Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

1992 CBECS Detailed Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables To download all 1992 detailed tables: Download Acrobat Reader for viewing PDF files. Yellow Arrow Buildings Characteristics Tables (PDF format) (70 tables, 230 pages, file size 1.39 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables (PDF format) (47 tables, 208 pages, file size 1.28 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy End-Use Tables (PDF format) (6 tables, 6 pages, file size 31.7 KB) Detailed tables for other years: Yellow Arrow 1999 CBECS Yellow Arrow 1995 CBECS Background information on detailed tables: Yellow Arrow Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Yellow Arrow Statistical Significance of Data 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) Detailed Tables Data from the 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables:

2

chapter 5. Detailed Tables  

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

5. Detailed Tables 5. Detailed Tables Chapter 5. Detailed Tables The following tables present detailed characteristics of vehicles in the residential sector. Data are from the 1994 Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey. Table Organization The "Detailed Tables" section consists of three types of tables: (1) Tables of totals such as number of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) or gallons consumed; (2) tables of per household statistics such as VMT per household; and (3) tables of per-vehicle statistics, such as vehicle fuel consumption per vehicle. The tables have been grouped together by specific topics such as model-year data or family-income data to facilitate finding related information. The Quick-Reference Guide to the detailed tables indicates major topics of each table.

3

1995 Detailed Tables  

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

Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey > Detailed Tables 1995 Detailed Tables Data from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables: Buildings Characteristics Tables, number of buildings and amount of floorspace for major building characteristics. Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables, energy consumption and expenditures for major energy sources. Energy End-Use Data, total, electricity and natural gas consumption and energy intensities for nine specific end-uses. Summary Table—All Principal Buildings Activities (HTML Format) Background information on detailed tables: Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Statistical Significance of Data

4

1999 CBECS Detailed Tables  

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

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables 1999 CBECS Detailed Tables Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures Data from the 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in the Building Characteristics tables, which include number of buildings and total floorspace for various Building Characteristics, and Consumption and Expenditures tables, which include energy usage figures for major energy sources. A table of Relative Standard Errors (RSEs) is included as a worksheet tab in each Excel tables. Complete sets of RSE tables are also available in .pdf format. (What is an RSE?) Preliminary End-Use Consumption Estimates for 1999 | Description of 1999 Detailed Tables and Categories of Data

5

CBECS 1992 - Building Characteristics, Detailed Tables  

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

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 The following 70 tables present extensive cross-tabulations of commercial buildings characteristics. These data are from the Buildings Characteristics Survey portion of the 1992 CBECS. The "Quick-Reference Guide," indicates the major topics of each table. Directions for calculating an approximate relative standard error (RSE) for each estimate in the tables are presented in Figure A1, "Use of RSE Row and Column Factor." The Glossary contains the definitions of the terms used in the tables. See the preceding "At A Glance" section for highlights of the detailed tables. Table Organization

6

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

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

2003 Detailed Tables 2003 Detailed Tables 2003 CBECS Detailed Tables most recent available Released: September 2008 Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures | End-Use Consumption In the 2003 CBECS, the survey procedures for strip shopping centers and enclosed malls ("mall buildings") were changed from those used in previous surveys, and, as a result, mall buildings are now excluded from most of the 2003 CBECS tables. Therefore, some data in the majority of the tables are not directly comparable with previous CBECS tables, all of which included mall buildings. Some numbers in the 2003 tables will be slightly lower than earlier surveys since the 2003 figures do not include mall buildings. See "Change in Data Collection Procedures for Malls" for a more detailed explanation.

7

CBECS 1993 - Federal Buildings Supplement Survey - Detailed Tables  

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

Publication > Detailed Tables Publication > Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Percent of FBSS Buildings and Floorspace by Selected Agencies, FY 1993 Percent of FBSS Buildings and Floorspace by Selected Agencies, FY 1993 Sources: Energy Information Administration, Energy Markets and End Use, 1993 Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey. Divider Line To View and/or Print Reports (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader) - Download Adobe Acrobat Reader If you experience any difficulties, visit our Technical Frequently Asked Questions. Divider Line You have the option of downloading the entire set of tables or selected tables by data item. Full Set of Tables - Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey, 1993 (file size 770,290 bytes) pages: 123 Detailed Table Information (file size 45,044 bytes) pages: 7, includes:

8

CBECS 1992 - Consumption & Expenditures, Detailed Tables  

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

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Figure on Energy Consumption in Commercial Buildings by Energy Source, 1992 Divider Line The 49 tables present detailed energy consumption and expenditure data for buildings in the commercial sector. This section provides assistance in reading the tables by explaining some of the headings for the data categories. It will also explain the use of row and column factors to compute both the confidence levels of the estimates given in the tables and the statistical significance of differences between the data in two or more categories. The section concludes with a "Quick-Reference Guide" to the statistics in the different tables. Categories of Data in the Tables After Table 3.1, which is a summary table, the tables are grouped into the major fuel tables (Tables 3.2 through 3.13) and the specific fuel tables (Tables 3.14 through 3.29 for electricity, Tables 3.30 through 3.40 for natural gas, Tables 3.41 through 3.45 for fuel oil, and Tables 3.46 through 3.47 for district heat). Table 3.48 presents energy management and DSM data as reported by the building respondent. Table 3.49 presents data on participation in electric utility-sponsored DSM programs as reported by both the building respondent and the electricity supplier.

9

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

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

Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel c2-pdf c2.xls c2.html Table C3. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels c3.pdf c3.xls c3.html Table C4. Expenditures for...

10

Table 2. Percent of Households with Vehicles, Selected Survey Years  

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

Percent of Households with Vehicles, Selected Survey Years " Percent of Households with Vehicles, Selected Survey Years " ,"Survey Years" ,1983,1985,1988,1991,1994,2001 "Total",85.5450237,89.00343643,88.75545852,89.42917548,87.25590956,92.08566108 "Household Characteristics" "Census Region and Division" " Northeast",77.22222222,"NA",79.16666667,82.9015544,75.38461538,85.09615385 " New England",88.37209302,"NA",81.81818182,82.9787234,82,88.52459016 " Middle Atlantic ",73.72262774,"NA",78.37837838,82.31292517,74.30555556,83.67346939 " Midwest ",85.51401869,"NA",90.66666667,90.17094017,92.30769231,91.47286822 " East North Central",82,"NA",88.81987578,89.88095238,91.51515152,90.55555556

11

Buildings and Energy in the 80's -- Detailed Tables  

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

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Total Residential and Commercial Primary Consumption by Type of Building Sources: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, EIA-457 of the 1980 Residential Energy Consumption Survey and Form EIA-871 of the 1989 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey. This report introduces several innovations in energy data reporting that complement the previously published triennial reports of the Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). (1) Both residential and commercial sector buildings data are presented together in the report. Common units of analysis, the residential or commercial building and floorspace, are used to facilitate comparison.17 (2) Unlike the triennial RECS and CBECS that

12

"Table 1. Aeo Reference Case Projection Results" "Variable","Average Absolute Percent Differences","Percent of Projections Over- Estimated"  

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

Aeo Reference Case Projection Results" Aeo Reference Case Projection Results" "Variable","Average Absolute Percent Differences","Percent of Projections Over- Estimated" "Gross Domestic Product" "Real Gross Domestic Product (Average Cumulative Growth)* (Table 2)",0.9772689079,42.55319149 "Petroleum" "Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil (Constant $) (Table 3a)",35.19047501,18.61702128 "Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil (Nominal $) (Table 3b)",34.68652106,19.68085106 "Total Petroleum Consumption (Table 4)",6.150682783,66.4893617 "Crude Oil Production (Table 5)",5.99969572,59.57446809 "Petroleum Net Imports (Table 6)",13.27260615,67.0212766 "Natural Gas"

13

1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Detailed Tables  

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

Consumption and Expenditures Tables Table C1. Total Energy Consumption by Major Fuel ............................................... 124 Table C2. Total Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel................................................ 130 Table C3. Consumption for Sum of Major Fuels ...................................................... 135 Table C4. Expenditures for Sum of Major Fuels....................................................... 140 Table C5. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels................................................................................................... 145 Table C6. Expenditures by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels......................... 150 Table C7. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Building Size for Sum of

14

Table B29. Percent of Floorspace Cooled, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 199  

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

9. Percent of Floorspace Cooled, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1999" 9. Percent of Floorspace Cooled, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1999" ,"Number of Buildings (thousand)",,,,,"Total Floorspace (million square feet)" ,"All Buildings","Not Cooled","1 to 50 Percent Cooled","51 to 99 Percent Cooled","100 Percent Cooled","All Buildings","Not Cooled","1 to 50 Percent Cooled","51 to 99 Percent Cooled","100 Percent Cooled" "All Buildings ................",4657,1097,1012,751,1796,67338,8864,16846,16966,24662 "Building Floorspace" "(Square Feet)" "1,001 to 5,000 ...............",2348,668,352,294,1034,6774,1895,1084,838,2957 "5,001 to 10,000 ..............",1110,282,292,188,348,8238,2026,2233,1435,2544

15

Table B30. Percent of Floorspace Lit When Open, Number of Buildings and Floorspa  

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

0. Percent of Floorspace Lit When Open, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1999" 0. Percent of Floorspace Lit When Open, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1999" ,"Number of Buildings (thousand)",,,,,"Total Floorspace (million square feet)" ,"All Buildings","Not Lita","1 to 50 Percent Lit","51 to 99 Percent Lit","100 Percent Lit","All Buildings","Not Lita","1 to 50 Percent Lit","51 to 99 Percent Lit","100 Percent Lit" "All Buildings ................",4657,498,835,1228,2096,67338,3253,9187,20665,34233 "Building Floorspace" "(Square Feet)" "1,001 to 5,000 ...............",2348,323,351,517,1156,6774,915,1061,1499,3299 "5,001 to 10,000 ..............",1110,114,279,351,367,8238,818,2014,2614,2793

16

Table B28. Percent of Floorspace Heated, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 199  

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

8. Percent of Floorspace Heated, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1999" 8. Percent of Floorspace Heated, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1999" ,"Number of Buildings (thousand)",,,,,"Total Floorspace (million square feet)" ,"All Buildings","Not Heated","1 to 50 Percent Heated","51 to 99 Percent Heated","100 Percent Heated","All Buildings","Not Heated","1 to 50 Percent Heated","51 to 99 Percent Heated","100 Percent Heated" "All Buildings ................",4657,641,576,627,2813,67338,5736,7593,10745,43264 "Building Floorspace" "(Square Feet)" "1,001 to 5,000 ...............",2348,366,230,272,1479,6774,1091,707,750,4227 "5,001 to 10,000 ..............",1110,164,194,149,603,8238,1148,1504,1177,4409

17

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey 2003 - Detailed Tables  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

The tables contain information about energy consumption and expenditures in U.S. commercial buildings and information about energy-related characteristics of these buildings.

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

18

Description of 2003 CBECS Detailed Tables and Categories of Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

floorspace heated, cooled, and lit, and energy-using equipment types (heating, cooling, water heating, lighting, and refrigeration). Tables C1-C12 and C1A-C12A contain energy usage...

19

Percent Distribution  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

. . Percent Distribution of Natural Gas Supply and Disposition by State, 1996 Table State Estimated Proved Reserves (dry) Marketed Production Total Consumption Alabama................................................................... 3.02 2.69 1.48 Alaska ...................................................................... 5.58 2.43 2.04 Arizona..................................................................... NA 0 0.55 Arkansas.................................................................. 0.88 1.12 1.23 California.................................................................. 1.25 1.45 8.23 Colorado .................................................................. 4.63 2.90 1.40 Connecticut.............................................................. 0 0 0.58 D.C...........................................................................

20

Percent Distribution  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

. . Percent Distribution of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State, 1996 Table State Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Utilities Alabama..................................... 1.08 0.92 2.27 0.08 0.23 Alaska ........................................ 0.31 0.87 0.85 - 1.16 Arizona....................................... 0.53 0.92 0.30 3.91 0.70 Arkansas.................................... 0.88 0.98 1.59 0.11 1.24 California.................................... 9.03 7.44 7.82 43.11 11.64 Colorado .................................... 2.12 2.18 0.94 0.58 0.20 Connecticut................................ 0.84 1.26 0.37 1.08 0.38 D.C............................................. 0.33 0.52 - 0.21 - Delaware.................................... 0.19 0.21 0.16 0.04 0.86 Florida........................................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

Variable Average Absolute Percent Differences  

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

Variable Variable Average Absolute Percent Differences Percent of Projections Over- Estimated Gross Domestic Product Real Gross Domestic Product (Average Cumulative Growth)* (Table 2) 1.0 42.6 Petroleum Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil (Constant $) (Table 3a) 35.2 18.6 Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil (Nominal $) (Table 3b) 34.7 19.7 Total Petroleum Consumption (Table 4) 6.2 66.5 Crude Oil Production (Table 5) 6.0 59.6 Petroleum Net Imports (Table 6) 13.3 67.0 Natural Gas Natural Gas Wellhead Prices (Constant $) (Table 7a) 30.7 26.1 Natural Gas Wellhead Prices (Nominal $) (Table 7b) 30.0 27.1 Total Natural Gas Consumption (Table 8) 7.8 70.2 Natural Gas Production (Table 9) 7.1 66.0 Natural Gas Net Imports (Table 10) 29.3 69.7 Coal Coal Prices to Electric Generating Plants (Constant $)** (Table 11a)

22

chapter 5. Detailed Tables  

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

is not statistically significant at the .05 level of significance (the level used to test significance of inferences in this report). In this example, 1.96 times the standard...

23

Louisiana Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

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

Louisiana Block Grant Tables Louisiana Block Grant Tables This table details funding for state, city, and county governments in the state of Louisiana. Louisiana Block Grant Tables...

24

Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey -- Publication and Tables  

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

Overview > Publication and Tables Overview > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Percent of FBSS Buildings and Floorspace by Selected Agencies, FY 1993 Percent of FBSS buildings and floorspace by selected agencies, FY 1993 Sources: Energy Information Administration, Energy Markets and End Use, 1993 Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey. Separater Bar Separater Bar You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey, 1993 (file size 1.15 MB) pages: 183 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 161,775 bytes) pages: 17. - Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader Contacts Preface Contents Introduction At a Glance Highlights on Federal Buildings Detailed Tables Appendices Appendix A. How the Survey Was Conducted (file size 45,191 bytes) pages: 8.

25

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 Tennessee - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S44. Summary statistics for natural gas - Tennessee, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 285 310 230 210 212 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 4,700 5,478 5,144 4,851 5,825 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

26

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

38 38 Nevada - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S30. Summary statistics for natural gas - Nevada, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 4 4 4 3 4 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 4 4 4 3 4

27

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 Connecticut - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S7. Summary statistics for natural gas - Connecticut, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

28

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Oregon - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S39. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oregon, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 18 21 24 26 24 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 409 778 821 1,407 1,344 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

29

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Idaho - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S14. Summary statistics for natural gas - Idaho, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

30

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Washington - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S49. Summary statistics for natural gas - Washington, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

31

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Maine - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S21. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maine, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0

32

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 Minnesota - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S25. Summary statistics for natural gas - Minnesota, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0

33

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 South Carolina - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S42. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Carolina, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

34

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 District of Columbia - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S9. Summary statistics for natural gas - District of Columbia, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

35

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 North Carolina - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S35. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Carolina, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

36

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Iowa - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S17. Summary statistics for natural gas - Iowa, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0

37

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

4 4 Massachusetts - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S23. Summary statistics for natural gas - Massachusetts, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

38

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 Oregon - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S39. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oregon, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 21 24 26 24 27 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 778 821 1,407 1,344 770 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

39

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Georgia - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S11. Summary statistics for natural gas - Georgia, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

40

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Minnesota - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S25. Summary statistics for natural gas - Minnesota, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Delaware - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S8. Summary statistics for natural gas - Delaware, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

42

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 District of Columbia - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S9. Summary statistics for natural gas - District of Columbia, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

43

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 New Jersey - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S32. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Jersey, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

44

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Tennessee - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S44. Summary statistics for natural gas - Tennessee, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 305 285 310 230 210 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells NA 4,700 5,478 5,144 4,851 From Oil Wells 3,942 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

45

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Nebraska - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S29. Summary statistics for natural gas - Nebraska, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 186 322 285 276 322 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,331 2,862 2,734 2,092 1,854 From Oil Wells 228 221 182 163 126 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

46

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Vermont - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S47. Summary statistics for natural gas - Vermont, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0

47

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Wisconsin - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S51. Summary statistics for natural gas - Wisconsin, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0

48

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 North Carolina - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S35. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Carolina, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

49

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 New Jersey - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S32. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Jersey, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

50

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Georgia - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S11. Summary statistics for natural gas - Georgia, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

51

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Connecticut - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S7. Summary statistics for natural gas - Connecticut, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

52

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Maryland - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S22. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maryland, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7 7 7 7 8 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 35 28 43 43 34 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 35

53

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Florida - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S10. Summary statistics for natural gas - Florida, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 2,000 2,742 290 13,938 17,129 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

54

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 New Hampshire - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S31. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Hampshire, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

55

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 Maryland - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S22. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maryland, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7 7 7 8 9 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 28 43 43 34 44 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 28

56

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 Missouri - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S27. Summary statistics for natural gas - Missouri, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 53 100 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

57

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

4 4 Delaware - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S8. Summary statistics for natural gas - Delaware, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

58

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Massachusetts - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S23. Summary statistics for natural gas - Massachusetts, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

59

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 South Carolina - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S42. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Carolina, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

60

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Rhode Island - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S41. Summary statistics for natural gas - Rhode Island, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Indiana - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S16. Summary statistics for natural gas - Indiana, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 525 563 620 914 819 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 4,701 4,927 6,802 9,075 8,814 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

62

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 Illinois - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S15. Summary statistics for natural gas - Illinois, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 45 51 50 40 40 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells E 1,188 E 1,438 E 1,697 2,114 2,125 From Oil Wells E 5 E 5 E 5 7 0 From Coalbed Wells E 0 E 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

63

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

50 50 North Dakota - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S36. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Dakota, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 194 196 188 239 211 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 13,738 11,263 10,501 14,287 22,261 From Oil Wells 54,896 45,776 38,306 27,739 17,434 From Coalbed Wells 0

64

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Mississippi - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S26. Summary statistics for natural gas - Mississippi, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 1,669 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 331,673 337,168 387,026 429,829 404,457 From Oil Wells 7,542 8,934 8,714 8,159 43,421 From Coalbed Wells 7,250

65

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Virginia - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S48. Summary statistics for natural gas - Virginia, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 5,735 6,426 7,303 7,470 7,903 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 6,681 R 7,419 R 16,046 R 23,086 20,375 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells R 86,275 R 101,567

66

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Michigan - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S24. Summary statistics for natural gas - Michigan, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 9,712 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 80,090 R 16,959 R 20,867 R 7,345 18,470 From Oil Wells 54,114 10,716 12,919 9,453 11,620 From Coalbed Wells 0

67

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Montana - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S28. Summary statistics for natural gas - Montana, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,925 7,095 7,031 6,059 6,477 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 69,741 R 67,399 R 57,396 R 51,117 37,937 From Oil Wells 23,092 22,995 21,522 19,292 21,777 From Coalbed Wells

68

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Mississippi - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S26. Summary statistics for natural gas - Mississippi, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 2,315 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 259,001 R 331,673 R 337,168 R 387,026 429,829 From Oil Wells 6,203 7,542 8,934 8,714 8,159 From Coalbed Wells

69

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Indiana - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S16. Summary statistics for natural gas - Indiana, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 2,350 525 563 620 914 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 3,606 4,701 4,927 6,802 9,075 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Shale Gas Wells 0

70

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 New York - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S34. Summary statistics for natural gas - New York, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,680 6,675 6,628 6,736 6,157 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 54,232 49,607 44,273 35,163 30,495 From Oil Wells 710 714 576 650 629 From Coalbed Wells 0

71

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Texas - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S45. Summary statistics for natural gas - Texas, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 76,436 87,556 93,507 95,014 100,966 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 4,992,042 R 5,285,458 R 4,860,377 R 4,441,188 3,794,952 From Oil Wells 704,092 745,587 774,821 849,560 1,073,301

72

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 Ohio - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S37. Summary statistics for natural gas - Ohio, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 34,416 34,963 34,931 46,717 35,104 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 79,769 83,511 73,459 30,655 65,025 From Oil Wells 5,072 5,301 4,651 45,663 6,684 From Coalbed Wells 0

73

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Colorado - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S6. Summary statistics for natural gas - Colorado, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 32,000 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 496,374 459,509 526,077 563,750 1,036,572 From Oil Wells 199,725 327,619 338,565

74

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 South Dakota - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S43. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Dakota, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 71 71 89 102 100 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 422 R 1,098 R 1,561 1,300 933 From Oil Wells 11,458 10,909 11,366 11,240 11,516 From Coalbed Wells 0 0

75

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Illinois - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S15. Summary statistics for natural gas - Illinois, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 43 45 51 50 40 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells RE 1,389 RE 1,188 RE 1,438 RE 1,697 2,114 From Oil Wells E 5 E 5 E 5 E 5 7 From Coalbed Wells RE 0 RE

76

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Colorado - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S6. Summary statistics for natural gas - Colorado, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 22,949 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 436,330 R 496,374 R 459,509 R 526,077 563,750 From Oil Wells 160,833 199,725 327,619

77

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Alaska - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S2. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alaska, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 239 261 261 269 277 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 165,624 150,483 137,639 127,417 112,268 From Oil Wells 3,313,666 3,265,401 3,174,747 3,069,683 3,050,654

78

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Ohio - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S37. Summary statistics for natural gas - Ohio, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 34,416 34,416 34,963 34,931 46,717 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 82,812 R 79,769 R 83,511 R 73,459 30,655 From Oil Wells 5,268 5,072 5,301 4,651 45,663 From Coalbed Wells

79

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Kentucky - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S19. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kentucky, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 16,563 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 95,437 R 112,587 R 111,782 133,521 122,578 From Oil Wells 0 1,529 1,518 1,809 1,665 From Coalbed Wells 0

80

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Utah - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S46. Summary statistics for natural gas - Utah, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 5,197 5,578 5,774 6,075 6,469 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 271,890 R 331,143 R 340,224 R 328,135 351,168 From Oil Wells 35,104 36,056 36,795 42,526 49,947 From Coalbed Wells

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 California - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S5. Summary statistics for natural gas - California, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,540 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 93,249 91,460 82,288 73,017 63,902 From Oil Wells R 116,652 R 122,345 R 121,949 R 151,369 120,880

82

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Utah - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S46. Summary statistics for natural gas - Utah, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 5,578 5,774 6,075 6,469 6,900 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 331,143 340,224 328,135 351,168 402,899 From Oil Wells 36,056 36,795 42,526 49,947 31,440 From Coalbed Wells 74,399

83

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Louisiana - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S20. Summary statistics for natural gas - Louisiana, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 18,145 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 1,261,539 R 1,288,559 R 1,100,007 R 911,967 883,712 From Oil Wells 106,303 61,663 58,037 63,638 68,505

84

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Oklahoma - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S38. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oklahoma, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 38,364 41,921 43,600 44,000 41,238 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 1,583,356 R 1,452,148 R 1,413,759 R 1,140,111 1,281,794 From Oil Wells 35,186 153,227 92,467 210,492 104,703

85

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 New Mexico - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S33. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Mexico, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 42,644 44,241 44,784 44,748 32,302 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 657,593 R 732,483 R 682,334 R 616,134 556,024 From Oil Wells 227,352 211,496 223,493 238,580 252,326

86

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 West Virginia - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S50. Summary statistics for natural gas - West Virginia, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 48,215 49,364 50,602 52,498 56,813 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 189,968 R 191,444 R 192,896 R 151,401 167,113 From Oil Wells 701 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells

87

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 Michigan - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S24. Summary statistics for natural gas - Michigan, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 10,900 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 16,959 20,867 7,345 18,470 17,041 From Oil Wells 10,716 12,919 9,453 11,620 4,470 From Coalbed Wells 0

88

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 West Virginia - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S50. Summary statistics for natural gas - West Virginia, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 49,364 50,602 52,498 56,813 50,700 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 191,444 192,896 151,401 167,113 397,313 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 1,477 From Coalbed Wells 0

89

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

80 80 Wyoming - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S52. Summary statistics for natural gas - Wyoming, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 27,350 28,969 25,710 26,124 26,180 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells R 1,649,284 R 1,764,084 R 1,806,807 R 1,787,599 1,709,218 From Oil Wells 159,039 156,133 135,269 151,871 152,589

90

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 New York - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S34. Summary statistics for natural gas - New York, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,675 6,628 6,736 6,157 7,176 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 49,607 44,273 35,163 30,495 25,985 From Oil Wells 714 576 650 629 439 From Coalbed Wells 0

91

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 Wyoming - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S52. Summary statistics for natural gas - Wyoming, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 28,969 25,710 26,124 26,180 22,171 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,764,084 1,806,807 1,787,599 1,709,218 1,762,095 From Oil Wells 156,133 135,269 151,871 152,589 24,544

92

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

4 4 Virginia - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S48. Summary statistics for natural gas - Virginia, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,426 7,303 7,470 7,903 7,843 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 7,419 16,046 23,086 20,375 21,802 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 9 From Coalbed Wells 101,567 106,408

93

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 Kentucky - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S19. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kentucky, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 17,936 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 112,587 111,782 133,521 122,578 106,122 From Oil Wells 1,529 1,518 1,809 1,665 0 From Coalbed Wells 0

94

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Pennsylvania - Natural Gas 2011 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S40. Summary statistics for natural gas - Pennsylvania, 2007-2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 52,700 55,631 57,356 44,500 54,347 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 182,277 R 188,538 R 184,795 R 173,450 242,305 From Oil Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Coalbed Wells 0

95

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 Texas - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S45. Summary statistics for natural gas - Texas, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 87,556 93,507 95,014 100,966 96,617 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 5,285,458 4,860,377 4,441,188 3,794,952 3,619,901 From Oil Wells 745,587 774,821 849,560 1,073,301 860,675

96

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

0 0 Alabama - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S1. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alabama, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,860 6,913 7,026 7,063 6,327 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 158,964 142,509 131,448 116,872 114,407 From Oil Wells 6,368 5,758 6,195 5,975 10,978

97

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 Louisiana - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S20. Summary statistics for natural gas - Louisiana, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 19,792 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,288,559 1,100,007 911,967 883,712 775,506 From Oil Wells 61,663 58,037 63,638 68,505 49,380

98

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

4 4 South Dakota - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S43. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Dakota, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 71 89 102 100 95 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,098 1,561 1,300 933 14,396 From Oil Wells 10,909 11,366 11,240 11,516 689 From Coalbed Wells 0 0 0 0 0

99

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

4 4 Kansas - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S18. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kansas, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 17,862 21,243 22,145 25,758 24,697 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 286,210 269,086 247,651 236,834 264,610 From Oil Wells 45,038 42,647 39,071 37,194 0 From Coalbed Wells 44,066

100

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

6 6 Arkansas - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S4. Summary statistics for natural gas - Arkansas, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 5,592 6,314 7,397 8,388 8,538 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 173,975 164,316 152,108 132,230 121,684 From Oil Wells 7,378 5,743 5,691 9,291 3,000

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

8 8 California - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S5. Summary statistics for natural gas - California, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 1,423 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 91,460 82,288 73,017 63,902 120,579 From Oil Wells 122,345 121,949 151,369 120,880 70,900

102

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

4 4 Oklahoma - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S38. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oklahoma, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 41,921 43,600 44,000 41,238 40,000 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,452,148 1,413,759 1,140,111 1,281,794 1,394,859 From Oil Wells 153,227 92,467 210,492 104,703 53,720

103

Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total  

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

2 2 Alaska - Natural Gas 2012 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S2. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alaska, 2008-2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 261 261 269 277 185 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 150,483 137,639 127,417 112,268 107,873 From Oil Wells 3,265,401 3,174,747 3,069,683 3,050,654 3,056,918

104

EIA","Percent  

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

0. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, state to state, 2009" 0. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, state to state, 2009" "comparison of EIA and STB data" ,,"Transportation cost per short ton (nominal)",,,"Percent difference EIA vs. STB ",,"Total delivered cost per short ton (nominal) EIA","Percent transportation cost is of total delivered cost EIA","Shipments (1,000 short tons) EIA","Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments (percent)" "Origin State","Destination State"," STB"," EIA",,,,,,,"STB ","EIA " "Alabama","Alabama"," W"," $13.59",," W",," $63.63"," 21.4%"," 3,612"," W"," 100.0%"

105

EIA","Percent  

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

1. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, 2008" 1. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, 2008" "comparison of EIA and STB data" ,,"Transportation cost per short ton (nominal)",,,"Percent difference EIA vs. STB ",,"Total delivered cost per short ton (nominal) EIA","Percent transportation cost is of total delivered cost EIA","Shipments (1,000 short tons) EIA","Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments (percent)" "Origin Basin","Destination State"," STB"," EIA",,,,,,,"STB ","EIA " "Northern Appalachian Basin","Delaware"," W"," $28.49",," W",," $131.87"," 21.6%", 59," W"," 100.0%"

106

EIA","Percent  

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

9. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, state to state, 2008" 9. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, state to state, 2008" "comparison of EIA and STB data" ,,"Transportation cost per short ton (nominal)",,,"Percent difference EIA vs. STB ",,"Total delivered cost per short ton (nominal) EIA","Percent transportation cost is of total delivered cost EIA","Shipments (1,000 short tons) EIA","Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments (percent)" "Origin State","Destination State"," STB"," EIA",,,,,,,"STB ","EIA " "Alabama","Alabama"," W"," $14.43",," W",," $65.38"," 22.1%"," 4,509"," W"," 81.8%"

107

EIA","Percent  

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

2. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, 2009" 2. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, 2009" "comparison of EIA and STB data" ,,"Transportation cost per short ton (nominal)",,,"Percent difference EIA vs. STB",,"Total delivered cost per short ton (nominal) EIA","Percent transportation cost is of total delivered cost EIA","Shipments (1,000 short tons) EIA","Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments (percent)" "Origin Basin","Destination State"," STB"," EIA",,,,,,,"STB ","EIA " "Northern Appalachian Basin","Florida"," W"," $38.51",," W",," $140.84"," 27.3%", 134," W"," 100.0%"

108

Table 2. Percent of Households with Vehicles, Selected Survey...  

