National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for feet driving cycle

  1. NREL: Transportation Research - DRIVE: Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation,

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

    Visualization, and Evaluation Analysis Tool DRIVE: Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation Analysis Tool The Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation (DRIVE) analysis tool produces representative, testable drive cycles at record speed from large amounts of vehicle data gathered via onboard logging devices. Developed by NREL, DRIVE uses GPS and controller area network data to characterize vehicle operation and produce custom vehicle drive cycles

  2. Light-Duty Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition Drive Cycle...

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

    Light-Duty Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition Drive Cycle Fuel Economy and Emissions Estimates Light-Duty Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition Drive Cycle Fuel ...

  3. Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling...

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

    Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling Expansion Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling Expansion 2009 DOE Hydrogen Program ...

  4. Defining Real World Drive Cycles to Support APRF Technology Evaluation...

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

    Real World Drive Cycles to Support APRF Technology Evaluations Defining Real World Drive Cycles to Support APRF Technology Evaluations 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and...

  5. DRIVE Analysis Tool Generates Custom Vehicle Drive Cycles Based on Real-World Data (Fact Sheet)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2013-04-01

    This fact sheet from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory describes the Drive-Cycle Rapid Investigation, Visualization, and Evaluation (DRIVE) analysis tool, which uses GPS and controller area network data to characterize vehicle operation and produce custom vehicle drive cycles, analyzing thousands of hours of data in a matter of minutes.

  6. NYC Taxi Drive Cycle Development and Simulation Study | Department of

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

    Energy NYC Taxi Drive Cycle Development and Simulation Study NYC Taxi Drive Cycle Development and Simulation Study 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting PDF icon vss073_jones_2012_o.pdf More Documents & Publications Dynamometer Testing of USPS EV Conversions Vehicle Technologies Office Merit Review 2014: Dynamic Feasibility Study Technical Cost Modeling - Life Cycle Analysis Basis for Program Focus

  7. Defining Real World Drive Cycles to Support APRF Technology Evaluations |

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

    Department of Energy Real World Drive Cycles to Support APRF Technology Evaluations Defining Real World Drive Cycles to Support APRF Technology Evaluations 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting PDF icon vss091_rask_2012_p.pdf More Documents & Publications Data Collection for Improved Cold Temperature Thermal Modeling Data Collection for Improved Cold Temperature Thermal Modeling and Strategy Development

  8. Response Surface Energy Modeling of an Electric Vehicle over a Reduced Composite Drive Cycle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jehlik, Forrest; LaClair, Tim J

    2014-01-01

    Response surface methodology (RSM) techniques were applied to develop a predictive model of electric vehicle (EV) energy consumption over the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) standardized drive cycles. The model is based on measurements from a synthetic composite drive cycle. The synthetic drive cycle is a minimized statistical composite of the standardized urban (UDDS), highway (HWFET), and US06 cycles. The composite synthetic drive cycle is 20 minutes in length thereby reducing testing time of the three standard EPA cycles by over 55%. Vehicle speed and acceleration were used as model inputs for a third order least squared regression model predicting vehicle battery power output as a function of the drive cycle. The approach reduced three cycles and 46 minutes of drive time to a single test of 20 minutes. Application of response surface modeling to the synthetic drive cycle is shown to predict energy consumption of the three EPA cycles within 2.6% of the actual measured values. Additionally, the response model may be used to predict energy consumption of any cycle within the speed/acceleration envelope of the synthetic cycle. This technique results in reducing test time, which additionally provides a model that may be used to expand the analysis and understanding of the vehicle under consideration.

  9. Comparison of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Life Across Geographies and Drive-Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, K.; Warleywine, M.; Wood, E.; Neubauer, J.; Pesaran, A.

    2012-06-01

    In a laboratory environment, it is cost prohibitive to run automotive battery aging experiments across a wide range of possible ambient environment, drive cycle and charging scenarios. Since worst-case scenarios drive the conservative sizing of electric-drive vehicle batteries, it is useful to understand how and why those scenarios arise and what design or control actions might be taken to mitigate them. In an effort to explore this problem, this paper applies a semi-empirical life model of the graphite/nickel-cobalt-aluminum lithium-ion chemistry to investigate impacts of geographic environments under storage and simplified cycling conditions. The model is then applied to analyze complex cycling conditions, using battery charge/discharge profiles generated from simulations of PHEV10 and PHEV40 vehicles across 782 single-day driving cycles taken from Texas travel survey data.

  10. Modeling Heavy/Medium-Duty Fuel Consumption Based on Drive Cycle Properties

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, Lijuan; Duran, Adam; Gonder, Jeffrey; Kelly, Kenneth

    2015-10-13

    This paper presents multiple methods for predicting heavy/medium-duty vehicle fuel consumption based on driving cycle information. A polynomial model, a black box artificial neural net model, a polynomial neural network model, and a multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) model were developed and verified using data collected from chassis testing performed on a parcel delivery diesel truck operating over the Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT), City Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle (CSHVC), New York Composite Cycle (NYCC), and hydraulic hybrid vehicle (HHV) drive cycles. Each model was trained using one of four drive cycles as a training cycle and the other three as testing cycles. By comparing the training and testing results, a representative training cycle was chosen and used to further tune each method. HHDDT as the training cycle gave the best predictive results, because HHDDT contains a variety of drive characteristics, such as high speed, acceleration, idling, and deceleration. Among the four model approaches, MARS gave the best predictive performance, with an average absolute percent error of -1.84% over the four chassis dynamometer drive cycles. To further evaluate the accuracy of the predictive models, the approaches were first applied to real-world data. MARS outperformed the other three approaches, providing an average absolute percent error of -2.2% of four real-world road segments. The MARS model performance was then compared to HHDDT, CSHVC, NYCC, and HHV drive cycles with the performance from Future Automotive System Technology Simulator (FASTSim). The results indicated that the MARS method achieved a comparative predictive performance with FASTSim.

  11. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnitt, R.; Gonder, J.

    2011-04-01

    The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) collected and analyzed real-world school bus drive cycle data and selected similar standard drive cycles for testing on a chassis dynamometer. NREL tested a first-generation plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) school bus equipped with a 6.4L engine and an Enova PHEV drive system comprising a 25-kW/80 kW (continuous/peak) motor and a 370-volt lithium ion battery pack. A Bluebird 7.2L conventional school bus was also tested. Both vehicles were tested over three different drive cycles to capture a range of driving activity. PHEV fuel savings in charge-depleting (CD) mode ranged from slightly more than 30% to a little over 50%. However, the larger fuel savings lasted over a shorter driving distance, as the fully charged PHEV school bus would initially operate in CD mode for some distance, then in a transitional mode, and finally in a charge-sustaining (CS) mode for continued driving. The test results indicate that a PHEV school bus can achieve significant fuel savings during CD operation relative to a conventional bus. In CS mode, the tested bus showed small fuel savings and somewhat higher nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than the baseline comparison bus.

  12. Hydraulic Hybrid and Conventional Parcel Delivery Vehicles' Measured Laboratory Fuel Economy on Targeted Drive Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; Burton, J.; Sindler, P.; Duran, A.

    2014-10-01

    This research project compares laboratory-measured fuel economy of a medium-duty diesel powered hydraulic hybrid vehicle drivetrain to both a conventional diesel drivetrain and a conventional gasoline drivetrain in a typical commercial parcel delivery application. Vehicles in this study included a model year 2012 Freightliner P100H hybrid compared to a 2012 conventional gasoline P100 and a 2012 conventional diesel parcel delivery van of similar specifications. Drive cycle analysis of 484 days of hybrid parcel delivery van commercial operation from multiple vehicles was used to select three standard laboratory drive cycles as well as to create a custom representative cycle. These four cycles encompass and bracket the range of real world in-use data observed in Baltimore United Parcel Service operations. The NY Composite cycle, the City Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle cycle, and the California Air Resources Board Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck (HHDDT) cycle as well as a custom Baltimore parcel delivery cycle were tested at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Renewable Fuels and Lubricants Laboratory. Fuel consumption was measured and analyzed for all three vehicles. Vehicle laboratory results are compared on the basis of fuel economy. The hydraulic hybrid parcel delivery van demonstrated 19%-52% better fuel economy than the conventional diesel parcel delivery van and 30%-56% better fuel economy than the conventional gasoline parcel delivery van on cycles other than the highway-oriented HHDDT cycle.

