oakleaf, Jim

    2010-03-26

    Energy development is expanding across the United States, particularly in western states like Wyoming. Federal and state land management agencies, local governments, industry and non-governmental organizations have realized the need to access spatially-referenced data and other non-spatial information to determine the geographical extent and cumulative impacts of expanding energy development. The Wyoming Energy Resources Information Clearinghouse (WERIC) is a web-based portal which centralizes access to news, data, maps, reports and other information related to the development, management and conservation of Wyoming??s diverse energy resources. WERIC was established in 2006 by the University of Wyoming??s Ruckelshaus Institute of Environment and Natural Resources (ENR) and the Wyoming Geographic Information Science Center (WyGISC) with funding from the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The WERIC web portal originated in concept from a more specifically focused website, the Coalbed Methane (CBM) Clearinghouse. The CBM Clearinghouse effort focused only on coalbed methane production within the Powder River Basin of northeast Wyoming. The CBM Clearinghouse demonstrated a need to expand the effort statewide with a comprehensive energy focus, including fossil fuels and renewable and alternative energy resources produced and/or developed in Wyoming. WERIC serves spatial data to the greater Wyoming geospatial community through the Wyoming GeoLibrary, the WyGISC Data Server and the Wyoming Energy Map. These applications are critical components that support the Wyoming Energy Resources Information Clearinghouse (WERIC). The Wyoming GeoLibrary is a tool for searching and browsing a central repository for metadata. It provides the ability to publish and maintain metadata and geospatial data in a distributed environment. The WyGISC Data Server is an internet mapping application that provides traditional GIS mapping and analysis functionality via the web. It is linked into various state and federal agency spatial data servers allowing users to visualize multiple themes, such as well locations and core sage grouse areas, in one domain. Additionally, this application gives users the ability to download any of the data being displayed within the web map. The Wyoming Energy Map is the newest mapping application developed directly from this effort. With over a 100 different layers accessible via this mapping application, it is the most comprehensive Wyoming energy mapping application available. This application also provides the public with the ability to create cultural and wildlife reports based on any location throughout Wyoming and at multiple scales. The WERIC website also allows users to access links to federal, state, and local natural resource agency websites and map servers; research documents about energy; and educational information, including information on upcoming energy-relate conferences. The WERIC website has seen significant use by energy industry consultants, land management agencies, state and local decision-makers, non-governmental organizations and the public. Continued service to these sectors is desirable but some challenges remain in keeping the WERIC site viable. The most pressing issue is finding the human and financial resources to keep the site continually updated. Initially, the concept included offering users the ability to maintain the site themselves; however, this has proven not to be a viable option since very few people contributed. Without user contributions, the web page relied on already committed university staff to publish and link to the appropriate documents and web-pages. An option that is currently being explored to address this issue is development of a partnership with the University of Wyoming, School of Energy Resources (SER). As part of their outreach program, SER may be able to contribute funding for a full-time position dedicated to maintenance of WERIC.

  13. Reuse of Produced Water from CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery, Coal-Bed Methane, and Mine Pool Water by Coal-Based Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chad Knutson; Seyed Dastgheib; Yaning Yang; Ali Ashraf; Cole Duckworth; Priscilla Sinata; Ivan Sugiyono; Mark Shannon; Charles Werth

    2012-04-30

    Power generation in the Illinois Basin is expected to increase by as much as 30% by the year 2030, and this would increase the cooling water consumption in the region by approximately 40%. This project investigated the potential use of produced water from CO{sub 2} enhanced oil recovery (CO{sub 2}-EOR) operations; coal-bed methane (CBM) recovery; and active and abandoned underground coal mines for power plant cooling in the Illinois Basin. Specific objectives of this project were: (1) to characterize the quantity, quality, and geographic distribution of produced water in the Illinois Basin; (2) to evaluate treatment options so that produced water may be used beneficially at power plants; and (3) to perform a techno-economic analysis of the treatment and transportation of produced water to thermoelectric power plants in the Illinois Basin. Current produced water availability within the basin is not large, but potential flow rates up to 257 million liters per day (68 million gallons per day (MGD)) are possible if CO{sub 2}-enhanced oil recovery and coal bed methane recovery are implemented on a large scale. Produced water samples taken during the project tend to have dissolved solids concentrations between 10 and 100 g/L, and water from coal beds tends to have lower TDS values than water from oil fields. Current pretreatment and desalination technologies including filtration, adsorption, reverse osmosis (RO), and distillation can be used to treat produced water to a high quality level, with estimated costs ranging from $2.6 to $10.5 per cubic meter ($10 to $40 per 1000 gallons). Because of the distances between produced water sources and power plants, transportation costs tend to be greater than treatment costs. An optimization algorithm was developed to determine the lowest cost pipe network connecting sources and sinks. Total water costs increased with flow rate up to 26 million liters per day (7 MGD), and the range was from $4 to $16 per cubic meter ($15 to $60 per 1000 gallons), with treatment costs accounting for 13 ?? 23% of the overall cost. Results from this project suggest that produced water is a potential large source of cooling water, but treatment and transportation costs for this water are large.

  14. Louisiana - South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,304 1980's 2,134 1,871 1,789 1,582 1,488 1,792 1,573 1,380 1,338 1,273 1990's 1,106 995 853 649 678 720 627 599 630 599

  15. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 955 1980's 921 806 780 747 661 570 517 512 428 430 1990's 407 352 308 288 299 245 252 235 204 202 2000's 115 65 70 81

  16. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1,416 1980's 1,292 1,005 890 765 702 684 596 451 393 371 1990's 301 243 228 215 191 209 246 368 394 182 2000's 176 140

  17. Table 15. Coalbed methane proved reserves and production, 2010-14

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed methane proved reserves and production, 2010-14" "billion cubic feet" ,,"Reserves",,,,,,"Production" "State and Subdivision",,2010,2011,2012,2013,2014,,2010,2011,2012,2013,2014 "Alaska",,0,0,0,0,0,,0,0,0,0,0 "Lower 48 States",,17508,16817,13591,12392,15696,,1886,1763,1655,1466,1404 "Alabama",,1298,1210,1006,413,978,,102,98,91,62,78 "Arkansas",,28,21,10,13,15,,3,4,2,2,2

  18. ,"U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production",10,"Annual",2014,"6/30/1989" ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  20. New basins invigorate U.S. gas shales play

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reeves, S.R.; Kuuskraa, V.A.; Hill, D.G.

    1996-01-22

    While actually the first and oldest of unconventional gas plays, gas shales have lagged the other main unconventional gas resources--tight gas and coalbed methane--in production and proved reserves. Recently, however, with active drilling of the Antrim shales in Michigan and promising results from the Barnett shales of North Texas, this gas play is growing in importance. While once thought of as only an Appalachian basin Devonian-age Ohio shales play and the exclusive domain of regional independents, development of gas shales has expanded to new basins and has began to attract larger E and P firms. Companies such as Amoco, Chevron, and Shell in the Michigan basin and Mitchell Energy and Development and Anadarko Petroleum Corporation in the Fort Worth basin are aggressively pursuing this gas resource. This report, the third of a four part series assessing unconventional gas development in the US, examines the state of the gas shales industry following the 1992 expiration of the Sec. 29 Nonconventional Fuels Tax Credit. The main questions being addressed are first, to what extent are these gas sources viable without the tax credit, and second, what advances in understanding of these reservoirs and what progress in extraction technologies have changed the outlook for this large but complex gas resource?

  1. Texas-Louisiana- Mississippi Salt Basin Greater Green River Basin

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas-Louisiana- Mississippi Salt Basin Greater Green River Basin W. Gulf Coast Basin Appalachian Basin Wind River Basin Eastern Shelf NW Shelf Abo Sussex-Shannon Muddy J Mesaverde- Lance-Lewis Medina/Clinton-Tuscarora Bradford-Venango-Elk Berea-Murrysville Piceance Basin Bossier Williston Basin Ft Worth Basin Davis Bighorn Basin Judith River- Eagle Permian Basin Anadarko Basin Denver Basin San Juan Basin North-Central Montana Area Uinta Basin Austin Chalk Codell-Niobrara Penn-Perm Carbonate

  2. Parana basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zalan, P.V.; Wolff, S.; Conceicao, J.C.J.; Vieira, I.S.; Astolfi, M.A.; Appi, V.T.; Zanotto, O.; Neto, E.V.S.; Cerqueira, J.R.

    1987-05-01

    The Parana basin is a large intracratonic basin in South America, developed entirely on continental crust and filled with sedimentary and volcanic rocks ranging in age from Silurian to Cretaceous. It occupies the southern portion of Brazil (1,100,000 km/sup 2/ or 425,000 mi/sup 2/) and the eastern half of Paraguay (100,000 km/sup 2/ or 39,000 mi/sup 2/); its extension into Argentina and Uruguay is known as the Chaco-Parana basin. Five major depositional sequences (Silurian, Devonian, Permo-Carboniferous, Triassic, Juro-Cretaceous) constitute the stratigraphic framework of the basin. The first four are predominantly siliciclastic in nature, and the fifth contains the most voluminous basaltic lava flows of the planet. Maximum thicknesses are in the order of 6000 m (19,646 ft). The sequences are separated by basin wide unconformities related in the Paleozoic to Andean orogenic events and in the Mesozoic to the continental breakup and sea floor spreading between South America and Africa. The structural framework of the Parana basin consists of a remarkable pattern of criss-crossing linear features (faults, fault zones, arches) clustered into three major groups (N45/sup 0/-65/sup 0/W, N50/sup 0/-70/sup 0/E, E-W). The northwest- and northeast-trending faults are long-lived tectonic elements inherited from the Precambrian basement whose recurrent activity throughout the Phanerozoic strongly influenced sedimentation, facies distribution, and development of structures in the basin. Thermomechanical analyses indicate three main phases of subsidence (Silurian-Devonian, late Carboniferous-Permian, Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous) and low geothermal gradients until the beginning of the Late Jurassic Permian oil-prone source rocks attained maturation due to extra heat originated from Juro-Cretaceous igneous intrusions. The third phase of subsidence also coincided with strong tectonic reactivation and creation of a third structural trend (east-west).