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

or More","NA","NA",93.75,96.42857143,91.27516779,97.46835443 "Race of Householder1" " White",88.61111111,"NA",91.54929577,91.68704156,90.27093596,92.77845777 " Black...

109

Table Search (or Ranking Tables)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

;Table Search #3 #12;Outline · Goals of table search · Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3 search Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3: (setup): Fusion Tables · Table search #2: WebTables ­Version 1: modify document search ­Version 2: recover table semantics #12;Searching the Deep Web store

Halevy, Alon

110

RSE Table 7.5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.5  

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

5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.5;" " Unit: Percents." " ",," "," ",," "," " "Economic",,"Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and" "Characteristic(a)","Electricity","Fuel...

111

RSE Table 10.12 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.12  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.12;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"LPG",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural...

112

2003 CBECS RSE Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" type=text/css rel=stylesheet> Home > Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > 2003 Detailed Tables > RSE Tables 2003 CBECS Relative Standard Error (RSE) Tables Released: Dec 2006 Next CBECS will be conducted in 2007 Standard error is a measure of the reliability or precision of the survey statistic. The value for the standard error can be used to construct confidence intervals and to perform hypothesis tests by standard statistical methods. Relative Standard Error (RSE) is defined as the standard error (square root of the variance) of a survey estimate, divided by the survey estimate and multiplied by 100. (More information on RSEs)

113

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2002 (AEO2002) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2002, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2002 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seven tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2002 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2000-2002 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current

114

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Homepage Homepage Supplement Tables to the AEO2001 The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2001 (AEO2001) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2001, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2001 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2001 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1999 and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

115

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO200 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1998, and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, Fourth Quarter 1999 or Short Term Energy Outlook, First Quarter 2000, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

116

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 EIA Glossary Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Release date: February 2005 Next release date: February 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO2005) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2025. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2005, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2005 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2005 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2003-2005 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

117

Percent Yield and Mass of Water  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Percent Yield and Mass of Water Percent Yield and Mass of Water Name: Lisa Status: educator Grade: 9-12 Location: CA Country: USA Date: Winter 2011-2012 Question: When doing a percent yield activity in lab, we use MgCl hexahydrate and CaSO4. How do we factor the mass of the water that is released during the reaction? Replies: Lisa, Based on your question, I am not quite sure what the experiment is. Are you heating the hydrates and looking at the percent-yield of water removed during the heating? If so, then you would calculate the theoretical yield (using stoichiometry and the balanced chemical equation: MgCl2.6H2O --> MgCl2 + 6H2O) of water released, and compare it to the actual yield of water released in the experiment to get percent yield. Greg (Roberto Gregorius) Canisius College

118

27. 5-percent silicon concentrator solar cells  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Recent advances in silicon solar cells using the backside point-contact configuration have been extended resulting in 27.5-percent efficiencies at 10 W/sq cm (100 suns, 24 C), making these the most efficient solar cells reported to date. The one-sun efficiencies under an AM1.5 spectrum normalized to 100 mW/sq cm are 22 percent at 24 C based on the design area of the concentrator cell. The improvements reported here are largely due to the incorportation of optical light trapping to enhance the absorption of weakly absorbed near bandgap light. These results approach the projected efficiencies for a mature technology which are 23-24 percent at one sun and 29 percent in the 100-350-sun (10-35 W/sq cm) range. 10 references.

Sinton, R.A.; Kwark, Y.; Gan, J.Y.; Swanson, R.M.

1986-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

119

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook 1999 Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Contacts bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage supplemental.gif (7420 bytes) (Errata as of 9/13/99) The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1997 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO99, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO99 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables are presented.

120

CBECS 1989 - Energy End-use Intensities in Commercial Buildings -- Detailed  

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

Publication > Detailed Tables Publication > Detailed Tables 1989 Energy End-Use Intensities Detailed Tables Energy End Uses Ranked by Energy Consumption, 1989 Energy End Uses Ranked by Energy Consumption, 1989 Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, Forms EIA-871A through F of the 1989 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey. Table Organization The following 13 tables present detailed energy end-use consumption data from the 1989 CBECS. Summary tables for all major fuels (electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and district heat) appear first, followed by separate tables for each of the four major fuels. Within each energy source’s group of tables, there is a table showing end-use consumption, a table showing end-use intensities (consumption per square foot), and a table (except for fuel oil and district heat) showing the end-use shares of total consumption.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

Residential Transportation Historical Data Tables for 1983-2001  

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

RTECS Historical Data Tables RTECS Historical Data Tables Residential Transportation Historical Data Tables Released: May 2008 Below are historical data tables from the Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey (RTECS) and Household Vehicles Energy Use: Latest Data & Trends report. These tables cover the trends in energy consumption for household transportation throughout the survey years. The data focus on several important indicators of demand for transportation: number and type of vehicles per household; vehicle-miles traveled per household and per vehicle; fuel consumption; fuel expenditures; and fuel economy. Excel PDF Trends in Households & Vehicles Table 1. Number of Households with Vehicles excel pdf Table 2. Percent of Households with Vehicles excel pdf

122

RSE Table 3.5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.5  

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

5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.5;" 5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.5;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","Waste",," " " "," "," ","Blast"," "," ","Pulping Liquor"," ","Oils/Tars" "NAICS"," "," ","Furnace/Coke","Waste","Petroleum","or","Wood Chips,","and Waste" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Oven Gases","Gas","Coke","Black Liquor","Bark","Materials"

123

Conversion Tables  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Contents taken from Glossary: Carbon Dioxide and Climate, 1990. ORNL/CDIAC-39, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Third Edition. Edited by: Fred O'Hara Jr. 1 - International System of Units (SI) Prefixes 2 - Useful Quantities in CO2 3 - Common Conversion Factors 4 - Common Energy Unit Conversion Factors 5 - Geologic Time Scales 6 - Factors and Units for Calculating Annual CO2 Emissions Using Global Fuel Production Data Table 1. International System of Units (SI) Prefixes Prefix SI Symbol Multiplication Factor exa E 1018 peta P 1015 tera T 1012 giga G 109 mega M 106 kilo k 103 hecto h 102 deka da 10 deci d 10-1 centi c 10-2

124

Commercial Buildings Characteristics 1992 - Publication and Tables  

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

Buildings Characteristics Data > Publication and Tables Buildings Characteristics Data > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 figure on percent of building and floorspace by census region, 1992 separater bar To View and/or Print Reports (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader) - Download Adobe Acrobat Reader If you experience any difficulties, visit our Technical Frequently Asked Questions. You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Commercial Buildings Characteristics, 1992 with only selected tables (file size 1.34 MB) pages: 157 Selected Sections: Main Text (file size 883,980 bytes) pages: 28, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Background Organization of the report

125

The Matter of Detailing  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Project success is truly a matter of detailing! So, it is imperative that the strongest of cases must be made for the process of detailing!

Ralph W. Liebing RA; CSI; CPCA; CBO

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

126

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format Excel logo Spreadsheets are provided in excel 1 to117 - Complete set of Supplemental Tables PDF Energy Consumption by Sector (Census Division) Table 1. New England XLS PDF Table 2. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 3. East North Central XLS PDF Table 4. West North Central XLS PDF Table 5. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 6. East South Central XLS PDF Table 7. West South Central XLS PDF Table 8. Mountain XLS PDF Table 9. Pacific XLS PDF Table 10. Total United States XLS PDF Energy Prices by Sector (Census Division) Table 11. New England XLS PDF Table 12. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 13. East North Central XLS PDF Table 14. West North Central XLS PDF Table 15. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 16. East South Central

127

Table 1. Comparison of Absolute Percent Errors for Present and Current AEO Forecast Evaluations  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AEO82 to AEO82 to AEO99 AEO82 to AEO2000 AEO82 to AEO2001 AEO82 to AEO2002 AEO82 to AEO2003 AEO82 to AEO2004 Total Energy Consumption 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Total Petroleum Consumption 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.9 Total Natural Gas Consumption 7.3 7.1 7.1 6.7 6.4 6.5 Total Coal Consumption 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8

128

Colorado Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

% of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Colorado Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

129

Connecticut Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent...  

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

% of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Connecticut Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

130

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

i i ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 4 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 6 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) .................... 6

131

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO2006) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2006, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2006 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2006 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2004-2006 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

132

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 (AEO2007) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2005 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2007, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2007 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and eighteen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2007 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Projections for 2006 and 2007 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term projections and are based on more current information than the AEO.

133

MECS 1991 Publications and Tables  

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

Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Figure showing the Largest Energy Consumers in the Manufacturing Sector You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1991 (file size 17.2 MB) pages:566 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 380,153 bytes) pages: 33, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector: An Overview Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector, 1991 Manufacturing Capability To Switch Fuels Appendices Appendix A. Detailed Tables Appendix B. Survey Design, Implementation, and Estimates (file size 141,211 bytes) pages: 22. Appendix C. Quality of the Data (file size 135,511 bytes) pages: 8.

134

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

The Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the AEO using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO projections.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

135

CBECS - Buildings and Energy in the 1980's - Detailed Tables  

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

Consumption by Type of Building Sources: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, EIA-457 of the 1980 Residential Energy Consumption Survey and...

136

"RSE Table N5.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N5.1;"  

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

1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N5.1;" 1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N5.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","Waste",," " " "," "," ","Blast"," "," ","Pulping Liquor"," ","Oils/Tars" "NAICS"," "," ","Furnace/Coke"," ","Petroleum","or","Wood Chips,","and Waste" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Oven Gases","Waste Gas","Coke","Black Liquor","Bark","Materials"

137

RSE Table 3.2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.2  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.2;" 2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," " "NAICS"," "," ","Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural","LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",4,5,25,20,5,27,6,0,10

138

RSE Table 5.2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.2  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.2;" 2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," " " "," ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" "NAICS"," "," ","Net","Residual","and","Natural ","LPG and","(excluding Coal"," " "Code(a)","End Use","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(c)","Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES"

139

RSE Table 7.3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.3  

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

3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.3;" 3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.3;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" " "," ",,,"Electricity",,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",," " " "," ",,"Electricity","from Sources",,"Natural Gas","from Sources",,"Steam","from Sources" " "," ","Electricity","from Local","Other than","Natural Gas","from Local","Other than","Steam","from Local","Other than"

140

RSE Table 5.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.4  

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

4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.4;" 4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.4;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," " " "," ","Net Demand",,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" "NAICS"," ","for ","Residual","and","Natural ","LPG and","(excluding Coal" "Code(a)","End Use","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(c)","Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coke and Breeze)" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES" ,"TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION",2,3,6,2,3,9

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

RSE Table 7.9 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.9  

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

9 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.9;" 9 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.9;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," " "NAICS"," "," ",,"Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",4,4,24,21,5,23,7,0,20

142

RSE Table 1.2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.2  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.2;" 2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments" "NAICS"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural","LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"

143

RSE Table 7.7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.7  

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

7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.7;" 7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.7;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" " "," ",,,,,,,,,,," " " "," ",,,"Electricity",,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam" " "," ",,"Electricity","from Sources",,"Natural Gas","from Sources",,"Steam","from Sources" "NAICS"," ","Electricity","from Local","Other than","Natural Gas","from Local","Other than","Steam","from Local","Other than"

144

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

2 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 5 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 8 1.2 Vacuum System 12 1.3 Power Supplies 14 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.7 Beam Line Front Ends 19 1.8 Facilities 19 1.9 Installation 20 2.1 Accelerator Physics 21 2 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress The progress and highlights of each major technical system are summarized below. Additional details are provided in Section B. Magnets - As of the end of this quarter (March 31, 2002), the status of magnet fabrication is as follows: Magnet Type Number Received % of Total Received Dipoles 40 100% Quadrupoles 102 100% Sextupoles 76 100%

145

Table 25  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

89 89 Table 25 Created on: 1/3/2014 3:10:33 PM Table 25. Natural gas home customer-weighted heating degree days, New England Middle Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic Month/Year/Type of data CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT NJ, NY, PA IL, IN, MI, OH, WI IA, KS, MN, MO, ND, NE, SD DE, FL, GA, MD, DC, NC, SC, VA, WV November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0 November to November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0

146

Table 4  

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

4. Light Usage by Total Number of Rooms, Percent of U.S. 4. Light Usage by Total Number of Rooms, Percent of U.S. Households, 1993 Total Number of Rooms Housing Unit and Household Characteristics Total 1 or 2 3 to 5 6 to 8 9 or More RSE Column Factors: 0.5 2.6 0.7 0.7 1.6 RSE Row Factor Total....................................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Indoor Electric Lights Total Number Lights 1 to 4 Hours None................................................. 10.0 16.8 10.5 9.4 5.8 11.52 1 ....................................................... 22.9 36.5 27.7 17.8 10.7 5.96 2 ....................................................... 28.4 29.3 31.4 25.8 21.1 5.33 3 ....................................................... 17.4 11.1 16.5 18.7 19.0 7.20 4 ....................................................... 9.5 Q 6.7 12.8 13.5 10.03 5 or More ..........................................

147

Table 4  

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

. Light Usage by Heated Floorspace Category, Percent of U.S. . Light Usage by Heated Floorspace Category, Percent of U.S. Households, 1993 Heated Floorspace Category (square feet) Housing Unit and Household Characteristics Total Fewer than 600 600 to 999 1,000 to 1,599 1,600 to 1,999 2,000 to 2,399 2,400 to 2,999 3,000 or More RSE Column Factors: 0.4 1.6 0.9 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.2 RSE Row Factor Total................................................. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Indoor Electric Lights Total Number Lights 1 to 4 Hours None........................................... 10.0 16.5 10.2 9.9 9.2 9.4 9.1 6.7 11.42 1 ................................................. 22.9 31.3 30.9 23.5 19.9 15.3 17.9 11.5 6.62 2 ................................................. 28.4 32.3 31.9 28.7 28.7 24.8 26.0 21.5 5.64 3 .................................................

148

Table 4  

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

8. Light Usage by Household Size, Percent of U.S. Households, 1993 8. Light Usage by Household Size, Percent of U.S. Households, 1993 Household Size Housing Unit and Household Characteristics Total 1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4 Persons 5 Persons 6 or More Persons RSE Column Factors: 0.5 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.4 2.0 RSE Row Factors Total.................................................. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Indoor Electric Lights Total Number Lights 1 to 4 Hours None............................................ 10.0 13.8 9.8 8.8 7.2 7.5 8.0 11.39 1 ................................................... 22.9 32.0 23.2 20.7 15.1 15.6 15.4 6.49 2 ................................................... 28.4 32.3 30.0 26.8 24.3 23.9 20.1 5.64 3 ................................................... 17.4 12.9 17.9 18.9 20.6 18.5 20.2 6.89 4 ...................................................

149

Table 4  

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

6. Light Usage by Family Income Category, Percent of U.S. 6. Light Usage by Family Income Category, Percent of U.S. Households, 1993 1993 Family Income Category Housing Unit and Household Characteristics Total Less than $5,000 $5,000 to $9,999 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $49,000 $75,000 or More RSE Column Factors: 0.4 1.8 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.1 RSE Row Factor Total............................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Indoor Electric Lights Total Number Lights 1 to 4 Hours None......................................... 10.0 18.7 14.0 12.7 10.0 10.2 9.0 7.6 8.0 6.3 12.08 1 ................................................ 22.9 35.8 33.0 29.5 28.4 22.6 24.1 16.1 13.9 14.1 6.91 2 ................................................ 28.4

150

Notices TABLE  

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

7 Federal Register 7 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 160 / Thursday, August 18, 2011 / Notices TABLE 2-NET BURDEN CHANGE-Continued 2011-2012 2012-2013 Change % Change Burden disposition Total Applicants .................................... 23,611,500 24,705,864 +1,094,364 +4.63 Net decrease in burden. The increase in applicants is offset by the results of the Department's simplification changes. This has created an over- all decrease in burden of 8.94% or 2,881,475 hours. Total Applicant Burden ......................... 32,239,328 29,357,853 ¥2,881,475 ¥8.94 Total Annual Responses ....................... 32,239,328 46,447,024 +14,207,696 +44.07 Cost for All Applicants .......................... $159,370.20 $234,804.24 $75,434.04 +47.33 The Department is proud that efforts to simplify the FAFSA submission

151

Table 4  

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

4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of 4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of Household Members by Number of Rooms, 1993 (Dollars) Number of Rooms Number of Household Members All Households One to Three Four Five Six Seven Eight or More RSE Column Factors: 0.5 1.8 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 RSE Row Factors All Households................................... 83 49 63 76 87 104 124 2.34 One..................................................... 55 44 51 54 69 78 87 5.33 Two..................................................... 80 56 63 77 82 96 107 3.38 Three.................................................. 92 60 73 82 95 97 131 4.75 Four.................................................... 106 64 78 93 96 124 134 4.53 Five or More....................................... 112 70 83 98 99 117 150 5.89 Notes: -- To obtain the RSE percentage for any table cell, multiply the

152

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

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

25 25 Table 11 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:10:53 PM Table 11. Underground natural gas storage - storage fields other than salt caverns, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,900 2,976 76 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,856 2,563 -293 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,781 2,822 41 2011 January 4,166 2,131 6,298 -63 -2.9 27 780 753 February 4,166 1,597 5,763 -10 -0.6 51 586 535 March 4,165 1,426 5,591 -114 -7.4 117 288 172

153

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

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

1 1 Table 8 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:07:39 PM Table 8. Underground natural gas storage - all operators, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total a Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals b 2008 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,340 3,374 34 2009 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,315 2,966 -349 2010 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,291 3,274 -17 2011 January 4,303 2,306 6,609 2 0.1 50 849 799 February 4,302 1,722 6,024 39 2.3 82 666 584 March 4,302 1,577 5,879 -75 -4.6 168 314 146 April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100

154

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2013 Data Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2013 (See release cycle changes) | correction | full 2013 (See release cycle changes) | correction | full report Overview Data Reference Case Side Cases Interactive Table Viewer Topics Source Oil/Liquids Natural Gas Coal Electricity Renewable/Alternative Nuclear Sector Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Energy Demand Other Emissions Prices Macroeconomic International Efficiency Publication Chapter Market Trends Issues in Focus Legislation & Regulations Comparison Appendices View All Filter By Source Oil Natural Gas Coal Electricity Renewable/Alternative Nuclear Sector Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Other Topics Emissions Prices Macroeconomic International Data TablesAll Tables Reference case summary & detailed tables... + EXPAND ALL Summary Case Tables additional formats Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary XLS

155

EIA - Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2008  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplemental Tables to the AEO 2008 Supplemental Tables to the AEO 2008 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2008 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2008 (AEO2008) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2005 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2008, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2008 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables are presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2008 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Projections for 2007 and 2008 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term projections and are based on more current information than the AEO.

156

Supplement Tables - Contact  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplement Tables to the AEO99 Supplement Tables to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage furtherinfo.gif (5474 bytes) The Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) was prepared by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, under the direction of Mary J. Hutzler (mhutzler@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222). General questions may be addressed to Arthur T. Andersen (aanderse@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-1441), Director of the International, Economic, and Greenhouse Gas Division; Susan H. Holte (sholte@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-4838), Director of the Demand and Integration Division; James M. Kendell (jkendell@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-9646), Director of the Oil and Gas Division; Scott Sitzer (ssitzer@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2308), Director of the Coal and Electric Power Division; or Andy S. Kydes (akydes@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222), Senior Modeling Analyst. Detailed questions about the forecasts and related model components may be addressed to the following analysts:

157

Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent since  

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

Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent since 1999; Exceeds Goal Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent since 1999; Exceeds Goal November 3, 2005 - 12:35pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The Department of Energy (DOE) announced today that the federal government has exceeded its goal of obtaining 2.5 percent of its electricity needs from renewable energy sources by September 30, 2005. The largest energy consumer in the nation, the federal government now uses 2375 Gigawatt hours (GWh) of renewable energy -- enough to power 225,000 homes or a city the size of El Paso, Texas, for a year. "Particularly in light of tight oil and gas supplies caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it is important that all Americans - including the

158

Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent since  

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

Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent since 1999; Exceeds Goal Federal Government Increases Renewable Energy Use Over 1000 Percent since 1999; Exceeds Goal November 3, 2005 - 12:35pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The Department of Energy (DOE) announced today that the federal government has exceeded its goal of obtaining 2.5 percent of its electricity needs from renewable energy sources by September 30, 2005. The largest energy consumer in the nation, the federal government now uses 2375 Gigawatt hours (GWh) of renewable energy -- enough to power 225,000 homes or a city the size of El Paso, Texas, for a year. "Particularly in light of tight oil and gas supplies caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it is important that all Americans - including the

159

Ninety - Two Percent Minimum Heater Efficiency By 1980  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Technology is now available to increase heater efficiencies to 92 percent and more. By 1980, this technology will be field proven and corrosion and reliability problems identified and resolved. Recent studies have shown that a minimum efficiency...

Mieth, H. C.; Hardie, J. E.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

160

BOSS Measures the Universe to One-Percent Accuracy  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

This and future measures at this precision are the key to determining the nature of dark energy. "One-percent accuracy in the scale of the universe is the most precise such...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

through June 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 9 1.2 Vacuum System 16 1.3 Power Supplies 21 1.4 RF System 25 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 26 1.6 Cable Plant 28 1.8 Facilities 28 2.0 Accelerator Physics 29 2.1 ES&H 31 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress Magnet System - The project has received three shipments of magnets from IHEP. A total of 55 dipole, quadrupole and sextupole magnets out of 218 have arrived. All main magnets will arrive by December. The additional mechanical and electrical checks of the magnets at SSRL have been successful. Only minor mechanical problems were found and corrected. The prototype

162

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

October October through December 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 7 1.2 Vacuum System 9 1.3 Power Supplies 13 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.9 Installation 19 2.0 Accelerator Physics 20 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress In the magnet area, the production of all major components (dipoles, quadrupoles, and sextupoles) has been completed on schedule. This results from a highly successful collaboration with our colleagues at the Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP) in Beijing. The production of corrector magnets is still in progress with completion scheduled for May 2002.