  13. Analysis of Battery Wear and V2G Benefits Using Real-world Drive Cycles and

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

    Ambient Data | Department of Energy of Battery Wear and V2G Benefits Using Real-world Drive Cycles and Ambient Data Analysis of Battery Wear and V2G Benefits Using Real-world Drive Cycles and Ambient Data 2011 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program, and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation PDF icon vss044_barnitt_2011_p.pdf More Documents & Publications AVTA: Vehicle to Grid Power Flow Regulations and Building Codes Review Vehicle Technologies Office Merit

  14. A Statistical Characterization of School Bus Drive Cycles Collected via Onboard Logging Systems

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

    ____________________________________ 2013-01-2400 Published 09/24/2013 doi:10.4271/2013-01-2400 saecomveh.saejournals.org A Statistical Characterization of School Bus Drive Cycles Collected via Onboard Logging Systems Adam Duran and Kevin Walkowicz National Renewable Energy Laboratory ABSTRACT In an effort to characterize the dynamics typical of school bus operation, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) researchers set out to gather in-use duty cycle data from school bus fleets operating

  15. Large Scale Duty Cycle (LSDC) Project: Tractive Energy Analysis Methodology and Results from Long-Haul Truck Drive Cycle Evaluations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim J

    2011-05-01

    This report addresses the approach that will be used in the Large Scale Duty Cycle (LSDC) project to evaluate the fuel savings potential of various truck efficiency technologies. The methods and equations used for performing the tractive energy evaluations are presented and the calculation approach is described. Several representative results for individual duty cycle segments are presented to demonstrate the approach and the significance of this analysis for the project. The report is divided into four sections, including an initial brief overview of the LSDC project and its current status. In the second section of the report, the concepts that form the basis of the analysis are presented through a discussion of basic principles pertaining to tractive energy and the role of tractive energy in relation to other losses on the vehicle. In the third section, the approach used for the analysis is formalized and the equations used in the analysis are presented. In the fourth section, results from the analysis for a set of individual duty cycle measurements are presented and different types of drive cycles are discussed relative to the fuel savings potential that specific technologies could bring if these drive cycles were representative of the use of a given vehicle or trucking application. Additionally, the calculation of vehicle mass from measured torque and speed data is presented and the accuracy of the approach is demonstrated.

  16. Greenhouse gas emission impacts of electric vehicles under varying driving cycles in various counties and US cities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, M.Q.; Marr, W.W.

    1994-02-10

    Electric vehicles (EVs) can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, relative to emissions from gasoline-fueled vehicles. However, those studies have not considered all aspects that determine greenhouse gas emissions from both gasoline vehicles (GVs) and EVs. Aspects often overlooked include variations in vehicle trip characteristics, inclusion of all greenhouse gases, and vehicle total fuel cycle. In this paper, we estimate greenhouse gas emission reductions for EVs, including these important aspects. We select four US cities (Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C.) and six countries (Australia, France, Japan, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and analyze greenhouse emission impacts of EVs in each city or country. We also select six driving cycles developed around the world (i.e., the US federal urban driving cycle, the Economic Community of Europe cycle 15, the Japanese 10-mode cycle, the Los Angeles 92 cycle, the New York City cycle, and the Sydney cycle). Note that we have not analyzed EVs in high-speed driving (e.g., highway driving), where the results would be less favorable to EVs; here, EVs are regarded as urban vehicles only. We choose one specific driving cycle for a given city or country and estimate the energy consumption of four-passenger compact electric and gasoline cars in the given city or country. Finally, we estimate total fuel cycle greenhouse gas emissions of both GVs and EVs by accounting for emissions from primary energy recovery, transportation, and processing; energy product transportation; and powerplant and vehicle operations.

  17. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus: Preprint

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

    Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption of a PHEV School Bus Preprint Robb Barnitt and Jeff Gonder To be presented at the SAE 2011 World Congress Detroit, Michigan April 12-14, 2011 Conference Paper NREL/CP-5400-50251 April 2011 NOTICE The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (Alliance), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Accordingly, the US Government and Alliance retain

  18. Statistical Characterization of Medium-Duty Electric Vehicle Drive Cycles; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prohaska, R.; Duran, A.; Ragatz, A.; Kelly, K.

    2015-05-03

    With funding from the U.S. Department of Energys Vehicle Technologies Office, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducts real-world performance evaluations of advanced medium- and heavy-duty fleet vehicles. Evaluation results can help vehicle manufacturers fine-tune their designs and assist fleet managers in selecting fuel-efficient, low-emission vehicles that meet their economic and operational goals. In 2011, NREL launched a large-scale performance evaluation of medium-duty electric vehicles. With support from vehicle manufacturers Smith and Navistar, NREL research focused on characterizing vehicle operation and drive cycles for electric delivery vehicles operating in commercial service across the nation.

  19. Statistical Characterization of Medium-Duty Electric Vehicle Drive Cycles: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prohaska, R.; Duran, A.; Ragatz, A.; Kelly, K.

    2015-05-01

    In an effort to help commercialize technologies for electric vehicles (EVs) through deployment and demonstration projects, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE's) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provided funding to participating U.S. companies to cover part of the cost of purchasing new EVs. Within the medium- and heavy-duty commercial vehicle segment, both Smith Electric Newton and and Navistar eStar vehicles qualified for such funding opportunities. In an effort to evaluate the performance characteristics of the new technologies deployed in these vehicles operating under real world conditions, data from Smith Electric and Navistar medium-duty EVs were collected, compiled, and analyzed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Fleet Test and Evaluation team over a period of 3 years. More than 430 Smith Newton EVs have provided data representing more than 150,000 days of operation. Similarly, data have been collected from more than 100 Navistar eStar EVs, resulting in a comparative total of more than 16,000 operating days. Combined, NREL has analyzed more than 6 million kilometers of driving and 4 million hours of charging data collected from commercially operating medium-duty electric vehicles in various configurations. In this paper, extensive duty-cycle statistical analyses are performed to examine and characterize common vehicle dynamics trends and relationships based on in-use field data. The results of these analyses statistically define the vehicle dynamic and kinematic requirements for each vehicle, aiding in the selection of representative chassis dynamometer test cycles and the development of custom drive cycles that emulate daily operation. In this paper, the methodology and accompanying results of the duty-cycle statistical analysis are presented and discussed. Results are presented in both graphical and tabular formats illustrating a number of key relationships between parameters observed within the data set that relate to medium duty EVs.

  20. Comparison of Battery Life Across Real-World Automotive Drive-Cycles (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, K.; Earleywine, M.; Wood, E.; Pesaran, A.

    2011-11-01

    Laboratories run around-the-clock aging tests to try to understand as quickly as possible how long new Li-ion battery designs will last under certain duty cycles. These tests may include factors such as duty cycles, climate, battery power profiles, and battery stress statistics. Such tests are generally accelerated and do not consider possible dwell time at high temperatures and states-of-charge. Battery life-predictive models provide guidance as to how long Li-ion batteries may last under real-world electric-drive vehicle applications. Worst-case aging scenarios are extracted from hundreds of real-world duty cycles developed from vehicle travel surveys. Vehicles examined included PHEV10 and PHEV40 EDVs under fixed (28 degrees C), limited cooling (forced ambient temperature), and aggressive cooling (20 degrees C chilled liquid) scenarios using either nightly charging or opportunity charging. The results show that battery life expectancy is 7.8 - 13.2 years for the PHEV10 using a nightly charge in Phoenix, AZ (hot climate), and that the 'aggressive' cooling scenario can extend battery life by 1-3 years, while the 'limited' cooling scenario shortens battery life by 1-2 years. Frequent (opportunity) charging can reduce battery life by 1 year for the PHEV10, while frequent charging can extend battery life by one-half year.

  1. Drive cycle analysis of butanol/diesel blends in a light-duty vehicle.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miers, S. A.; Carlson, R. W.; McConnell, S. S.; Ng, H. K.; Wallner, T.; LeFeber, J.; Energy Systems; Esper Images Video & Multimedia

    2008-10-01

    The potential exists to displace a portion of the petroleum diesel demand with butanol and positively impact engine-out particulate matter. As a preliminary investigation, 20% and 40% by volume blends of butanol with ultra low sulfur diesel fuel were operated in a 1999 Mercedes Benz C220 turbo diesel vehicle (Euro III compliant). Cold and hot start urban as well as highway drive cycle tests were performed for the two blends of butanol and compared to diesel fuel. In addition, 35 MPH and 55 MPH steady-state tests were conducted under varying road loads for the two fuel blends. Exhaust gas emissions, fuel consumption, and intake and exhaust temperatures were acquired for each test condition. Filter smoke numbers were also acquired during the steady-state tests.