  3. Visayan Basin - the birthplace of Philippine petroleum exploration revisited

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rillera, F.G. ); Durkee, E.F. )

    1994-07-01

    Petroleum exploration in the Philippines has its roots in the Visayan Basin in the central Philippines. This is a Tertiary basin with up to 30,000 ft of sedimentary fill. With numerous surface oil and gas manifestations known as early as 1888, the area was the site of the first attempts to establish commercial petroleum production in the country. Over the past 100 years, more than 200 wells have been drilled in the basin. Several of these have yielded significant oil and gas shows. Production, albeit noncommercial in scale, has been demonstrated to be present in some places. A review of past exploration data reveals that many of the earlier efforts failed due to poorly located tests from both structural and stratigraphic standpoints. Poor drilling and completion technology and lack of funding compounded the problems of early explorationists. Because of this, the basin remains relatively underexplored. A recent assessment by COPLEX and E.F. Durkee and Associates demonstrates the presence of many untested prospects in the basin. These prospects may contain recoverable oil and gas potential on the order of 5 to 10 MMBO onshore and 25 to 100 MMBO offshore. With new exploration ideas, innovative development concepts, and the benefit of modern technology, commercial oil and gas production from the basin may yet be realized.

  4. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,079 1980's 1,645 1,920 1,785 1,890 1,965 1,895 1,760 1,861 1,703 1,419 1990's 1,418 1,127 1,176 1,137 1,169 1,126 1,178 1,497 1,516

  5. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,513 1980's 2,429 2,080 1,881 1,784 1,756 1,537 1,405 1,296 1,226 1,148 1990's 1,056 1,123 1,206 1,159 1,063 960

  6. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 4,052 1980's 3,333 3,466 3,167 3,220 3,264 2,940 2,605 2,563 2,400 2,278 1990's 2,024 1,987 1,723 2,092 2,590 3,196 3,612 3,539 3,275

  7. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 7,143 1980's 7,074 7,251 7,802 7,847 8,094 7,825 7,964 7,317 6,891 7,009 1990's 7,473 7,096 6,813 7,136 7,679 7,812 7,877 8,115 8,430

  8. ,"California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  9. Economic evaluation on CO₂-EOR of onshore oil fields in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wei, Ning; Li, Xiaochun; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.; Liu, Shengnan; Zha, Yongjin

    2015-06-01

    Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO₂-EOR) and sequestration in depleted oil reservoirs is a plausible option for utilizing anthropogenic CO₂ to increase oil production while storing CO₂ underground. Evaluation of the storage resources and cost of potential CO₂-EOR projects is an essential step before the commencement of large-scale deployment of such activities. In this paper, a hybrid techno-economic evaluation method, including a performance model and cost model for onshore CO₂-EOR projects, has been developed based on previous studies. Total 296 onshore oil fields, accounting for about 70% of total mature onshore oil fields in China, were evaluated by the techno-economic method. The key findings of this study are summarized as follows: (1) deterministic analysis shows there are approximately 1.1 billion tons (7.7 billion barrels) of incremental crude oil and 2.2 billion tons CO₂ storage resource for onshore CO₂-EOR at net positive revenue within the Chinese oil fields reviewed under the given operating strategy and economic assumptions. (2) Sensitivity study highlights that the cumulative oil production and cumulative CO₂ storage resource are very sensitive to crude oil price, CO₂ cost, project lifetime, discount rate and tax policy. High oil price, short project lifetime, low discount rate, low CO₂ cost, and low tax policy can greatly increase the net income of the oil enterprise, incremental oil recovery and CO₂ storage resource. (3) From this techno-economic evaluation, the major barriers to large-scale deployment of CO₂-EOR include complex geological conditions, low API of crude oil, high tax policy, and lack of incentives for the CO₂-EOR project.

  10. Economic evaluation on CO₂-EOR of onshore oil fields in China

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Wei, Ning; Li, Xiaochun; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.; Liu, Shengnan; Zha, Yongjin

    2015-06-01

    Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO₂-EOR) and sequestration in depleted oil reservoirs is a plausible option for utilizing anthropogenic CO₂ to increase oil production while storing CO₂ underground. Evaluation of the storage resources and cost of potential CO₂-EOR projects is an essential step before the commencement of large-scale deployment of such activities. In this paper, a hybrid techno-economic evaluation method, including a performance model and cost model for onshore CO₂-EOR projects, has been developed based on previous studies. Total 296 onshore oil fields, accounting for about 70% of total mature onshore oil fields in China, were evaluated by the techno-economicmore » method. The key findings of this study are summarized as follows: (1) deterministic analysis shows there are approximately 1.1 billion tons (7.7 billion barrels) of incremental crude oil and 2.2 billion tons CO₂ storage resource for onshore CO₂-EOR at net positive revenue within the Chinese oil fields reviewed under the given operating strategy and economic assumptions. (2) Sensitivity study highlights that the cumulative oil production and cumulative CO₂ storage resource are very sensitive to crude oil price, CO₂ cost, project lifetime, discount rate and tax policy. High oil price, short project lifetime, low discount rate, low CO₂ cost, and low tax policy can greatly increase the net income of the oil enterprise, incremental oil recovery and CO₂ storage resource. (3) From this techno-economic evaluation, the major barriers to large-scale deployment of CO₂-EOR include complex geological conditions, low API of crude oil, high tax policy, and lack of incentives for the CO₂-EOR project.« less

  11. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 137 134 2000's 130 148 61 61 16 70 85 42 26 51 2010's 199 248 293 280 281 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  12. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  13. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2 1980's 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1990's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2000's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  14. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 64 1980's 64 88 75 99 103 100 89 102 92 72 1990's 80 75 80 86 86 93 93 87 85 76 2000's 72 67 71 69 79 91 90 111 105 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  15. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 231 1980's 216 230 265 285 270 260 237 241 208 213 1990's 181 208 211 253 254 272 289 286 246 226 2000's 209 226 241 207 221 226 234 271 196 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  16. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 248 1980's 252 260 289 292 295 269 281 277 260 260 1990's 279 273 272 278 290 287 323 347 363 422 2000's 406 378 370 287 326 309 333 327 310 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  17. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3 1980's 2 3 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 3 1990's 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 4 2 2000's 2 3 2 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 2010's 5 18 33 49 66 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  18. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 8 1980's 7 9 10 8 8 8 9 10 9 8 1990's 8 8 8 13 13 13 15 17 16 14 2000's 15 16 14 14 14 14 15 16 16 17 2010's 20 16 14 11 10 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  19. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 9 1980's 9 9 9 8 10 11 11 10 10 11 1990's 11 10 11 12 12 11 12 12 14 12 2000's 13 13 16 15 13 13 14 13 13 11 2010's 12 15 18 20 21 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  20. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 66 2010's 154 691 1,508 1,857 2,110 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude

  1. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 257 2010's 272 261 428 500 613 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil

  2. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 92 2010's 207 222 203 256 257 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil

  3. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 19 1980's 16 20 23 26 22 24 20 32 25 16 1990's 17 14 14 14 12 11 8 12 10 12 2000's 13 14 11 13 15 19 16 17 17 15 2010's 47 229 506 594 706 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  4. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 45 1980's 48 68 52 73 81 76 69 70 67 56 1990's 63 61 66 72 74 82 85 75 75 64 2000's 59 53 60 56 64 72 74 94 88 77 2010's 113 203 374 698 1,037 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  5. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 54 1980's 52 51 53 57 53 49 53 75 58 73 1990's 49 48 39 57 54 68 79 116 77 74 2000's 69 82 71 72 72 78 75 128 65 74 2010's 75 76 81 63 67 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  6. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 177 1980's 164 179 212 228 217 211 184 166 150 140 1990's 132 160 172 196 200 204 210 170 169 152 2000's 140 144 170 135 149 148 159 143 131 127 2010's 129 158 184 196 199 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  7. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 76 1980's 75 77 85 80 87 86 84 80 74 72 1990's 71 69 65 65 70 70 82 86 96 122 2000's 90 97 91 85 73 71 87 77 79 74 2010's 96 202 181 228 223 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  8. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 172 1980's 177 183 204 212 208 183 197 197 186 188 1990's 208 204 207 213 220 217 241 261 267 300 2000's 316 281 279 202 253 238 246 250 231 231 2010's 258 402 562 1,069 987 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  9. ,"Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  11. ,"Louisiana - South Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana - South Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  12. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  13. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  14. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  15. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. NATURAL GAS RESOURCES IN DEEP SEDIMENTARY BASINS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thaddeus S. Dyman; Troy Cook; Robert A. Crovelli; Allison A. Henry; Timothy C. Hester; Ronald C. Johnson; Michael D. Lewan; Vito F. Nuccio; James W. Schmoker; Dennis B. Riggin; Christopher J. Schenk