163

Detailed Test Information  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Detailed Test Information Detailed Test Information EPA tests vehicles by running them through a series of driving routines, also called cycles or schedules, that specify vehicle speed for each point in time during the laboratory tests. For 2007 and earlier model year vehicles, only the city and highway schedules were used. Beginning with 2008 models, three additional tests will be used to adjust the city and highway estimates to account for higher speeds, air conditioning use, and colder temperatures. Note: EPA has established testing criteria for electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids that are slightly different than those for conventional vehicles. New Tests City Highway High Speed Air Conditioning Cold Temperature Detailed Comparison EPA Federal Test Procedure (City Schedule): Shows vehicle speed (mph) at each second of test

164

1997 Housing Characteristics Tables Housing Unit Tables  

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

Percent of U.S. Households; 45 pages, 121 kb) Percent of U.S. Households; 45 pages, 121 kb) Contents Pages HC1-1b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Climate Zone, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 4 HC1-2b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Year of Construction, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 4 HC1-3b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Household Income, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 4 HC1-4b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Housing Unit, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 3 HC1-5b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Owner-Occupied Housing Unit, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 3 HC1-6b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Rented Housing Unit, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 3 HC1-7b. Housing Unit Characteristics by Four Most Populated States, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 4

165

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in excel Errata - August 25, 2004 1 to117 - Complete set of of Supplemental Tables PDF Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) XLS PDF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) XLS PDF Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) XLS PDF Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) XLS PDF Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) XLS PDF Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

166

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2012 Data Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Release Date: June 25, 2012 | Next Early Release Date: December 5, 2012 | Report Number: DOE/EIA-0383(2012) Overview Data Reference Case Side Cases Interactive Table Viewer Topics Source Oil/Liquids Natural Gas Coal Electricity Renewable/Alternative Nuclear Sector Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Energy Demand Other Emissions Prices Macroeconomic International Efficiency Publication Chapter Executive Summary Market Trends Issues in Focus Legislation & Regulations Comparison Appendices View All Filter By Source Oil Natural Gas Coal Electricity Renewable/Alternative Nuclear Sector Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Other Topics Emissions Prices Macroeconomic International Data TablesAll Tables Reference case summary & detailed tables... + EXPAND ALL Summary Case Tables Additional Formats

167

NETL: News Release - President's Initiative to Seek 90 Percent Mercury  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

April 21, 2004 April 21, 2004 President's Initiative to Seek 90 Percent Mercury Removal We Energies to Test TOXECON(tm) Process in Michigan Coal-fired Power Plant WASHINGTON, DC - The Department of Energy (DOE) and We Energies today initiated a joint venture to demonstrate technology that will remove an unprecedented 90 percent of mercury emissions from coal-based power plants. Presque Isle Power Plant - We Energies' Presque Isle Power Plant located on the shores of Lake Superior in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. As part of the President's Clean Coal Power Initiative of technology development and demonstration, the new project supports current proposals to reduce mercury emissions in the range of 70 percent through a proposed regulation pending before the Environmental Protection Agency or, in the

168

Computers in Commercial Buildings - Table 4  

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

4 4 Table 4. Percent Change in the Number of Computers in Commercial Buildings, 1992 to 1999 Percent Change in Number of Computers Percent Change in Computers per Thousand Employees Percent Change in Computers per Million Square Feet 1992 to 1995 1995 to 1999 1992 to 1995 1995 to 1999 1992 to 1995 1995 to 1999 All Buildings 45 35 32 24 58 17 Principal Building Activity Assembly* 109 -6 54 104 157 44 Education 34 48 -3 58 46 33 Food Sales 142 20 213 -20 184 -22 Food Service 89 102 82 17 108 48 Health Care 126 43 70 3 70 15 Lodging 99 45 47 69 59 16 Mercantile and Service 62 25 96 107 57 147 Office 37 31 33 20 53 14 Large (>50,000 Sq. Ft.) 37 31 24 16 52 3 Small (<=50,000 Sq. Ft.) 37 30 48 26 55 28 Warehouse and Storage 24 43 4 13 58 16 Other (incl. Vacant) 24 44 -15 462 54 364  * The category "assembly" is equivalent to the "public assembly" category used in the 1999 tables and figures.

169

ITER: Japan to assign 20 percent of construction work to EU firms; Proposal for EU official to assume chief executive  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

ITER: Japan to assign 20 percent of construction work to EU firms; Proposal for EU official to assume chief executive position MAINICHI (Top Play) (Lead para.) December 7, 2004 Japan and the European Experimental Reactor (ITER). Japan yesterday revealed the details of a proposal to host the project. Tokyo has

170

"RSE Table C11.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table C11.3;"  

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

1.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table C11.3;" 1.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table C11.3;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,,"Natural","Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" ,,,,"Electricity","Electricity",,,"Natural Gas","Natural Gas",,,"Steam","Steam" " "," ",,,"from Only","from Both",,,"from Only","from Both",,,"from Only","from Both",," " " "," ",,"Electricity","Sources","Local Utility",,"Natural Gas","Sources","Local Utility",,"Steam","Sources","Local Utility"

171

"RSE Table C2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C2.1;"  

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

C2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C2.1;" C2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C2.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ","Any Combustible" "NAICS"," ","Energy","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",4,0,3,0,1,0,2,6

172

"RSE Table N11.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.3;"  

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

3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.3;" 3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.3;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" " "," ",,,"Electricity",,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",," " " "," ",,"Electricity","from Sources",,"Natural Gas","from Sources",,"Steam","from Sources" "NAICS"," ","Electricity","from Local","Other than","Natural Gas","from Local","Other than","Steam","from Local","Other than"

173

"RSE Table C3.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C3.1;"  

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

C3.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C3.1;" C3.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C3.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ","Any" "NAICS"," ","Energy","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(g)" ,,"Total United States"

174

"RSE Table N8.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N8.3;"  

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

3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N8.3;" 3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N8.3;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" " "," ",,,"Electricity",,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",," " " "," ",,"Electricity","from Sources",,"Natural Gas","from Sources",,"Steam","from Sources" "NAICS"," ","Electricity","from Local","Other than","Natural Gas","from Local","Other than","Steam","from Local","Other than"

175

"RSE Table C10.2. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.2;"  

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

2. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.2;" 2. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Establishments" " "," ",,"with Any"," Steam Turbines","Supplied","by Either","Conventional","Combustion","Turbines"," "," "," ","Internal","Combustion","Engines"," Steam Turbines","Supplied","by Heat",," " " "," ",,"Cogeneration","Conventional","or Fluidized","Bed Boilers","with","Heat","Recovery","Combined-Cycle","Combustion","Turbines","with","Heat","Recovery","Recovered from","High-Temperature","Processes"

176

"RSE Table N11.4. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.4;"  

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

4. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.4;" 4. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.4;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" " "," ",,,"Electricity",,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",," " " "," ",,"Electricity","from Sources",,"Natural Gas","from Sources",,"Steam","from Sources" "NAICS"," ","Electricity","from Local","Other than","Natural Gas","from Local","Other than","Steam","from Local","Other than"

177

"RSE Table E1.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E1.1;"  

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

.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E1.1;" .1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E1.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments" "Economic",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources" "Characteristic(a)","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"

178

"RSE Table C4.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C4.1;"  

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

C4.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C4.1;" C4.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C4.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ","Any" "NAICS"," ","Energy",,"Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(g)" ,,"Total United States" ,

179

"RSE Table C1.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C1.1;"  

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

.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C1.1;" .1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C1.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ","Any",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments" "NAICS"," ","Energy","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Source(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"

180

Detailed Course Module Description  

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

Course Module Description Course Module Description Module/Learning Objectives Level of Detail in Module by Audience Consumers Gen Ed/ Community College Trades 1. Energy Issues and Building Solutions High High High Learning Objectives: * Define terms of building science, ecological systems, economics of consumption * Relate building science perspective, ecology, social science * Explain historical energy and environmental issues related to buildings * Compare Site and source energy * Examine the health, safety and comfort issues in buildings * Examine the general context for building solutions (zero energy green home with durability as the goal) * Explain a basic overview of alternative energy (total solar flux) - do we have enough energy * Examine cash flow to homeowners

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

December 22, 2000 (Next Release: December, 2001) Related Links Annual Energy Outlook 2001 Assumptions to the AEO2001 NEMS Conference Contacts Forecast Homepage EIA Homepage AEO Supplement Reference Case Forecast (1999-2020) (HTML) Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

182

RSE Table 2.1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 2.1  

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

2.1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 2.1;" 2.1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 2.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " " "," " "NAICS"," "," ","Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",31,0,91,35,0,0,0,47 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 31131," Sugar ",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 311421," Fruit and Vegetable Canning",1,0,0,0,0,0,0,8

183

RSE Table 10.10 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.10  

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

0 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.10;" 0 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.10;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"Coal",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(c)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(d)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","LPG","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",6,18,5,0,20,85,29,20,0 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 31131," Sugar ",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0

184

RSE Table 10.13 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.13  

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

3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.13;" 3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.13;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"LPG(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual",,"and" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(d)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(e)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","Coal","Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",8,17,8,20,21,43,34,35,37,29 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0

185

RSE Table 5.7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.7  

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

7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.7;" 7 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.7;" " Unit: Percents." " ",,,"Distillate" " ","Net Demand",,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " ","for ","Residual","and","Natural ","LPG and","(excluding Coal" "End Use","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)" ,"Total United States" "TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION",2,3,6,2,4,9 "Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel",6,4,10,2,10,13 " Conventional Boiler Use",12,5,14,2,10,8 " CHP and/or Cogeneration Process",4,2,6,3,2,19

186

RSE Table 4.1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 4.1  

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

1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 4.1;" 1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 4.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " " "," " "NAICS"," "," ",,"Residual","Distillate","Natural","LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",4,5,25,20,5,27,6,0,17 311221," Wet Corn Milling",1,0,0,1,3,0,0,0,0 31131," Sugar ",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 311421," Fruit and Vegetable Canning",8,11,46,45,8,57,0,0,3

187

RSE Table 5.8 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.8  

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

8 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.8;" 8 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.8;" " Unit: Percents." " ",," ","Distillate"," "," " " ","Net Demand",,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " ","for ","Residual","and","Natural ","LPG and","(excluding Coal" "End Use","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)" ,"Total United States" "TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION",2,3,6,2,3,9 "Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel",6,4,14,2,9,13 " Conventional Boiler Use",12,5,14,2,10,8 " CHP and/or Cogeneration Process",4,2,6,3,2,18

188

RSE Table 5.6 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.6  

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

6 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.6;" 6 Relative Standard Errors for Table 5.6;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " "," ","Net","Residual","and","Natural","LPG and","(excluding Coal"," " "End Use","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(e)" ,"Total United States" "TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION",2,2,3,6,2,3,9,2 "Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel",0,11,4,14,2,9,13,0

189

RSE Table 7.6 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.6  

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

6 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.6;" 6 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.6;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " " "," ",,,,,,,,," " "NAICS"," "," ",,"Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and",,"Coke" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",4,5,25,20,5,27,6,0,20 311221," Wet Corn Milling",1,0,0,1,3,0,0,0,0 31131," Sugar ",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 311421," Fruit and Vegetable Canning",8,11,42,45,8,57,0,0,4

190

RSE Table 10.11 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.11  

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

1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.11;" 1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.11;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"Coal(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Consumed(d)","Switchable","Switchable","Receipts(e)","Gas","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil","LPG","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",20,32,21,0,16,68,65,73,0 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 31131," Sugar ",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0

191

FY 2005 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 6 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 6 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 6 Science.........................................................................................................

192

Microsoft Word - table_10.doc  

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

4 4 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:09:15 PM Table 10. Underground natural gas storage - salt cavern storage fields, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 440 398 -42 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 459 403 -56 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 511 452 -58 2011 January 137 174 311 65 59.3 23 69 46 February 137 125 262 48 62.5 30 80 49 March 137 151 288 39 34.8 51 25 -25 April 140 172 312 17 11.2 42 21 -22 May 140 211 352

193

EIA - Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis > Supplemental Tables to the AEO 2009 Analysis > Supplemental Tables to the AEO 2009 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009 The Early Release for next year's Annual Energy Outlook will be presented at the John Hopkins Kenney Auditorium on December 14th The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2009 (AEO2009) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2006 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2009, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2009 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and twenty-eight tables are presented.

194

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

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

3 3 Table 9 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:08:24 PM Table 9. Underground natural gas storage - by season, 2011-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year, Season, and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2011 Refill Season April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100 -212 May 4,304 2,187 6,491 -233 -9.6 458 58 -399 June 4,302 2,530 6,831 -210 -7.7 421 80 -340 July 4,300 2,775 7,075 -190 -6.4 359 116 -244 August 4,300 3,019 7,319 -134 -4.2 370 126 -244 September 4,301 3,416 7,717 -92 -2.6 454 55

195

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

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

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Monthly 31 Table 13 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:28:44 PM Table 13. Activities of underground natural gas storage operators, by state, September 2013 (volumes in million cubic feet) State Field Count Total Storage Capacity Working Gas Storage Capacity Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Alabama 2 35,400 27,350 8,050 21,262 29,312 2,852 15.5 1,743 450 Alaska a 5 83,592 67,915 14,197 20,455 34,652 NA NA 1,981 30 Arkansas 2 21,853 12,178 9,648 3,372 13,020 -1,050 -23.7 204 0 California 14 599,711 374,296

196

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

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

8 8 Table 25. Average price of natural gas delivered to residential and commercial sector consumers by local distribution and marketers in selected states, 2011-2012 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Georgia 11.98 16.38 15.72 15.1 12.47 16.82 16.23 13.5 New York 13.52 14.22 13.71 72.4 12.72 13.59 12.97 71.2 Ohio 10.32 11.09 10.78 40.8 8.75 10.42 9.91 30.9 Residential 2011 2012 State Local Distribution Company Average Price a Marketer Average Price b Combined Average Price c Percent Sold by Local Distribution Company Local Distribution Company Average Price a Marketer Average Price b Combined Average Price c Percent Sold by Local Distribution Company a Price derived from Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition."

197

FY 2005 Laboratory Table  

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

Congressional Budget Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropria ted as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress.

198

Mississippi Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

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

Mississippi Block Grant Tables Mississippi Block Grant Tables A table describing where state funding is being distributed Mississippi Block Grant Tables More Documents &...

199

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Buildings Use Tables Buildings Use Tables (24 pages, 129 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 12. Employment Size Category, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 13. Employment Size Category, Floorspace, 1995 Table 14. Weekly Operating Hours, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 15. Weekly Operating Hours, Floorspace, 1995 Table 16. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 17. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the

200

ARM - Instrument Location Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

govInstrumentsLocation Table govInstrumentsLocation Table Instruments Location Table Contacts Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument Locations Site abbreviations explained in the key. Instrument Name Abbreviation NSA SGP TWP AMF C1 C2 EF BF CF EF IF C1 C2 C3 EF IF Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor ACSM Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer AERI Aethalometer AETH Ameriflux Measurement Component AMC Aerosol Observing System AOS Meteorological Measurements associated with the Aerosol Observing System AOSMET Broadband Radiometer Station BRS

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

FY 2009 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2009 Congressional Budget 1/30/2008 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 9:01:45AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Request State Table 1 1 $27,588

202

FY 2005 State Table  

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

Office of Management, Budget Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Preliminary Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number

203

FY 2010 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2010 Congressional Budget 5/4/2009 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 2:13:22PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request State Table 1 1 $46,946 $48,781 $38,844 Alabama 2 $6,569

204

FY 2006 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 State Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2006 Congressional Budget 1/27/2005 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 3:32:58PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp FY 2006 Request State Table

205

FY 2010 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2010 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 2:08:56PM Department Of Energy 5/4/2009 Page Number FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request Laboratory Table 1 1 $1,200

206

Table of Contents  

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

E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOEIG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ......

207

FY 2008 State Table  

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

State Table State Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2008 Congressional Budget 2/1/2007 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:53:08AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request State Table 1 1 $28,332 $30,341

208

RSE Table N8.1 and N8.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N8.1 and N8.2  

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

1 and N8.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N8.1 and N8.2;" 1 and N8.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N8.1 and N8.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Selected","Wood and Other","Biomass","Components" ,,,,,,,"Coal Components",,,"Coke",,"Electricity","Components",,,,,,,,,,,,,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Total",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Wood Residues" " "," "," ",,,,,"Bituminous",,,,,,"Electricity","Diesel Fuel",,,,,,"Motor",,,,,,,"Natural Gas",,,"Steam",,,," ",,,"and","Wood-Related",,," "

209

Computed tomography:the details.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Computed Tomography (CT) is a well established technique, particularly in medical imaging, but also applied in Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imaging. Basic CT imaging via back-projection is treated in many texts, but often with insufficient detail to appreciate subtleties such as the role of non-uniform sampling densities. Herein are given some details often neglected in many texts.

Doerry, Armin Walter

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

210

Microsoft Word - table_26.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 26. Percent distribution of natural gas supply and disposition by state, 2011 Alabama 0.8 2.5 Alaska 1.5 1.4 Arizona < 1.2 Arkansas 4.7 1.2 California 1.0 8.8 Colorado 6.8 1.9 Connecticut -- 0.9 Delaware -- 0.3 District of Columbia -- 0.1 Florida 0.1 5.0 Georgia -- 2.1 Gulf of Mexico 7.9 0.4 Hawaii -- < Idaho -- 0.3 Illinois < 4.0 Indiana < 2.6 Iowa -- 1.3 Kansas 1.2 1.1 Kentucky 0.5 0.9 Louisiana 12.8 5.7 Maine -- 0.3 Maryland < 0.8 Massachusetts -- 1.8 Michigan 0.6 3.2 Minnesota -- 1.7 Mississippi 0.3 1.8 Missouri -- 1.1 Montana 0.3 0.3 Nebraska < 0.7 Nevada < 1.0 New Hampshire -- 0.3 New Jersey -- 2.7 New Mexico 5.0 1.0 New York 0.1

211

"RSE Table E13.2. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.2;"  

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

2. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.2;" 2. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.2;" " Unit: Percents." " ",,,"Renewable Energy" ,,,"(excluding Wood" "Economic","Total Onsite",,"and" "Characteristic(a)","Generation","Cogeneration(b)","Other Biomass)(c)","Other(d)" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",15,15,58,37 " 20-49",17,19,27,7 " 50-99",6,6,5,9 " 100-249",7,7,25,4 " 250-499",2,2,0,0 " 500 and Over",1,1,0,1 "Total",2,2,15,1 "Employment Size" " Under 50",16,16,90,35

212

"RSE Table C9.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C9.1;"  

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

C9.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C9.1;" C9.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C9.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," " " "," ",,,"General","Amount of ","Establishment-Paid","Activity Cost" "NAICS"," "," " "Code(a)","Energy-Management Activity","No Participation","Participation(b)","All","Some","None","Don't Know" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES" ,"Participation in One or More of the Following Types of Activities",1,2,0,0,0,0 ," Energy Audits",1,3,5,6,5,7 ," Electricity Load Control",1,3,4,7,6,7

213

"RSE Table N13.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N13.1;"  

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

1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N13.1;" 1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N13.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " " "," ",,,,"Sales and","Net Demand" "NAICS"," ",,,"Total Onsite","Transfers","for" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Purchases","Transfers In(b)","Generation(c)","Offsite","Electricity(d)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",1,1,1,8,1 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0 312,"Beverage and Tobacco Products",4,0,1,0,4 313,"Textile Mills",2,8,7,0,2 313210," Broadwoven Fabric Mills",3,0,22,0,3 314,"Textile Product Mills",11,73,8,90,11

214

"RSE Table E7.2. Relative Standard Errors for Table E7.2;"  

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

2. Relative Standard Errors for Table E7.2;" 2. Relative Standard Errors for Table E7.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",,,"Consumption" " "," ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" "NAICS",,"Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "Code(a)","Economic Characteristic(b)","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES" ,"Value of Shipments and Receipts" ,"(million dollars)" ," Under 20",2,2,2 ," 20-49",2,3,2 ," 50-99",3,3,2 ," 100-249",2,3,2 ," 250-499",3,3,3

215

"RSE Table E2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E2.1;"  

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

E2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E2.1;" E2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E2.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," ",," "," ",," " "Economic",,"Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," " "Characteristic(a)","Total","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","Breeze","Other(e)" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",9,87,48,26,1,85,16,25 " 20-49",11,32,28,5,63,20,3,21 " 50-99",8,23,38,2,22,49,42,4

216

"RSE Table N1.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N1.3;"  

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

.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N1.3;" .3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N1.3;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " ,"Total" "Energy Source","First Use" ,"Total United States" "Coal ",3 "Natural Gas",1 "Net Electricity",1 " Purchases",1 " Transfers In",9 " Onsite Generation from Noncombustible Renewable Energy",15 " Sales and Transfers Offsite",3 "Coke and Breeze",2 "Residual Fuel Oil",4 "Distillate Fuel Oil",5 "Liquefied Petroleum Gases and Natural Gas Liquids",1 "Other",2 " Asphalt and Road Oil (a)",0 " Lubricants (a)",0 " Naphtha < 401 Degrees (a)",0

217

"RSE Table N13.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N13.3;"  

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

3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N13.3;" 3. Relative Standard Errors for Table N13.3;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ","Total of" "NAICS"," ","Sales and","Utility","Nonutility" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Transfers Offsite","Purchaser(b)","Purchaser(c)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",8,9,0 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0 312,"Beverage and Tobacco Products",0,0,0 313,"Textile Mills",0,0,0 313210," Broadwoven Fabric Mills",0,0,0 314,"Textile Product Mills",90,90,0 315,"Apparel",0,0,0 316,"Leather and Allied Products",0,0,0

218

"RSE Table C10.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.1;"  

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

1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.1;" 1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",,,"Computer","Control of","Processes"," "," "," ",,,,," " " "," ","Computer Control","of Building-Wide","Environment(b)","or Major","Energy-Using","Equipment(c)","Waste","Heat","Recovery","Adjustable -","Speed","Motors" "NAICS"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","In Use(d)","Not in Use","Don't Know","In Use(d)","Not in Use","Don't Know","In Use(d)","Not in Use","Don't Know","In Use(d)","Not in Use","Don't Know"

219

"RSE Table E13.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.1;"  

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

1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.1;" 1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.1;" " Unit: Percents." " ",," "," ",," " ,,,,"Sales and","Net Demand" "Economic",,,"Total Onsite","Transfers","for" "Characteristic(a)","Purchases","Transfers In(b)","Generation(c)","Offsite","Electricity(d)" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",4,52,15,4,4 " 20-49",2,14,17,33,2 " 50-99",2,31,6,10,2 " 100-249",1,13,7,9,1 " 250-499",2,2,2,1,2 " 500 and Over",1,2,1,1,1

220

"RSE Table N7.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N7.1;"  

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

N7.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N7.1;" N7.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table N7.1;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",,,"Consumption" " "," ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" "NAICS"," ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",1,1,1 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0 312,"Beverage and Tobacco Products",8,4,5 313,"Textile Mills",3,2,3 313210," Broadwoven Fabric Mills",3,4,3 314,"Textile Product Mills",7,5,5

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

"RSE Table C12.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C12.1;"  

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

2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C12.1;" 2.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table C12.1;" " Units: Percents." ,,"Approximate",,,"Approximate","Average" ,,"Enclosed Floorspace",,"Average","Number","Number" "NAICS"," ","of All Buildings",,"Enclosed Floorspace","of All Buildings","of Buildings Onsite" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Onsite","Establishments(b)","per Establishment","Onsite","per Establishment" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",2,0,2,1,1 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0 312,"Beverage and Tobacco Products",11,0,15,14,14

222

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 1. Comparison of Absolute Percent Errors for Present and Current AEO Forecast Evaluations Table 1. Comparison of Absolute Percent Errors for Present and Current AEO Forecast Evaluations Average Absolute Percent Error Variable AEO82 to AEO98 AEO82 to AEO99 AEO82 to AEO2000 AEO82 to AEO2001 AEO82 to AEO2002 AEO82 to AEO2003 Consumption Total Energy Consumption 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.1 Total Petroleum Consumption 2.9 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.9 Total Natural Gas Consumption 5.7 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.5 6.5 Total Coal Consumption 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.7 Total Electricity Sales 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.4 2.5 2.4 Production Crude Oil Production 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.7 Natural Gas Production 4.8 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.4 Coal Production 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.8 Imports and Exports Net Petroleum Imports 9.5 8.8 8.4 7.9 7.4 7.5 Net Natural Gas Imports 16.7 16.0 15.9 15.8 15.8 15.4

223

RSE Table 7.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.4  

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

4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.4;" 4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.4;" " Unit: Percents." " ",," "," ",," "," " "Economic",,"Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and" "Characteristic(a)","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",8,21,14,7,9,13 " 20-49",4,6,15,4,13,4 " 50-99",3,6,4,3,6,8 " 100-249",3,8,17,2,5,7 " 250-499",4,1,9,7,1,37 " 500 and Over",1,7,4,1,1,1 "Total",2,3,7,2,1,11

224

U.S. Utility-Scale Solar 60 Percent Towards Cost-Competition...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

U.S. Utility-Scale Solar 60 Percent Towards Cost-Competition Goal U.S. Utility-Scale Solar 60 Percent Towards Cost-Competition Goal February 12, 2014 - 11:05am Addthis News Media...

225

FY 2011 State Table  

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

State Tables State Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 State Index Page Number FY 2011 Congressional Budget 1/29/2010 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:34:40AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2009 Appropriation

226

FY 2007 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory tables Laboratory tables preliminary Department of Energy FY 2007 Congressional Budget Request February 2006 Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory tables preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2007 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 12:10:40PM Department Of Energy 1/31/2006 Page Number FY 2005 Appropriation FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007

227

FY 2011 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2011 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:24:57AM Department Of Energy 1/29/2010 Page

228

FY 2008 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Table Laboratory Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2008 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:51:02AM Department Of Energy 2/1/2007 Page Number FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request

229

FY 2006 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2006 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 3:43:16PM Department Of Energy 1/27/2005 Page Number FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp

230

Fy 2009 Laboratory Table  

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

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2009 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 8:59:25AM Department Of Energy 1/30/2008 Page Number FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009

231

FY 2013 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Current Enacted Congressional Approp. Approp. * Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy........................................ 1,771,721 1,809,638 2,337,000 +527,362 +29.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability......................................... 138,170 139,103 143,015 +3,912 +2.8% Nuclear energy................................................................................ 717,817 765,391 770,445 +5,054 +0.7% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................................. -16,500 -- --

232

FY 2009 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Current Current Congressional Op. Plan Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy.......................... -- 1,722,407 1,255,393 -467,014 -27.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................... -- 138,556 134,000 -4,556 -3.3% Nuclear energy................................................................. -- 961,665 853,644 -108,021 -11.2% Legacy management........................................................ -- 33,872 -- -33,872 -100.0% Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance..........................................

233

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents 4. Building HVAC Requirements ....................................................................................1 4.1.2 What's New for the 2013 Standards.............................................................................................3 4.1.4 California Appliance Standards and Equipment Certification

234

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Tables  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Table Updated: October 6, 2014 FY 2016 September 2014 CRC Calculation Table (pdf) Final FY 2015 CRC Letter & Table (pdf) Note: The Cost...

235

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

/2011 /2011 Decades of Discovery Decades of Discovery Page 2 6/1/2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 6 2 BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES .................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Adenosine Triphosphate: The Energy Currency of Life .............................................. 7 2.2 Making Better Catalysts .............................................................................................. 8 2.3 Understanding Chemical Reactions............................................................................ 9 2.4 New Types of Superconductors ................................................................................ 10

236

NETL: Gasifipedia - Gasification in Detail  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Fundamentals Fundamentals Gasification is a partial oxidation process. The term partial oxidation is a relative term which simply means that less oxygen is used in gasification than would be required for combustion (i.e., burning or complete oxidation) of the same amount of fuel. Gasification typically uses only 25 to 40 percent of the theoretical oxidant (either pure oxygen or air) to generate enough heat to gasify the remaining unoxidized fuel, producing syngas. The major combustible products of gasification are carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2), with only a minor amount of the carbon completely oxidized to carbon dioxide (CO2) and water. The heat released by partial oxidation provides most of the energy needed to break up the chemical bonds in the feedstock, to drive the other endothermic gasification reactions, and to increase the temperature of the final gasification products.