  2. Evaluating the Impact of Road Grade on Simulated Commercial Vehicle Fuel Economy Using Real-World Drive Cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lopp, Sean; Wood, Eric; Duran, Adam

    2015-10-13

    Commercial vehicle fuel economy is known to vary significantly with both positive and negative road grade. Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles operating at highway speeds require incrementally larger amounts of energy to pull heavy payloads up inclines as road grade increases. Non-hybrid vehicles are then unable to recapture energy on descent and lose energy through friction braking. While the on-road effects of road grade are well understood, the majority of standard commercial vehicle drive cycles feature no climb or descent requirements. Additionally, existing literature offers a limited number of sources that attempt to estimate the on-road energy implications of road grade in the medium- and heavy-duty space. This study uses real-world commercial vehicle drive cycles from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Fleet DNA database to simulate the effects of road grade on fuel economy across a range of vocations, operating conditions, and locations. Drive-cycles are matched with vocation-specific vehicle models and simulated with and without grade. Fuel use due to grade is presented, and variation in fuel consumption due to drive cycle and vehicle characteristics is explored through graphical and statistical comparison. The results of this study suggest that road grade accounts for 1%-9% of fuel use in commercial vehicles on average and up to 40% on select routes.

  3. Medium Truck Duty Cycle Data from Real-World Driving Environments: Project Interim Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Franzese, Oscar; Lascurain, Mary Beth; Capps, Gary J

    2011-01-01

    Since the early part of the 20th century, the US trucking industry has provided a safe and economical means of moving commodities across the country. At the present time, nearly 80% of the US domestic freight movement involves the use of trucks. The US Department of Energy (DOE) is spearheading a number of research efforts to improve heavy vehicle fuel efficiencies. This includes research in engine technologies (including hybrid and fuel cell technologies), lightweight materials, advanced fuels, and parasitic loss reductions. In addition, DOE is developing advanced tools and models to support heavy vehicle truck research, and is leading the 21st Century Truck Partnership whose stretch goals involve a reduction by 50% of the fuel consumption of heavy vehicles on a ton-mile basis. This Medium Truck Duty Cycle (MTDC) Project is a critical element in DOE s vision for improved heavy vehicle energy efficiency and is unique in that there is no other national database of characteristic duty cycles for medium trucks. It involves the collection of real-world data for various situational characteristics (rural/urban, freeway/arterial, congested/free-flowing, good/bad weather, etc.) and looks at the unique nature of medium trucks drive cycles (stop-and-go delivery, power takeoff, idle time, short-radius trips), to provide a rich source of data that can contribute to the development of new tools for fuel efficiency and modeling, provide DOE a sound basis upon which to make technology investment decisions, and provide a national archive of real-world-based medium-truck operational data to support heavy vehicle energy efficiency research. The MTDC project involves a two-part field operational test (FOT). For the Part-1 FOT, three vehicles, each from two vocations (urban transit and dry-box delivery) were instrumented for one year of data collection. The Part-2 FOT will involve the towing/recovery and utility vocations. The vehicles participating in the MTDC project are doing so through gratis partnerships in return for early access to the results of this study. Partnerships such as these are critical to FOTs in which real-world data is being collected. In Part 1 of the project, Oak Ridge National Laboratory(ORNL) established partnerships with the H.T. Hackney Company, one of the largest wholesale distributors in the country, distributing products to 21 states; and with the Knoxville Area Transit (KAT), the City of Knoxville s transit system, operating services across the city of Knoxville and parts of Knox co. These partnerships and agreements provided ORNL access to three Class-7 2005/2007 International day-cab tractors, model 8600, which regularly haul 28 ft pup trailers (H.T. Hackney Co) and three Class-7 2005 Optima LF-34 buses (KAT), for collection of duty cycle data. In addition, ORNL has collaborated with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to determine if there were possible synergies between this duty cycle data collection effort and FMCSA s need to learn more about the operation and duty cycles of the second-largest fuel consuming commercial vehicle category in the US. FMCSA s primary interest was in collecting safety data relative to the driver, carrier, and vehicle. In order to collect the duty cycle and safety-related data, ORNL developed a data acquisition and wireless communication system that was placed on each test vehicle. Each signal recorded in this FOT was collected by means of one of the instruments incorporated into each data acquisition system (DAS). Native signals were obtained directly from the vehicle s J1939 and J1708 data buses. A VBOX II Lite collected Global Positioning System related information including speed, acceleration, and spatial location information at a rate of 5 Hz, and communicated this data via the CAN (J1939) protocol. The Air-Weigh LoadMaxx, a self-weighing system which determines the vehicle s gross weight by means of pressure transducers and posts the weight to the vehicle s J1939 data bus, was used to collect vehicle payload information. A cellular modem, the Raven X

  4. Medium Truck Duty Cycle Data from Real-World Driving Environments: Final Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lascurain, Mary Beth; Franzese, Oscar; Capps, Gary J; Siekmann, Adam; Thomas, Neil; LaClair, Tim J; Barker, Alan M; Knee, Helmut E

    2012-11-01

    Since the early part of the 20th century, the US trucking industry has provided a safe and economical means of moving commodities across the country. At present, nearly 80% of US domestic freight movement involves the use of trucks. The US Department of Energy (DOE) is spearheading a number of research efforts to improve heavy vehicle fuel efficiencies. This includes research in engine technologies (including hybrid and fuel cell technologies), lightweight materials, advanced fuels, and parasitic loss reductions. In addition, DOE is developing advanced tools and models to support heavy vehicle research and is leading the 21st Century Truck Partnership and the SuperTruck development effort. Both of these efforts have the common goal of decreasing the fuel consumption of heavy vehicles. In the case of SuperTruck, a goal of improving the overall freight efficiency of a combination tractor-trailer has been established. This Medium Truck Duty Cycle (MTDC) project is a critical element in DOE s vision for improved heavy vehicle energy efficiency; it is unique in that there is no other existing national database of characteristic duty cycles for medium trucks based on collecting data from Class 6 and 7 vehicles. It involves the collection of real-world data on medium trucks for various situational characteristics (e.g., rural/urban, freeway/arterial, congested/free-flowing, good/bad weather) and looks at the unique nature of medium trucks drive cycles (stop-and-go delivery, power takeoff, idle time, short-radius trips). This research provides a rich source of data that can contribute to the development of new tools for FE and modeling, provide DOE a sound basis upon which to make technology investment decisions, and provide a national archive of real-world-based medium-truck operational data to support energy efficiency research. The MTDC project involved a two-part field operational test (FOT). For the Part-1 FOT, three vehicles each from two vocations (urban transit and dry-box delivery) were instrumented for the collection of one year of operational data. The Part-2 FOT involved the towing and recovery and utility vocations for a second year of data collection. The vehicles that participated in the MTDC project did so through gratis partnerships in return for early access to the results of this study. Partnerships such as these are critical to FOTs in which real-world data is being collected. In Part 1 of the project, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) established partnerships with the H.T. Hackney Company (HTH), one of the largest wholesale distributors in the country, distributing products to 21 states; and with Knoxville Area Transit (KAT), the city of Knoxville s transit system, which operates across Knoxville and parts of Knox County. These partnerships and agreements provided ORNL access to three Class-7 day-cab tractors that regularly haul 28 ft pup trailers (HTH) and three Class-7 buses for the collection of duty cycle data. In addition, ORNL collaborated with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to determine if there were possible synergies between this duty cycle data collection effort and FMCSA s need to learn more about the operation and duty cycles of medium trucks. FMCSA s primary interest was in collecting safety data relative to the driver, carrier, and vehicle. In Part 2 of the project, ORNL partnered with the Knoxville Utilities Board, which made available three Class-8 trucks. Fountain City Wrecker Service was also a Part 2 partner, providing three Class-6 rollback trucks. In order to collect the duty cycle and safety-related data, ORNL developed a data acquisition system (DAS) that was placed on each test vehicle. Each signal recorded in this FOT was collected by means of one of the instruments incorporated into each DAS. Other signals were obtained directly from the vehicle s J1939 and J1708 data buses. A VBOX II Lite collected information available from a global positioning system (GPS), including speed, acceleration, and spatial location information at a rate of 5 Hz for the Part 1

  5. Hydraulic Hybrid and Conventional Parcel Delivery Vehicles' Measured Laboratory Fuel Economy on Targeted Drive Cycles

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

    Hybrid drivetrains have shown signifcant promise as part of an overall petroleum reduction feet strategy [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. Hybrid drivetrains consist of an energy storage device and a motor integrated into a traditional powertrain and offer the potential fuel savings by capturing energy normally lost during deceleration through the application of regenerative braking. Because hybrid technologies, especially hydraulic hybrids, have low adoption rates in the medium-duty vehicle segment and

  6. Battery Wear from Disparate Duty-Cycles: Opportunities for Electric-Drive Vehicle Battery Health Management; Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, K.; Earleywine, M.; Wood, E.; Pesaran, A.