    2002-02-05

    From a geological perspective, deep natural gas resources are generally defined as resources occurring in reservoirs at or below 15,000 feet, whereas ultra-deep gas occurs below 25,000 feet. From an operational point of view, ''deep'' is often thought of in a relative sense based on the geologic and engineering knowledge of gas (and oil) resources in a particular area. Deep gas can be found in either conventionally-trapped or unconventional basin-center accumulations that are essentially large single fields having spatial dimensions often exceeding those of conventional fields. Exploration for deep conventional and unconventional basin-center natural gas resources deserves special attention because these resources are widespread and occur in diverse geologic environments. In 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that 939 TCF of technically recoverable natural gas remained to be discovered or was part of reserve appreciation from known fields in the onshore areas and State waters of the United. Of this USGS resource, nearly 114 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of technically-recoverable gas remains to be discovered from deep sedimentary basins. Worldwide estimates of deep gas are also high. The U.S. Geological Survey World Petroleum Assessment 2000 Project recently estimated a world mean undiscovered conventional gas resource outside the U.S. of 844 Tcf below 4.5 km (about 15,000 feet). Less is known about the origins of deep gas than about the origins of gas at shallower depths because fewer wells have been drilled into the deeper portions of many basins. Some of the many factors contributing to the origin of deep gas include the thermal stability of methane, the role of water and non-hydrocarbon gases in natural gas generation, porosity loss with increasing thermal maturity, the kinetics of deep gas generation, thermal cracking of oil to gas, and source rock potential based on thermal maturity and kerogen type. Recent experimental simulations using laboratory pyrolysis methods have provided much information on the origins of deep gas. Technologic problems are one of the greatest challenges to deep drilling. Problems associated with overcoming hostile drilling environments (e.g. high temperatures and pressures, and acid gases such as CO{sub 2} and H{sub 2}S) for successful well completion, present the greatest obstacles to drilling, evaluating, and developing deep gas fields. Even though the overall success ratio for deep wells is about 50 percent, a lack of geological and geophysical information such as reservoir quality, trap development, and gas composition continues to be a major barrier to deep gas exploration. Results of recent finding-cost studies by depth interval for the onshore U.S. indicate that, on average, deep wells cost nearly 10 times more to drill than shallow wells, but well costs and gas recoveries vary widely among different gas plays in different basins. Based on an analysis of natural gas assessments, many topical areas hold significant promise for future exploration and development. One such area involves re-evaluating and assessing hypothetical unconventional basin-center gas plays. Poorly-understood basin-center gas plays could contain significant deep undiscovered technically-recoverable gas resources.

  17. Basin Destination State

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    43 0.0294 W - W W - - - Northern Appalachian Basin Florida 0.0161 W W W W 0.0216 W W W W W Northern Appalachian Basin Illinois W W - - - - - - - - - Northern Appalachian Basin...

  18. Basin Destination State

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, EIA data Basin Destination State 2008 2009 2010 2008-2010 2009-2010 Northern Appalachian Basin Delaware 26.24 - W...

  19. Basin Destination State

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    3. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, EIA data Basin Destination State 2008 2009 2010 2008-2010 2009-2010 Northern Appalachian Basin Delaware 28.49 - W...

  20. Late Cenozoic fault kinematics and basin development, Calabrian arc, Italy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Knott, S.D.; Turco, E.

    1988-08-01

    Current views for explaining the present structure of the Calabrian arc emphasize bending or buckling of an initially straight zone by rigid indentation. Although bending has played an important role, bending itself cannot explain all structural features now seen in the arc for the following reasons: (1) across-arc extension is inconsistent with buckling, (2) north-south compression predicted by a bending mechanism to occur in the internal part of a curved mountain belt is not present in the Calabrian arc, and (3) lateral shear occurs throughout the arc, not just along the northern and southern boundaries. The model presented here is based on lateral bending of mantle and lower crust (demonstrated by variation in extension in the Tyrrhenian basin) and semibrittle faulting and block rotation in the upper crust. These two styles of deformation are confined to the upper plate of the Calabrian subduction system. This deformation is considered to have been active from the beginning of extension in the Tyrrhenian basin (late Tortonian) and is still active today (based on Holocene seismicity). Block rotations are a consequence of lateral heterogeneous shear during extension. Therefore, some of the observed rotation of paleo-magnetic declinations may have occurred in areas undergoing extension and not just during thrusting. Inversion of sedimentary basins by block rotation is predicted by the model. The model will be a useful aid in interpreting reflection seismic data and exploring and developing offshore and onshore sedimentary basins in southern Italy.

  1. Recoverable Resource Estimate of Identified Onshore Geopressured Geothermal Energy in Texas and Louisiana (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Esposito, A.; Augustine, C.

    2012-04-01

    Geopressured geothermal reservoirs are characterized by high temperatures and high pressures with correspondingly large quantities of dissolved methane. Due to these characteristics, the reservoirs provide two sources of energy: chemical energy from the recovered methane, and thermal energy from the recovered fluid at temperatures high enough to operate a binary power plant for electricity production. Formations with the greatest potential for recoverable energy are located in the gulf coastal region of Texas and Louisiana where significantly overpressured and hot formations are abundant. This study estimates the total recoverable onshore geopressured geothermal resource for identified sites in Texas and Louisiana. In this study a geopressured geothermal resource is defined as a brine reservoir with fluid temperature greater than 212 degrees F and a pressure gradient greater than 0.7 psi/ft.

  2. U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Four-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Four-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Four-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

  3. U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Three-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Three-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Three-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 36 36 34 37 39 40 39 41 40 41 2001 38 38 38 39 37 35 35 32 30 33 34 33 2002 32 31 26 25 24 23 26 26 28 30 27 22 2003 19 20 20 20 17 18 21 22 22 24 24 25 2004 25 27 27 27 26 30 30 31 32 34 33 32

  4. U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Two-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Two-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Two-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 4 4 3 5 4 4 3 4 4 5 2001 5 6 6 7 7 6 6 8 8 5 7 7 2002 6 9 9 7 8 9 8 7 9 8 8 8 2003 8 9 8 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 7 7 2004 8 8 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 9 9 2005 8 8 6 8 8 9 8 8 7 6 5 6 2006 5 5 4 4 4 9 5 4 4 5 5 5 2007

  5. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,162 2,976 2,974 1980's 2,502 2,629 2,493 2,534 2,512 2,358 2,180 2,273 2,037 1,770 1990's 1,737 1,393 1,389 1,321 1,360 1,251 1,322 1,634 1,614 1,881 2000's 1,980 1,801 1,782 1,770 1,844 2,073 2,060 2,255 2,238 1,800 2010's 2,090

  6. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 7,518 7,186 6,315 1980's 5,531 5,292 4,756 4,680 4,708 4,180 3,753 3,632 3,422 3,233 1990's 2,894 2,885 2,684 2,972 3,366 3,866 4,349 4,172 3,961 3,913 2000's 3,873 3,770 3,584 3,349 3,185 3,192 3,050 2,904 2,752 2,616 2010's 2,588

  7. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 9,621 9,031 8,326 1980's 8,130 8,004 8,410 8,316 8,525 8,250 8,274 7,490 7,029 7,111 1990's 7,475 7,048 6,739 7,038 7,547 7,709 7,769 8,099 8,429 8,915 2000's 9,645 9,956 9,469 8,763 8,699 8,761 8,116 7,963 7,604 6,728 2010's 7,014

  8. VENTURA BASIN LOS ANGELES BASIN CENTRAL COASTAL BASIN W Y T

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    VENTURA BASIN LOS ANGELES BASIN CENTRAL COASTAL BASIN W Y T H R U S T B E L T U I N T A - P I C E A N C E B A S I N GR EA TE R GR EE N RIV ER BA SIN PARADOX BASIN RATON BASIN SAN JUAN BASIN ARKOMA BASIN ANADARKO BASIN EAST TEXAS BASIN FT WORTH BASIN LOUISIANA-MISSISSIPPIA SALT BASINS APPALACHIAN BASIN WESTERN GULF PROVINCE GULF COAST OFFSHORE BASIN WIND RIVER BASIN POWDER RIVER BASIN PERMIAN BASIN DENVER BASIN SAN JOAQUIN BAS IN WILLISTON BASIN 4 5 3 1 8 7 9 2 59 54 61 89 78 80 83 88 57 62 98 76

  9. Outer continental shelf oil and gas activities in the South Atlantic (US) and their onshore impacts. South Atlantic summary report update

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Havran, K.J.

    1983-01-01

    An update of the South Atlantic Summary Report 2, this report provides current information about Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil- and gas-related activities and their onshore impacts for the period June 1982 to February, 1983. The geographical area covered by the report extends from north of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina to Cape Canaveral, Florida. The information is designed to assist in planning for the onshore effects associated with offshore oil and gas development. It covers lease and transportation strategies and the nature and location of onshore facilities. An appendix summarizes related state and federal studies. 11 references, 2 tables.

  10. Basin Destination State

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.0323 0.0284 W - W W - - - Northern Appalachian Basin Florida 0.0146 W W W W 0.0223 W W W W W Northern Appalachian Basin Illinois W W - - - - - - - - - Northern Appalachian...

  11. ,"Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  12. Coastal energy transportation study, phase ii, volume 1: a study of OCS onshore support bases and coal export terminals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cribbins, P.D.

    1981-08-01

    This study concentrates on siting alternatives for on-shore support bases for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas exploration and coal export terminals. Sixteen alternative OCS sites are described, and a parametric analysis is utilized to select the most promising sites. Site-specific recommendations regarding infrastructure requirements and transportation impacts are provided. Eleven alternative coal terminal sites are identified and assessed for their potential impacts.