237

Cooperative Education Detailed Operational Procedures  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

credits of Cooperative education for one of the required elective courses in the ME programME 3990 Cooperative Education Detailed Operational Procedures Overview Cooperative education and Aeronautical Engineering faculty. Cooperative education is not a required component of the ME program

de Doncker, Elise

238

The effects of storage time, storage temperature, and concentration on percent recoveries of thermally desorbed diffusive dosimeter samples contaminated with chloroform  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, the Analabs Thermal Desorber. 4. The Programmed Thermal Desorber on the left and linear chart recorder on the far right. 5. Gas Chromatograph Peak, Integrator Counting, and GC Conditions for Chloroform. 10 17 19 21 24 6. Photograph Illustrating.... A 2 x 3 x 3 Factorial Treatment Design . 13. Analysis of Variance Table for the Experimental Data 14. Mean Percent Recovery vs. Storage Temperature for 7 Days and 14 Days Storage Time At Concentration I (5 ppm - 8 hours). 26 27 28 29 30 31...

Gallucci, Joseph Matthew

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

239

New Details of Ferroelectric Switching  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

New Details of Ferroelectric Switching New Details of Ferroelectric Switching All of our current information technology relies on devices that process information as binary ones and zeroes. Ferroelectric materials are of special interest to developers of the next generation of such devices because they exhibit polarized electronic states that can represent bits of information. Moreover, these materials retain their polarization states without consuming electrical power, making ferroelectrics the subject of intense study for nonvolatile memory applications in which data is stored even when the power is turned off. One problem, however, is polarization fatigue: after a number of cycles, the switchable polarization begins to taper off, rendering the device unusable. Recently, a team of researchers

240

Electric Power detailed State data  

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

Detailed State Data Detailed State Data Annual data for 2012 Release Date: November 12, 2013 Next Release Date: November 2014 Revision/Corrections Annual data format 1990 - 2012 Net Generation by State by Type of Producer by Energy Source (EIA-906, EIA-920, and EIA-923)1 XLS 1990 - 2012 Fossil Fuel Consumption for Electricity Generation by Year, Industry Type and State (EIA-906, EIA-920, and EIA-923)2 XLS 1990 - 2011 Existing Nameplate and Net Summer Capacity by Energy Source, Producer Type and State (EIA-860)1, 3 XLS 2011 - 2016 Proposed Nameplate and Net Summer Capacity by Year, Energy Source, and State (EIA-860)1 XLS 1990 - 2011 U.S. Electric Power Industry Estimated Emissions by State (EIA-767, EIA-906, EIA-920, and EIA-923)4 XLS 1990 - 2012 Average Price by State by Provider (EIA-861)5 XLS

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

FY 2006 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Comparable Comparable Request to FY 2006 vs. FY 2005 Approp Approp Congress Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply Operation and maintenance................................................. 787,941 909,903 862,499 -47,404 -5.2% Construction......................................................................... 6,956 22,416 40,175 17,759 +79.2% Total, Energy supply................................................................ 794,897 932,319 902,674 -29,645 -3.2% Non-Defense site acceleration completion............................. 167,272 157,316 172,400 15,084 +9.6%

242

FY 2013 Laboratory Table  

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

8 8 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0078 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2013 Congressional Budget

243

FY 2010 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2009 FY 2010 Current Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Recovery Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 1,704,112 2,178,540 16,800,000 2,318,602 +140,062 +6.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 136,170 137,000 4,500,000 208,008 +71,008 +51.8% Nuclear energy.............................................................................. 960,903 792,000 -- 761,274 -30,726 -3.9% Legacy management..................................................................... 33,872 -- -- --

244

FY 2012 State Table  

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

6 6 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0066 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled

245

FY 2012 Statistical Table  

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

2Statistical Table by Appropriation 2Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2011 FY 2012 Current Congressional Annualized Congressional Approp. Request CR Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 2,216,392 2,355,473 2,242,500 3,200,053 +983,661 +44.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 168,484 185,930 171,982 237,717 +69,233 +41.1% Nuclear energy............................................................................. 774,578 824,052 786,637 754,028 -20,550 -2.7% Fossil energy programs Fossil energy research and development................................... 659,770 586,583 672,383 452,975

246

FY 2007 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance............................................ 1,779,399 1,791,372 1,917,331 +125,959 +7.0% Construction................................................................... 22,416 21,255 6,030 -15,225 -71.6% Total, Energy supply and conservation.............................. 1,801,815 1,812,627 1,923,361 +110,734 +6.1% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology..................................................... -160,000 -20,000 -- +20,000 +100.0% Fossil energy research and development.......................

247

FY 2012 Laboratory Table  

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

5 5 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0065 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2012 Congressional Budget

248

FY 2008 Statistical Table  

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

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 Current Congressional Congressional Approp. Request Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance........................................... 1,781,242 1,917,331 2,187,943 +270,612 +14.1% Construction.................................................................... 31,155 6,030 -- -6,030 -100.0% Total, Energy supply and conservation............................. 1,812,397 1,923,361 2,187,943 +264,582 +13.8% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................... -20,000 -- -58,000 -58,000 N/A Fossil energy research and development......................

249

Table of Contents  

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

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS OF SMART GRID TECHNOLOGIES October 5, 2010 i Table of Contents I. Introduction and Executive Summary.......................................................... 1 a. Overview of Smart Grid Benefits and Communications Needs................. 2 b. Summary of Recommendations .................................................................... 5 II. Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives ................................................ 7 a. DOE Request for Information ....................................................................... 7 b. Other Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives .................................... 9 III. Communications Requirements of Smart Grid Applications .................. 11 a. Advanced Metering Infrastructure ............................................................12

250

Canada: Automobile Innovation Fund - Program Detail & Criteria...  

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

Canada: Automobile Innovation Fund - Program Detail & Criteria Canada: Automobile Innovation Fund - Program Detail & Criteria Information from the Canadian Embassy Canada:...

251

Improving alternative fuel utilization: detailed kinetic combustion...  

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

alternative fuel utilization: detailed kinetic combustion modeling & experimental testing Improving alternative fuel utilization: detailed kinetic combustion modeling &...

252

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Geographic Location Tables Geographic Location Tables (24 pages, 136kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 3. Census Region, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 4. Census Region and Division, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 5. Census Region and Division, Floorspace, 1995 Table 6. Climate Zone, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 7. Metropolitan Status, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

253

Vehicle Technologies Office: Fact #720: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

0: March 26, 0: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of New Light Trucks Sold have Gasoline Direct Injection to someone by E-mail Share Vehicle Technologies Office: Fact #720: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of New Light Trucks Sold have Gasoline Direct Injection on Facebook Tweet about Vehicle Technologies Office: Fact #720: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of New Light Trucks Sold have Gasoline Direct Injection on Twitter Bookmark Vehicle Technologies Office: Fact #720: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of New Light Trucks Sold have Gasoline Direct Injection on Google Bookmark Vehicle Technologies Office: Fact #720: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of New Light Trucks Sold have Gasoline Direct Injection on Delicious Rank Vehicle Technologies Office: Fact #720: March 26, 2012 Eleven Percent of New Light Trucks Sold have Gasoline Direct Injection on Digg

254

Comparison of the percent recoveries of activated charcoal and Spherocarb after storage utilizing thermal desorption  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

between the two adsorbents. The parameters of storage in- cluded various durations of time, temperatures, and concentrations. Rather than the present conventional solvent desorption methods, thermal desorption was used in the analysis of samples... Duncan's Multiple Range Test For Variable Percent. 32 6 Mean Percent Recoveries For The Interaction Between Type Of Adsorbent And Storage Time . 7 Mean Percent Recoveries For The Interaction Between Sample Concentration And Storage Time. 39 40 8...

Stidham, Paul Emery

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

255

EECBG 11-002 Clarification of Ten Percent Limitation on Use of...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECBG), ten percent limitation, administrative expenses, the Energy...

256

1997 Housing Characteristics Tables Home Office Equipment Tables  

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

Percent of U.S. Households; 13 pages, 48 kb) Percent of U.S. Households; 13 pages, 48 kb) Contents Pages HC7-1b. Home Office Equipment by Climate Zone, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1 HC7-2b. Home Office Equipment by Year of Construction, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1 HC7-3b. Home Office Equipment by Household Income, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1 HC7-4b. Home Office Equipment by Type of Housing Unit, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1 HC7-5b. Home Office Equipment by Type of Owner-Occupied Housing Unit, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1 HC7-6b. Home Office Equipment by Type of Rented Housing Unit, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1 HC7-7b. Home Office Equipment by Four Most Populated States, Percent of U.S. Households, 1997 1

257

Table of Contents  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

NT0005638 NT0005638 Cruise Report 1-19 July 2009 HYFLUX Sea Truth Cruise Northern Gulf of Mexico Submitted by: Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Dr. Corpus Christi, TX 78412 Principal Authors: Ian R. MacDonald and Thomas Naehr Prepared for: United States Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory October 30, 2009 Office of Fossil Energy HYFLUX Seatruth Cruise Report -1- Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................. 2 Participating Organizations ................................................................................................. 3 Major Equipment ................................................................................................................ 4

258

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Table 2. Total Energy Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 5. Total Coal Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 6. Total Electricity Sales, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 7. Crude Oil Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 8. Natural Gas Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 9. Coal Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 12. Net Coal Exports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 13. World Oil Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 15. Coal Prices to Electric Utilities, Actual vs. Forecasts

259

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Download Adobe Acrobat Reader Printer friendly version on our site are provided in Adobe Acrobat Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Actual vs. Forecasts Formats Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF Table 12. World Oil Prices Excel, PDF Table 13. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices

260

Help:Tables | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Tables Tables Jump to: navigation, search Tables may be authored in wiki pages using either XHTML table elements directly, or using wikicode formatting to define the table. XHTML table elements and their use are well described on various web pages and will not be discussed here. The benefit of wikicode is that the table is constructed of character symbols which tend to make it easier to perceive the table structure in the article editing view compared to XHTML table elements. As a general rule, it is best to avoid using a table unless you need one. Table markup often complicates page editing. Contents 1 Wiki table markup summary 2 Basics 2.1 Table headers 2.2 Caption 3 XHTML attributes 3.1 Attributes on tables 3.2 Attributes on cells 3.3 Attributes on rows 3.4 HTML colspan and rowspan

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Policy ForumSeries "Beyond 33 Percent: California's Renewable Energy Future,  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Policy ForumSeries "Beyond 33 Percent: California's Renewable Energy Future, From Near with the UC Davis Policy Institute is the UC Davis Energy Institute. Renewables Beyond 33 Percent October 17 as it transitions to a renewable energy future. Featuring panelists from government, industry and academia

California at Davis, University of

262

PRESS RELEASES OF SENATOR PETE DOMENICI Domenici Supports 12 Percent Increase for Nuclear Energy, Disputes Fusion  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

PRESS RELEASES OF SENATOR PETE DOMENICI Domenici Supports 12 Percent Increase for Nuclear Energy his support for a 12 percent increase in federal funding for nuclear energy research, but challenged of modern nuclear power plants. Domenici is chairman of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations

263

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Conservation Tables Conservation Tables (16 pages, 86 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 41. Energy Conservation Features, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 42. Building Shell Conservation Features, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 43. Building Shell Conservation Features, Floorspace, 1995 Table 44. Reduction in Equipment Use During Off Hours, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

264

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

Structure Tables Structure Tables (16 pages, 93 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 8. Building Size, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 9. Building Size, Floorspace, 1995 Table 10. Year Constructed, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 11. Year Constructed, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings and 58.8 billion square feet of commercial floorspace in the U.S. The 1995 data are available for the four Census

265

Wind Energy Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 |  

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

Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 Wind Energy Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 May 12, 2008 - 11:30am Addthis DOE Report Analyzes U.S. Wind Resources, Technology Requirements, and Manufacturing, Siting and Transmission Hurdles to Increasing the Use of Clean and Sustainable Wind Power WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S Department of Energy (DOE) today released a first-of-its kind report that examines the technical feasibility of harnessing wind power to provide up to 20 percent of the nation's total electricity needs by 2030. Entitled "20 Percent Wind Energy by 2030", the report identifies requirements to achieve this goal including reducing the cost of wind technologies, citing new transmission infrastructure, and

266

Wind Energy Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 |  

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

Wind Energy Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 Wind Energy Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 Wind Energy Could Produce 20 Percent of U.S. Electricity By 2030 May 12, 2008 - 11:30am Addthis DOE Report Analyzes U.S. Wind Resources, Technology Requirements, and Manufacturing, Siting and Transmission Hurdles to Increasing the Use of Clean and Sustainable Wind Power WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S Department of Energy (DOE) today released a first-of-its kind report that examines the technical feasibility of harnessing wind power to provide up to 20 percent of the nation's total electricity needs by 2030. Entitled "20 Percent Wind Energy by 2030", the report identifies requirements to achieve this goal including reducing the cost of wind technologies, citing new transmission infrastructure, and

267

Recovery Act Exceeds Major Cleanup Milestone, DOE Complex Now 74 Percent  

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

Recovery Act Exceeds Major Cleanup Milestone, DOE Complex Now 74 Recovery Act Exceeds Major Cleanup Milestone, DOE Complex Now 74 Percent Remediated Recovery Act Exceeds Major Cleanup Milestone, DOE Complex Now 74 Percent Remediated The Office of Environmental Management's (EM) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Program recently achieved 74 percent footprint reduction, exceeding the originally established goal of 40 percent. EM has reduced its pre-Recovery Act footprint of 931 square miles, established in 2009, by 688 square miles. Reducing its contaminated footprint to 243 square miles has proven to be a monumental task, and a challenge the EM team was ready to take on from the beginning. Recovery Act Exceeds Major Cleanup Milestone, DOE Complex Now 74 Percent Remediated More Documents & Publications 2011 ARRA Newsletters

268

CARINA Data Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Cruise Summary Table and Data Cruise Summary Table and Data Users are requested to report any data or metadata errors in the CARINA cruise files to CDIAC. Parameter units in all CARINA data files are in CCHDO exchange format. No Cruise Namea (Alias) Areab Number of Stations Datec Ship Chief Scientist Carbon PI Oxygen Nutrients TCO2d TALK pCO2e pHf CFC Other Measurements Data Files 1 06AQ19920929g (06ANTX_6) (See map) 2 118 9/29-11/30/1992 Polarstern V. Smetacek M. Stoll, J. Rommets, H. De Baar, D. Bakker 62 114h 53 54i U C 0 Choloroa,b Fluorescence, NH4 Data Files (Metadata) 2 06AQ19930806 (06ARKIX_4) (See map) 4 64 8/6-10/5/1993 Polarstern D.K. Fütterer L. Anderson 64 63 63j, bb 0 0 0 59he 3H, 3He, 18O, 14C, 85Kr, Bak Data Files

269

Appendix B: Summary Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman Appendix B: Summary Tables Table B1. The BCES and alternative cases compared to the Reference case, 2025 2009 2025 Ref Ref BCES All Clean Partial Credit Revised Baseline Small Utilities Credit Cap 2.1 Credit Cap 3.0 Stnds + Cds Generation (billion kilowatthours) Coal 1,772 2,049 1,431 1,305 1,387 1,180 1,767 1,714 1,571 1,358 Petroleum 41 45 43 44 44 44 45 45 45 43 Natural Gas 931 1,002 1,341 1,342 1,269 1,486 1,164 1,193 1,243 1,314 Nuclear 799 871 859 906 942 889 878 857 843 826 Conventional Hydropower 274 306 322 319 300 321 316 298 312 322 Geothermal 15 25 28 25 31 24 27 22 23 24 Municipal Waste 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Wood and Other Biomass 38 162 303 289 295 301 241 266

270

NETL: Gasifipedia - Gasification in Detail  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Commercial Gasifiers Commercial Gasifiers Types of Gasifiers Although there are various types of gasifers (gasification reactors), different in design and operational characteristics, there are three main gasifier classifications into which most of the commercially available gasifiers fall. These categories are as follows: Fixed-bed gasifiers (also referred as moving-bed gasifiers) Entrained-flow gasifiers Fluidized-bed gasifiers Commercial gasifiers of GE Energy, ConocoPhillips E-Gas(tm) and Shell SCGP are examples of entrained-flow types. Fixed-or moving-bed gasifiers include that of Lurgi and British Gas Lurgi (BGL). Fluidized-bed gasifiers include the catalytic gasifier technology being commercialized by Great Point Energy, the Winkler gasifier, and the KBR transport gasifiers. For more specific information on these gasifiers, follow the links for the bulleted gasifier types above. NOTE: Although specific gasifiers named above are described in detail throughout this website, it is realized that other gasification technologies exist. The gasifiers discussed herein were not preferentially chosen by NETL.

271

Microsoft Word - table_87  

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

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and natural gas plant liquids production, by state, 2012 Alabama 87,269 5,309 7,110 Alabama Onshore Alabama 33,921 2,614 3,132 Alabama Offshore Alabama 53,348 2,695 3,978 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Onshore California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Offshore California NA NA NA Federal Offshore California NA NA NA

272

Reviews, Tables, and Plots  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

4 Review of Particle Physics 4 Review of Particle Physics Please use this CITATION: S. Eidelman et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004) (bibtex) Standalone figures are now available for these reviews. Categories: * Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties * Standard Model and Related Topics * Particle Properties * Hypothetical Particles * Astrophysics and Cosmology * Experimental Methods and Colliders * Mathematical Tools * Kinematics, Cross-Section Formulae, and Plots * Authors, Introductory Text, History plots PostScript help file PDF help file Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties Physical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (1 page) Astrophysical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (2 pages) International System of units (SI) PS PDF (2 pages) Periodic table of the elements (Rev.) errata PS PDF (1 page)

273

Table G3  

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

1905-0194 1905-0194 Expiration Date: 07/31/2013 May 28, 2010 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 14 Table G3. Decision Chart for a Start Year Report for a Large Emitter Intending To Register Reductions Report Characteristics Reporting Requirements Schedule I Schedule II (For Each Subentity) Schedule III Schedule IV Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 & Add. A Sec. 3 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Part A Part B Part C Independent Verification? All A- or B-Rated Methods? Foreign Emissions? Entity-Wide Reductions Only? Entity Statement Aggregated Emissions by Gas (Domestic and Foreign) † Emissions Inventory by Source

274

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AC05-00OR22800 AC05-00OR22800 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page # TOC - i SECTION A - SOLICITATION/OFFER AND AWARD ......................................................................... A-i SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS ........................................................ B-i B.1 SERVICES BEING ACQUIRED ....................................................................................B-2 B.2 TRANSITION COST, ESTIMATED COST, MAXIMUM AVAILABLE FEE, AND AVAILABLE FEE (Modification 295, 290, 284, 280, 270, 257, 239, 238, 219, M201, M180, M162, M153, M150, M141, M132, M103, M092, M080, M055, M051, M049, M034, M022, M003, A002) ..........................................................B-2 SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/WORK STATEMENT DESCRIPTION OF

275

Table of Contents  

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

U U U . . S S . . D D E E P P A A R R T T M M E E N N T T O O F F E E N N E E R R G G Y Y O O F F F F I I C C E E O O F F I I N N S S P P E E C C T T O O R R G G E E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOE/IG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ..................................................... 2 Impacts Key Accomplishments ............................................................................................... 3 Positive Outcomes ...................................................................................................... 3 Reports Investigative Outcomes .............................................................................................. 6 Audits ......................................................................................................................... 8

276

Coal deposit characterization by gamma-gamma density/percent dry ash relationships  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

: pb = C + Va(pa) Equation 3 where C is a constant. Ash content can therefore be geophysically determined as variations In log-derived bulk density measurements are in direct response to variations in ash content. However, when any of the above... by applying the relationships between geophysi cally-derived gamma-gamma density and laboratory-derived percent dry ash. The linear gamma-gamma density/percent dry ash relationship is dependent upon a constant fuel ratio (percent fixed carbon...

Wright, David Scott

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

277

Table A4. Residential sector key indicators and consumption  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Reference case Table A4. Residential sector key indicators and consumption (quadrillion Btu per year, unless otherwise noted) Energy Information Administration / Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Table A4. Residential sector key indicators and consumption (quadrillion Btu per year, unless otherwise noted) Key indicators and consumption Reference case Annual growth 2011-2040 (percent) 2010 2011 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Key indicators Households (millions) Single-family ....................................................... 82.85 83.56 91.25 95.37 99.34 103.03 106.77 0.8% Multifamily ........................................................... 25.78 26.07 29.82 32.05 34.54 37.05 39.53 1.4%

278

RSE Table N3.1 and N3.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N3.1 and N3.2  

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

N3.1 and N3.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N3.1 and N3.2;" N3.1 and N3.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N3.1 and N3.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " "NAICS"," "," ","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",1,1,2,3,1,1,0,0,1

279

RSE Table S1.1 and S1.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S1.1 and S1.2  

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

S1.1 and S1.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S1.1 and S1.2;" S1.1 and S1.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S1.1 and S1.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments" "SIC"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources" "Code(a)","Major Group and Industry","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"

280

RSE Table N4.1 and N4.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N4.1 and N4.2  

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

N4.1 and N4.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N4.1 and N4.2;" N4.1 and N4.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N4.1 and N4.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " "NAICS"," "," ",,"Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",1,1,2,3,1,1,0,0,1

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

RSE Table N1.1 and N1.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N1.1 and N1.2  

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

1 and N1.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N1.1 and N1.2;" 1 and N1.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N1.1 and N1.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments" "NAICS"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total(b)","Electricity(c)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(d)","Natural Gas(e)","NGL(f)","Coal","Breeze","Other(g)","Produced Onsite(h)"

282

RSE Table N6.1 and N6.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N6.1 and N6.2  

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

1 and N6.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N6.1 and N6.2;" 1 and N6.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N6.1 and N6.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," " " "," ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" "NAICS"," "," ","Net","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal"," " "Code(a)","End Use","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(c)","Natural Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States"

283

2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of...  

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

Table of Contents 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents June 2014 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents The Table of...

284

FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Summary Table FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table Summary Table by Appropriations Summary Table by Organization More Documents & Publications FY 2014 Budget Request Statistical...

285

ARM - Instrument - s-table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

govInstrumentss-table govInstrumentss-table Documentation S-TABLE : Instrument Mentor Monthly Summary (IMMS) reports S-TABLE : Data Quality Assessment (DQA) reports ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument : Stabilized Platform (S-TABLE) Instrument Categories Ocean Observations For ship-based deployments, some instruments require actively stabilized platforms to compensate for the ship's motion, especially rotations around the long axis of the ship (roll), short axis (pitch), and, for some instruments, vertical axis (yaw). ARM currently employs two types of stabilized platforms: one electrically controlled for lighter instruments that includes yaw control (dubbed RPY for Roll, Pitch, Yaw) and one

286

"RSE Table N5.2. Relative Standard Errors for Table N5.2;"  

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

2. Relative Standard Errors for Table N5.2;" 2. Relative Standard Errors for Table N5.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,"S e l e c t e d","W o o d","a n d","W o o d -","R e l a t e d","P r o d u c t s" ,,,,,"B i o m a s s" ,,,,,,"Wood Residues" ,,,,,,"and","Wood-Related" " "," ","Pulping Liquor"," "," ","Wood","Byproducts","and",," " "NAICS"," ","or","Biomass","Agricultural","Harvested Directly","from Mill","Paper-Related" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Black Liquor","Total(b)","Waste(c)","from Trees(d)","Processing(e)","Refuse(f)"

287

"RSE Table N11.2. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.2;"  

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

2. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.2;" 2. Relative Standard Errors for Table N11.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " "NAICS"," "," ",,"Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",1,1,3,3,1,1,0,0,1 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 312,"Beverage and Tobacco Products",4,4,16,41,4,22,3,0,15 313,"Textile Mills",2,2,5,14,3,5,1,0,5

288

"RSE Table C10.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.3;"  

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

3. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.3;" 3. Relative Standard Errors for Table C10.3;" " Unit: Percents." "NAICS"," " "Code(a)","Industry-Specific Technology","In Use(b)","Not in Use","Don't Know" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"FOOD" ," Infrared Heating",3,1,2 ," Microwave Drying",5,1,3 ," Closed-Cycle Heat Pump System Used to Recover Heat",7,1,3 ," Open-Cycle Heat Pump System Used to Produce Steam",7,1,3 ," Gas-Driven Rotary Engines and/or Turbines",20,1,3 ," Membrane Separation",3,1,2 ," Irradiation",23,1,2 ," Freeze Concentration",9,1,3 ," Membrane Hyperfiltration to Separate Water from Food Products",4,1,3

289

"RSE Table E7.1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E7.1;"  

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

1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E7.1;" 1. Relative Standard Errors for Table E7.1;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Consumption" " ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" "Economic","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "Characteristic(a)","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",2,2,2 " 20-49",2,3,2 " 50-99",3,3,2 " 100-249",2,3,2 " 250-499",3,3,3 " 500 and Over",1,2,2 "Total",1,1,1 "Employment Size" " Under 50",2,3,3 " 50-99",3,3,3

290

"RSE Table E13.3. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.3;"  

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

3. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.3;" 3. Relative Standard Errors for Table E13.3;" " Unit: Percents." ,"Total of" "Economic","Sales and","Utility","Nonutility" "Characteristic(a)","Transfers Offsite","Purchaser(b)","Purchaser(c)" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",4,4,10 " 20-49",33,35,70 " 50-99",10,12,10 " 100-249",9,14,1 " 250-499",1,1,3 " 500 and Over",1,1,2 "Total",3,4,5 "Employment Size" " Under 50",42,44,21 " 50-99",20,21,73 " 100-249",16,16,38 " 250-499",1,2,1

291

If I generate 20 percent of my national electricity from wind...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

generate 20 percent of my national electricity from wind and solar - what does it do to my GDP and Trade Balance ? Home I think that the economics of fossil fuesl are well...

292

EECBG 11-002 Clarification of Ten Percent Limitation on Use of Funds for Administrative Expenses  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECBG), ten percent limitation, administrative expenses, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

293

Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the other 99 percent  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...disaster assistance, food assistance) that buffer...executives and financial professionals...evidence of rents in top 1 percent...macro-micro-minnesota/2012/02...attractive financial proposition on average...research assistance. Supported...

David H. Autor

2014-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

294

Fact #727: May 14, 2012 Nearly Twenty Percent of Households Own Three or More Vehicles  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Household vehicle ownership has changed over the last six decades. In 1960, over twenty percent of households did not own a vehicle, but by 2010, that number fell to less than 10%. The number of...