    2012-10-01

    Electric-drive vehicles utilizing lithium-ion batteries experience wholly different degradation patterns than do conventional vehicles, depending on geographic ambient conditions and consumer driving and charging patterns. A semi-empirical life-predictive model for the lithium-ion graphite/nickel-cobalt-aluminum chemistry is presented that accounts for physically justified calendar and cycling fade mechanisms. An analysis of battery life for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles considers 782 duty-cycles from travel survey data superimposed with climate data from multiple geographic locations around the United States. Based on predicted wear distributions, opportunities for extending battery life including modification of battery operating limits, thermal and charge control are discussed.

  7. Requirements for Defining Utility Drive Cycles: An Exploratory Analysis of Grid Frequency Regulation Data for Establishing Battery Performance Testing Standards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hafen, Ryan P.; Vishwanathan, Vilanyur V.; Subbarao, Krishnappa; Kintner-Meyer, Michael CW

    2011-10-19

    Battery testing procedures are important for understanding battery performance, including degradation over the life of the battery. Standards are important to provide clear rules and uniformity to an industry. The work described in this report addresses the need for standard battery testing procedures that reflect real-world applications of energy storage systems to provide regulation services to grid operators. This work was motivated by the need to develop Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) testing procedures, or V2G drive cycles. Likewise, the stationary energy storage community is equally interested in standardized testing protocols that reflect real-world grid applications for providing regulation services. As the first of several steps toward standardizing battery testing cycles, this work focused on a statistical analysis of frequency regulation signals from the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnect with the goal to identify patterns in the regulation signal that would be representative of the entire signal as a typical regulation data set. Results from an extensive time-series analysis are discussed, and the results are explained from both the statistical and the battery-testing perspectives. The results then are interpreted in the context of defining a small set of V2G drive cycles for standardization, offering some recommendations for the next steps toward standardizing testing protocols.

  8. Light-Duty Drive Cycle Simulations of Diesel Engine-Out Exhaust Properties for an RCCI-Enabled Vehicle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gao, Zhiming; Curran, Scott; Daw, C Stuart; Wagner, Robert M

    2013-01-01

    In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel fuels to achieve low-temperature reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) can reduce NOx and PM emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency compared to conventional diesel combustion (CDC). Moreover, the dual-fueling RCCI is able to achieve these benefits by tailoring combustion reactivity over a wider range of engine operation than is possible with a single fuel. However, the currently demonstrated range of stable RCCI combustion just covers a portion of the engine speed-load range required in several light-duty drive cycles. This means that engines must switch from RCCI to CDC when speed and load fall outside of the stable RCCI range. In this study we investigated the impact of RCCI as it has recently been demonstrated on practical engine-out exhaust temperature and emissions by simulating a multi-mode RCCI-enabled vehicle operating over two urban and two highway driving cycles. To implement our simulations, we employed experimental engine maps for a multi-mode RCCI/CDC engine combined with a standard mid-size, automatic transmission, passenger vehicle in the Autonomie vehicle simulation platform. Our results include both detailed transient and cycle-averaged engine exhaust temperature and emissions for each case, and we note the potential implications of the modified exhaust properties on catalytic emissions control and utilization of waste heat recovery on future RCCI-enabled vehicles.

  9. Statistical Characterization of School Bus Drive Cycles Collected via Onboard Logging Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duran, A.; Walkowicz, K.

    2013-10-01

    In an effort to characterize the dynamics typical of school bus operation, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) researchers set out to gather in-use duty cycle data from school bus fleets operating across the country. Employing a combination of Isaac Instruments GPS/CAN data loggers in conjunction with existing onboard telemetric systems resulted in the capture of operating information for more than 200 individual vehicles in three geographically unique domestic locations. In total, over 1,500 individual operational route shifts from Washington, New York, and Colorado were collected. Upon completing the collection of in-use field data using either NREL-installed data acquisition devices or existing onboard telemetry systems, large-scale duty-cycle statistical analyses were performed to examine underlying vehicle dynamics trends within the data and to explore vehicle operation variations between fleet locations. Based on the results of these analyses, high, low, and average vehicle dynamics requirements were determined, resulting in the selection of representative standard chassis dynamometer test cycles for each condition. In this paper, the methodology and accompanying results of the large-scale duty-cycle statistical analysis are presented, including graphical and tabular representations of a number of relationships between key duty-cycle metrics observed within the larger data set. In addition to presenting the results of this analysis, conclusions are drawn and presented regarding potential applications of advanced vehicle technology as it relates specifically to school buses.

  10. Application of a Tractive Energy Analysis to Quantify the Benefits of Advanced Efficiency Technologies Using Characteristic Drive Cycle Data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim J

    2012-01-01

    Accurately predicting the fuel savings that can be achieved with the implementation of various technologies developed for fuel efficiency can be very challenging, particularly when considering combinations of technologies. Differences in the usage of highway vehicles can strongly influence the benefits realized with any given technology, which makes generalizations about fuel savings inappropriate for different vehicle applications. A model has been developed to estimate the potential for reducing fuel consumption when advanced efficiency technologies, or combinations of these technologies, are employed on highway vehicles, particularly medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The approach is based on a tractive energy analysis applied to drive cycles representative of the vehicle usage, and the analysis specifically accounts for individual energy loss factors that characterize the technologies of interest. This tractive energy evaluation is demonstrated by analyzing measured drive cycles from a long-haul trucking fleet and the results of an assessment of the fuel savings potential for combinations of technologies are presented. The results of this research will enable more reliable estimates of the fuel savings benefits that can be realized with particular technologies and technology combinations for individual trucking applications so that decision makers can make informed investment decisions for the implementation of advanced efficiency technologies.

  11. Numerical evaluation of mechanisms driving Early Jurassic changes in global carbon cycling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beerling, D.J.; Brentnall, S.J.

    2007-03-15

    The Early Jurassic (early Toarcian, ca. 183 Ma) carbon cycle perturbation is characterized by aabout -5 parts per thousand {delta} {sup 13}C excursion in the exogenic carbon reservoirs, a 1000 ppm rise in atmospheric CO{sub 2}, and a 6-7 degrees warming. Two proposed explanations for this presumed global carbon cycle perturbation are the liberation of massive amounts of isotopically light CH4 from (1) Gondwanan coals by heating during the intrusive eruption of the Karoo-Ferrar large igneous province (LIP) or (2) the thermal dissociation of gas hydrates. Carbon cycle modeling indicates that the release of CH4 from Gondwanan coals synchronous with the eruption of the Karoo-Ferrar LIP fails to reproduce the magnitude or timing of the CO{sub 2} and {delta} {sup 13}C excursions. However, sensitivity analyses constrained by a marine cyclostratigraphically dated {delta}{sup 13}C record indicate that both features of geologic record can be explained with the huge input of about 15,340-24,750 Gt C over about 220 k.y., a result possibly pointing to the involvement of hydrothermal vent complexes in the Karoo Basin. The simulated release of > 6000 Gt C from gas hydrates also reproduces aspects of the early Toarcian rock record, but the large mass involved raises fundamental questions about its formation, storage, and release.

  12. Comparative urban drive cycle simulations of light-duty hybrid vehicles with gasoline or diesel engines and emissions controls

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gao, Zhiming; Daw, C Stuart; Smith, David E

    2013-01-01

    Electric hybridization is a very effective approach for reducing fuel consumption in light-duty vehicles. Lean combustion engines (including diesels) have also been shown to be significantly more fuel efficient than stoichiometric gasoline engines. Ideally, the combination of these two technologies would result in even more fuel efficient vehicles. However, one major barrier to achieving this goal is the implementation of lean-exhaust aftertreatment that can meet increasingly stringent emissions regulations without heavily penalizing fuel efficiency. We summarize results from comparative simulations of hybrid electric vehicles with either stoichiometric gasoline or diesel engines that include state-of-the-art aftertreatment emissions controls for both stoichiometric and lean exhaust. Fuel consumption and emissions for comparable gasoline and diesel light-duty hybrid electric vehicles were compared over a standard urban drive cycle and potential benefits for utilizing diesel hybrids were identified. Technical barriers and opportunities for improving the efficiency of diesel hybrids were identified.