  13. Crossing Active Faults on the Sakhalin II Onshore Pipeline Route: Analysis Methodology and Basic Design

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vitali, Luigino; Mattiozzi, Pierpaolo

    2008-07-08

    Twin oil (20 and 24 inch) and gas (20 and 48 inch) pipeline systems stretching 800 km are being constructed to connect offshore hydrocarbon deposits from the Sakhalin II concession in the North to an LNG plant and oil export terminal in the South of Sakhalin island. The onshore pipeline route follows a regional fault zone and crosses individual active faults at 19 locations. Sakhalin Energy, Design and Construction companies took significant care to ensure the integrity of the pipelines, should large seismic induced ground movements occur during the Operational life of the facilities. Complex investigations including the identification of the active faults, their precise location, their particular displacement values and assessment of the fault kinematics were carried out to provide input data for unique design solutions. Lateral and reverse offset displacements of 5.5 and 4.5 m respectively were determined as the single-event values for the design level earthquake (DLE)--the 1000-year return period event. Within the constraints of a pipeline route largely fixed, the underground pipeline fault crossing design was developed to define the optimum routing which would minimize stresses and strain using linepipe materials which had been ordered prior to the completion of detailed design, and to specify requirements for pipe trenching shape, materials, drainage system, etc. This Paper describes the steps followed to formulate the concept of the special trenches and the analytical characteristics of the Model.

  14. Crossing Active Faults on the Sakhalin II Onshore Pipeline Route: Pipeline Design and Risk Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mattiozzi, Pierpaolo; Strom, Alexander

    2008-07-08

    Twin oil (20 and 24 inch) and gas (20 and 48 inch) pipeline systems stretching 800 km are being constructed to connect offshore hydrocarbon deposits from the Sakhalin II concession in the North to an LNG plant and oil export terminal in the South of Sakhalin island. The onshore pipeline route follows a regional fault zone and crosses individual active faults at 19 locations. Sakhalin Energy, Design and Construction companies took significant care to ensure the integrity of the pipelines, should large seismic induced ground movements occur during the Operational life of the facilities. Complex investigations including the identification of the active faults, their precise location, their particular displacement values and assessment of the fault kinematics were carried out to provide input data for unique design solutions. Lateral and reverse offset displacements of 5.5 and 4.5 m respectively were determined as the single-event values for the design level earthquake (DLE) - the 1000-year return period event. Within the constraints of a pipeline route largely fixed, the underground pipeline fault crossing design was developed to define the optimum routing which would minimize stresses and strain using linepipe materials which had been ordered prior to the completion of detailed design, and to specify requirements for pipe trenching shape, materials, drainage system, etc. Detailed Design was performed with due regard to actual topography and to avoid the possibility of the trenches freezing in winter, the implementation of specific drainage solutions and thermal protection measures.

  15. the Central Basin Platform,

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    q / ~ ~ - ~ / o o f - - 2 3 - / % 8 Overview of the Structural Geology and Tectonics of the Central Basin Platform, Delaware Basin, and Midland Basin, West Texas and New Mexico T . Hoaka, K. Sundbergb, and P. Ortolevac a Kestrel Geoscience, LLC 9683 West Chatfield Avenue, Unit D Littleton, Colorado 80128 b Phillips Petroleum Company 252 Geoscience Building Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74003 c Laboratory for Computational Geodynamics Department of Chemistry Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana 47405

  16. H. R. 2998: A bill to amend the Natural Gas Act to permit the development of coalbed methane gas in areas where its development has been impeded or made impossible by uncertainty and litigation over ownership rights, and for other purposes, introduced in the US House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, First Session, July 23, 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-01-01

    This bill would direct the Secretary of Energy to compile a list of affected states which are determined to be states in which disputes, uncertainty, or litigation exist or potentially exists regarding the ownership of coalbed methane; in which the development of significant deposits of coalbed methane may be impeded by such disputes; in which statutory or regulatory procedures permitting and encouraging development of coalbed methane prior to final resolution of disputes are not in place; and in which extensive development of coalbed methane does not exist. Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah, Virginia, and Alabama are excluded from such a list since they currently have development of coalbed methane. Until the Secretary of Energy publishes a different list, the affected states are West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Indiana, and Illinois, effective on the date of enactment of this bill.

  17. Recoverable Resource Estimate of Identified Onshore Geopressured Geothermal Energy in Texas and Louisiana (Presentation), NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Recoverable Resource Estimate of Identified Onshore Geopressured Geothermal Energy in Texas and Louisiana AAPG 2012 Annual Convention and Exhibition Ariel Esposito and Chad Augustine April 24, 2012 NREL/PR-6A20-54999 2 * Geopressured Geothermal o Reservoirs characterized by pore fluids under high confining pressures and high temperatures with correspondingly large quantities of dissolved methane o Soft geopressure: Hydrostatic to 15.83 kPa/m o Hard geopressure: 15.83- 22.61 kPa/m (lithostatic

  18. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next

  20. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  2. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  3. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  4. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  5. ,"Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  6. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  7. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015"

  8. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  9. ,"Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  10. Basin Destination State

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    10.68 12.03 13.69 14.71 16.11 19.72 20.69 9.1 4.9 Northern Appalachian Basin Massachusetts W W - - - - - - - - - Northern Appalachian Basin Michigan 6.74 8.16 W 8.10 W W...

  11. Basin Destination State

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    11.34 12.43 13.69 14.25 15.17 18.16 18.85 6.5 3.8 Northern Appalachian Basin Massachusetts W W - - - - - - - - - Northern Appalachian Basin Michigan 7.43 8.85 W 8.37 W W...

  12. Wave Basin | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Basin Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleWaveBasin&oldid596392" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating Reference...

  13. K Basin safety analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Porten, D.R.; Crowe, R.D.

    1994-12-16

    The purpose of this accident safety analysis is to document in detail, analyses whose results were reported in summary form in the K Basins Safety Analysis Report WHC-SD-SNF-SAR-001. The safety analysis addressed the potential for release of radioactive and non-radioactive hazardous material located in the K Basins and their supporting facilities. The safety analysis covers the hazards associated with normal K Basin fuel storage and handling operations, fuel encapsulation, sludge encapsulation, and canister clean-up and disposal. After a review of the Criticality Safety Evaluation of the K Basin activities, the following postulated events were evaluated: Crane failure and casks dropped into loadout pit; Design basis earthquake; Hypothetical loss of basin water accident analysis; Combustion of uranium fuel following dryout; Crane failure and cask dropped onto floor of transfer area; Spent ion exchange shipment for burial; Hydrogen deflagration in ion exchange modules and filters; Release of Chlorine; Power availability and reliability; and Ashfall.

  14. Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in the Mid-Atlantic and their onshore impacts: a summary report, November 1979. Update 3, August 1981

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McCord, C.A.

    1981-01-01

    At the present, there are no operators drilling in the Mid-Atlantic Region. The prime targets for future exploration will be in areas of 3000 to 6000 feet (914 to 1829 m) depth of water, seaward of previously leased tracts. No commercial discoveries have been found during the 4-year drilling history of the area. Because of the minimal offshore oil- and gas-related activity in the Mid-Atlantic Region, the onshore impacts are also minimal. Little development has occurred as a result of exploration or development. The level of nearshore and onshore activity may increase with exploration associated with upcoming Lease Sale 59. More permanent onshore development will be contingent on the outcome of future exploration efforts. After Lease Sale 59, the next sale is Lease Sale 76, which is tentatively scheduled for March 1983.

  15. Geohydrologic feasibility study of the Piceance Basin of Colorado for the potential applicability of Jack W. McIntyre`s patented gas/produced water separation process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kieffer, F.

    1994-02-01

    Geraghty & Miller, Inc. of Midland, Texas conducted geologic and hydrologic feasibility studies of the potential applicability of Jack McIntyre`s patented process for the recovery of natural gas from coalbed/sand formations in the Piceance Basin through literature surveys. Jack McIntyre`s tool separates produced water from gas and disposes of the water downhole into aquifers unused because of poor water quality, uneconomic lifting costs or poor aquifer deliverability. The beneficial aspects of this technology are two fold. The process increases the potential for recovering previously uneconomic gas resources by reducing produced water lifting, treatment and disposal costs. Of greater importance is the advantage of lessening the environmental impact of produced water by downhole disposal. Results from the survey indicate that research in the Piceance Basin includes studies of the geologic, hydrogeologic, conventional and unconventional recovery oil and gas technologies. Available information is mostly found centered upon the geology and hydrology for the Paleozoic and Mesozoic sediments. Lesser information is available on production technology because of the limited number of wells currently producing in the basin. Limited information is available on the baseline geochemistry of the coal/sand formation waters and that of the potential disposal zones. No determination was made of the compatibility of these waters. The study also indicates that water is often produced in variable quantities with gas from several gas productive formations which would indicate that there are potential applications for Jack McIntyre`s patented tool in the Piceance Basin.

  16. K Basin Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PECH, S.H.

    2000-08-23

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the K Basins Hazard Analysis, which provides the foundation for the K Basins Final Safety Analysis Report. This hazard analysis was performed in accordance with guidance provided by DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  17. K Basins Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEBB, R.H.

    1999-12-29

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the K Basins Hazard Analysis, which provides the foundation for the K Basins Safety Analysis Report (HNF-SD-WM-SAR-062, Rev.4). This hazard analysis was performed in accordance with guidance provided by DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  18. Haynes Wave Basin | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wave Basin Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Haynes Wave Basin Overseeing Organization Texas A&M (Haynes) Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type Wave Basin...