295

97 percent of special nuclear material de-inventoried from LLNL | National  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

97 percent of special nuclear material de-inventoried from LLNL | National 97 percent of special nuclear material de-inventoried from LLNL | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > NNSA Blog > 97 percent of special nuclear material de-inventoried ... 97 percent of special nuclear material de-inventoried from LLNL Posted By Office of Public Affairs

296

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) MS Excel Viewer PDF (Acrobat Reader required Download Acrobat Reader ) Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF

297

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) PDF (Acrobat Reader required) Table 2. Total Energy Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales HTML, Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 12. Net Coal Exports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 13. World Oil Prices HTML, Excel, PDF

298

Effects of time constraint and percent defective on visual inspection performance  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

EFFECTS OF TIME CONSTRAINT AND PERCENT DEFECTIVE ON VISUAL INSPECTION PERFORMANCE A Thesis by WALTER EDGAR GILMORE II Submitted to the Graduate College of Texas ABM University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree MASTER... OF SCIENCE August 1982 Major Subject: Industrial Engineering EFFECTS OF TIME CONSTRAINT AND PERCENT DEFECTIVE ON VISUAL INSPECTION PERFORMANCE A Thesis by WALTER EDGAR GILMORE II Approved as to sty1e and content by: Chairman of Committ e) (Memb r...

Gilmore, Walter Edgar

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

299

Sec. Chu Announces More 'SunShot' Details | Department of Energy  

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

Sec. Chu Announces More 'SunShot' Details Sec. Chu Announces More 'SunShot' Details Sec. Chu Announces More 'SunShot' Details February 4, 2011 - 1:30pm Addthis Sec. Chu Announces More 'SunShot' Details. | Department of Energy Photo | Courtesy of National Renewable Energy Laboratory | Public Domain | Sec. Chu Announces More 'SunShot' Details. | Department of Energy Photo | Courtesy of National Renewable Energy Laboratory | Public Domain | Ginny Simmons Ginny Simmons Former Managing Editor for Energy.gov, Office of Public Affairs What does this project do? The SunShot initiative will bring the cost of solar energy down by about 75 percent, making it cost competitive with fossil fuels, like coal, by the end of the decade. Visit the SunShot website for more information. Today, Secretary Chu announced more details of the Department's

300

table14.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections (current dollars per thousand cubic feet) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 AEO 1982 4.32 5.47 6.67 7.51 8.04 8.57 AEO 1983 2.93 3.11 3.46 3.93 4.56 5.26 12.74 AEO 1984 2.77 2.90 3.21 3.63 4.13 4.79 9.33 AEO 1985 2.60 2.61 2.66 2.71 2.94 3.35 3.85 4.46 5.10 5.83 6.67 AEO 1986 1.73 1.96 2.29 2.54 2.81 3.15 3.73 4.34 5.06 5.90 6.79 7.70 8.62 9.68 10.80 AEO 1987 1.83 1.95 2.11 2.28 2.49 2.72 3.08 3.51 4.07 7.54 AEO 1989* 1.62 1.70 1.91 2.13 2.58 3.04 3.48 3.93 4.76 5.23 5.80 6.43 6.98 AEO 1990 1.78 1.88 2.93 5.36 AEO 1991 1.77 1.90 2.11 2.30 2.42 2.51 2.60 2.74 2.91 3.29 3.75 4.31 5.07 5.77 6.45 AEO 1992 1.69 1.85 2.03 2.15 2.35 2.51 2.74 3.01 3.40 3.81 4.24 4.74 5.25 5.78 AEO 1993 1.85 1.94 2.09 2.30 2.44 2.60 2.85 3.12 3.47 3.84 4.31 4.81 5.28

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

Code Tables | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

System NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms Code Tables Code Tables U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards...

302

MECS Fuel Oil Tables  

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

: Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas : Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas Year Distillate Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 185 148 1224 3.4% 1994 152 125 1020 3.1% Residual Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 505 290 1577 16.7% 1994 441 241 1249 19.8% Natural Gas (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 4656 2702 5233 77.2% 1994 6141 4435 6758 73.4% Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, 1985 and 1994 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Surveys. Table 2: Establishments That Actually Switched Between Natural Gas and Residual Fuel Oil Type of Switch Number of Establishments in Population Number That Use Original Fuel Percentage That Use Original Fuel Number That Can Switch to Another Fuel Percentage That Can Switch to Another Fuel Number That Actually Made a Switch Percentage That Actually Made a Switch

303

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Turbines The Gas Turbine Handbook The Gas Turbine Handbook TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Updated Author Contact Information Introduction - Rich Dennis, Turbines Technology Manager 1.1 Simple and Combined Cycles - Claire Soares 1.1-1 Introduction 1.1-2 Applications 1.1-3 Applications versatility 1.1-4 The History of the Gas Turbine 1.1-5 Gas Turbine, Major Components, Modules, and systems 1.1-6 Design development with Gas Turbines 1.1-7 Gas Turbine Performance 1.1-8 Combined Cycles 1.1-9 Notes 1.2 Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) - Massod Ramezan and Gary Stiegel 1.2-1 Introduction 1.2-2 The Gasification Process 1.2-3 IGCC Systems 1.2-4 Gasifier Improvements 1.2-5 Gas Separation Improvements 1.2-6 Conclusions 1.2-7 Notes 1.2.1 Different Types of Gasifiers and Their Integration with Gas Turbines - Jeffrey Phillips

304

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - chapter Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Chapter Tables Chapter Tables Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 Chapter Tables Table 1. Estimated fuel economy for light-duty vehicles, based on proposed CAFE standards, 2010-2015 Table 2. State appliance efficiency standards and potential future actions Table 3. State renewable portfolio standards Table 4. Key analyses from "issues in Focus" in recent AEOs Table 5. Liquid fuels production in three cases, 2007 and 2030 Table 6. Assumptions used in comparing conventional and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles Table 7. Conventional vehicle and plug-in hybrid system component costs for mid-size vehicles at volume production Table 8. Technically recoverable resources of crude oil and natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf, as of January 1, 2007

305

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

............................................... 12 Water-Source Heat Pump Performance ............................ 18 Air-Source Heat Pump OF PERFORMANCE OF WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMP .............................. ................. 23 FIGURE 2. NODAL. MONTHLY HEAT GAIN/LOSS FACTORS ........................... 5 TABLE 2. BASE TEMPERATURES

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

306

Better Buildings Challenge Partners Pledge 20 Percent Energy Drop By 2020 |  

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

Better Buildings Challenge Partners Pledge 20 Percent Energy Drop Better Buildings Challenge Partners Pledge 20 Percent Energy Drop By 2020 Better Buildings Challenge Partners Pledge 20 Percent Energy Drop By 2020 November 9, 2011 - 10:00am Addthis This is the Atlanta Better Buildings Challenge Breakout Session Panel with representatives from the City of Atlanta Office of Sustainability, Southface, the U.S. General Services Administration, and two Atlanta BBC partner organizations. | Photo courtesy of Fred Perry Photography This is the Atlanta Better Buildings Challenge Breakout Session Panel with representatives from the City of Atlanta Office of Sustainability, Southface, the U.S. General Services Administration, and two Atlanta BBC partner organizations. | Photo courtesy of Fred Perry Photography Maria Tikoff Vargas

307

Novel Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Test |  

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

Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Test Novel Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Test August 21, 2012 - 1:00pm Addthis Washington, DC - The successful bench-scale test of a novel carbon dioxide (CO2) capturing sorbent promises to further advance the process as a possible technological option for reducing CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants. The new sorbent, BrightBlack™, was originally developed for a different application by Advanced Technology Materials Inc. (ATMI) , a subcontractor to SRI for the Department of Energy (DOE)-sponsored test at the University of Toledo. Through partnering with the Office of Fossil Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and others, SRI developed a method to

308

If I generate 20 percent of my national electricity from wind and solar -  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

If I generate 20 percent of my national electricity from wind and solar - If I generate 20 percent of my national electricity from wind and solar - what does it do to my GDP and Trade Balance ? Home > Groups > DOE Wind Vision Community I think that the economics of fossil fuesl are well understood. Some gets to find the fuel and sell it. The fuel and all associated activities factor into the economic equation of the nation and the wrold. What is the economics of generating 20 percent of my total capacity from say wind? And all of it replaces coal powered electricty ? What happended to GDP ? Is the economy a net gain or net loss ? The value of the electricity came into the system, but no coal is bought or sold. Submitted by Jamespr on 6 May, 2013 - 17:46 0 answers Groups Menu You must login in order to post into this group.

309

Novel Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Test |  

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

Novel Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Novel Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Test Novel Sorbent Achieves 90 Percent Carbon Capture in DOE-Sponsored Test August 21, 2012 - 1:00pm Addthis Washington, DC - The successful bench-scale test of a novel carbon dioxide (CO2) capturing sorbent promises to further advance the process as a possible technological option for reducing CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants. The new sorbent, BrightBlack™, was originally developed for a different application by Advanced Technology Materials Inc. (ATMI) , a subcontractor to SRI for the Department of Energy (DOE)-sponsored test at the University of Toledo. Through partnering with the Office of Fossil Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and others, SRI developed a method to

310

Moab Mill Tailings Pile 25 Percent Disposed: DOE Moab Project Reaches  

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

Mill Tailings Pile 25 Percent Disposed: DOE Moab Project Mill Tailings Pile 25 Percent Disposed: DOE Moab Project Reaches Significant Milestone Moab Mill Tailings Pile 25 Percent Disposed: DOE Moab Project Reaches Significant Milestone June 3, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Donald Metzler Moab Federal Project Director (970) 257-2115 Wendee Ryan S&K Aerospace Public Affairs Manager (970) 257-2145 Grand Junction, CO - One quarter of the uranium mill tailings pile located in Moab, Utah, has been relocated to the Crescent Junction, Utah, site for permanent disposal. Four million tons of the 16 million tons total has been relocated under the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project managed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). A little over 2 years ago, Remedial Action Contractor EnergySolutions began

311

Recovery Act Exceeds Major Cleanup Milestone, DOE Complex Now 74 Percent Remediated  

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

November 2, 2012 November 2, 2012 WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Office of Environmental Management's (EM) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Program recently achieved 74 percent footprint reduction, exceeding the originally established goal of 40 percent. EM has reduced its pre-Recovery Act footprint of 931 square miles, established in 2009, by 688 square miles. Reducing its contaminated footprint to 243 square miles has proven to be a monu- mental task, and a challenge the EM team was ready to take on from the beginning. In 2009, EM identified a goal of 40 percent footprint reduction by September 2011 as its High Priority Performance Goal. EM achieved that goal in April 2011, five months ahead of schedule, and continues to achieve footprint reduction, primarily at Savannah River Site and Hanford. Once

312

26-percent efficient point-junction concentrator solar cells with a front metal grid  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper reports on silicon concentrator cells with point diffusions and metal contacts on both the front and back sides. The design minimizes reflection losses by forming an inverted pyramid topography on the front surface and by shaping the metal grid lines in the form of a triangular ridge. A short-circuit current density of 39.6 mA/cm{sup 2} has been achieved even though the front grid covers 16 percent of the cell's active area of 1.56 cm{sup 2}. This, together with an open-circuit voltage of 700 mV, has led to an efficiency of 22 percent at one sun, AM1.5 global spectrum. Under direct-spectrum, 8.8-W/cm{sup 2}, concentrated light, the efficiency is 26 percent. This is the highest ever reported for a silicon cell having a front metal grid.

Cuevas, A.; Sinton, R.A.; Midkiff, N.E.; Swanson, R.M. (Stanford Univ., CA (USA). Dept. of Electrical Engineering)

1990-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

313

Moab Reaches 40-Percent Mark in Tailings Removal | Department of Energy  

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

Moab Reaches 40-Percent Mark in Tailings Removal Moab Reaches 40-Percent Mark in Tailings Removal Moab Reaches 40-Percent Mark in Tailings Removal December 24, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis A haul truck carrying a container is loaded with mill tailings at the Moab site. Once loaded and lidded, the container will be placed on a railcar for shipment by train to the Crescent Junction disposal site. A haul truck carrying a container is loaded with mill tailings at the Moab site. Once loaded and lidded, the container will be placed on a railcar for shipment by train to the Crescent Junction disposal site. MOAB, Utah - The Moab Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project had a productive year, despite continued budget constraints and a first-ever, three-month curtailment of shipping operations last winter. On June 18, the project reached a significant milestone of having shipped 6

314

Table 7. U.S. Coal Exports  

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

U.S. Coal Exports U.S. Coal Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 7. U.S. Coal Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Continent and Country of Destination April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change North America Total 3,122,664 2,010,882 3,565,711 5,133,546 5,327,583 -3.6 Canada* 1,773,644 943,061 2,101,534 2,716,705 3,176,066 -14.5 Dominican Republic 51,792 211,736 124,720 263,528 312,741 -15.7 Honduras - 41,664 34,161 41,664 68,124 -38.8 Jamaica 25 36,311 - 36,336 33,585 8.2 Mexico 1,244,972 777,750 1,268,077 2,022,722 1,698,391 19.1 Other** 52,231 360 37,219 52,591 38,676 36.0 South America Total 2,945,181 3,368,119

315

Table 16. U.S. Coke Exports  

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

U.S. Coke Exports U.S. Coke Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 16. U.S. Coke Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Continent and Country of Destination April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change North America Total 162,796 79,217 201,795 242,013 340,944 -29.0 Canada* 73,859 17,837 112,348 91,696 161,596 -43.3 Mexico 88,535 60,517 86,721 149,052 176,163 -15.4 Other** 402 863 2,726 1,265 3,185 -60.3 South America Total 223 217 591 440 1,158 -62.0 Other** 223 217 591 440 1,158 -62.0 Europe Total 48,972 59,197 - 108,169 6 NM Other** 347 11,743 - 12,090 - - United Kingdom 48,625 47,454 - 96,079 6 NM Asia Total 317 553 633 870 4,778

316

Table 20. Coal Imports by Customs District  

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

Coal Imports by Customs District Coal Imports by Customs District (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 20. Coal Imports by Customs District (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Customs District April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change Eastern Total 469,878 331,008 156,004 800,886 350,124 128.7 Baltimore, MD - - 106,118 - 154,318 - Boston, MA 373,985 154,438 - 528,423 51,185 NM Buffalo, NY 44 - - 44 - - New York City, NY 1,373 1,402 487 2,775 507 447.3 Norfolk, VA - 68,891 - 68,891 35,856 92.1 Ogdensburg, NY - 1 12 1 12 -91.7 Portland, ME 42,428 44,547 - 86,975 - - Providence, RI 52,028 61,729 49,387 113,757 108,226 5.1 St. Albans, VT 20

317

Table 21. U.S. Coke Imports  

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

U.S. Coke Imports U.S. Coke Imports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 21. U.S. Coke Imports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Continent and Country of Origin April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change North America Total 10,284 2,293 159,462 12,577 183,712 -93.2 Canada 3,009 2,293 159,462 5,302 183,712 -97.1 Panama 7,275 - - 7,275 - - South America Total 25,267 13,030 88,424 38,297 106,612 -64.1 Brazil - - 78,595 - 78,595 - Colombia 25,267 13,030 9,829 38,297 28,017 36.7 Europe Total 6,044 40,281 165,027 46,325 485,791 -90.5 Czech Republic - 170 - 170 - - Spain 363 - - 363 - - Ukraine 5,681 40,111 5,047 45,792 53,543 -14.5 United Kingdom

318

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (2005-2035) Tables (2005-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 Reference Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix A. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

319

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

10 10 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

320

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

09 09 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

Achieving a ten percent greenhouse gas reduction by 2020 Response to  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

's environmental and economic goals are to ensure ... (e) greenhouse gas emissions will be at least ten per cent). The Nova Scotia Department of Energy also assumes this level of emissions by 2020 in its background paper of carbon dioxide. #12;Energy Research Group: Achieving a ten percent greenhouse gas reduction 2 shows NRCan

Hughes, Larry

322

What is the problem? Buildings account for 40 percent of U.S.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

What is the problem? Buildings account for 40 percent of U.S. energy use and a similar percentage with buildings and appliances are projected to grow faster than those from any other sector. In order to ensure that building energy consumption be significantly reduced. One way this can be achieved is through

323

Nature Bulletin Table of Contents  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Table of Contents: Table of Contents: Here is our table of contents for the Forset Preserve District of Cook Country Nature Bulletins. To search, go to the Natuere Bulletin's Search Engine and type in your topic. You can also use your browser's "FIND" command to search the 750+ article titles here for a specific subject! Fish Smother Under Ice Coyotes in Cook County Tough Times for the Muskrats Wild Geese and Ducks Fly North Squirrels Spring Frogs Snapping Turtles A Phenomenal Spring Good People Do Not Pick Wildflowers Fire is the Enemy of Field and Forest Crows Earthworms Bees Crayfish Floods Handaxes and Knives in the Forest Preserves Ant Sanctuary Conservation Mosquitoes More About Mosquitoes Fishing in the Forest Preserve Our River Grasshoppers Chiggers Ticks Poison Ivy Fireflies

324

COST AND QUALITY TABLES 95  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 Tables 5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts The annual publication Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Utility Plants (C&Q) will no longer be pub- lished by the EIA. The tables presented in this docu- ment are intended to replace that annual publication. Questions regarding the availability of these data should be directed to: Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division

325

MTS Table Top Load frame  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

MTS Table Top Load frame MTS Table Top Load frame The Non-destructive Evaluation group operates an MTS Table Top Load frame for ultimate strength and life cycle testing of various ceramic, ceramic-matrix (FGI), carbon, carbon fiber, cermet (CMC) and metal alloy engineering samples. The load frame is a servo-hydraulic type designed to function in a closed loop configuration under computer control. The system can perform non-cyclic, tension, compression and flexure testing and cyclic fatigue tests. The system is comprised of two parts: * The Load Frame and * The Control System. Load Frame The Load Frame (figure 1) is a cross-head assembly which includes a single moving grip, a stationary grip and LVDT position sensor. It can generate up to 25 kN (5.5 kip) of force in the sample under test and can

326

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 1 to 116 Complete set of Supplemental Tables Complete set of Supplemental Tables. Need help, please contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central

327

Simulation levels of detail for plant motion  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

and determine the allowable error in the simulation of branch motion. This allows us to choose the appropriate simulation level of detail and we provide smooth transitions from level to level. Our level of detail approach affects only the simulation parameters...

Beaudoin, Jacob Michael

2013-02-22T23:59:59.000Z

328

Lighting in Commercial Buildings (1986 Data)> -- Publication and Tables  

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

Executive Summary > Publication and Tables Executive Summary > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Figure ES1. Ranges of Potential Savings, Maintaining Current Lighting Levels Figure on Ranges of Potential Savings, Maintaining Current Lighting Levels Note: Each shaded band indicates the range of savings estimates obtained, under varying assumptions for the effectiveness of the conservation features considered for each case. The potential savings are shown for each case as a percent of the base case lighting energy estimate (321 billion kilowatthours). Additional savings are possible if lighting levels are reduced. Sources: Adapted from Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, Form EIA-871A, "Building Questionnaire" of the 1986 Nonresidential Buildings Energy Consumption Survey; and sources described in Appendices B and C.

329

Table 2. Change in the Number of Personal Computers and Computer Terminals  

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

2 PC's and Computer Terminals 2 PC's and Computer Terminals Table 2. Change in the Number of Personal Computers and Computer Terminals in Commercial Buildings, 1992 to 1995 PCs and Terminals (thousand) PCs and Terminals per Thousand Employees PCs and Terminals per Million Sq. Ft. 1992 1995 Change (percent) 1992 1995 Change (percent) 1992 1995 Change (percent) All Buildings 29,752 43,003 45 431 571 32 463 732 58 Principal Building Activity Assembly 845 1,763 109 167 258 54 102 262 157 Education 6,004 8,046 34 877 847 -3 710 1,039 46 Food Sales 85 206 142 101 316 213 113 321 184 Food Service 146 276 89 65 118 82 98 204 108 Health Care 1,128 2,549 126 334 569 70 641 1,092 70 Lodging 651 1,296 99 322 472 47 225 358 59

330

A combined cycle designed to achieve greater than 60 percent efficiency  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In cooperation with the US Department of Energy`s Morgantown Energy Technology Center, Westinghouse is working on Phase 2 of an 8-year Advanced Turbine Systems Program to develop the technologies required to provide a significant increase in natural gas-fired combined cycle power generation plant efficiency. In this paper, the technologies required to yield an energy conversion efficiency greater than the Advanced Turbine Systems Program target value of 60 percent are discussed. The goal of 60 percent efficiency is achievable through an improvement in operating process parameters for both the combustion turbine and steam turbine, raising the rotor inlet temperature to 2,600 F (1,427 C), incorporation of advanced cooling techniques in the combustion turbine expander, and utilization of other cycle enhancements obtainable through greater integration between the combustion turbine and steam turbine.

Briesch, M.S.; Bannister, R.L.; Diakunchak, I.S.; Huber, D.J. [Westinghouse Electric Corp., Orlando, FL (United States)

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

331

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents Section 1 - General Statement Section 2 - Management's Responsibility for Preventing Fraud Section 3 - Consequences for Fraudulent Acts Section 4 - Procedures for Reporting Fraud Section 5 - Procedures for the Investigation of Alleged Fraud Section 6 - Protection Under

Shihadeh, Alan

332

CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

-Specific Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) Section 8 Employee Training Section 9 Inspections and Exposure1 CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents Section 1 Safety Program Key Personnel Section 2 Laboratory Protective Equipment (PPE) Assessment Section 18 Hazard Assessment Information and PPE Selection Information

Braun, Paul

333

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2009-2013 (million cubic feet) 2009 Total 259,848 327,105 586,953 1,878,928 606,403 2,485,331...

334

PARENT HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

PARENT HANDBOOK 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS The Parent's Role 3 Academics 7 Academic Advising 7 Academic Services 26 Athletics, Physical Education and Recreation 28 Campus Resources and Student Services 30 to seeing you in person and connecting with you online! PARENT HANDBOOK THEPARENT'SROLE PARENT HANDBOOK 3

Adali, Tulay

335

Automatic Construction of Diagnostic Tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......more usual, at least in microbiology.) Keys and diagnostic tables...Mechanization and Data Handling in Microbiology, Society for Applied Bacteriology...by A. Baillie and R. J. Gilbert, London: Academic Press...cultures, Canadian Journal of Microbiology, Vol. 14, pp. 271-279......

W. R. Willcox; S. P. Lapage

1972-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

336

Table 5. Electric Power Industry Generation by Primary Energy...  

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

1992, 1991, 1990,"Percent Share 2000","Percent Share 2010","Percent Share 2012" "Electric Utilities",75183893,85006849,92198096,93939609,98396809,100536445,98159139,102750838,14230...

337

Table 5. Electric Power Industry Generation by Primary Energy...  

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

1992, 1991, 1990,"Percent Share 2000","Percent Share 2010","Percent Share 2012" "Electric Utilities",96763006,99451077,95099161,90418339,94637160,97259636,94637956,95187030,9205415...

338

Table 5. Electric Power Industry Generation by Primary Energy...  

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

1992, 1991, 1990,"Percent Share 2000","Percent Share 2010","Percent Share 2012" "Electric Utilities",106615302,103334454,88057219,90733028,93162079,90531201,94067080,83152928,83500...

339

Table 5. Electric Power Industry Generation by Primary Energy...  

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

1992, 1991, 1990,"Percent Share 2000","Percent Share 2010","Percent Share 2012" "Electric Utilities",56188401,53328664,58902054,59225368,59780402,64316732,61176351,65456080,6510365...

340

Ultrasonic methods for measuring liquid viscosity and volume percent of solids  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes two ultrasonic techniques under development at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) in support of the tank-waste transport effort undertaken by the U.S. Department of Energy in treating low-level nuclear waste. The techniques are intended to provide continuous on-line measurements of waste viscosity and volume percent of solids in a waste transport line. The ultrasonic technique being developed for waste-viscosity measurement is based on the patented ANL viscometer. Focus of the viscometer development in this project is on improving measurement accuracy, stability, and range, particularly in the low-viscosity range (<30 cP). A prototype instrument has been designed and tested in the laboratory. Better than 1% accuracy in liquid density measurement can be obtained by using either a polyetherimide or polystyrene wedge. To measure low viscosities, a thin-wedge design has been developed and shows good sensitivity down to 5 cP. The technique for measuring volume percent of solids is based on ultrasonic wave scattering and phase velocity variation. This report covers a survey of multiple scattering theories and other phenomenological approaches. A theoretical model leading to development of an ultrasonic instrument for measuring volume percent of solids is proposed, and preliminary measurement data are presented.

Sheen, S.H.; Chien, H.T.; Raptis, A.C.

1997-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

An optimal filtering algorithm for table constraints  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Filtering algorithms for table constraints are constraint-based, which means that the propagation queue only contains information on the constraints that must be reconsidered. This paper proposes four efficient value-based algorithms for table constraints, ...

Jean-Baptiste Mairy; Pascal Van Hentenryck; Yves Deville

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

342

Table Name query? | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Name query? Home > Groups > Databus Is there an API feature which returns the names of tables? Submitted by Hopcroft on 28 October, 2013 - 15:37 1 answer Points: 0 if you are...

343

Microsoft Word - table_C01.doc  

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

11 11 Created on: 12/12/2013 3:12:35 PM Table C1. Standard error for natural gas deliveries and price by consumers, by state, September 2013 Volume Relative Standard Error (Percent) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) State Residential Commercial Industrial Total Residential Commercial Industrial Alabama 2.7 1.8 1.6 1.4 0.67 0.09 0.06 Alaska 0.1 1.8 0.0 0.7 0.01 0.16 0.00 Arizona 1.3 3.4 2.4 1.7 0.37 0.01 0.10 Arkansas 1.0 3.7 1.5 1.4 0.46 0.21 0.15 California 2.6 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.59 0.51 0.14 Colorado 0.7 2.2 0.8 0.6 0.34 0.40 0.16 Connecticut 0.6 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.08 0.09 0.00 Delaware 0.0 0.0 NA NA 0.00 0.00 0.00 District of Columbia 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA 0.00 0.00 Florida 2.6 NA 1.2 NA 0.62 0.46 1.08 Georgia 0.7 0.6 1.3 0.9

344

Property Types, Definitions, and Use Detail  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Types, Definitions, and Use Details Types, Definitions, and Use Details The property types listed on pages 1 through 7 are eligible to receive the 1-100 ENERGY STAR score. The Use Details marked with an asterisk are required in order to receive a score. Portfolio Manager now contains more than 80 property types to choose from when setting up your property, in order to best identify the primary use of your property. Although the building types for which the 1-100 ENERGY STAR score is currently available will not change, the expanded list of property types that can be selected will offer users more specific and accurate categorization for comparison. See below for the full list of property types available in Portfolio Manager, along with their definitions and the property use details that you will need to enter.