  13. Drive Cycle Powertrain Efficiencies and Trends Derived From EPA Vehicle Dynamometer Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, John F

    2014-01-01

    Vehicle manufacturers among others are putting great emphasis on improving fuel economy (FE) of light-duty vehicles in the U.S. market, with significant FE gains being realized in recent years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data indicates that the aggregate FE of vehicles produced for the U.S. market has improved by over 20% from model year (MY) 2005 to 2013. This steep climb in FE includes changes in vehicle choice, improvements in engine and transmission technology, and reducing aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and parasitic losses. The powertrain related improvements focus on optimizing in-use efficiency of the transmission and engine as a system, and may make use of what is termed downsizing and/or downspeeding. This study explores quantifying recent improvements in powertrain efficiency, viewed separately from other vehicle alterations and attributes (noting that most vehicle changes are not completely independent). A methodology is outlined to estimate powertrain efficiency for the U.S city and highway cycle tests using data from the EPA vehicle database. Comparisons of common conventional gasoline powertrains for similar MY 2005 and 2013 vehicles are presented, along with results for late-model hybrid electric vehicles, the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt and other selected vehicles.

  14. EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRUCK EFFICIENCY TECHNOLOGIES IN CLASS 8 TRACTOR-TRAILERS BASED ON A TRACTIVE ENERGY ANALYSIS USING MEASURED DRIVE CYCLE DATA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LaClair, Tim J; Gao, Zhiming; Fu, Joshua S.; Calcagno, Jimmy; Yun, Jeongran

    2014-01-01

    Quantifying the fuel savings that can be achieved from different truck fuel efficiency technologies for a fleet s specific usage allows the fleet to select the combination of technologies that will yield the greatest operational efficiency and profitability. This paper presents an analysis of vehicle usage in a commercial vehicle fleet and an assessment of advanced efficiency technologies using an analysis of measured drive cycle data for a class 8 regional commercial shipping fleet. Drive cycle measurements during a period of a full year from six tractor-trailers in normal operations in a less-than-truckload (LTL) carrier were analyzed to develop a characteristic drive cycle that is highly representative of the fleet s usage. The vehicle mass was also estimated to account for the variation of loads that the fleet experienced. The drive cycle and mass data were analyzed using a tractive energy analysis to quantify the fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions benefits that can be achieved on class 8 tractor-trailers when using advanced efficiency technologies, either individually or in combination. Although differences exist among class 8 tractor-trailer fleets, this study provides valuable insight into the energy and emissions reduction potential that various technologies can bring in this important trucking application.

  15. Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles

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

    2-01-2049 Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Published Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for 09/24/2012 Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles Michael P. Lammert, Kevin Walkowicz, Adam Duran and Petr Sindler National Renewable Energy Laboratory ABSTRACT This research project compares the in-use and laboratory- derived fuel economy of a medium-duty hybrid electric drivetrain with "engine off at idle" capability to a conventional drivetrain in a typical

  16. Effect of B20 and Low Aromatic Diesel on Transit Bus NOx Emissions Over Driving Cycles with a Range of Kinetic Intensity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; McCormick, R. L.; Sindler, P.; Williams, A.

    2012-10-01

    Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions for transit buses for up to five different fuels and three standard transit duty cycles were compared to establish whether there is a real-world biodiesel NOx increase for transit bus duty cycles and engine calibrations. Six buses representing the majority of the current national transit fleet and including hybrid and selective catalyst reduction systems were tested on a heavy-duty chassis dynamometer with certification diesel, certification B20 blend, low aromatic (California Air Resources Board) diesel, low aromatic B20 blend, and B100 fuels over the Manhattan, Orange County and UDDS test cycles. Engine emissions certification level had the dominant effect on NOx; kinetic intensity was the secondary driving factor. The biodiesel effect on NOx emissions was not statistically significant for most buses and duty cycles for blends with certification diesel, except for a 2008 model year bus. CARB fuel had many more instances of a statistically significant effect of reducing NOx. SCR systems proved effective at reducing NOx to near the detection limit on all duty cycles and fuels, including B100. While offering a fuel economy benefit, a hybrid system significantly increased NOx emissions over a same year bus with a conventional drivetrain and the same engine.

  17. Contribution of Road Grade to the Energy Use of Modern Automobiles Across Large Datasets of Real-World Drive Cycles: Preprint

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

    Contribution of Road Grade to the Energy Use of Modern Automobiles Across Large Datasets of Real-World Drive Cycles Preprint Eric Wood, Evan Burton, Adam Duran, and Jeff Gonder To be presented at the SAE World Congress 2014 Detroit, Michigan April 8-10, 2014 Conference Paper NREL/CP-5400-61108 January 2014 NOTICE The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (Alliance), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308.

  18. Measured Laboratory and In-Use Fuel Economy Observed over Targeted Drive Cycles for Comparable Hybrid and Conventional Package Delivery Vehicles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lammert, M. P.; Walkowicz, K.; Duran, A.; Sindler, P.

    2012-10-01

    In-use and laboratory-derived fuel economies were analyzed for a medium-duty hybrid electric drivetrain with 'engine off at idle' capability and a conventional drivetrain in a typical commercial package delivery application. Vehicles studied included eleven 2010 Freightliner P100H hybrids in service at a United Parcel Service facility in Minneapolis during the first half of 2010. The hybrids were evaluated for 18 months against eleven 2010 Freightliner P100D diesels at the same facility. Both vehicle groups use the same 2009 Cummins ISB 200-HP engine. In-use fuel economy was evaluated using UPS's fueling and mileage records, periodic ECM image downloads, and J1939 CAN bus recordings during the periods of duty cycle study. Analysis of the in-use fuel economy showed 13%-29% hybrid advantage depending on measurement method, and a delivery route assignment analysis showed 13%-26% hybrid advantage on the less kinetically intense original diesel route assignments and 20%-33% hybrid advantage on the more kinetically intense original hybrid route assignments. Three standardized laboratory drive cycles were selected that encompassed the range of real-world in-use data. The hybrid vehicle demonstrated improvements in ton-mi./gal fuel economy of 39%, 45%, and 21% on the NYC Comp, HTUF Class 4, and CARB HHDDT test cycles, respectively.

  19. DRIVE CYCLE EFFICIENCY AND EMISSIONS ESTIMATES FOR REACTIVITY CONTROLLED COMPRESSION IGNITION IN A MULTI-CYLINDER LIGHT-DUTY DIESEL ENGINE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Curran, Scott; Briggs, Thomas E; Cho, Kukwon; Wagner, Robert M

    2011-01-01

    In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel to achieve Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) has been shown to reduce NOx and PM emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency as compared to conventional diesel combustion (CDC). The RCCI concept has an advantage over many advanced combustion strategies in that by varying both the percent of premixed gasoline and EGR rate, stable combustion can be extended over more of the light-duty drive cycle load range. Changing the percent premixed gasoline changes the fuel reactivity stratification in the cylinder providing further control of combustion phasing and pressure rise rate than the use of EGR alone. This paper examines the combustion and emissions performance of light-duty diesel engine using direct injected diesel fuel and port injected gasoline to carry out RCCI for steady-state engine conditions which are consistent with a light-duty drive cycle. A GM 1.9L four-cylinder engine with the stock compression ratio of 17.5:1, common rail diesel injection system, high-pressure EGR system and variable geometry turbocharger was modified to allow for port fuel injection with gasoline. Engine-out emissions, engine performance and combustion behavior for RCCI operation is compared against both CDC and a premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI) strategy which relies on high levels of EGR dilution. The effect of percent of premixed gasoline, EGR rate, boost level, intake mixture temperature, combustion phasing and pressure rise rate is investigated for RCCI combustion for the light-duty modal points. Engine-out emissions of NOx and PM were found to be considerably lower for RCCI operation as compared to CDC and PCCI, while HC and CO emissions were higher. Brake thermal efficiency was similar or higher for many of the modal conditions for RCCI operation. The emissions results are used to estimate hot-start FTP-75 emissions levels with RCCI and are compared against CDC and PCCI modes.

  20. Drive Diagnostic Filter Wheel Control

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2007-07-17

    DrD Filter Wheel Control is National Instrument's Labview software that drives a Drive Diagnostic filter wheel. The software can drive the filter wheel between each end limit, detect the positive and negative limit and each home position and post the stepper motot values to an Excel spreadsheet. The software can also be used to cycle the assembly between the end limits.

  1. iDriving (Intelligent Driving)

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-09-17

    iDriving identifies the driving style factors that have a major impact on fuel economy. An optimization framework is used with the aim of optimizing a driving style with respect to these driving factors. A set of polynomial metamodels is constructed to reflect the responses produced in fuel economy by changing the driving factors. The optimization framework is used to develop a real-time feedback system, including visual instructions, to enable drivers to alter their driving stylesmore »in responses to actual driving conditions to improve fuel efficiency.« less

  2. Fuel Cycle Technologies | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Initiatives Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Preparing for Tomorrow's Energy Demands Powerful imperatives drive the continued need for...