  19. Coos Bay Field Gulf Coast Coal Region Williston Basin Illinois

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Coos Bay Field Gulf Coast Coal Region Williston Basin Illinois Basin Forest City Basin Northern Appalachian Basin Powder River Basin Uinta Basin Cherokee Platform San Juan Basin C e n t r a l A p p a l a c h i a n B a s i n Michigan Basin Greater Green River Basin Black Warrior Basin North Central Coal Region Arkoma Basin Denver Basin Southwestern Coal Region Piceance Basin Big Horn Basin Wind River Basin Raton Basin Black Mesa Basin Terlingua Field Kaiparowits Basin Deep River Basin SW Colorado

  20. Carbon Dioxide Transport and Sorption Behavior in Confined Coal Cores for Enhanced Coalbed Methane and CO2 Sequestration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jikich, S.A.; McLendon, T.R.; Seshadri, K.S.; Irdi, G.A.; Smith, D.H.

    2007-11-01

    Measurements of sorption isotherms and transport properties of CO2 in coal cores are important for designing enhanced coalbed methane/CO2 sequestration field projects. Sorption isotherms measured in the lab can provide the upper limit on the amount of CO2 that might be sorbed in these projects. Because sequestration sites will most likely be in unmineable coals, many of the coals will be deep and under considerable lithostatic and hydrostatic pressures. These lithostatic pressures may significantly reduce the sorption capacities and/or transport rates. Consequently, we have studied apparent sorption and diffusion in a coal core under confining pressure. A core from the important bituminous coal Pittsburgh #8 was kept under a constant, three-dimensional external stress; the sample was scanned by X-ray computer tomography (CT) before, then while it sorbed, CO2. Increases in sample density due to sorption were calculated from the CT images. Moreover, density distributions for small volume elements inside the core were calculated and analyzed. Qualitatively, the computerized tomography showed that gas sorption advanced at different rates in different regions of the core, and that diffusion and sorption progressed slowly. The amounts of CO2 sorbed were plotted vs. position (at fixed times) and vs. time (for various locations in the sample). The resulting sorption isotherms were compared to isotherms obtained from powdered coal from the same Pittsburgh #8 extended sample. The results showed that for this single coal at specified times, the apparent sorption isotherms were dependent on position of the volume element in the core and the distance from the CO2 source. Also, the calculated isotherms showed that less CO2 was sorbed than by a powdered (and unconfined) sample of the coal. Changes in density distributions during the experiment were also observed. After desorption, the density distribution of calculated volume elements differed from the initial distribution, suggesting hysteresis and a possible rearrangement of coal structure due to CO2 sorption.

  1. Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Information Program. Update 2, August 1981, Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Activities in the South Atlantic (US) and their Onshore Impacts: a summary report, July 1980

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McCord, C.A.

    1981-01-01

    In July 1980, the Office of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Information issued an initial report called Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Activities in the South Atlantic (US) and their Onshore Impacts: A Summary Report, July 1980. The purpose of this report was to provide State and local governments with current information about offshore oil and gas resources and onshore activity in the area extending from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, to Cape Canaveral, Florida. This information was designed to assist in socioeconomic planning for the onshore impacts of oil and gas development in the affected areas. This report, Update 2, discusses Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities and their onshore impacts for the period of February 1981 to August 1981. Because of the minimal offshore oil- and gas-related activity in the South Atlantic Region, the onshore impacts are also minimal. Very little, if any, development has occurred as a result of exploration or development. Even though the South Atlantic OCS does contain large areas with hydrocarbon potential, little optimism has been generated by exploration associated with Lease Sale 43. Lease Sale 56 included tracts with geologic conditions more favorable to the generation, migration, and accumulation of hydrocarbons, especially the deepwatr tracts, but industry showed moderate interest in the first deepwater lease sale. The level of nearshore and onshore activity may increase with exploration associated with Lease Sale 56. More permanent onshore development will be contingent on the outcome of exploration efforts.

  2. CO2 flood tests on whole core samples of the Mt. Simon sandstone, Illinois Basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O'Connor, William K.; Rush, Gilbert E.

    2005-09-01

    Geological sequestration of CO2, whether by enhanced oil recovery (EOR), coal-bed methane (CBM) recovery, or saline aquifer injection is a promising near-term sequestration methodology. While tremendous experience exists for EOR, and CBM recovery has been demonstrated in existing fields, saline aquifer injection studies have only recently been initiated. Studies evaluating the availability of saline aquifers suitable for CO2 injection show great potential, however, the long-term fate of the CO2 injected into these ancient aqueous systems is still uncertain. For the subject study, a series of laboratory-scale CO2 flood tests were conducted on whole core samples of the Mt. Simon sandstone from the Illinois Basin. By conducting these tests on whole core samples rather than crushed core, an evaluation of the impact of the CO2 flood on the rock mechanics properties as well as the geochemistry of the core and brine solution has been possible. This empirical data could provide a valuable resource for the validation of reservoir models under development for these engineered CO2 systems.

  3. Matrix Shrinkage and Swelling Effects on Economics of Enhanced Coalbed Methane Production and CO2 Sequestration in Coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gorucu, F.B.; Jikich, S.A.; Bromhal, G.S.; Sams, W.N.; Ertekin, T.; Smith, D.H.

    2005-09-01

    Increases in CO2 levels in the atmosphere and their contributions to global climate change have been a major concern. It has been shown that CO2 injection can enhance the methane recovery from coal. Accordingly, sequestration costs can be partially offset by the value added product. Indeed, coal seam sequestration may be profitable, particularly with the introduction of incentives for CO2 sequestration. Hence, carbon dioxide sequestration in unmineable coals is a very attractive option, not only for environmental reasons, but also for possible economic benefits. Darcy flow through cleats is an important transport mechanism in coal. Cleat compression and permeability changes due to gas sorption desorption, changes of effective stress, and matrix swelling and shrinkage introduce a high level of complexity into the feasibility of a coal sequestration project. The economic effects of carbon dioxide-induced swelling on permeabilities and injectivities has received little (if any) detailed attention. Carbon dioxide and methane have different swelling effects on coal. In this work, the Palmer-Mansoori model for coal shrinkage and permeability increases during primary methane production was re-written to also account for coal swelling caused by carbon dioxide sorption. The generalized model was added to PSU-COALCOMP, a dual porosity reservoir simulator for primary and enhanced coalbed methane production. A standard five-spot of vertical wells and representative coal properties for Appalachian coals were used.[1] Simulations and sensitivity analyses were performed with the modified simulator for nine different parameters, including coal seam and operational parameters and economic criteria. The coal properties and operating parameters that were varied included Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, the cleat porosity, and the injection pressure. The economic variables included CH4 price, CO2 cost, CO2 credit, water disposal cost, and interest rate. Net present value analyses of the simulation results included profits due to methane production, and potential incentives for CO2 sequestered. This work shows that for some coal-property values, the compressibility and cleat porosity of coal may be more important than more purely economic criteria.

  4. Maps of Selected State Subdivisions

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    - South Federal Offshore Map 2: California CA 50 - Coastal Region Onshore CA 90 - Los Angeles Basin Onshore CA 10 - San Joaquin Basin Onshore CA 05 - State Offshore CA 00 - Federal ...

  5. Denver Basin Map | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Basin Map Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Denver Basin Map Abstract This webpage contains a map of the Denver Basin. Published Colorado...

  6. Fifteenmile Basin Habitat Enhancement Project: Annual Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    wild winter steelhead in the Fifteenmile Creek Basin under the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The project is funded by through the Bonneville Power...

  7. Great Basin Geothermal Area | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Great Basin Geothermal Area Jump to: navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Great Basin Geothermal Area Contents 1 Area Overview 2 History and Infrastructure 3...

  8. Sediment Basin Flume | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Sediment Basin Flume Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Sediment Basin Flume Overseeing Organization University of Iowa Hydrodynamic Testing Facility...

  9. Coalbed Methane Estimated Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1,966 1,914 1,886 1,763 1,655 1,466 1989-2013 Federal Offshore U.S. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2013 Pacific (California) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2013 Gulf of Mexico (Louisiana & Alabama) 0 0 0 0 0...

  10. Coalbed Methane Production

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Period: Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 1,914 1,886 1,763 1,655 1,466 1,404 1989-2014 Alabama 105 102 98 91 62 78 1989-2014 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Arkansas 3 3 4 2 2 2 2005-2014 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Colorado 498 533 516 486 444 412 1989-2014 Florida 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005-2014 Kansas 43 41 37 34 30 27

  11. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  12. ,"Louisiana - South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana - South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  13. Analysis of Critical Permeabilty, Capillary Pressure and Electrical Properties for Mesaverde Tight Gas Sandstones from Western U.S. Basins

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alan Byrnes; Robert Cluff; John Webb; John Victorine; Ken Stalder; Daniel Osburn; Andrew Knoderer; Owen Metheny; Troy Hommertzheim; Joshua Byrnes; Daniel Krygowski; Stefani Whittaker

    2008-06-30

    Although prediction of future natural gas supply is complicated by uncertainty in such variables as demand, liquefied natural gas supply price and availability, coalbed methane and gas shale development rate, and pipeline availability, all U.S. Energy Information Administration gas supply estimates to date have predicted that Unconventional gas sources will be the dominant source of U.S. natural gas supply for at least the next two decades (Fig. 1.1; the period of estimation). Among the Unconventional gas supply sources, Tight Gas Sandstones (TGS) will represent 50-70% of the Unconventional gas supply in this time period (Fig. 1.2). Rocky Mountain TGS are estimated to be approximately 70% of the total TGS resource base (USEIA, 2005) and the Mesaverde Group (Mesaverde) sandstones represent the principal gas productive sandstone unit in the largest Western U.S. TGS basins including the basins that are the focus of this study (Washakie, Uinta, Piceance, northern Greater Green River, Wind River, Powder River). Industry assessment of the regional gas resource, projection of future gas supply, and exploration programs require an understanding of reservoir properties and accurate tools for formation evaluation. The goal of this study is to provide petrophysical formation evaluation tools related to relative permeability, capillary pressure, electrical properties and algorithms for wireline log analysis. Detailed and accurate moveable gas-in-place resource assessment is most critical in marginal gas plays and there is need for quantitative tools for definition of limits on gas producibility due to technology and rock physics and for defining water saturation. The results of this study address fundamental questions concerning: (1) gas storage; (2) gas flow; (3) capillary pressure; (4) electrical properties; (5) facies and upscaling issues; (6) wireline log interpretation algorithms; and (7) providing a web-accessible database of advanced rock properties. The following text briefly discusses the nature of these questions. Section I.2 briefly discusses the objective of the study with respect to the problems reviewed.