345

Route selection and detailed line design  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The requirements for route selection and detailed line design of a high-voltage overhead line are established by the preparatory work, studies ... the required starting and terminal point of a transmission connec...

Dr.-Ing. Friedrich Kiessling; Dipl.-Ing. Peter Nefzger

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

346

Property:Project Details | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Details Details Jump to: navigation, search Property Name Project Details Property Type Text Pages using the property "Project Details" Showing 25 pages using this property. (previous 25) (next 25) M MHK Projects/40MW Lewis project + Aquamarine Power is developing its first commercial 40MW Oyster wave farm off the north-west coast of Lewis in Scotland. The company was granted an exclusive option on the site by UK seabed owner The Crown Estate in May 2011. MHK Projects/ADM 3 + 1/4 scale model MHK Projects/ADM 4 + Shore based PTO test MHK Projects/ADM 5 + Framework 7 program of the European Union MHK Projects/AW Energy EMEC + AW Energy successfully demonstrated a 1:3 scale prototype device at EMEC (European Marine Energy Center) in both calm and rough winter conditions. Bottom wave velocity measurements were taken concurrently using a Doppler device.

347

Chemistry Department Assessment Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

0 Chemistry Department Assessment May, 2006 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 1 Prelude 1 Mission Statement and Learning Goals 1 Facilities 2 Staffing 3 Students: Chemistry Majors and Student Taking Service Courses Table: 1997-2005 graduates profile Table: GRE Score for Chemistry Majors, 1993

Bogaerts, Steven

348

Simulating plant motion with levels of detail  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

SIMULATING PLANT MOTION WITH LEVELS OF DETAIL A Senior Honors Thesis by REBECCA LYNN FLANNERY Submitted to the Office of Honors Programs k. Academic Scholarships Texas AkM University in partial fulfillment of the requirements... of the UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH FELLOWS April 2003 Group: Engineering & Physics I SIMULATING PLANT MOTION WITH LEVELS OF DETAIL A Senior Honors Thesis by REBECCA LYNN FLANNERY Submitted to the Office of Honors Programs & Academic Scholarships...

Flannery, Rebecca Lynn

2013-02-22T23:59:59.000Z

349

OE Budget Control Table TerriL.pdf  

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

Hoffman, Patricia Hoffman, Patricia From: Henderson, Robin Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 2:18 PM To: Hoffman, Patricia Subject: RE: OE Budget Control Table TerriL.pdf Hi Pat, Ifyou have not already done so, this is fine to submit to the transition team. Sorry it took us so long. Thanks very much! Robin D. Henderson Program Support Specialist Department ofEnergy Office of Management (202) 586-2550 fax: (202) 586-1661 Robin.D.Henderson@hq. doe.gov From: Hoffman, Patricia Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 5:58 PM To: Kolb, Ingrid; Henderson, Robin Subject: FW: OE Budget Control Table TerriL.pdf Ingrid, Robin The transition team asked for a detailed breakdown of our budget (FY07-09) in our Transition meeting today with Skila Harris, Greg Watson, Todd Atkinson, Susan Tierney. We agreed to provide them the information. Once we

350

Table 38. Coal Stocks at Coke Plants by Census Division  

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

Coal Stocks at Coke Plants by Census Division Coal Stocks at Coke Plants by Census Division (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 38. Coal Stocks at Coke Plants by Census Division (thousand short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Census Division June 30, 2013 March 31, 2013 June 30, 2012 Percent Change (June 30) 2013 versus 2012 Middle Atlantic w w w w East North Central 1,313 1,177 1,326 -1.0 South Atlantic w w w w East South Central w w w w U.S. Total 2,500 2,207 2,295 8.9 w = Data withheld to avoid disclosure. Note: Total may not equal sum of components because of independent rounding. Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-5, 'Quarterly Coal Consumption and Quality Report - Coke Plants.'

351

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Action Codes Table Home > About Us > Our Programs > Nuclear Security > Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System > NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms > Code Tables > Action Codes Table

352

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5. Energy Prices and Expenditures, Ranked by State, 2011 5. Energy Prices and Expenditures, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Prices Expenditures a Energy Expenditures per Person Energy Expenditures as Percent of Current-Dollar GDP b State Dollars per Million Btu State Million Dollars State Dollars State Percent 1 Hawaii 38.41 Texas 169,290 Alaska 10,692 Louisiana 18.9 2 Connecticut 27.81 California 136,096 Louisiana 10,237 North Dakota 15.9 3 Vermont 27.77 Florida 68,013 Wyoming 9,529 Mississippi 15.5 4 New Hampshire 27.36 New York 65,877 North Dakota 9,360 Alaska 15.1 5 District of Columbia 27.04 Pennsylvania 55,164 Texas

353

New Water Booster Pump System Reduces Energy Consumption by 80 Percent and Increases Reliability  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This case study outlines how General Motors (GM) developed a highly efficient pumping system for their Pontiac Operations Complex in Pontiac, Michigan. In short, GM was able to replace five original 60- to 100-hp pumps with three 15-hp pumps whose speed could be adjusted to meet plant requirements. As a result, the company reduced pumping system energy consumption by 80 percent (225,100 kWh per year), saving an annual $11,255 in pumping costs. With a capital investment of $44,966 in the energy efficiency portion of their new system, GM projected a simple payback of 4 years.

354

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Power State Average Price Percent of Total Volume Delivered Average Price Percent of Total Volume Delivered Average Price Percent of Total Volume Delivered Average Price Average Price Alabama ..................... 13.34 99.99 10.91 81.99 7.34 20.03 -- 6.24 Alaska......................... 4.88 100.00 4.14 55.48 3.62 66.78 -- 2.79 Arizona ....................... 12.16 100.00 8.50 93.89 6.91 55.15 6.57 5.84 Arkansas .................... 11.73 100.00 8.86 80.30 8.03 5.67 6.86 6.19 California .................... 9.86 96.51 8.63 71.17 7.89 5.25 6.97 6.05 Colorado..................... 8.47 99.99 7.48 94.67 6.54 0.77 5.99 5.65 Connecticut................. 14.06 98.62 11.31 68.99 9.32 43.99 12.65 W

355

Description of Energy Intensity Tables (12)  

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

3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables 3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables There are 12 data tables used as references for this report. Specifically, these tables are categorized as tables 1 and 2 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1985, 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1985 and the three subsequent years (1988, 1991, and 1994) tables 3 and 4 present 1988, 1991, and 1994 energy-intensity ratios that have been adjusted to the mix of products shipped from manufacturing establishments in 1985 tables 5 and 6 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1988 and the two subsequent

356

Sandia National Labs: PCNSC: IBA Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Home Home About Us Departments Radiation, Nano Materials, & Interface Sciences > Radiation & Solid Interactions > Nanomaterials Sciences > Surface & Interface Sciences Semiconductor & Optical Sciences Energy Sciences Small Science Cluster Business Office News Partnering Research Ion Beam Analysis (IBA) Periodic Table (HTML) IBA Table (HTML) | IBA Table (135KB GIF) | IBA Table (1.2MB PDF) | IBA Table (33MB TIF) | Heavy Ion Backscattering Spectrometry (HIBS) | Virtual Lab Tour (6MB) The purpose of this table is to quickly give the visitor to this site information on the sensitivity, depth of analysis and depth resolution of most of the modern ion beam analysis techniques in a single easy to use format: a periodic table. Note that you can click on each panel of this

357

First Detailed Look at RNA Dicer  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Detailed Look at RNA Dicer Print Detailed Look at RNA Dicer Print Scientists have gotten their first detailed look at the molecular structure of an enzyme that Nature has been using for eons to help silence unwanted genetic messages. A team of researchers with Berkeley Lab and the University of California, Berkeley, used x-ray crystallography at ALS Beamlines 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 to determine the crystal structure of Dicer, an enzyme that plays a critical role in a process known as RNA interference. The Dicer enzyme is able to snip a double-stranded form of RNA into segments that can attach themselves to genes and block their activity. With this crystal structure, the researchers learned that Dicer serves as a molecular ruler, with a clamp at one end and a cleaver at the other end a set distance away, that produces RNA fragments of an ideal size for gene-silencing.

358

First Detailed Look at RNA Dicer  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

First Detailed Look at RNA Dicer Print First Detailed Look at RNA Dicer Print Scientists have gotten their first detailed look at the molecular structure of an enzyme that Nature has been using for eons to help silence unwanted genetic messages. A team of researchers with Berkeley Lab and the University of California, Berkeley, used x-ray crystallography at ALS Beamlines 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 to determine the crystal structure of Dicer, an enzyme that plays a critical role in a process known as RNA interference. The Dicer enzyme is able to snip a double-stranded form of RNA into segments that can attach themselves to genes and block their activity. With this crystal structure, the researchers learned that Dicer serves as a molecular ruler, with a clamp at one end and a cleaver at the other end a set distance away, that produces RNA fragments of an ideal size for gene-silencing.

359

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4-2030) 4-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Price Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Price Case Tables Low Price Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity Table 10. Electricity Trade Table 11. Petroleum Supply and Disposition Balance

360

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Economic Growth Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Economic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables Low Economic Growth Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

RSE Table S2.1 and S2.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S2.1 and S2.2  

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

S2.1 and S2.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S2.1 and S2.2;" S2.1 and S2.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S2.1 and S2.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " "SIC"," "," ","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Major Group and Industry","Total","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" , 20,"Food and Kindred Products",5,0,8,0,0,0,0,7 21,"Tobacco Products",0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0

362

RSE Table E6.1 and E6.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables E6.1 and E6.2  

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

E6.1 and E6.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables E6.1 and E6.2;" E6.1 and E6.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables E6.1 and E6.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",," ","Distillate"," "," ",," " " ",,,,"Fuel Oil",,,"Coal" " "," ","Net","Residual","and",,"LPG and","(excluding Coal"," " "End Use","Total","Electricity(a)","Fuel Oil","Diesel Fuel(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coke and Breeze)","Other(e)" ,"Total United States" "TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION",1,1,4,4,1,3,4,2 "Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel",0,3,4,5,1,2,5,0

363

RSE Table E8.1 and E8.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables E8.1 and E8.2  

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

E8.1 and E8.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables E8.1 and E8.2;" E8.1 and E8.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables E8.1 and E8.2;" " Unit: Percents." " ",," "," ",," "," " "Economic",,"Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and" "Characteristic(a)","Electricity","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",4,18,10,7,3,8 " 20-49",2,19,5,3,11,8 " 50-99",2,14,6,2,17,10 " 100-249",1,11,4,2,1,12 " 250-499",2,1,10,2,0,1 " 500 and Over",1,1,1,1,0,1

364

RSE Table N2.1 and N2.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N2.1 and N2.2  

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

N2.1 and N2.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N2.1 and N2.2;" N2.1 and N2.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables N2.1 and N2.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " "NAICS"," "," ","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","Total","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(b)","Natural Gas(c)","NGL(d)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(e)" ,,"Total United States" , 311,"Food",6,0,8,0,0,0,0,7 312,"Beverage and Tobacco Products",10,0,82,0,0,0,0,9 313,"Textile Mills",19,0,77,3,20,0,0,48 314,"Textile Product Mills",38,0,0,38,27,0,0,42

365

RSE Table S3.1 and S3.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S3.1 and S3.2  

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

S3.1 and S3.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S3.1 and S3.2;" S3.1 and S3.2. Relative Standard Errors for Tables S3.1 and S3.2;" " Unit: Percents." " "," " "SIC"," "," ","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke"," " "Code(a)","Major Group and Industry","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Natural Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","and Breeze","Other(f)" ,,"Total United States" , 20,"Food and Kindred Products",1,1,3,5,1,6,1,0,1 21,"Tobacco Products",4,5,23,53,10,24,1,0,32 22,"Textile Mill Products",2,2,4,16,3,7,1,0,4

366

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in B-100 Bone-equivalent plastic Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52740 1.450 85.9 0.05268 3.7365 0.1252 3.0420 3.4528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.435 7.435 7.443 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.803 5.803 1.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.535 4.535 2.543 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.521 3.521 5.080 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.008 3.008 8.173 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.256 2.256 2.401 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.115 2.115 3.319 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 5.287 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 8.408 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 1.376 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 1.866 1.913 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.940 0.000 0.000 1.940 4.016 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.973 0.000 0.000 1.974 5.037 × 10 2 1.40

367

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium monoxide Na 2 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.48404 2.270 148.8 0.07501 3.6943 0.1652 2.9793 4.1892 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.330 6.330 8.793 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.955 4.956 1.601 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.883 3.884 2.984 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.024 3.024 5.943 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.588 2.588 9.541 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.954 1.954 2.789 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.840 1.840 3.846 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.725 1.725 6.102 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.663 1.664 9.656 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.646 0.000 1.647 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.647 0.000 1.647 1.571 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.659 0.000 1.660 2.177 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.738 0.000 0.000 1.738 4.531 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.771 0.000 0.000 1.772 5.670 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

368

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Tissue-equivalent gas (Propane based) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55027 1.826 × 10 -3 59.5 0.09802 3.5159 1.5139 3.9916 9.3529 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.132 8.132 6.782 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.337 6.337 1.241 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.943 4.944 2.326 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.831 3.831 4.656 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.269 3.269 7.500 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.450 2.450 2.209 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.303 2.303 3.053 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.158 2.158 4.855 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.084 2.084 7.695 × 10 1 263. MeV 3.527 × 10 2 2.068 0.000 2.069 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.071 0.000 2.072 1.252 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.097 0.000 2.097 1.732 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.232 0.000 0.000 2.232 3.580 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.289 0.000 0.000 2.290

369

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead oxide (PbO) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.40323 9.530 766.7 0.19645 2.7299 0.0356 3.5456 6.2162 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.046 4.046 1.411 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.207 3.207 2.532 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.542 2.542 4.656 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.003 2.003 9.146 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.727 1.727 1.455 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.327 1.327 4.176 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.256 1.256 5.729 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.188 1.189 9.017 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.158 1.158 1.415 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.155 0.000 1.155 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.161 0.000 0.000 1.161 2.279 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.181 0.000 0.000 1.181 3.133 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.266 0.001 0.000 1.267 6.398 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.299 0.001 0.000 1.301 7.955 × 10 2 1.40

370

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Liquid argon (Ar) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 18 (Ar) 39.948 (1) 1.396 188.0 0.19559 3.0000 0.2000 3.0000 5.2146 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.687 5.687 9.833 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.461 4.461 1.786 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.502 3.502 3.321 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.731 2.731 6.598 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.340 2.340 1.058 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.084 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.669 1.670 4.250 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.570 1.570 6.732 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.518 1.519 1.063 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.508 0.000 1.508 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.509 0.000 1.510 1.725 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.526 0.000 0.000 1.526 2.385 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.610 0.000 0.000 1.610 4.934 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.644 0.000 0.000 1.645 6.163

371

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-13 (CF 3 Cl) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.47966 0.950 126.6 0.07238 3.5551 0.3659 3.2337 4.7483 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.416 6.416 8.659 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.019 5.019 1.578 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.930 3.930 2.945 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 5.870 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.615 2.615 9.430 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 2.760 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 3.809 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.745 1.745 6.041 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.685 1.685 9.551 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 1.553 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.151 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.762 0.000 0.000 1.763 4.473 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.596 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

372

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lutetium silicon oxide [Lu 2 SiO 5 ] Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42793 7.400 472.0 0.20623 3.0000 0.2732 3.0000 5.4394 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.679 4.679 1.209 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.692 3.693 2.181 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.916 2.916 4.029 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.287 2.287 7.953 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.968 1.968 1.270 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.503 1.503 3.666 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.421 1.422 5.038 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.344 1.344 7.944 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.308 1.308 1.248 × 10 2 242. MeV 3.316 × 10 2 1.304 1.304 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.309 0.000 0.000 1.309 2.014 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.329 2.773 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.416 5.684 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.449 0.001 0.000 1.450 7.080

373

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Boron oxide (B 2 O 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49839 1.812 99.6 0.11548 3.3832 0.1843 2.7379 3.6027 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.889 6.889 8.045 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.381 5.381 1.468 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.208 4.208 2.744 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.269 3.269 5.477 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.794 2.794 8.807 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.102 2.103 2.583 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 3.567 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.843 1.843 5.674 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.768 1.768 9.010 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 1.472 × 10 2 307. MeV 3.990 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.750 0.000 1.750 2.045 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.822 0.000 0.000 1.823 4.285 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.854 0.000 0.000 1.855 5.373 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

374

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Liquid H-note density shift (H 2 ) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 1 (H) 1.00794 (7) 7.080 × 10 -2 21.8 0.32969 3.0000 0.1641 1.9641 2.6783 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 16.508 16.508 3.316 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 12.812 12.812 6.097 × 10 -1 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 9.956 9.956 1.147 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 7.684 7.684 2.307 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 6.539 6.539 3.727 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 4.870 4.870 1.105 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 4.550 4.550 1.531 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 4.217 4.217 2.448 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 4.018 0.000 4.018 3.912 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 3.926 0.000 3.926 6.438 × 10 1 356. MeV 4.497 × 10 2 3.919 0.000 3.919 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 3.922 0.000 3.922 8.988 × 10 1 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 4.029 0.000 4.030 1.906 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 4.084 0.001

375

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Cortical bone (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52130 1.850 106.4 0.06198 3.5919 0.1161 3.0919 3.6488 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.142 7.142 7.765 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.581 5.581 1.417 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.366 4.366 2.646 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.393 3.393 5.281 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.900 2.901 8.489 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.179 2.179 2.489 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.044 2.044 3.440 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.475 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.830 1.830 8.700 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 1.422 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.812 0.000 1.812 1.976 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.888 0.000 0.000 1.889 4.138 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.922 0.000 0.000 1.923 5.187 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

376

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-13B1 (CF 3 Br) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.45665 1.500 210.5 0.03925 3.7194 0.3522 3.7554 5.3555 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.678 5.678 9.844 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.454 4.454 1.788 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.498 3.498 3.325 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.729 2.729 6.606 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.339 2.339 1.059 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.086 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.671 1.671 4.251 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.574 1.574 6.729 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.524 1.524 1.062 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.513 0.000 1.513 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.515 0.000 1.515 1.721 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.531 0.000 0.000 1.532 2.378 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.616 0.000 0.000 1.616 4.919 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.650 0.001 0.000 1.651 6.142 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

377

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium carbonate (Na 2 CO 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49062 2.532 125.0 0.08715 3.5638 0.1287 2.8591 3.7178 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.575 6.575 8.449 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.142 5.142 1.540 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.026 4.026 2.874 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.131 3.131 5.729 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.679 2.679 9.204 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 2.695 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.895 1.895 3.721 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.771 1.772 5.914 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.703 1.703 9.381 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 1.531 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.690 0.000 1.691 2.125 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.764 0.000 0.000 1.764 4.440 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.563 × 10 2 1.40

378

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Tungsten hexafluoride (WF 6 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42976 2.400 354.4 0.03658 3.5134 0.3020 4.2602 5.9881 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.928 4.928 1.143 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.880 3.880 2.067 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 3.828 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.393 2.393 7.574 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.056 2.056 1.211 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.565 1.565 3.509 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.479 1.479 4.827 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.396 1.396 7.623 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.353 1.353 1.200 × 10 2 253. MeV 3.431 × 10 2 1.346 0.000 1.346 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.349 0.000 0.000 1.349 1.942 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.367 0.000 0.000 1.367 2.679 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.451 0.001 0.000 1.452 5.516 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.485 0.001 0.000 1.486 6.877

379

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Standard rock Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.50000 2.650 136.4 0.08301 3.4120 0.0492 3.0549 3.7738 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.619 6.619 8.400 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.180 5.180 1.530 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.057 4.057 2.854 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.157 3.157 5.687 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.701 2.702 9.133 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.028 2.029 2.675 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.904 1.904 3.695 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.779 1.779 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.710 1.710 9.331 × 10 1 297. MeV 3.884 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 1.523 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.698 0.000 1.698 2.114 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.774 0.000 0.000 1.775 4.418 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.808 0.000 0.000 1.808 5.534 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

380

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Ceric sulfate dosimeter solution Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55279 1.030 76.7 0.07666 3.5607 0.2363 2.8769 3.5212 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.909 7.909 6.989 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.170 6.170 1.278 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.391 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.739 3.739 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.193 3.193 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.398 2.398 2.261 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.255 2.255 3.123 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.102 2.102 4.968 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 7.896 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.980 0.000 1.980 1.292 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.979 0.000 1.979 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.986 0.000 1.986 1.797 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.062 0.000 0.000 2.062 3.774 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.096 0.000 0.000 2.097 4.735 × 10

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Silicon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 14 (Si) 28.0855 (3) 2.329 173.0 0.14921 3.2546 0.2015 2.8716 4.4355 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.363 6.363 8.779 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.987 4.987 1.595 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.912 3.912 2.969 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.047 3.047 5.905 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.608 2.608 9.476 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.965 1.965 2.770 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.849 1.849 3.822 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.737 1.737 6.064 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.678 1.678 9.590 × 10 1 273. MeV 3.633 × 10 2 1.664 0.000 1.664 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.665 0.000 1.666 1.559 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.157 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.767 0.000 0.000 1.768 4.475 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.803 0.000 0.000 1.804 5.595 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

382

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyethylene terephthalate (Mylar) (C 10 H 8 O 4 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52037 1.400 78.7 0.12679 3.3076 0.1562 2.6507 3.3262 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.420 7.420 7.451 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.789 5.789 1.362 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.522 4.522 2.548 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.509 3.509 5.093 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.997 2.997 8.197 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.250 2.250 2.409 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.108 2.108 3.329 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.963 1.964 5.305 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.440 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 1.382 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.848 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.855 0.000 1.855 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.926 0.000 0.000 1.926 4.039 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.958 0.000 0.000 1.959

383

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Dichlorodiethyl ether C 4 Cl 2 H 8 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51744 1.220 103.3 0.06799 3.5250 0.1773 3.1586 4.0135 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.789 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.561 5.561 1.421 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.349 4.349 2.655 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.380 3.380 5.300 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.889 2.889 8.521 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.174 2.174 2.499 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.042 2.042 3.450 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.486 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.832 1.832 8.708 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 1.422 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.817 0.000 1.817 1.974 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.895 0.000 0.000 1.896 4.129 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.931 5.174 × 10

384

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 82 (Pb) 207.2 (1) 11.350 823.0 0.09359 3.1608 0.3776 3.8073 6.2018 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.823 3.823 1.524 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.054 3.054 2.705 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.436 2.436 4.927 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.928 1.928 9.600 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.666 1.666 1.521 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.283 1.283 4.338 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.215 1.215 5.943 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.151 1.152 9.339 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.124 1.124 1.463 × 10 2 226. MeV 3.145 × 10 2 1.122 0.000 1.123 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.130 0.000 0.000 1.131 2.352 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.151 0.000 0.000 1.152 3.228 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.237 0.001 0.000 1.238 6.572 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.270 0.001 0.000 1.272 8.165 × 10 2 1.40

385

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium iodide (NaI) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42697 3.667 452.0 0.12516 3.0398 0.1203 3.5920 6.0572 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.703 4.703 1.202 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.710 3.710 2.169 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.928 2.928 4.009 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.297 2.297 7.917 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 1.264 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.509 1.509 3.652 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.427 1.427 5.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.347 1.348 7.916 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.310 1.310 1.245 × 10 2 243. MeV 3.325 × 10 2 1.305 1.305 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.310 0.000 0.000 1.310 2.010 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.330 2.768 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.417 0.001 0.000 1.418 5.677 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.452 0.001 0.000 1.453 7.070 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

386

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyvinyl alcohol (C 2 H3-O-H) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54480 1.300 69.7 0.11178 3.3893 0.1401 2.6315 3.1115 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.891 7.891 6.999 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.153 6.153 1.280 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.804 4.804 2.396 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.726 3.726 4.793 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.181 3.181 7.717 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.383 2.384 2.270 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.231 2.232 3.140 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.076 2.076 5.007 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.986 1.986 7.974 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.950 0.000 1.950 1.307 × 10 2 324. MeV 4.161 × 10 2 1.949 0.000 1.949 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.955 0.000 1.955 1.820 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.026 0.000 0.000 2.026 3.830 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.059 0.000 0.000 2.059 4.809 × 10 2 1.40

387

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Cesium Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 55 (Cs)132.9054519 (2) 1.873 488.0 0.18233 2.8866 0.5473 3.5914 6.9135 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.464 4.464 1.277 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.532 3.532 2.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.794 2.794 4.224 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.195 2.195 8.315 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.890 1.890 1.325 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.444 1.444 3.820 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.366 1.366 5.248 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.291 1.291 8.274 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.257 1.257 1.300 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.254 1.254 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.261 0.000 0.000 1.261 2.096 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.284 0.000 0.000 1.285 2.882 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.378 0.001 0.000 1.380 5.881 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.417 7.311 × 10 2

388

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Propane (C 3 H 8 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.58962 1.868 × 10 -3 47.1 0.09916 3.5920 1.4339 3.8011 8.7939 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.969 8.969 6.137 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.982 6.982 1.125 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.441 5.441 2.109 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 4.212 4.213 4.228 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.592 3.592 6.815 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.688 2.688 2.010 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.525 2.526 2.780 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.365 2.365 4.424 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.281 2.281 7.018 × 10 1 267. MeV 3.577 × 10 2 2.262 0.000 2.263 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.265 0.000 2.265 1.143 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.291 0.000 2.291 1.582 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.434 0.000 0.000 2.435 3.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.495 0.000 0.000 2.496 4.086 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

389

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polystyrene ([C 6 H 5 CHCH 2 ] n ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53768 1.060 68.7 0.16454 3.2224 0.1647 2.5031 3.2999 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.803 7.803 7.077 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.084 6.084 1.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.749 4.749 2.424 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.683 3.683 4.848 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.144 3.144 7.806 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.359 2.359 2.296 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.210 2.211 3.174 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.058 2.058 5.059 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.970 1.971 8.049 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.937 0.000 1.937 1.318 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.936 0.000 1.936 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.942 0.000 1.943 1.834 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.015 0.000 0.000 2.015 3.856 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.048 0.000 0.000 2.049 4.841 × 10 2 1.40

390

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Air (dry, 1 atm) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49919 1.205 × 10 -3 85.7 0.10914 3.3994 1.7418 4.2759 10.5961 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.039 7.039 7.862 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.494 5.495 1.436 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.294 4.294 2.686 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.333 3.333 5.366 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.847 2.847 8.633 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.140 2.140 2.535 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 3.501 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 5.562 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.827 1.827 8.803 × 10 1 257. MeV 3.471 × 10 2 1.815 0.000 1.816 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 1.819 1.430 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.844 0.000 1.844 1.977 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.968 0.000 0.000 1.968 4.074 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.020 0.000 0.000 2.021 5.077 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