  3. Balancing Item (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Balancing Item (Billion Cubic Feet) Balancing Item (Billion Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 140 143 41 166 30 -13 -8 -6 -26 -133 -76 -161 2002...

  4. Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures...

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

    Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and Aggressive Driving Cycles Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and Aggressive Driving ...

  5. DRIVING DIRECTIONS

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

    DRIVING DIRECTIONS HILTON PALACIO DEL RIO 200 South Alamo Street San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 222-1400 San Antonio International Airport DIRECTIONS Take Interstate 281 south to Commerce Street. Continue west on Commerce Street to Losoya Street, turn left. Losoya becomes Alamo. The Hilton Palacio del Rio is located at 200 South Alamo Street. Distance from Hotel: 8 mi. Drive Time: 20 min. From the South: -I 37 North and take Commerce Street exit -Turn left at Commerce Street -Follow Commerce

  6. Drive Less, Save More | Department of Energy

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

    Drive Less, Save More Drive Less, Save More May 24, 2011 - 12:31pm Addthis Shannon Brescher Shea Communications Manager, Clean Cities Program For someone who works in the Vehicle Technologies Program, I actually don't spend that much time in my automobile. I usually get around using a combination of public transit, my bike, and my own two feet. But I'm an exception. In the U.S., the vehicle miles travelled per person is actually twice as high as it is in Western Europe and three times higher

  7. Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 7,018,237...

  8. West Virginia Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) West Virginia Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 11...

  9. Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Drive Vehicle Simulation and...

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

    model using measured fuel consumption by drive cycle * Simulate fuel consumption 4. Analysis * Sweep range of designs, usage patterns, costs NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY...

  10. Analysis of Battery Wear and V2G Benefits Using Real-world Drive...

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

    of Battery Wear and V2G Benefits Using Real-world Drive Cycles and Ambient Data Analysis of Battery Wear and V2G Benefits Using Real-world Drive Cycles and Ambient Data 2011 DOE...

  11. Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis...

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

    More Documents & Publications Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling Expansion Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis Program 2010 ...

  12. Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis...

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

    More Documents & Publications Truck Duty Cycle and Performance Data Collection and Analysis Program Heavy Duty & Medium Duty Drive Cycle Data Collection for Modeling Expansion ...

  13. Holiday Food Drive

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

    Food Drive Holiday Food Drive Laboratory employees helped donate 300 boxes of nonperishable food items and 360 frozen turkeys during the 2015 annual food drive. September 16, 2013 LANL employees organize food for the Holiday Food Drive. Contacts Annual Food & Holiday Gift Drives Mike Martinez (505) 699-3388 Community Relations & Partnerships (505) 665-4400 Email Helping feed Northern New Mexico families During the Laboratory's 2015 Annual Food Drive, employees and subcontract workers

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Alaska - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 269 277 185 R 159 170 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 127,417 112,268

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Connecticut - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 District of Columbia - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Indiana - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 620 914 819 R 921 895 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 6,802 9,075

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Maryland - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7 8 9 7 7 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 43 34 44 32 20 From Oil

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Massachusetts - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Minnesota - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Nebraska - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 276 322 270 R 357 310 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 2,092 1,854

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 New Hampshire - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 North Carolina - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    50 North Dakota - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 188 239 211 200 200 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 South Carolina - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Washington - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    80 Wisconsin - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  8. ,"Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  9. Stirling cycle machine

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burnett, S.C.; Purcell, J.R.; Creedon, W.P.; Joshi, C.H.

    1990-06-05

    This patent describes an improvement in a Stirling cycle machine including first and second variable-volume, compression-expansion chambers containing a gas a regenerator interconnecting the chambers and for conducting the gas therebetween, and eccentric drive means for driving the first and second chambers. It comprises: the eccentric drive means comprising a pair of rotatably mounted shafts, at least one pair of eccentric disks fixed on the shafts in phase with each other, and means for causing the shafts and thereby the eccentric disks to rotate in opposite directions.

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Alabama - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,026 7,063 6,327 R 6,165 6,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Arkansas - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,397 8,388 8,538 R 9,843 10,150 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 California - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,580 1,308 1,423 R 1,335 1,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Colorado - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 28,813 30,101 32,000 R 32,468 38,346 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Florida - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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 17,182 16,459 19,742

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Georgia - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Illinois - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 50 40 40 R 34 36 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells E 1,697 2,114

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Iowa - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Kansas - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 22,145 25,758 24,697 R 23,792 24,354 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Kentucky - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 17,670 14,632 17,936 R 19,494 19,256 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Louisiana - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 19,137 21,235 19,792 R 19,528 19,251 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Maine - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Michigan - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 10,100 11,100 10,900 R 10,550 10,500 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Mississippi - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,979 5,732 1,669 R 1,967 1,645 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Missouri - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 53 100 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 R 8 8 From

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Montana - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,059 6,477 6,240 5,754 5,754 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Nevada - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 R 4 4 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 3 From Oil Wells

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 New Jersey - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 New Mexico - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,748 32,302 28,206 R 27,073 27,957 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 New York - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,736 6,157 7,176 R 6,902 7,119 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Ohio - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 34,931 46,717 35,104 R 32,664 32,967 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Oklahoma - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,000 41,238 40,000 39,776 40,070 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Oregon - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 26 24 27 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,407 1,344 770 770

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Pennsylvania - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,500 54,347 55,136 R 53,762 70,400 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Rhode Island - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Tennessee - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 230 210 212 R 1,089 1,024 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 5,144

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Texas - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 95,014 100,966 96,617 97,618 98,279 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Utah - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,075 6,469 6,900 R 7,030 7,275 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 328,135

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Vermont - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 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

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Virginia - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,470 7,903 7,843 R 7,956 7,961 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 West Virginia - Natural Gas 2014 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, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 52,498 56,813 50,700 R 54,920 60,000 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  1. Oscillatory nonohomic current drive for maintaining a plasma current

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Fisch, N.J.

    1984-01-01

    Apparatus and methods are described for maintaining a plasma current with an oscillatory nonohmic current drive. Each cycle of operation has a generation period in which current driving energy is applied to the plasma, and a relaxation period in which current driving energy is removed. Plasma parameters, such as plasma temperature or plasma average ionic charge state, are modified during the generation period so as to oscillate plasma resistivity in synchronism with the application of current driving energy. The invention improves overall current drive efficiencies.

  2. Oscillatory nonhmic current drive for maintaining a plasma current

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Fisch, Nathaniel J. (Princeton, NJ)

    1986-01-01

    Apparatus and method of the invention maintain a plasma current with an oscillatory nonohmic current drive. Each cycle of operation has a generation period in which current driving energy is applied to the plasma, and a relaxation period in which current driving energy is removed. Plasma parameters, such as plasma temperature or plasma average ionic charge state, are modified during the generation period so as to oscillate plasma resistivity in synchronism with the application of current driving energy. The invention improves overall current drive efficiencies.

  3. Eastern States Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  4. Indiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 191 102 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  5. School Supply Drive

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

    School Supply Drive School Supply Drive Each year, Laboratory employees donate school supplies and backpacks for Northern New Mexico students as they start the new school year. September 16, 2013 Del Norte Credit Union's Baxter Bear takes a moment to pose with some of the backpacks filled with school supplies that will help students start their school year off right. Contact Giving Drives Mike Martinez Community Relations & Partnerships (505) 699-3388 Email Providing students with good start

  6. Holiday Food Drive

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

    Community Programs Office (505) 665-4400 Email Get Expertise Helping feed Northern New Mexico families During the Laboratory's 2015 Annual Food Drive, employees and subcontract...

  7. Variable Frequency Drives

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

    Marketing Toolkit The Benefits of Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) VFDs help adjust motor speeds to match loads and improve efficiency while conserving energy. The benefits...

  8. Piezoelectric drive circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Treu, C.A. Jr.

    1999-08-31

    A piezoelectric motor drive circuit is provided which utilizes the piezoelectric elements as oscillators and a Meacham half-bridge approach to develop feedback from the motor ground circuit to produce a signal to drive amplifiers to power the motor. The circuit automatically compensates for shifts in harmonic frequency of the piezoelectric elements due to pressure and temperature changes. 7 figs.

  9. Piezoelectric drive circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Treu, Jr., Charles A.

    1999-08-31

    A piezoelectric motor drive circuit is provided which utilizes the piezoelectric elements as oscillators and a Meacham half-bridge approach to develop feedback from the motor ground circuit to produce a signal to drive amplifiers to power the motor. The circuit automatically compensates for shifts in harmonic frequency of the piezoelectric elements due to pressure and temperature changes.