  14. Effects of matrix shrinkage and swelling on the economics of enhanced-coalbed-methane production and CO{sub 2} sequestration in coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gorucu, F.B.; Jikich, S.A.; Bromhal, G.S.; Sams, W.N.; Ertekin, T.; Smith, D.H.

    2007-08-15

    In this work, the Palmer-Mansoori model for coal shrinkage and permeability increases during primary methane production was rewritten to also account for coal swelling caused by CO{sub 2} sorption. The generalized model was added to a compositional, dual porosity coalbed-methane reservoir simulator for primary (CBM) and ECBM production. A standard five-spot of vertical wells and representative coal properties for Appalachian coals was used. Simulations and sensitivity analyses were performed with the modified simulator for nine different parameters, including coal seam and operational parameters and economic criteria. The coal properties and operating parameters that were varied included Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, cleat porosity, and injection pressure. The economic variables included CH{sub 4}, price, Col Cost, CO{sub 2} credit, water disposal cost, and interest rate. Net-present value (NPV) analyses of the simulation results included profits resulting from CH{sub 4}, production and potential incentives for sequestered CO{sub 2}, This work shows that for some coal seams, the combination of compressibility, cleat porosity, and shrinkage/swelling of the coal may have a significant impact on project economics.

  15. Targeted technology applications for infield reserve growth: A synopsis of the Secondary Natural Gas Recovery project, Gulf Coast Basin. Topical report, September 1988--April 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Levey, R.A.; Finley, R.J.; Hardage, B.A.

    1994-06-01

    The Secondary Natural Gas Recovery (SGR): Targeted Technology Applications for Infield Reserve Growth is a joint venture research project sponsored by the Gas Research Institute (GRI), the US Department of Energy (DOE), the State of Texas through the Bureau of Economic Geology at The University of Texas at Austin, with the cofunding and cooperation of the natural gas industry. The SGR project is a field-based program using an integrated multidisciplinary approach that integrates geology, geophysics, engineering, and petrophysics. A major objective of this research project is to develop, test, and verify those technologies and methodologies that have near- to mid-term potential for maximizing recovery of gas from conventional reservoirs in known fields. Natural gas reservoirs in the Gulf Coast Basin are targeted as data-rich, field-based models for evaluating infield development. The SGR research program focuses on sandstone-dominated reservoirs in fluvial-deltaic plays within the onshore Gulf Coast Basin of Texas. The primary project research objectives are: To establish how depositional and diagenetic heterogeneities cause, even in reservoirs of conventional permeability, reservoir compartmentalization and hence incomplete recovery of natural gas. To document examples of reserve growth occurrence and potential from fluvial and deltaic sandstones of the Texas Gulf Coast Basin as a natural laboratory for developing concepts and testing applications. To demonstrate how the integration of geology, reservoir engineering, geophysics, and well log analysis/petrophysics leads to strategic recompletion and well placement opportunities for reserve growth in mature fields.

  16. EA-64 Basin Electric Power Cooperative | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Basin Electric Power Cooperative EA-64 Basin Electric Power Cooperative Order authorizing Basin Electric Power Cooperative to export electric energy to Canada PDF icon EA-64 Basin Electric Power Cooperative More Documents & Publications EA-64-A

  17. EA-64-A Basin Electric Power Cooperative | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    -A Basin Electric Power Cooperative EA-64-A Basin Electric Power Cooperative Order authorizing Basin Electric Power Cooperative to export electric energy to Canada PDF icon EA-64-A Basin Electric Power Cooperative More Documents & Publications EA-64

  18. H-Area Seepage Basins

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stejskal, G.

    1990-12-01

    During the third quarter of 1990 the wells which make up the H-Area Seepage Basins (H-HWMF) monitoring network were sampled. Laboratory analyses were performed to measure levels of hazardous constituents, indicator parameters, tritium, nonvolatile beta, and gross alpha. A Gas Chromatograph Mass Spectrometer (GCMS) scan was performed on all wells sampled to determine any hazardous organic constituents present in the groundwater. The primary contaminants observed at wells monitoring the H-Area Seepage Basins are tritium, nitrate, mercury, gross alpha, nonvolatile beta, trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene, lead, cadmium, arsenic, and total radium.

  19. Fifteenmile Basin Habitat Enhancement Project: Annual Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    in the Fifteenmile Creek Basin. This goal was addressed under the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, Measure 703 (c) (1) - Action Item 4.2. Construction of fish...

  20. Hydrogeochemical Indicators for Great Basin Geothemal Resources

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Hydrogeochemical Indicators for Great Basin Geothemal Resources presentation at the April 2013 peer review meeting held in Denver, Colorado.

  1. K Basins Groundwater Monitoring Task, K Basins Closure Project: Report for July, August, and September 2006

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peterson, Robert E.

    2006-12-08

    This report provides information on groundwater monitoring at the K Basins during July, August, and September 2006. Conditions remain very similar to those reported in the previous quarterly report, with no evidence in monitoring results to suggest groundwater impact from current loss of basin water to the ground. The K Basins monitoring network will be modified in the coming quarters as a consequence of remedial action at KE Basin, i.e., removal of sludge and basin demolition.

  2. Reserves in western basins: Part 1, Greater Green River basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01

    This study characterizes an extremely large gas resource located in low permeability, overpressured sandstone reservoirs located below 8,000 feet drill depth in the Greater Green River basin, Wyoming. Total in place resource is estimated at 1,968 Tcf. Via application of geologic, engineering and economic criteria, the portion of this resource potentially recoverable as reserves is estimated. Those volumes estimated include probable, possible and potential categories and total 33 Tcf as a mean estimate of recoverable gas for all plays considered in the basin. Five plays (formations) were included in this study and each was separately analyzed in terms of its overpressured, tight gas resource, established productive characteristics and future reserves potential based on a constant $2/Mcf wellhead gas price scenario. A scheme has been developed to break the overall resource estimate down into components that can be considered as differing technical and economic challenges that must be overcome in order to exploit such resources: in other words, to convert those resources to economically recoverable reserves. Total recoverable reserves estimates of 33 Tcf do not include the existing production from overpressured tight reservoirs in the basin. These have estimated ultimate recovery of approximately 1.6 Tcf, or a per well average recovery of 2.3 Bcf. Due to the fact that considerable pay thicknesses can be present, wells can be economic despite limited drainage areas. It is typical for significant bypassed gas to be present at inter-well locations because drainage areas are commonly less than regulatory well spacing requirements.

  3. K Basins Groundwater Monitoring Task, K Basins Closure Project: Report for January, February, and March 2007

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peterson, Robert E.

    2007-04-01

    This report describes the results of groundwater monitoring near the K Basins for the period January, February, and March 2007.

  4. Geothermal Resources Of California Sedimentary Basins | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Conference Paper: Geothermal Resources Of California Sedimentary Basins Abstract The 2004 Department of Energy...

  5. K-Basins - Hanford Site

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Basins About Us About Hanford Cleanup Hanford History Hanford Site Wide Programs Contact Us 100 Area 118-K-1 Burial Ground 200 Area 222-S Laboratory 242-A Evaporator 300 Area 324 Building 325 Building 400 Area/Fast Flux Test Facility 618-10 and 618-11 Burial Grounds 700 Area B Plant B Reactor C Reactor Canister Storage Building and Interim Storage Area Canyon Facilities Cold Test Facility D and DR Reactors Effluent Treatment Facility Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility F Reactor H

  6. K Basins Groundwater Monitoring Task, K Basins Closure Project: Report for October, November, and December 2006

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peterson, Robert E.

    2007-03-22

    This report provides information on groundwater monitoring at the K Basins during October, November, and December 2006. Conditions remained very similar to those reported in the previous quarterly report, with no evidence in monitoring results to suggest groundwater impact from current loss of basin water to the ground. The K Basins monitoring network will be modified in the coming months as a consequence of new wells having been installed near KW Basin as part of a pump-and-treat system for chromium contamination, and new wells installed between the KE Basin and the river to augment long-term monitoring in that area.

  7. Northwest Basin and Range Geothermal Region | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Basin and Range Geothermal Region Jump to: navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Northwest Basin and Range Geothermal Region Details Areas (51) Power Plants (10)...

  8. L-Shaped Flume Wave Basin | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    L-Shaped Flume Wave Basin Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name L-Shaped Flume Wave Basin Overseeing Organization United States Army Corp of Engineers...

  9. CRAD, Emergency Management - Office of River Protection K Basin...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Emergency Management - Office of River Protection K Basin Sludge Waste System CRAD, Emergency Management - Office of River Protection K Basin Sludge Waste System May 2004 A section ...

  10. Geographic Information System At Nw Basin & Range Region (Nash...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Nw Basin & Range Region (Nash & Johnson, 2003) Jump to: navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Exploration Activity: Geographic Information System At Nw Basin & Range...

  11. Climate Change and the Macroeconomy in the Caribbean Basin: Analysis...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    in the Caribbean Basin: Analysis and Projections to 2099 Jump to: navigation, search Name Climate Change and the Macroeconomy in the Caribbean Basin: Analysis and Projections to...