391

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead tungstate (PbWO 4 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.41315 8.300 600.7 0.22758 3.0000 0.4068 3.0023 5.8528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.333 4.333 1.311 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.426 3.426 2.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.710 2.711 4.350 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.131 2.131 8.566 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.835 1.835 1.365 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.406 1.406 3.931 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.331 1.331 5.397 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.261 1.261 8.498 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.231 1.231 1.333 × 10 2 227. MeV 3.154 × 10 2 1.229 1.230 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.237 0.000 0.000 1.238 2.145 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.260 0.000 0.000 1.260 2.946 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.349 0.001 0.000 1.350 6.007 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.383 0.001 0.000 1.385 7.469 × 10 2 1.40

392

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Carbon (compact) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) [12.0107 (8)] 2.265 78.0 0.26142 2.8697 -0.0178 2.3415 2.8680 0.12 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.116 7.116 7.772 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.549 5.549 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.331 4.331 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.355 3.355 5.318 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.861 2.861 8.567 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.126 2.127 2.531 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.991 1.992 3.505 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.854 1.854 5.597 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.775 1.775 8.917 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 1.462 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.751 0.000 1.751 2.034 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.820 4.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.850 0.000 0.000 1.851 5.365 × 10

393

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Methanol (CH 3 OH) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56176 0.791 67.6 0.08970 3.5477 0.2529 2.7639 3.5160 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.169 8.169 6.759 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.369 6.369 1.236 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.972 4.972 2.315 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.855 3.855 4.631 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.291 3.291 7.457 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.469 2.469 2.194 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.321 2.322 3.032 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.166 2.166 4.823 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 7.664 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.039 0.000 2.039 1.254 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 2.038 0.000 2.039 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.045 0.000 2.045 1.744 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.121 0.000 0.000 2.122 3.665 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.156 0.000 0.000 2.157 4.600 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 ×

394

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Carbon (amorphous) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) 12.0107 (8) 2.000 78.0 0.20240 3.0036 -0.0351 2.4860 2.9925 0.10 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.771 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.550 5.551 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.332 4.332 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.357 3.357 5.317 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.862 2.862 8.564 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.129 2.129 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.994 1.994 3.502 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 5.591 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.778 1.779 8.905 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 1.459 × 10 2 313. MeV 4.055 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.755 0.000 1.756 2.030 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.824 0.000 0.000 1.825 4.266 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.855 0.000 0.000 1.856 5.353 × 10

395

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Mix D wax Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56479 0.990 60.9 0.07490 3.6823 0.1371 2.7145 3.0780 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.322 8.322 6.628 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.485 6.486 1.213 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.060 5.060 2.273 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.922 3.922 4.549 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.347 3.347 7.327 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.505 2.506 2.158 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.346 2.346 2.985 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.182 2.182 4.761 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.087 2.087 7.584 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.049 0.000 2.049 1.243 × 10 2 328. MeV 4.201 × 10 2 2.048 0.000 2.048 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.053 0.000 2.053 1.731 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.125 0.000 0.000 2.125 3.647 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.158 0.000 0.000 2.159 4.581 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10 3 2.213

396

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium nitrate NaNO 3 Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49415 2.261 114.6 0.09391 3.5097 0.1534 2.8221 3.6502 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.702 6.702 8.281 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.239 5.239 1.510 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.100 4.100 2.820 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.187 3.187 5.624 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.726 2.726 9.039 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.053 2.053 2.648 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.927 1.927 3.656 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.800 1.800 5.814 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.729 1.729 9.228 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 1.507 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.714 0.000 1.714 2.092 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 0.000 1.787 4.377 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.819 5.486 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

397

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-12B2 (CF 2 Br 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.44901 1.800 284.9 0.05144 3.5565 0.3406 3.7956 5.7976 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.330 5.330 1.053 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.190 4.190 1.908 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.297 3.297 3.540 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.577 2.577 7.017 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.212 2.212 1.123 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.680 1.680 3.263 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.586 1.586 4.491 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.496 1.496 7.099 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.452 1.452 1.118 × 10 2 252. MeV 3.421 × 10 2 1.445 0.000 1.445 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.448 0.000 1.449 1.809 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.467 0.000 0.000 1.468 2.496 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.556 0.000 0.000 1.557 5.139 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.592 0.001 0.000 1.593 6.409 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

398

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Eye lens (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54977 1.100 73.3 0.09690 3.4550 0.2070 2.7446 3.3720 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.912 7.912 6.984 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.171 6.171 1.277 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.390 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.738 3.738 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.192 3.192 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.396 2.396 2.262 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.251 2.251 3.125 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.095 2.096 4.976 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.006 2.006 7.914 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 1.296 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.977 0.000 1.977 1.803 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.051 0.000 0.000 2.051 3.790 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.085 0.000 0.000 2.085 4.756 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

399

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Compact bone (ICRU) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53010 1.850 91.9 0.05822 3.6419 0.0944 3.0201 3.3390 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.406 7.406 7.477 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.783 5.783 1.365 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.521 4.521 2.552 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.511 3.511 5.097 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.000 3.000 8.199 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.247 2.247 2.408 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.106 2.106 3.330 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.962 1.962 5.307 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.444 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.850 1.382 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.856 0.000 1.857 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.930 4.036 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.963 0.000 0.000 1.964 5.063 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

400

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyimide film (C 22 H 10 N 2 O 5 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51264 1.420 79.6 0.15972 3.1921 0.1509 2.5631 3.3497 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.299 7.299 7.576 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.695 5.695 1.385 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.449 4.449 2.590 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.453 3.453 5.177 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.949 2.949 8.332 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.214 2.214 2.448 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 3.384 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.932 1.932 5.392 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.851 1.851 8.577 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 1.404 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.826 0.000 1.827 1.953 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.897 0.000 0.000 1.898 4.102 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.929 0.000 0.000 1.930 5.147 × 10 2 1.40

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Silicon dioxide (fused quartz) (SiO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49930 2.200 139.2 0.08408 3.5064 0.1500 3.0140 4.0560 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.591 6.591 8.438 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.158 5.158 1.537 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.041 4.041 2.866 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.145 3.145 5.710 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.691 2.691 9.170 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.030 2.030 2.682 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.908 1.908 3.701 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.786 1.786 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.719 1.719 9.315 × 10 1 288. MeV 3.788 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 1.518 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.711 0.000 1.711 2.105 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.789 0.000 0.000 1.790 4.391 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.823 0.000 0.000 1.824 5.497

402

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Radon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 86 (Rn) [222.01758 (2)]9.066 × 10 -3 794.0 0.20798 2.7409 1.5368 4.9889 13.2839 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.782 3.782 1.535 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.018 3.018 2.730 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.405 2.405 4.980 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.902 1.902 9.715 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.644 1.644 1.540 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.267 1.267 4.394 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.201 1.201 6.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.140 1.140 9.452 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.116 1.117 1.479 × 10 2 216. MeV 3.039 × 10 2 1.116 1.116 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.127 0.000 0.000 1.128 2.372 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.154 0.000 0.000 1.154 3.249 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.258 0.001 0.000 1.260 6.559 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.300 0.001 0.000 1.302 8.119

403

Table  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Solid carbon dioxide (dry ice; CO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49989 1.563 85.0 0.43387 3.0000 0.2000 2.0000 3.4513 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.057 7.057 7.841 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.508 5.508 1.432 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.304 4.304 2.679 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.341 3.341 5.353 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.854 2.854 8.612 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.145 2.145 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 3.493 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.886 1.886 5.554 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.812 1.812 8.811 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 1.438 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.795 0.000 1.795 1.997 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 0.000 1.866 4.182 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.896 0.000 0.000 1.897 5.245 × 10

404

First Detailed Look at RNA Dicer  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Detailed Look at RNA Dicer Detailed Look at RNA Dicer First Detailed Look at RNA Dicer Print Wednesday, 25 January 2006 00:00 Scientists have gotten their first detailed look at the molecular structure of an enzyme that Nature has been using for eons to help silence unwanted genetic messages. A team of researchers with Berkeley Lab and the University of California, Berkeley, used x-ray crystallography at ALS Beamlines 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 to determine the crystal structure of Dicer, an enzyme that plays a critical role in a process known as RNA interference. The Dicer enzyme is able to snip a double-stranded form of RNA into segments that can attach themselves to genes and block their activity. With this crystal structure, the researchers learned that Dicer serves as a molecular ruler, with a clamp at one end and a cleaver at the other end a set distance away, that produces RNA fragments of an ideal size for gene-silencing.

405

Contact Details Journeying Beyond Breast Cancer  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Home About Contact Details Facebook Search Journeying Beyond Breast Cancer making sense of the cancer experience Feeds: Posts Comments Cancer-fighting fountain pen May 20, 2009 by JBBC A research team be used both as a research tool in the development of next-generation cancer treatments

Espinosa, Horacio D.

406

Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics (2004-2012...  

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

Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics (2004-2012) Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics (2004-2012) Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics...

407

Variable White Dwarf Data Tables  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Below, I give a brief explanation of the information in these tables. In all cases, I list the WD {number_sign}, either from the catalog of McCook {ampersand} Sion (1987) or determined by me from the epoch 1950 coordinates. Next, I list the most commonly used name (or alias), then I list the variable star designation if it is available. If not, I list the constellation name and a V** or?? depending on what the last designated variable star for that constellation is. I present epoch 2000 coordinates for all of the stars, which I precessed from the 1950 ones in most cases. I do not include proper motion effects; this is negligible for all except the largest proper motion DAV stars, such as L 19-2, BPM 37093, B 808, and G 29-38. Even in these cases, the error is no more than 30` in declination and 2 s in right ascension. I culled effective temperatures from the latest work (listed under each table); they are now much more homogeneous than before. I pulled the magnitude estimates from the appropriate paper, and they are mean values integrated over several cycles. The amplitude given is for the height of a typical pulse in the light curve. The periods correspond the dominant ones found in the light curve. In some cases, there is a band of power in a given period range, or the light curve is very complex, and I indicate this in the table. In the references, I generally list the paper with the most comprehensive pulsation analysis for the star in question. In some cases, there is more than one good reference, and I list them as well.

Bradley, P. A.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

408

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2008 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 2 0 6,256 6,258 Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 * 0 0 * Hawaii............................. 2,554 5 0 0 2,559 Illinois.............................. 0 15 0 0 15 Indiana............................ 0 30 0 0 30 Iowa ................................ 0 24 3 0 27 Kentucky......................... 0 15 0 0 15 Maryland ......................... 0 181 0 0 181 Massachusetts................ 0 13 0 0 13 Minnesota ....................... 0 46 0 0 46 Missouri .......................... * 6 0 0 6 Nebraska ........................ 0 28 0 0 28 New Hampshire .............. 0 44 0 0 44 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 489 489 New York ........................

409

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2009 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 7,525 7,527 Connecticut..................... 0 * 0 0 * Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 0 52 * 52 Hawaii............................. 2,438 9 0 0 2,447 Illinois.............................. 0 20 0 0 20 Indiana............................ 0 * 0 0 * Iowa ................................ 0 3 0 0 3 Kentucky......................... 0 18 0 0 18 Maryland ......................... 0 170 0 0 170 Massachusetts................ 0 10 0 0 10 Minnesota ....................... 0 47 0 0 47 Missouri .......................... * 10 0 0 10 Nebraska ........................ 0 18 0 0 18 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 454 454 New York ........................

410

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 4 0 5,144 5,148 Delaware ........................ 0 1 0 0 1 Georgia........................... 0 0 732 0 732 Hawaii............................. 2,465 6 0 0 2,472 Illinois.............................. 0 17 0 0 17 Indiana............................ 0 1 0 0 1 Iowa ................................ 0 2 0 0 2 Kentucky......................... 0 5 0 0 5 Louisiana ........................ 0 0 249 0 249 Maryland ......................... 0 115 0 0 115 Massachusetts................ 0 * 0 0 * Minnesota ....................... 0 12 0 0 12 Missouri .......................... * 18 0 0 18 Nebraska ........................ 0 12 0 0 12 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 457 457 New York ........................

411

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2007 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 6,866 6,869 Delaware ........................ 0 5 0 0 5 Georgia........................... 0 2 0 0 2 Hawaii............................. 2,679 4 0 0 2,683 Illinois.............................. 0 11 0 0 11 Indiana............................ 0 81 0 554 635 Iowa ................................ 0 2 38 0 40 Kentucky......................... 0 124 0 0 124 Maryland ......................... 0 245 0 0 245 Massachusetts................ 0 15 0 0 15 Minnesota ....................... 0 54 0 0 54 Missouri .......................... 7 60 0 0 66 Nebraska ........................ 0 33 0 0 33 New Hampshire .............. 0 9 0 0 9 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 379 379 New York ........................

412

Table-top job analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this Handbook is to establish general training program guidelines for training personnel in developing training for operation, maintenance, and technical support personnel at Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. TTJA is not the only method of job analysis; however, when conducted properly TTJA can be cost effective, efficient, and self-validating, and represents an effective method of defining job requirements. The table-top job analysis is suggested in the DOE Training Accreditation Program manuals as an acceptable alternative to traditional methods of analyzing job requirements. DOE 5480-20A strongly endorses and recommends it as the preferred method for analyzing jobs for positions addressed by the Order.

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

413

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - Low Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main Low Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year Low Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions

414

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - High Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main High Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary High Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year High Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Excel Gif

415

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, October 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

416

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, August 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (August 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M., Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

417

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, September 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

418

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

419

Environmental regulatory update table, July 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (July 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

420

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1990  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Hawkins, G.T.; Houlberg, L.M.; Noghrei-Nikbakht, P.A.; Salk, M.S.

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

Details of U.S. Climate Zones:  

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

Details of U.S. Climate Zones Details of U.S. Climate Zones Details of U.S. Climate Zones: The CBECS climate zones are groups of climate divisions, as defined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which are regions within a state that are as climatically homogeneous as possible. Each NOAA climate division is placed into one of five CBECS climate zones based on its 30-year average heating degree-days (HDD) and cooling degree-days (CDD) for the period 1971 through 2000. (These climate zones have been updated for the 2003 CBECS. All previous CBECS used averages for the 45-year period from 1931 through 1975.) A HDD is a measure of how cold a location was over a period of time, relative to a base temperature (in CBECS, 65 degrees Fahrenheit). The heating degree-day is the difference between that day's average temperature and 65 degrees if the daily average is less than 65; it is zero if the daily average temperature is greater than or equal to 65. For example, if the average temperature for a given day is 40 degrees, then the heating degree-days for that single day equal 25. Heating degree-days for a year are the sum of the daily heating degree-days that year.

422

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1) 1) June 2013 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2011 2011 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table E1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price Estimates, 2011 (Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector g,h Retail Electricity Total Energy g,i Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total g,h,i Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Other e Total Wood and Waste f Alabama 3.09 5.66 26.37 22.77 25.54 27.12 13.18 19.42 25.90 0.61 3.01 8.75 2.56 27.08 19.85 Alaska 3.64 6.70 29.33 23.12 29.76 31.60 20.07 34.62 26.61 - 14.42 20.85 6.36 47.13 25.17 Arizona 1.99 7.07 27.73 22.84 31.95 26.97 17.00 17.23 26.71 0.75 6.31 10.79 2.16 28.46 25.23 Arkansas 1.93 6.94 26.37 22.45 26.66 27.35 17.35 33.22

423

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2004 2004 Consumption Summary Tables Table S1. Energy Consumption Estimates by Source and End-Use Sector, 2004 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Power d Biomass e Other f Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/Losses g Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Alabama 2,159.7 853.9 404.0 638.5 329.9 106.5 185.0 0.1 -358.2 393.7 270.2 1,001.1 494.7 Alaska 779.1 14.1 411.8 334.8 0.0 15.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 56.4 63.4 393.4 266.0 Arizona 1,436.6 425.4 354.9 562.8 293.1 69.9 8.7 3.6 -281.7 368.5 326.0 231.2 511.0 Arkansas 1,135.9 270.2 228.9 388.3 161.1 36.5 76.0 0.6 -25.7 218.3 154.7 473.9 288.9 California 8,364.6 68.9 2,474.2 3,787.8 315.6 342.2

424

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9) 9) June 2011 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2009 2009 Consumption Summary Tables Table C1. Energy Consumption Overview: Estimates by Energy Source and End-Use Sector, 2009 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy e Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/ Losses f Net Electricity Imports Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum d Total Alabama 1,906.8 631.0 473.9 583.9 1,688.8 415.4 272.9 -470.3 0.0 383.2 266.0 788.5 469.2 Alaska 630.4 14.5 344.0 255.7 614.1 0.0 16.3 0.0 (s) 53.4 61.0 325.4 190.6 Arizona 1,454.3 413.3 376.7 520.8 1,310.8 320.7 103.5 -279.9 -0.8 400.8 352.1 207.8 493.6 Arkansas 1,054.8 264.1 248.1 343.1 855.3 158.7 126.5 -85.7 0.0 226.3 167.0 372.5

425

Microsoft Word - table_01.doc  

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

3 3 Table 1 Table 1. Summary of natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Year and Month Gross Withdrawals Marketed Production NGPL Production a Dry Gas Production b Supplemental Gaseous Fuels c Net Imports Net Storage Withdrawals d Balancing Item e Consumption f 2008 Total 25,636 21,112 953 20,159 61 3,021 34 2 23,277 2009 Total 26,057 21,648 1,024 20,624 65 2,679 -355 -103 22,910 2010 Total 26,816 22,382 1,066 21,316 65 2,604 -13 115 24,087 2011 January 2,299 1,953 92 1,861 5 236 811 R -24 R 2,889 February 2,104 1,729 82 1,647 4 186 594 R 20 R 2,452 March 2,411 2,002 95 1,908 5 171 151 R -4 R 2,230 April 2,350 1,961 93 1,868 5 R 152 -216 R 17 R 1,825 May 2,411 2,031

426

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Annual 4 Table 2 Alabama 215,710 7,110 -162,223 617,883 0 -2,478 0 666,738 Alaska 351,259 21,470 22,663 0 -9,342 0 0 343,110 Arizona 117 0 -13,236 389,036 -43,838 0 0 332,079 Arkansas 1,146,168 424 -18,281 -831,755 0 -103 0 295,811 California 246,822 12,755 104,820 2,222,355 -109,787 48,071 0 2,403,385 Colorado 1,709,376 81,943 -107,940 -1,077,968 0 2,570 4,412 443,367 Connecticut 0 0 4,191 225,228 0 260 0 229,159 Delaware 0 0 21,035 80,692 0 51 * 101,676 District of Columbia 0 0 497 28,075 0 0 0 28,572 Florida 18,681 0 15,168 1,294,620 0 0 0 1,328,469

427

TableHC2.12.xls  

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

Detached Attached 2 to 4 Units Energy Information Administration: 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing...

428

TableHC10.13.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

or More... 0.3 Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators U.S. Census Region Northeast Midwest Table HC10.13 Lighting Usage...

429

TABLE54.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Administration (EIA) Forms EIA-812, "Monthly Product Pipeline Report," and EIA-813, Monthly Crude Oil Report." Table 54. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline...

430

TABLE19.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Table 19. PAD District IV-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

431

TABLE15.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Table 15. PAD District III-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

432

TABLE53.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Table 53. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline, Tanker, and Barge Between July 2004 Crude Oil ... 0 383 0...

433

TABLE11.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

(Thousand Barrels) Table 11. PAD District II-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

434

2011 Annual Report Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

) ...................12 Smart Grid Cyber Security.....................................................13 ICT Supply ChainComputer Security Division 2011 Annual Report #12;Table of Contents Welcome ................................................................. 1 Division Organization .................................................2 The Computer Security

435

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

Cost Report." Figure Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996 3 Table 2. U.S. Refiner Prices of Petroleum Products to End Users (Cents per Gallon...

436

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Volume II Table of Contents SURVEY OF AVAILABLE DATA Introduction ...................................................................................13 EVALUATING GIS HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE Introduction ...................................................................................14 Sources of Information About GIS......................................................14 GIS

Ghelli, Giorgio

437

Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - High Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6-2030) 6-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 XLS GIF Spreadsheets are provided in Excel High Price Case Tables (2006-2030) Table Title Formats Summary High Price Case Tables PDF GIF High Price Case Tables XLS GIF Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary XLS GIF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption XLS GIF Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions XLS GIF Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

438

Extraction of Plutonium into 30 Percent Tri-Butyl Phosphate from Nitric Acid Solution Containing Fluoride, Aluminum, and Boron  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This work consists of experimental batch extraction data for plutonium into 30 volume-percent tri-butyl phosphate at ambient temperature from such a solution matrix and a model of this data using complexation constants from the literature.

Kyser, E.A.

2000-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

439

"EIA-914 Production Weighted Response Rates, Percent"  

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

EIA-914 Production Weighted Response Rates, Percent" EIA-914 Production Weighted Response Rates, Percent" "Areas",38353,38384,38412,38443,38473,38504,38534,38565,38596,38626,38657,38687,38718,38749,38777,"application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel"

440

A correlation of water solubility in jet fuels with API gravity: aniline point percent aromatics, and temperature.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

A CORRELATION OF WATER SOLUBILITY IN JET FUELS WITH API GRAVITY, ANILINE POINT PERCENT AROMATICS, AND TEMPERATURE A Thesis By ALONZO B YINGTON Submitted to the Graduate College of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment... of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE January, 1964 Major Subject: Petroleum Engineering A CORRELATION OF MATER SOLUBILITT IH JET FUELS WITS API GEAVITT, ANILINE POINT, PERCENT ARONATICS, AND TENPERATURE A Thesis By ALOHZO BYIHGTOH Approved...

Byington, Alonzo

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Detailed stability analysis of electroweak strings  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

We give a detailed stability analysis of the Z-string in the standard electroweak model. We identify the mode that determines the stability of the string and numerically map the region of parameter space where the string is stable. For sin2?W = 0.23, we find that the strings are unstable for a Higgs mass larger than 23 GeV. Given the latest constraints of the Higgs mass from LEP, this shows that, if the standard electroweak model is realized in nature, the existing vortex solutions are unstable.

Margaret James; Leandros Perivolaropoulos; Tanmay Vachaspati

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

442

Exhibit C Table of Contents  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" SCHEDULES AND LISTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Form Title A Schedule of Quantities and Prices B Milestone and Payment Schedule C Lower-Tier Subcontractor and Vendor List Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 2 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" FORM A SCHEDULE OF QUANTITIES AND PRICES NOTE: This Exhibit "C" Form A is part of the model subcontract for Trinity and is provided to Offerors for informational purposes only. It is not intended that this form be returned with the Offeror's proposal. 1.0 WORK TO BE PERFORMED Work shall be performed strictly in accordance with requirements of the Subcontract

443

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2005 Alabama .................................. 255,157 9,748 13,759 37,048 Alaska...................................... 3,089,229 23,700 27,956 105,449 Arkansas.................................. 16,756 177 231 786 California ................................. 226,230 11,101 13,748 45,926 Colorado .................................. 730,948 25,603 34,782 95,881 Florida...................................... 3,584 359 495 1,400 Illinois....................................... 280 37 46 129 Kansas..................................... 476,656 22,165 31,521 85,737 Kentucky.................................. 38,792 1,411 1,716 5,725 Louisiana ................................. 2,527,636 73,035 103,381

444

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Producing Gas Wells by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2006-2010 Alabama .......................................................... 6,227 6,591 6,860 6,913 7,026 Alaska.............................................................. 231 239 261 261 269 Arizona ............................................................ 7 7 6 6 5 Arkansas.......................................................... 3,814 4,773 5,592 6,314 7,397 California ......................................................... 1,451 1,540 1,645 1,643 1,580 Colorado .......................................................... 20,568 22,949 25,716 27,021 28,813 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 2,419 2,552 1,527 1,984 1,852 Illinois...............................................................

445

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2004-2008, and by State, 2008 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ R 16,335,710 -- R 6.25 R 20,196,346 R 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,424,440 -- 7.96 21,239,516 169,038,089 Alabama ............................... 246,747 2,382,188 9.65 257,884 2,489,704 Alaska................................... 337,359 2,493,128 7.39 398,442 2,944,546 Arizona ................................. 503 3,568 7.09 523 3,710 Arkansas...............................

446

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... 2,476 281 2,757 2,789 271 3,060 Alaska.......................... 2 4 6 2 1 3 Arizona ........................ 285 98 383 274 116 390 Arkansas...................... 648 456 1,104 582 443 1,025 California ..................... 36,124 R 3,467 R 39,591 35,126 3,762 38,888 Colorado ...................... 341 4,475 4,816 297 4,787 5,084 Connecticut.................. 2,386 810 3,196 2,228 910 3,138 Delaware ..................... 96 69 165 39 73 112 Florida.......................... 161 288 449 123 484 607 Georgia........................ 1,003 1,887 2,890 956 1,298 2,254 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 25 0 25 Idaho............................ 108 91 199 109 78 187 Illinois...........................

447

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... 2,495 R 304 R 2,799 2,487 299 2,786 Alaska.......................... 6 4 10 7 5 12 Arizona ........................ 328 86 414 319 106 425 Arkansas...................... 782 R 441 R 1,223 671 449 1,120 California ..................... 39,426 2,061 41,487 38,150 2,076 40,226 Colorado ...................... 393 3,782 4,175 364 3,954 4,318 Connecticut.................. 2,625 845 3,470 2,618 819 3,437 Delaware ..................... 134 52 186 124 55 179 Florida.......................... R 174 224 R 398 159 273 432 Georgia........................ R 993 2,168 R 3,161 854 2,599 3,453 Hawaii.......................... 29 0 29 28 0 28 Idaho............................ 117 79 196 116 79 195

448

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2001-2005 Alabama .......................................................... 4,597 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 Alaska.............................................................. 170 165 195 224 227 Arizona ............................................................ 8 7 9 6 6 Arkansas.......................................................... 4,825 6,755 7,606 3,460 2,878 California ......................................................... 1,244 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 Colorado .......................................................... 22,117 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,271 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 Illinois...............................................................