  10. Montana Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  11. Montana Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 12 13 7 2010's 13 13 16 19 42 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Montana Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale

  12. Montana Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 140 125 137 2010's 186 192 216 229 482 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Montana Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  13. New Mexico Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 2 0 2 2010's 6 9 13 16 28 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production New Mexico Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  14. North Dakota Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 3 3 25 2010's 64 95 203 268 426 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production North Dakota Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes,

  15. Ohio Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 14 101 441 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Ohio Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale Gas

  16. Oklahoma Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  17. Pennsylvania Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  18. Pennsylvania Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1 1 65 2010's 396 1,068 2,036 3,076 4,009 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Pennsylvania Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  19. Colorado Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 1 2010's 1 3 9 18 236 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Colorado Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale

  20. Colorado Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Colorado Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 4 2010's 4 10 53 136 3,775 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Colorado Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  1. Kansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  2. Kansas Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  3. Kansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  4. Kentucky Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  5. Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Kentucky Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 21 20 55 2010's 10 41 34 46 50 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Kentucky Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  6. Michigan Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 148 122 132 2010's 120 106 108 101 96 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Michigan Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  7. Michigan Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 3,281 2,894 2,499 2010's 2,306 1,947 1,345 1,418 1,432 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Michigan Shale Gas Proved

  8. Alabama Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  9. Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 103 1990's - 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Used for Repressuring Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

  10. Arkansas Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  11. Arkansas Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 94 279 527 2010's 794 940 1,027 1,026 1,038 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Arkansas Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  12. Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,460 3,833 9,070 2010's 12,526 14,808 9,779 12,231 11,695 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Arkansas Shale Gas

  13. Colorado Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  14. Tennessee Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 11 1990's 19 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 6,146 6,200 6,304 5,721 5,000 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas

  15. Utah Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  16. Virginia Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  17. Virginia Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  18. Wyoming Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  19. Wyoming Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 7 102 29 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Wyoming Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production Shale Gas

  20. Ohio Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 483 2,319 6,384 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Ohio Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  1. Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 944 3,845 6,389 2010's 9,670 10,733 12,572 12,675 16,653 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Oklahoma Shale Gas

  2. Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 96 88 3,790 2010's 10,708 23,581 32,681 44,325 56,210 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Pennsylvania Shale

  3. Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Wyoming Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 1 0 216 856 380 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Wyoming Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  4. Virginia Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Virginia Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 135 126 84 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Virginia Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserve

  5. Control rod drive

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hawke, Basil C. (Solana Beach, CA)

    1986-01-01

    A control rod drive uses gravitational forces to insert one or more control rods upwardly into a reactor core from beneath the reactor core under emergency conditions. The preferred control rod drive includes a vertically movable weight and a mechanism operatively associating the weight with the control rod so that downward movement of the weight is translated into upward movement of the control rod. The preferred control rod drive further includes an electric motor for driving the control rods under normal conditions, an electrically actuated clutch which automatically disengages the motor during a power failure and a decelerator for bringing the control rod to a controlled stop when it is inserted under emergency conditions into a reactor core.

  6. US DRIVE Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle Efficiency...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Vehicle Efficiency and Energy Sustainability Partnership Plan US DRIVE Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle Efficiency and Energy Sustainability Partnership Plan This ...

  7. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Jesse, Stowell; Costin, Daniel

    2006-10-10

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  8. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett Lee; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Stowell, Jesse; Costin, Daniel

    2006-09-19

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  9. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Stowell, Jesse; Costin, Daniel

    2006-07-11

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  10. Direct drive wind turbine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Bywaters, Garrett; Danforth, William; Bevington, Christopher; Jesse, Stowell; Costin, Daniel

    2007-02-27

    A wind turbine is provided that minimizes the size of the drive train and nacelle while maintaining the power electronics and transformer at the top of the tower. The turbine includes a direct drive generator having an integrated disk brake positioned radially inside the stator while minimizing the potential for contamination. The turbine further includes a means for mounting a transformer below the nacelle within the tower.

  11. Holiday Gift Drive

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

    Gift Drive Holiday Gift Drive Every year, Laboratory employees help fulfill the holiday wishes of children and seniors in our communities. In 2015, our employees donated more than 1,200 gifts to 23 nonprofit organizations to help Northern New Mexico children, senior citizens, and families have a brighter holiday season. May 7, 2015 Every holiday season, employees of Los Alamos National Laboratory donate and distribute gifts to families in need throughout Northern New Mexico. Contacts Annual Food

  12. Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and

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

    Aggressive Driving Cycles | Department of Energy Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and Aggressive Driving Cycles Off-Cycle Benchmarking of PHEVs; Wide Range of Temperatures and Aggressive Driving Cycles 2009 DOE Hydrogen Program and Vehicle Technologies Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting, May 18-22, 2009 -- Washington D.C. PDF icon vss_04_carlson.pdf More Documents & Publications AVTA … PHEV Demonstrations and Testing Advanced Vehicle

  13. Sandia Energy - Electric Drive Systems

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

    Electric Drive Systems Home Transportation Energy Energy Storage Components and Systems Electric Drive Systems Electric Drive Systemscwdd2015-05-08T03:08:45+00:00 Reduce Size,...

  14. Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Montana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 317 313...

  15. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 998...

  16. Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 271 275...

  17. Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Arizona Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  18. New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) New Mexico Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 4,406...

  19. Texas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's...

  20. Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

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

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

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

  2. Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

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

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

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

  4. Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  5. Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

  6. Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  8. Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  9. Texas Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  10. Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Kansas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 1,049...

  11. West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) West Virginia Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006...

  12. West Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's...

  13. Connecticut Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  14. North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  15. New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1 1 23...

  16. New York Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  17. New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  18. New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  19. New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) New York Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet per Day) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 149 147...

  20. Ceramic vane drive joint

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Smale, Charles H. (Indianapolis, IN)

    1981-01-01

    A variable geometry gas turbine has an array of ceramic composition vanes positioned by an actuating ring coupled through a plurality of circumferentially spaced turbine vane levers to the outer end of a metallic vane drive shaft at each of the ceramic vanes. Each of the ceramic vanes has an end slot of bow tie configuration including flared end segments and a center slot therebetween. Each of the vane drive shafts has a cross head with ends thereof spaced with respect to the sides of the end slot to define clearance for free expansion of the cross head with respect to the vane and the cross head being configured to uniformly distribute drive loads across bearing surfaces of the vane slot.

  1. U.S. DRIVE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-03-16

    U.S. DRIVE, which stands for United States Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle efficiency and Energy sustainability, is an expanded government-industry partnership among the U.S. Department of Energy; USCAR, representing Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company and General Motors; Tesla Motors; five energy companies BP America, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil Corporation, and Shell Oil Products US; two utilities Southern California Edison and Michigan-based DTE Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The U.S. DRIVE mission is to accelerate the development of pre-competitive and innovative technologies to enable a full range of affordable and clean advanced light-duty vehicles, as well as related energy infrastructure.

  2. Combined cycle power plant incorporating coal gasification

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Liljedahl, Gregory N. (Tariffville, CT); Moffat, Bruce K. (Simsbury, CT)

    1981-01-01

    A combined cycle power plant incorporating a coal gasifier as the energy source. The gases leaving the coal gasifier pass through a liquid couplant heat exchanger before being used to drive a gas turbine. The exhaust gases of the gas turbine are used to generate both high pressure and low pressure steam for driving a steam turbine, before being exhausted to the atmosphere.