  12. Structure and Groundwater Flow in the Espanola Basin Near Rio...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Structure and Groundwater Flow in the Espanola Basin Near Rio Grande and Buckman Wellfield Structure and Groundwater Flow in the Espanola Basin Near Rio Grande and Buckman...

  13. Judith Basin County, Montana: Energy Resources | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    6 Climate Zone Subtype B. Places in Judith Basin County, Montana Hobson, Montana Stanford, Montana Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleJudithBasinCounty,...

  14. South Atlantic summary report 2. Revision of Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in the South Atlantic (US) and their onshore impacts

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Deis, J.L.; Kurz, F.N.; Porter, E.O.

    1982-05-01

    The search for oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) in the South Atlantic Region began in 1960, when geophysical surveys of the area were initiated. In 1977, a Continental Offshore Stratigraphic Test (COST) well was drilled in the Southeast Georgia Embayment. In March 1978, the first lease sale, Sale 43, was held, resulting in the leasing of 43 tracts. Approximately a year later, in May 1979, the first exploratory drilling began, and by February 1980, six exploratory wells had been drilled by four companies. Hydrocarbons were not found in any of these wells. Lease Sale 56, the second lease sale in the South Atlantic Region, was held in August 1981. The sale resulted in the leasing of 47 tracts. Most of the leased tracts are in deep water along the Continental Slope off North Carolina. To date, no drilling has occurred on these tracts, but it is likely that two wells will be drilled or will be in the process of being drilled by the end of 1982. Reoffering Sale RS-2 is scheduled for July 1982, and it will include tracts offered in Lease Sale 56 that were not awarded leases. Lease Sale 78 is scheduled to be held in July 1983. The most recent (March 1982) estimates of risked resources for leased lands in the South Atlantic OCS are 27 million barrels of oil and 120 billion cubic feet of gas. To date, onshore impacts resulting from OCS exploration have been minimal, and they were associated with Lease Sale 43 exploratory activities. In June 1981, the South Atlantic Regional Technical Working Group prepared a Regional Transportation Management Plan for the South Atlantic OCS. The plan is principally an integration of regulatory frameworks, policies, and plans that are applicable to pipeline siting from each of the South Atlantic coastal States and Federal agencies with jurisdiction in the area.

  15. Play Analysis and Digital Portfolio of Major Oil Reservoirs in the Permian Basin: Application and Transfer of Advanced Geological and Engineering Technologies for Incremental Production Opportunities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shirley P. Dutton; Eugene M. Kim; Ronald F. Broadhead; Caroline L. Breton; William D. Raatz; Stephen C. Ruppel; Charles Kerans

    2004-01-13

    A play portfolio is being constructed for the Permian Basin in west Texas and southeast New Mexico, the largest onshore petroleum-producing basin in the United States. Approximately 1,300 reservoirs in the Permian Basin have been identified as having cumulative production greater than 1 MMbbl (1.59 x 10{sup 5} m{sup 3}) of oil through 2000. Of these significant-sized reservoirs, approximately 1,000 are in Texas and 300 in New Mexico. There are 32 geologic plays that have been defined for Permian Basin oil reservoirs, and each of the 1,300 major reservoirs was assigned to a play. The reservoirs were mapped and compiled in a Geographic Information System (GIS) by play. The final reservoir shapefile for each play contains the geographic location of each reservoir. Associated reservoir information within the linked data tables includes RRC reservoir number and district (Texas only), official field and reservoir name, year reservoir was discovered, depth to top of the reservoir, production in 2000, and cumulative production through 2000. Some tables also list subplays. Play boundaries were drawn for each play; the boundaries include areas where fields in that play occur but are smaller than 1 MMbbl (1.59 x 10{sup 5} m{sup 3}) of cumulative production. Oil production from the reservoirs in the Permian Basin having cumulative production of >1 MMbbl (1.59 x 10{sup 5} m{sup 3}) was 301.4 MMbbl (4.79 x 10{sup 7} m{sup 3}) in 2000. Cumulative Permian Basin production through 2000 was 28.9 Bbbl (4.59 x 10{sup 9} m{sup 3}). The top four plays in cumulative production are the Northwest Shelf San Andres Platform Carbonate play (3.97 Bbbl [6.31 x 10{sup 8} m{sup 3}]), the Leonard Restricted Platform Carbonate play (3.30 Bbbl [5.25 x 10{sup 8} m{sup 3}]), the Pennsylvanian and Lower Permian Horseshoe Atoll Carbonate play (2.70 Bbbl [4.29 x 10{sup 8} m{sup 3}]), and the San Andres Platform Carbonate play (2.15 Bbbl [3.42 x 10{sup 8} m{sup 3}]). Detailed studies of three reservoirs are in progress: Kelly-Snyder (SACROC unit) in the Pennsylvanian and Lower Permian Horseshoe Atoll Carbonate play, Fullerton in the Leonard Restricted Platform Carbonate play, and Barnhart (Ellenburger) in the Ellenburger Selectively Dolomitized Ramp Carbonate play. For each of these detailed reservoir studies, technologies for further, economically viable exploitation are being investigated.

  16. Delaware Basin Monitoring Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services; Washington TRU Solutions LLC

    2005-09-30

    The Delaware Basin Drilling Surveillance Program (DBDSP) is designed to monitor drilling activities in the vicinity of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). This program is based on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements. The EPA environmental standards for the management and disposal of transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste are codified in 40 CFR Part 191 (EPA 1993). Subparts B and C of the standard address the disposal of radioactive waste. The standard requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to demonstrate the expected performance of the disposal system using a probabilistic risk assessment or performance assessment (PA). This PA must show that the expected repository performance will not release radioactive material above limits set by the EPA's standard. This assessment must include the consideration of inadvertent drilling into the repository at some future time.

  17. K Basins isolation barriers summary report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Strickland, G.C., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-31

    The 105-K East and 105-K West fuel storage basins (105-K Basins) were designed and constructed in the early 1950`s for interim storage of irradiated fuel following its discharge from the reactors. The 105-K- East and 105-K West reactor buildings were constructed first, and the associated storage basins were added about a year later. The construction joint between each reactor building structure and the basin structure included a flexible membrane waterstop to prevent leakage. Water in the storage basins provided both radiation shielding and cooling to remove decay heat from stored fuel until its transfer to the Plutonium Uranium Extraction (PUREX) Facility for chemical processing. The 105-K West Reactor was permanently shut down in February 1970; the 105-K East Reactor was permanently shut down in February 1971. Except for a few loose pieces, fuel stored in the basins at that time was shipped to the PUREX Facility for processing. The basins were then left idle but were kept filled with water. The PUREX Facility was shut down and placed on wet standby in 1972 while N Reactor continued to operate. When the N Reactor fuel storage basin began to approach storage capacity, the decision was made to modify the fuel storage basins at 105-K East and 105-K West to provide additional storage capacity. Both basins were subsequently modified (105-K East in 1975 and 105-K West in 1981) to provide for the interim handling and storage of irradiated N Reactor fuel. The PUREX Facility was restarted in November 1983 to provide 1698 additional weapons-grade plutonium for the United States defense mission. The facility was shut down and deactivated in December 1992 when the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) determined that the plant was no longer needed to support weapons-grade plutonium production. When the PUREX Facility was shut down, approximately 2.1 x 1 06 kg (2,100 metric tons) of irradiated fuel aged 7 to 23 years was left in storage in the 105-K Basins pending a decision on final disposition of the material. The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Ecology et al. 1994), also known as the Tri-Party Agreement, commits to the removal of all fuel and sludge from the 105-K Basins by the year 2002.

  18. PP-64 Basin Electric Power Cooperative | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    4 Basin Electric Power Cooperative PP-64 Basin Electric Power Cooperative Presidential Permit Authorizing Basin Electric Power Cooperative to construct, operate, and maintain transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. PDF icon PP-64 Basin Electric Power Cooperative More Documents & Publications PP-61 Minnkota Power Cooperative (MPC) PP-42 Roseau Electric Cooperative, Inc. PP-61-1 Minnkota Power Cooperative (MPC

  19. K Basins Sludge Treatment Process | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Process K Basins Sludge Treatment Process Full Document and Summary Versions are available for download PDF icon K Basins Sludge Treatment Process PDF icon Summary - K Basins Sludge Treatment Process More Documents & Publications Compilation of TRA Summaries K Basins Sludge Treatment Project Phase 1 Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA)/Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) Process Guide

  20. K Basins Groundwater Monitoring Task, K Basins Closure Project: Report for April, May, and June 2007

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peterson, Robert E.

    2007-08-08

    This report provides information on groundwater monitoring near the K Basins during April, May, and June 2007. Conditions remained similar to those reported in the previous quarters report, with no evidence in monitoring results to suggest groundwater impact from current loss of shielding water from either basin to the ground. During the current quarter, the first results from two new wells installed between KE Basin and the river became available. Groundwater conditions at each new well are reasonably consistent with adjacent wells and expectations, with the exception of anomalously high chromium concentrations at one of the new wells. The K Basins monitoring network will be modified for FY 2008 to take advantage of new wells recently installed near KW Basin as part of a pump-and-treat system for chromium contamination, and also the new wells recently installed between the KE Basin and the river, which augment long-term monitoring capability in that area.

  1. Carderock Maneuvering & Seakeeping Basin | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    6.1 Water Type Freshwater Cost(per day) Contact POC Special Physical Features 10.7m deep x 15.2m wide trench along length of tank; the Maneuvering & Seakeeping Basin is spanned...

  2. Fifteenmile Basin Habitat Enhancement Project: Annual Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    This goal was addressed under the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, Measure 703 (c) (1) - Action Item 4.2. Construction of fish habitat structures was completed on ...