449

EM International Program Action Table  

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

EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 E M I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r o g r a m s Page 1 ACTION TABLE Subject Lead Office Engaging Country Meeting Location Purpose Status Date of Event 3 rd US/German Workshop on Salt Repository Research, Design and Operations N. Buschman, EM-22 Germany Albuquerque & Carlsbad, NM Continue collaboration with Germans on salt repository research, design and operations. Draft agenda prepared. October 8-12, 2012 International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) Ministerial R. Elmetti, EM- 2.1 Multilateral Marrakech, Morocco To support the development of nuclear energy infrastructure globally through workforce training, information sharing, and approaches related to the safe, secure and responsible use of

450

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2009 Alabama .................................. 248,232 11,667 17,232 42,984 Alaska...................................... 2,830,034 19,542 22,925 86,767 Arkansas.................................. 2,352 125 168 541 California ................................. 198,213 11,042 13,722 45,669 Colorado .................................. 1,233,260 47,705 67,607 174,337 Illinois....................................... 164 24 31 84 Kansas..................................... 370,670 18,863 26,948 72,922 Kentucky.................................. 60,167 2,469 3,270 9,982 Louisiana ................................. 2,175,026 67,067 95,359 250,586 Michigan .................................. 23,819 2,409

451

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 11 0 0 6,138 6,149 Connecticut.................. 0 91 0 0 0 91 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 3 0 0 0 3 Hawaii.......................... 2,610 3 0 0 0 2,613 Illinois........................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Indiana......................... 0 2 0 0 1,640 1,642 Iowa ............................. 0 * 0 0 46 46 Kentucky...................... 0 3 0 0 0 3 Maryland ...................... 0 41 0 0 0 41 Massachusetts............. 0 51 0 0 0 51 Minnesota .................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Missouri ....................... 0 78 0 0 0 78 Nebraska ..................... 0 19 0 0 0 19 New Hampshire ........... 0 92 0 0 0 92 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 175 175 New York .....................

452

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

20 20 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2004-2008 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 3,589,221 Mexico ...................................................... 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 43,314 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 3,632,535 LNG Algeria....................................................... 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 0 Australia.................................................... 14,990 0 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 54,839 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

453

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2007 Alabama .................................. 257,443 13,381 19,831 48,922 Alaska...................................... 2,965,956 22,419 26,332 99,472 Arkansas.................................. 11,532 126 162 552 California ................................. 206,239 11,388 13,521 47,045 Colorado .................................. 888,705 27,447 38,180 102,563 Florida...................................... 2,422 103 132 423 Illinois....................................... 235 38 48 131 Kansas..................................... 391,022 19,600 28,063 74,941 Kentucky.................................. 38,158 1,455 1,957 5,917 Louisiana ................................. 2,857,443 77,905 110,745

454

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C11. Energy Consumption by Source, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum b Retail Electricity Sales State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu 1 Texas 1,695.2 Texas 3,756.9 Texas 5,934.3 Texas 1,283.1 2 Indiana 1,333.4 California 2,196.6 California 3,511.4 California 893.7 3 Ohio 1,222.6 Louisiana 1,502.9 Louisiana 1,925.7 Florida 768.0 4 Pennsylvania 1,213.0 New York 1,246.9 Florida 1,680.3 Ohio 528.0 5 Illinois 1,052.2 Florida 1,236.6 New York 1,304.0 Pennsylvania 507.6 6 Kentucky 1,010.6 Pennsylvania 998.6 Pennsylvania 1,255.6 New York 491.5

455

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2008 Alabama .................................. 253,028 11,753 17,222 43,191 Alaska...................................... 2,901,760 20,779 24,337 92,305 Arkansas.................................. 6,531 103 139 446 California ................................. 195,272 11,179 13,972 46,176 Colorado .................................. 1,029,641 37,804 53,590 139,332 Florida...................................... 300 16 22 65 Illinois....................................... 233 33 42 115 Kansas..................................... 397,587 19,856 28,302 76,021 Kentucky.................................. 58,899 1,783 2,401 7,233 Louisiana ................................. 2,208,920 66,369 94,785 245,631

456

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2002-2006 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 Mexico ...................................................... 1,755 0 0 9,320 12,749 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 LNG Algeria....................................................... 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 Australia.................................................... 0 0 14,990 0 0 Brunei ....................................................... 2,401 0 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

457

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2001-2005 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,728,537 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 Mexico ...................................................... 10,276 1,755 0 0 9,320 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,738,814 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 LNG Algeria....................................................... 64,945 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 Australia.................................................... 2,394 0 0 14,990 0 Brunei ....................................................... 0 2,401 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

458

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2002-2006 Alabama .......................................................... 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 Alaska.............................................................. 165 195 224 227 231 Arizona ............................................................ 7 9 6 6 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 6,755 7,606 3,460 R 3,462 3,811 California ......................................................... 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 Colorado .......................................................... 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 1,946 Illinois...............................................................

459

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

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

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 67,561 135 R 67,696 67,099 135 67,234 Alaska R 12,724 303 R 13,027 13,073 61 13,134 Arizona 56,349 198 56,547 56,252 280 56,532 Arkansas 67,454 361 67,815 68,151 614 68,765

460

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2003-2007 Alabama .......................................................... 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 6,591 Alaska.............................................................. 195 224 227 231 239 Arizona ............................................................ 9 6 6 7 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 7,606 3,460 3,462 R 3,814 4,773 California ......................................................... 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 1,540 Colorado .......................................................... 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 22,949 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,039 2,781 2,123 R 2,419 2,552 Illinois...............................................................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


461

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2003-2007 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 Mexico ...................................................... 0 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 LNG Algeria....................................................... 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 Australia.................................................... 0 14,990 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

462

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2007-2008 Alabama ...................... 2,409 295 2,704 2,476 281 2,757 Alaska.......................... 7 4 11 2 4 6 Arizona ........................ 296 99 395 285 98 383 Arkansas...................... 637 418 1,055 648 456 1,104 California ..................... 35,814 3,320 39,134 36,124 3,533 39,657 Colorado ...................... 298 4,294 4,592 341 4,475 4,816 Connecticut.................. 2,472 845 3,317 2,386 810 3,196 Delaware ..................... 125 60 185 96 69 165 Florida.......................... 156 311 467 161 288 449 Georgia........................ R 1,013 1,900 R 2,913 1,003 1,887 2,890 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 27 0 27 Idaho............................ 109 79 188 108 91 199 Illinois...........................

463

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2006 Alabama .................................. 287,278 14,736 21,065 54,529 Alaska...................................... 2,665,742 20,993 24,638 93,346 Arkansas.................................. 13,702 166 212 734 California ................................. 223,580 11,267 14,056 46,641 Colorado .................................. 751,036 26,111 36,317 97,697 Florida...................................... 3,972 357 485 1,416 Illinois....................................... 242 37 47 128 Kansas..................................... 453,111 21,509 30,726 83,137 Kentucky.................................. 39,559 1,666 2,252 6,763 Louisiana ................................. 2,511,802 73,551 105,236

464

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2005-2009 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ R 18,305,411 -- R 7.97 R 21,112,053 R 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 21,604,158 79,188,096 Alabama ............................... 225,666 975,789 4.32 236,029 1,020,599 Alaska................................... 397,077 1,163,555 2.93 397,077 1,163,554 Arizona ................................. 695 2,214 3.19 712 2,269 Arkansas............................... 680,613 2,332,956 3.43

465

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2010-2011 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 68,017 146 R 68,163 67,522 135 67,657 Alaska 12,673 325 12,998 12,721 303 13,024 Arizona 56,510 166 56,676 56,349 198 56,547 Arkansas 67,676 311 67,987 67,454 361 67,815 California 399,290 40,282

466

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2006-2010 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,305,411 -- 7.97 21,112,053 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 R 21,647,936 R 79,348,561 2010 Total ............................ 19,262,198 -- 4.48 22,402,141 100,272,654 Alabama ............................... 212,769 949,340 4.46 222,932 994,688 Alaska................................... 316,546 1,002,566 3.17 374,226 1,185,249 Arizona ................................. 165 676 4.11 183 753 Arkansas............................... 936,600 3,594,843 3.84

467

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 2 0 0 5,283 5,285 Connecticut.................. 0 273 0 0 0 273 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 * 0 0 0 * Hawaii.......................... 2,593 14 0 0 0 2,606 Illinois........................... 0 11 0 4 0 15 Indiana......................... 0 30 0 0 1,958 1,988 Iowa ............................. 0 2 0 30 0 31 Kentucky...................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Maryland ...................... 0 382 0 0 0 382 Massachusetts............. 0 46 0 0 0 46 Minnesota .................... 0 154 0 0 0 154 Missouri ....................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Nebraska ..................... 0 16 0 * 0 16 New Hampshire ........... 0 84 0 0 0 84 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 435 435 New York

468

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

17 17 Table C12. Total Energy Consumption, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Total Energy Consumption Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP State Trillion Btu State Billion Chained (2005) Dollars State Thousand Btu per Chained (2005) Dollar 1 Texas 12,206.6 California 1,735.4 Louisiana 19.7 2 California 7,858.4 Texas 1,149.9 Wyoming 17.5 3 Florida 4,217.1 New York 1,016.4 North Dakota 15.4 4 Louisiana 4,055.3 Florida 661.1 Alaska 14.3 5 Illinois 3,977.8 Illinois 582.1 Mississippi 13.8 6 Ohio 3,827.6 Pennsylvania 500.4 Kentucky 13.5

469

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2003-2007, and by State, 2007 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ R 15,981,421 -- R 6.39 R 19,409,674 R 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,031,199 -- 6.37 20,019,321 127,530,680 Alabama ............................... 259,062 1,926,374 7.44 270,407 2,010,736 Alaska................................... 368,344 2,072,647 5.63 433,485 2,439,193 Arizona ................................. 634 3,791 5.98 655 3,913 Arkansas...............................

470

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2010 Alabama .................................. 242,444 13,065 19,059 47,741 Alaska...................................... 2,731,803 17,798 20,835 79,355 Arkansas.................................. 9,599 160 213 692 California ................................. 204,327 10,400 13,244 42,509 Colorado .................................. 1,434,003 57,924 82,637 209,191 Kansas..................................... 341,778 18,424 26,251 70,425 Kentucky.................................. 66,579 3,317 4,576 13,311 Louisiana ................................. 2,207,760 71,231 102,448 262,178 Michigan .................................. 23,449 2,207 2,943 8,272 Mississippi ...............................

471

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

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

7 7 Table 7. Supplemental gas supplies by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) Colorado 0 99 0 4,313 4,412 Georgia 0 0 660 0 660 Hawaii 2,491 20 0 0 2,510 Illinois 0 1 0 0 1 Indiana 0 1 0 0 1 Kentucky 0 1 0 0 1 Louisiana 0 0 553 0 553 Maryland 0 116 0 0 116 Minnesota 0 9 0 0 9 Missouri * 0 0 0 * Nebraska 0 4 0 0 4 New Jersey 0 0 0 139 139 North Dakota 52,541 0 0 0 52,541 Ohio 0 6 360 0 366 Pennsylvania 0 2 0 0 2 Vermont 0 3 0 0 3 Virginia 0 48 0 0 48 Total 55,032 309 1,573 4,452 61,366 State Synthetic Natural Gas Propane-Air Biomass Gas Other Total * Volume is less than 500,000 cubic feet.

472

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

30 30 Salt Caverns Aquifers Depleted Fields Total State Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Number of Active Fields Capacity Percent of U.S. Capacity Aquifers Salt Caverns Depleted Fields Alabama ................. 1 8 0 0 1 3 2 11 0.13 Arkansas ................ 0 0 0 0 2 22 2 22 0.27 California ................ 0 0 0 0 11 478 11 478 5.79 Colorado................. 0 0 0 0 9 101 9 101 1.22 Illinois ..................... 0 0 17 767 12 216 29 982 11.90 Indiana ................... 0 0 12 81 10 32 22 113 1.37 Iowa ....................... 0 0 4 273 0 0 4 273 3.31 Kansas ................... 1 1 0 0 17 288 18 289 3.51 Kentucky ................ 0 0 3 10 20 211 23 221 2.68 Louisiana................ 6 63 0 0 8 530 14 594 7.19

473

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2004 2004 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2004 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector d,e Retail Electricity Total Energy d,f Coal Natural Gas Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass c Total d,e,f Distillate Fuel Jet Fuel LPG a Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Other b Total Alabama 1.57 7.72 11.91 8.82 15.78 13.68 4.78 8.25 12.28 0.43 1.81 5.32 1.68 18.01 11.29 Alaska 1.91 3.59 12.43 9.61 19.64 15.55 3.63 12.09 11.05 - 6.68 9.07 3.18 32.29 11.09 Arizona 1.31 6.84 13.59 9.53 18.40 15.33 5.29 7.23 13.92 0.45 5.90 6.68 2.18 21.83 15.24 Arkansas 1.25 8.09 12.01 8.30 14.80 13.97 4.67 11.02 12.77 0.49 1.79 6.59 1.43 16.76 11.89 California 1.82 7.63 13.58

474

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7) 7) August 2009 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2007 2007 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector e,f Retail Electricity Total Energy e,g Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total e,f,g Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel LPG b Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Oil Other c Total Wood and Waste d Alabama 2.17 9.06 19.43 16.20 21.84 21.26 8.46 14.19 19.62 0.42 2.71 7.47 2.29 22.46 16.01 Alaska 2.34 5.76 19.43 16.35 28.63 22.14 11.51 23.69 17.97 - 10.51 14.88 4.94 38.96 17.87 Arizona 1.61 8.44 19.84 16.24 27.16 21.95 10.04 11.27 20.50 0.57 10.86 9.61 2.78 25.02 20.72 Arkansas 1.65 9.33 19.63 15.73 21.10 21.54 8.65 18.76 20.42 0.57 2.66 9.45 1.98 20.57

475

Safeguarding Old and New Journal Tables for the VO: Status for Extragalactic and Radio Data  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Independent of established data centers, and partly for my own research, since 1989 I have been collecting the tabular data from over 2600 articles concerned with radio sources and extragalactic objects in general. Optical character recognition (OCR) was used to recover tables from 740 papers. Tables from only 41 percent of the 2600 articles are available in the CDS or CATS catalog collections, and only slightly better coverage is estimated for the NED database. This fraction is not better for articles published electronically since 2001. Both object databases (NED, SIMBAD, LEDA) as well as catalog browsers (VizieR, CATS) need to be consulted to obtain the most complete information on astronomical objects. More human resources at the data centers and better collaboration between authors, referees, editors, publishers, and data centers are required to improve data coverage and accessibility. The current efforts within the Virtual Observatory (VO) project, to provide retrieval and analysis tools for different t...

Andernach, Heinz

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

476

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION  

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SECTION B: HOUSING TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SECTION C: HOME HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SECTION D: AIR CONDITIONING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 SECTION E: WATER HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 SECTION F: LIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 SECTION G: APPLIANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cooking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Refrigerators and Freezers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

477

Tables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

design challenges for tabletop interfaces: integrating access to public and private information, managing a cooperative gesture to organize digital documents on an interactive table. Our tabletop interface designTables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with Ubicomp Environments Abstract Our work

Klemmer, Scott

478

Tafel Musik: Formatting algorithm of tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper provides a description on the formatting algorithm of tables that the authors have developed. This algorithm is an important component of the so called TafeMusik (Tafel Musik) environment. TafeMusikprovides the user with an environment to ... Keywords: First-fit algorithm, Linear programming, Optimization, Tables, Tabular formatting, Tabular layout

K. -H. Shin; K. Kobayashi; A. Suzuki

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

479

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 5. South Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

480

BUDGET DETAILS BOOK FOUR DPRMN OF N RGY U.S. Department of Energy  

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

BUDGET DETAILS BUDGET DETAILS BOOK FOUR DPRMN OF N RGY U.S. Department of Energy Transition Team Budget Book Office of the Chief Financial Officer Office of Budget 1. Budget Overview 2. Funding Tables and Charts 3. Appropriations Subcommittees 4. Program Overviews 5. Major Construction Projects, Activities, and Initiatives 6. Laboratory and State Data Acronyms commonly used in budget documents. ACI American Competitiveness Initiative AEI Advanced Energy Initiative AFP Approved Funding Program (monthly financial plan that dictates how funding is to be executed) AlP Accelerator Improvement Project Ames Ames National Laboratory ANL Argonne National Laboratory B&R Budget and Reference Code BA Budget Authority BAPL Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory BNL Brookhaven National Laboratory BO Budget Outlay

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "detailed tables percent" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


481

Table 4. Electric Power Industry Capability by Primary Energy...  

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

1992, 1991, 1990,"Percent Share 2000","Percent Share 2010","Percent Share 2012" "Electric Utilities",28463,27389,26533,25140,25005,24569,24991,24033,23587,22629,38903,38940,65384,6...

482

T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets...  

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

3: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information...

483

Table 4-3 Site Wide Environmental Management Matrix  

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

Table 4-3. Site-Wide Environmental Management Matrix National Renewable Energy Laboratory's South Table Mountain Complex FINAL POTENTIAL ISSUES PROGRAM OF IMPROVEMENTS Off- Site...

484

2007 Solar Decathlon Detailed Event Schedule  

Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

DETAILED EVENT SCHEDULE DETAILED EVENT SCHEDULE Last updated on September 14, 2007 Note: This schedule is subject to change at any time. 12:00 AM 12:30 AM 1:00 AM 1:30 AM 2:00 AM 2:30 AM 3:00 AM 3:30 AM 4:00 AM 4:30 AM 5:00 AM 5:30 AM 6:00 AM 6:30 AM 7:00 AM 7:30 AM 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 10:00 AM 10:30 AM 11:00 AM 11:30 AM 12:00 PM 12:30 PM 1:00 PM 1:30 PM 2:00 PM 2:30 PM 3:00 PM 3:30 PM 4:00 PM 4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM 12:00 AM 12:30 AM 1:00 AM 1:30 AM 2:00 AM 2:30 AM 3:00 AM 3:30 AM 4:00 AM 4:30 AM 5:00 AM 5:30 AM 6:00 AM 6:30 AM 7:00 AM 7:30 AM 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 10:00 AM 10:30 AM 11:00 AM 11:30 AM 12:00 PM 12:30 PM 1:00 PM 1:30 PM 2:00 PM 2:30 PM 3:00 PM 3:30 PM 4:00 PM 4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00

485

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

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

7 7 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:04:58 PM Table 3. Selected national average natural gas prices, 2008-2013 (dollars per thousand cubic feet, except where noted) Year and Month NGL Composite Spot Price a Natural Gas Spot Price b Citygate Price Delivered to Consumers Electric Power Price d Residential Commercial Industrial Price % of Total c Price % of Total c Price % of Total c 2008 Annual Average 15.20 8.86 9.18 13.89 97.5 12.23 79.7 9.65 20.4 9.26 2009 Annual Average 8.99 5.24 6.48 12.14 97.4 10.06 77.8 5.33 18.8 4.93 2010 Annual Average 11.83 4.37 6.18 11.39 97.4 9.47 77.5 5.49 18.0 5.27 2011 January 13.03 4.49 5.69 9.90 96.5 R 8.74 72.8 R 5.66 R 16.8 5.66 February 13.64 4.09 5.75 10.14 96.5 8.88 72.0 R 5.77 R 16.6

486

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and estimated extraction loss by state, 2011 Alabama 230,546 12,265 17,271 43,636 Alaska 2,721,396 18,314 21,554 82,255 Arkansas 5,611 212 268 883 California 180,648 9,831 12,095 39,909 Colorado 1,507,467 63,075 90,801 223,858 Illinois 15,727 705 1,043 2,409 Kansas 322,944 18,098 25,804 67,845 Kentucky 60,941 3,398 4,684 13,377 Louisiana 2,048,175 66,426 95,630 239,349 Michigan 21,518 2,132 2,465 7,875 Mississippi 126,859 7,732 11,221 28,404 Montana 11,185 927 1,252 3,744 New Mexico 795,069 61,857 90,291 223,829 North Dakota 112,206 10,199 14,182 41,156 Oklahoma 1,218,855 91,963 134,032 328,694 Pennsylvania 131,959 6,721 8,931 26,896 Tennessee 6,200

487

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 120,717 77.85 125,467 78.45 124,857 78.77 R 129,337 R 79.22 115,449 76.41 Alaska................................... 2,539 3.78 6,411 9.76 11,433 27.77 15,472 R 33.10 16,582 31.35 Arizona ................................. 11,380 53.61 10,089 58.81 9,174 60.05 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 Arkansas............................... 114,976 94.00 112,544 95.03 105,215 94.65 R 94,613 R 94.06 84,177 94.77 California .............................. 606,097 90.94 682,886 92.26 740,589 95.06 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 Colorado ............................... 136,704 99.27 128,709 98.75 111,291 99.07 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41

488

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 5. Number of producing gas wells by state and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2008-2012 Alabama 6,860 6,913 7,026 7,063 6,327 Alaska 261 261 269 277 185 Arizona 6 6 5 5 5 Arkansas 5,592 6,314 7,397 8,388 8,538 California 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 1,423 Colorado 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 32,000 Gulf of Mexico 1,527 1,984 1,852 1,559 1,474 Illinois 45 51 50 40 40 Indiana 525 563 620 914 819 Kansas 17,862 21,243 22,145 25,758 24,697 Kentucky 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 17,936 Louisiana 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 19,792 Maryland 7 7 7 8 9 Michigan 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 10,900 Mississippi 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 1,669 Missouri 0 0 0 53 100 Montana 7,095 7,031 6,059 6,477 6,240 Nebraska 322 285 276 322 270 Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 New Mexico 44,241 44,784

489

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2011 (million cubic feet) Alabama 195,581 17,271 -53,277 480,317 0 7,282 0 598,068 Alaska 356,225 21,554 14,450 0 -16,398 0 0 332,723 Arizona 168 0 -17,607 348,820 -42,026 0 0 289,357 Arkansas 1,072,212 268 3,943 -791,878 0 212 0 283,797 California 250,177 12,095 72,353 1,954,947 -91,287 20,598 0 2,153,498 Colorado 1,637,576 90,801 -76,093 -1,005,837 0 3,128 4,268 465,985 Connecticut 0 0 1,253 228,585 0 129 0 229,710 Delaware 0 0 11,756 67,928 0 -31 0 79,716 District of Columbia 0 0 1,961 31,016 0 0 0 32,976 Florida 15,125 0 -5,102 1,208,317 0 0 0 1,218,340 Georgia 0 0 -10,315 459,390 75,641 2,542 701 522,874 Gulf of Mexico 1,812,328 0 -82 -1,711,029 0

490

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.30 100.00 15.58 80.17 10.57 27.20 17.32 10.03 Alaska................................... 8.72 100.00 8.66 74.90 5.49 78.23 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.60 100.00 13.01 93.06 10.47 29.65 11.00 8.60 Arkansas............................... 14.09 100.00 11.32 64.49 10.56 3.87 -- 9.23 California .............................. 12.75 99.31 11.75 56.69 10.80 4.85 11.32 8.23 Colorado ............................... 9.77 100.00 9.01 95.24 8.76 0.56 13.57 7.02 Connecticut........................... 17.85 97.75 13.81 70.71 12.63 47.28 24.04 10.48 Delaware .............................. 16.07 100.00 14.24

491

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 129,337 79.22 115,449 76.41 114,699 76.48 R 114,325 R 75.97 103,662 72.80 Alaska................................... 15,472 33.10 16,582 31.35 11,619 36.94 5,934 30.04 1,304 21.77 Arizona ................................. 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 11,457 62.11 13,292 68.67 14,200 70.35 Arkansas............................... 94,613 94.06 84,177 94.77 83,347 95.22 82,213 95.85 81,841 96.13 California .............................. 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 690,491 94.32 699,283 94.69 726,927 95.15 Colorado ............................... 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41 110,565 99.38 116,699 99.55 119,032 99.44 Connecticut...........................

492

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Calais, ME .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 2,131 5.62 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 43,980 4.01 Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 113 4.49 Marysville, MI...................... 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 14,925 4.85 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 2,044 5.04 St. Clair, MI ......................... 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 R 492,235 R 8.96 612,369 4.62 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................

493

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2003-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 Alaska................................... 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 Arizona ................................. 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 Arkansas............................... 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 California .............................. 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 Colorado ............................... 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 Connecticut........................... 5.59 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 Delaware .............................. 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 Florida................................... 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 Georgia................................. 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15

494

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

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

4 4 Table 14. Underground natural gas storage capacity by state, December 31, 2012 (million cubic feet) Alabama 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 11,200 13,500 2 27,350 35,400 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12,178 21,853 2 12,178 21,853 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 349,296 592,411 14 349,296 592,411 Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 60,582 124,253 10 60,582 124,253 Illinois 0 0 0 17 215,594 779,862 11 87,368 220,070 28 302,962 999,931 Indiana 0 0 0 12 19,215 80,746 10 13,809 30,003 22 33,024 110,749 Iowa 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 Kansas 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,968 283,974 19 123,343 284,905 Kentucky 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana 11 200,702 297,020 0 0 0 7 211,780 402,626 18 412,482

495

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 115,449 76.4 114,699 76.5 114,325 76.0 103,662 72.8 94,597 72.1 Alaska................................... 16,582 31.4 11,619 36.9 5,934 30.0 1,304 21.8 1,827 27.5 Arizona ................................. 9,569 56.4 11,457 62.1 13,292 68.7 14,200 70.4 12,730 70.9 Arkansas............................... 84,177 94.8 83,347 95.2 82,213 95.8 81,841 96.1 74,752 96.4 California .............................. 738,704 94.5 690,491 94.3 699,283 94.7 R 683,512 R 94.9 673,034 95.3 Colorado ............................... 125,618 99.4 110,565 99.4 116,699 99.5 119,032 99.4 112,995 99.5 Connecticut...........................

496

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2006 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 484,711 12 484,711 5.82 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.18 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 881,037 11 103,731 29 984,768 11.82 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.37 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 275,200 0 0 4 275,200 3.30 Kansas.................................. 1 1,088 0 0 18 287,295 19 288,383 3.46 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 208,827 23 218,394

497

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2002-2006 (Million Cubic Feet) 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580 0 0 0 293,580 California................. 0 7,068 7,068 3,080 64,735 67,816 74,884 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,719,169 828,458 4,547,627 4,547,627 Louisiana ................ 125,481 11,711 137,192 NA NA NA 137,192 Texas...................... 54,672 2,391 57,063 NA NA NA 57,063 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010

498

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 Marysville, MI...................... 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 St. Clair, MI ......................... 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 524,065 8.98 Noyes, MN .......................... 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

499

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2004-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 9.84 Alaska................................... 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 6.74 Arizona ................................. 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 8.49 Arkansas............................... 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 8.88 California .............................. 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 8.11 Colorado ............................... 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 6.98 Connecticut........................... 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 10.24 Delaware .............................. 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 8.32 Florida................................... 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 9.73 Georgia................................. 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15 9.35

500

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2007-2011 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,782,708 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 Mexico 54,062 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 Total Pipeline Imports 3,836,770 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 LNG Algeria 77,299 0 0 0 0 Egypt 114,580 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 Equatorial Guinea 17,795 0 0 0 0 Nigeria 95,028 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 Norway 0 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 Peru 0 0 0 16,045 16,620 Qatar 18,352 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 Trinidad/Tobago 447,758 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 Yemen 0 0 0 38,897 60,071 Total LNG Imports 770,812 351,698