  3. Progress Update: H4 Basin Concrete Pour

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2012-06-14

    The Recovery Act funded project in the H area basin. A concrete ditch built longer than half a mile to prevent contaminated water from expanding and to reduce the footprint on the environment.

  4. 183-H Basin sludge treatability test report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Biyani, R.K.

    1995-12-31

    This document presents the results from the treatability testing of a 1-kg sample of 183-H Basin sludge. Compressive strength measurements, Toxic Characteristic Leach Procedure, and a modified ANSI 16.1 leach test were conducted

  5. K-Basins S/RIDS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Watson, D.J.

    1997-08-01

    The Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is a list of the Environmental, Safety, and Health (ES{ampersand}H) and Safeguards and Security (SAS) standards/requirements applicable to the K Basins facility.

  6. Atlas of major Appalachian basin gas plays

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aminian, K.; Avary, K.L.; Baranoski, M.T.; Flaherty, K.; Humphreys, M.; Smosna, R.A.

    1995-06-01

    This regional study of gas reservoirs in the Appalachian basin has four main objectives: to organize all of the -as reservoirs in the Appalachian basin into unique plays based on common age, lithology, trap type and other geologic similarities; to write, illustrate and publish an atlas of major gas plays; to prepare and submit a digital data base of geologic, engineering and reservoir parameters for each gas field; and technology transfer to the oil and gas industry during the preparation of the atlas and data base.

  7. Colorado Division of Water Resources Denver Basin Webpage | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Denver Basin Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Colorado Division of Water Resources Denver Basin Webpage Abstract This is the...

  8. CRAD, Engineering - Office of River Protection K Basin Sludge...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Engineering - Office of River Protection K Basin Sludge Waste System CRAD, Engineering - Office of River Protection K Basin Sludge Waste System May 2004 A section of Appendix C to ...

  9. Designated Ground Water Basin Map | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Designated Ground Water Basin Map Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Designated Ground Water Basin Map Abstract This webpage provides...

  10. Hazard categorization of 105-KE basin debris removal project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meichle, R.H.

    1996-01-25

    This supporting document provides the hazard categorization for 105-KE Basin Debris Removal Project activities planned in the K east Basin. All activities are categorized as less than Hazard Category 3.

  11. Geothermal Literature Review At Nw Basin & Range Region (Laney...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Exploration Activity: Geothermal Literature Review At Nw Basin & Range Region (Laney, 2005) Exploration Activity Details...

  12. Fifteenmile Basin Habitat Enhancement Project: Annual Report FY 1990.

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    (Technical Report) | SciTech Connect Technical Report: Fifteenmile Basin Habitat Enhancement Project: Annual Report FY 1990. Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Fifteenmile Basin Habitat Enhancement Project: Annual Report FY 1990. The goal of the Fifteenmile Creek Habitat Improvement project is to improve wild winter steelhead habitat in the Fifteenmile Creek Basin. This goal was addressed under the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, Measure 703 (c) (1) - Action Item 4.2.

  13. Tectonic & Structural Controls of Great Basin Geothermal Systems...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Successful Exploration Strategies Tectonic & Structural Controls of Great Basin Geothermal Systems: Developing Successful Exploration Strategies Keeping Nevada in Hot Water ...

  14. Shirley Basin South, Wyoming, Disposal Site Fact Sheet

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Shirley Basin South, Wyoming, Disposal Site This fact sheet provides information about the Shirley Basin South, Wyoming, Disposal Site. This site is managed by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. Location of the Shirley Basin South, Wyoming, Disposal Site Site Description and History The Shirley Basin South disposal site is located in rural Carbon County about 60 miles south of Casper and 35 miles

  15. Modeling-Computer Simulations At Northern Basin & Range Region...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    navigation, search GEOTHERMAL ENERGYGeothermal Home Exploration Activity: Modeling-Computer Simulations At Northern Basin & Range Region (Pritchett, 2004) Exploration Activity...

  16. BASIN ANALYSIS AND PETROLEUM SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION AND MODELING, INTERIOR SALT BASINS, CENTRAL AND EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ernest A. Mancini; Donald A. Goddard

    2005-08-01

    The principal research effort for Year 3 of the project is basin modeling and petroleum system identification, comparative basin evaluation and resource assessment. In the first six (6) months of Year 3, the research focus is on basin modeling and petroleum system identification and the remainder of the year the emphasis is on the comparative basin evaluation and resource assessment. No major problems have been encountered to date, and the project is on schedule.

  17. Okanogan Basin Spring Spawner Report for 2007.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Colville Tribes, Department of Fish & Wildlife

    2007-09-01

    The Okanogan Basin Monitoring and Evaluation Program collected data related to spring spawning anadromous salmonid stocks across the entire Okanogan River basin. Data were collected using redd surveys, traps, underwater video, and PIT-tag technology then summarized and analyzed using simple estimate models. From these efforts we estimated that 1,266 summer steelhead spawned in the Okanogan River basin and constructed 552 redds;152 of these fish where of natural origin. Of these, 121 summer steelhead, including 29 of natural origin, created an estimated 70 redds in the Canadian portion of the Okanagan basin. We estimated summer steelhead spawner escapement into each sub-watershed along with the number from natural origin and the number and density of redds. We documented redd desiccation in Loup Loup Creek, habitat utilization in Salmon Creek as a result of a new water lease program, and 10 spring Chinook returning to Omak Creek. High water through most of the redd survey period resulted in development of new modeling techniques and allowed us to survey additional tributaries including the observation of summer steelhead spawning in Wanacut Creek. These 2007 data provide additional support that redd surveys conducted within the United States are well founded and provide essential information for tracking the recovery of listed summer steelhead. Conversely, redd surveys do not appear to be the best approach for enumerating steelhead spawners or there distribution within Canada. We also identified that spawning distributions within the Okanogan River basin vary widely and stocking location may play an over riding roll in this variability.

  18. Analysis of K west basin canister gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Trimble, D.J., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-03-06

    Gas and Liquid samples have been collected from a selection of the approximately 3,820 spent fuel storage canisters in the K West Basin. The samples were taken to characterize the contents of the gas and water in the canisters providing source term information for two subprojects of the Spent Nuclear Fuel Project (SNFP) (Fulton 1994): the K Basins Integrated Water Treatment System Subproject (Ball 1996) and the K Basins Fuel Retrieval System Subproject (Waymire 1996). The barrels of ten canisters were sampled for gas and liquid in 1995, and 50 canisters were sampled in a second campaign in 1996. The analysis results from the first campaign have been reported (Trimble 1995a, 1995b, 1996a, 1996b). The analysis results from the second campaign liquid samples have been documented (Trimble and Welsh 1997; Trimble 1997). This report documents the results for the gas samples from the second campaign and evaluates all gas data in terms of expected releases when opening the canisters for SNFP activities. The fuel storage canisters consist of two closed and sealed barrels, each with a gas trap. The barrels are attached at a trunion to make a canister, but are otherwise independent (Figure 1). Each barrel contains up to seven N Reactor fuel element assemblies. A gas space of nitrogen was established in the top 2.2 to 2.5 inches (5.6 to 6.4 cm) of each barrel. Many of the fuel elements were damaged allowing the metallic uranium fuel to be corroded by the canister water. The corrosion releases fission products and generates hydrogen gas. The released gas mixes with the gas-space gas and excess gas passes through the gas trap into the basin water. The canister design does not allow canister water to be exchanged with basin water.

  19. K Basin sludge treatment process description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Westra, A.G.

    1998-08-28

    The K East (KE) and K West (KW) fuel storage basins at the 100 K Area of the Hanford Site contain sludge on the floor, in pits, and inside fuel storage canisters. The major sources of the sludge are corrosion of the fuel elements and steel structures in the basin, sand intrusion from outside the buildings, and degradation of the structural concrete that forms the basins. The decision has been made to dispose of this sludge separate from the fuel elements stored in the basins. The sludge will be treated so that it meets Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) acceptance criteria and can be sent to one of the double-shell waste tanks. The US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office accepted a recommendation by Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc., to chemically treat the sludge. Sludge treatment will be done by dissolving the fuel constituents in nitric acid, separating the insoluble material, adding neutron absorbers for criticality safety, and reacting the solution with caustic to co-precipitate the uranium and plutonium. A truck will transport the resulting slurry to an underground storage tank (most likely tank 241-AW-105). The undissolved solids will be treated to reduce the transuranic (TRU) and content, stabilized in grout, and transferred to the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) for disposal. This document describes a process for dissolving the sludge to produce waste streams that meet the TWRS acceptance criteria for disposal to an underground waste tank and the ERDF acceptance criteria for disposal of solid waste. The process described is based on a series of engineering studies and laboratory tests outlined in the testing strategy document (Flament 1998).

  20. K Basins fuel encapsulation and storage hazard categorization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Porten, D.R.

    1994-12-01

    This document establishes the initial hazard categorization for K-Basin fuel encapsulation and storage in the 100 K Area of the Hanford site. The Hazard Categorization for K-Basins addresses the potential for release of radioactive and non-radioactive hazardous material located in the K-Basins and their supporting facilities. The Hazard Categorization covers the hazards associated with normal K-Basin fuel storage and handling operations, fuel encapsulation, sludge encapsulation, and canister clean-up and disposal. The criteria categorizes a facility based on total curies per radionuclide located in the facility. Tables 5-3 and 5-4 display the results in section 5.0. In accordance with DOE-STD-1027 and the analysis provided in section 5.0, the K East Basin fuel encapsulation and storage activity and the K West Basin storage are classified as a {open_quotes}Category 2{close_quotes} Facility.