  3. Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 436 897 538 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  4. Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 1,808 850 889 0 1,141 1,234 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  5. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 81,755 86,285 87,196 1970's 86,432 85,027 82,265 82,396 83,488 83,486 85,479 89,365 91,342 96,366 1980's 101,198 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  6. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 375 320 312 1970's 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  7. Illinois Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 483,902 483,336 478,291 1970's 429,691 341,750 376,310 358,142 342,046 322,393 305,441 275,060 327,451 1980's 150,214 152,645 166,568 156,791 153,419 146,463 106,547 757 509 1990's 607 951 942 809 685 727 578 500 468 358 2000's 271 233 299 306 328 280 242 235 233 164 2010's 5,393 294 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  8. Michigan Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 171,531 156,996 143,802 1970's 139,571 141,784 94,738 37,384 45,106 79,154 151,318 172,578 199,347 1980's 155,984 151,560 137,364 148,076 151,393 142,255 137,687 125,183 123,578 1990's 134,550 170,574 186,144 201,985 196,000 179,678 117,119 86,564 83,052 67,514 2000's 58,482 50,734 47,292 41,619 37,977 34,545 33,213 29,436 30,008

  9. Nebraska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 13,130 9,437 6,415 1970's 3,697 2,848 2,890 33,369 34,243 34,463 35,351 32,226 29,828 1980's 1,648 1,281 1,154 1,256 1,097 707 987 690 381 1990's 31 136 65 586 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  10. Nebraska Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,629 1,200 427 1970's 318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  11. Ohio Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 207 670 1,713 2,263 2,591 2,555 3,036 2,812 2,608 1990's 3,081 2,615 2,730 2,989 2,930 2,257 2,477 2,553 2,895 2,933 2000's 3,285 4,336 4,098 3,609 3,883 2,657 2,397 1,456 2010's 2,211 33,031 344,073 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  12. Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 1,808 850 889 0 1,141 1,234 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  13. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 81,755 86,285 87,196 1970's 86,432 85,027 82,265 82,396 83,488 83,486 85,479 89,365 91,342 96,366 1980's 101,198 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  14. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 375 320 312 1970's 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  15. Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 436 897 538 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  16. Utah Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 68,211 95,670 93,934 98,598 99,233 241,904 274,470 286,592 286,929 1990's 334,067 333,591 319,017 348,010 368,585 308,174 265,546 249,930 242,070 211,514 2000's 169,553 166,505 136,843 161,275 193,093 187,524 193,836 195,701 202,380 412,639 2010's 454,832 490,233 535,365 448,687 419,773 - = No Data

  17. California Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 505,063 476,596 455,692 1970's 444,700 431,605 386,664 359,841 252,402 213,079 216,667 206,981 204,693 1980's 169,812 261,725 263,475 276,209 281,389 263,823 276,969 270,191 254,286 1990's 263,667 246,335 243,692 246,283 228,346 226,548 240,566 243,054 235,558 259,518 2000's 260,049 258,271 249,671 238,743 236,465 226,230 223,580

  18. Colorado Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 112,440 96,397 85,171 1970's 82,736 97,420 104,116 110,662 118,686 136,090 175,624 171,233 167,959 1980's 201,637 220,108 173,894 181,150 191,625 163,614 180,290 178,048 196,682 1990's 208,069 234,851 256,019 307,250 353,855 345,441 493,963 374,728 425,083 444,978 2000's 494,581 497,385 534,295 555,544 703,804 730,948 751,036

  19. Florida Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 375,090 409,248 765,597 854,064 886,147 859,996 1980's 279,690 272,239 270,004 265,840 247,870 218,288 228,721 226,028 260,627 1990's 258,984 222,893 226,254 207,975 10,265 9,061 8,514 8,364 8,174 8,439 2000's 7,844 7,186 6,063 5,771 4,805 3,584 3,972 2,422 300 2010's 2,915 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  20. Kansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,250,286 1,239,723 1,493,907 1970's 1,445,817 1,451,438 1,497,319 1,503,660 1,407,239 1,367,949 1,389,850 1,427,654 1,476,110 1980's 1,046,516 825,440 874,488 926,348 997,710 951,222 908,673 943,335 885,253 1990's 794,705 955,040 943,923 961,518 965,674 965,266 970,163 749,423 732,828 653,515 2000's 610,039 576,231 572,044 530,938

  1. Kentucky Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 237,759 230,940 241,558 256,522 253,652 150,627 26,888 26,673 18,707 1990's 28,379 40,966 47,425 45,782 42,877 44,734 46,015 43,352 37,929 44,064 2000's 36,734 36,901 41,078 42,758 38,208 38,792 39,559 38,158 58,899 60,167 2010's 66,579 60,941 92,883 85,549 79,985 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  2. Wyoming Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 261,478 259,227 269,921 1970's 276,926 292,434 298,439 303,519 263,684 215,104 251,846 262,801 255,760 1980's 366,530 393,027 432,313 579,479 624,619 506,241 512,579 560,603 591,472 1990's 635,922 681,266 728,113 750,853 821,689 895,129 845,253 863,052 870,518 902,889 2000's 993,702 988,595 1,083,860 1,101,425 1,249,309 1,278,087

  3. Nevada Natural Gas Wellhead (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

  4. Western States Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  5. Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition

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

    Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition Print Monday, 22 February 2016 00:00 Microbial decomposition of plant debris ("litter") is a keystone ecosystem process because it regulates nutrient availability, ecosystem productivity, and carbon (C) cycling. Historically, climate (primarily temperature and precipitation) has been thought to regulate the rate of litter decomposition, which then influences

  6. Arizona - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Arizona - Natural Gas 2014 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 S3. Summary statistics for natural gas - Arizona, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 5 5 5 5 5 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 183 168 117 72 106 From

  7. Drive Cycle Analysis, Measurement of Emissions and Fuel Consumption...

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

    ... Relative to the baseline school bus, the PHEV fuel savings in charge-depleting (CD) mode ... PHEV school bus would initially operate in CD mode for some distance, then in a ...

  8. Drive alignment pays maintenance dividends

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fedder, R.

    2008-12-15

    Proper alignment of the motor and gear drive on conveying and processing equipment will result in longer bearing and coupling life, along with lower maintenance costs. Selecting an alignment free drive package instead of a traditional foot mounted drive and motor is a major advancement toward these goals. 4 photos.

  9. ,"New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013 ,"Release...

  10. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  11. ,"New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","09...

  12. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013 ,"Release...

  13. ,"Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  14. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","09...

  15. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013 ,"Release...

  16. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013 ,"Release...

  17. ,"West Virginia Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  18. ,"Oregon Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160sor2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  19. ,"Nebraska Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160sne2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  20. ,"Virginia Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160sva2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  1. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160stx2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  2. ,"Utah Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160sut2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  3. ,"Ohio Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160soh2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  4. ,"New York Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160sny2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  5. ,"North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160snd2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  6. ,"Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160spa2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  7. ,"West Virginia Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160swv2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  8. ,"Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160sok2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  9. ,"Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160snv2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  10. ,"South Dakota Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160ssd2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  11. ,"Wyoming Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160swy2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  12. ,"Tennessee Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    Production (Million Cubic Feet)",1,"Monthly","122013" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1160stn2m.xls" ,"Available from ...

  13. Ohio Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  14. Florida Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  15. Kentucky Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  16. Michigan Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  17. Maryland Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

  18. Virginia Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

  19. Kentucky Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

  20. Fuel Cycle Technologies | Department of Energy

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

    Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Fuel Cycle Technologies Preparing for Tomorrow's Energy Demands Powerful imperatives drive the continued need for nuclear power, among them the need for reliable, baseload electricity and the threat of global climate change. As the only large-scale source of nearly greenhouse gas-free energy, nuclear power is an essential part of our all-of-the-above energy strategy, generating about 20 percent of our nation's electricity and more than 60 percent

  1. Base drive circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lange, Arnold C. (Livermore, CA)

    1995-01-01

    An improved base drive circuit (10) having a level shifter (24) for providing bistable input signals to a pair of non-linear delays (30, 32). The non-linear delays (30, 32) provide gate control to a corresponding pair of field effect transistors (100, 106) through a corresponding pair of buffer components (88, 94). The non-linear delays (30, 32) provide delayed turn-on for each of the field effect transistors (100, 106) while an associated pair of transistors (72, 80) shunt the non-linear delays (30, 32) during turn-off of the associated field effect transistor (100, 106).

  2. Base drive circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lange, A.C.

    1995-04-04

    An improved base drive circuit having a level shifter for providing bistable input signals to a pair of non-linear delays. The non-linear delays provide gate control to a corresponding pair of field effect transistors through a corresponding pair of buffer components. The non-linear delays provide delayed turn-on for each of the field effect transistors while an associated pair of transistors shunt the non-linear delays during turn-off of the associated field effect transistor. 2 figures.

  3. Stop/Start: Driving

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    highlighted Braking button subbanner graphic: gray bar PULLING OUT & DRIVING PART 1 The gasoline engine does not run when the vehicle is at rest. When pulling out, the electric starter/generator uses electricity from the battery to instantly start the gasoline engine---the sole source of propulsion for the vehicle. Go to next… stage graphic: vertical blue rule Main stage: See through car with battery, engine, and electric starter/generator visible. The car is stopped at an intersection.

  4. Alabama Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 57,208 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,517 31,610 32,806 1980's 38,572 41,914 38,810 42,181 45,662 48,382 49,341 52,511 55,939 1990's 58,136 76,739 126,910 132,222 136,195 118,688 112,868 114,411 107,334 309,492 2000's 372,136 285,953 290,164 237,377 263,426 255,157 287,278 257,443 253,028 248,232 2010's 242,444 230,546 87,269 89,258 80,590 -

  5. Alaska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 149,865 151,669 147,954 1980's 111,512 115,394 42,115 62,144 66,062 58,732 134,945 76,805 75,703 1990's 1,571,438 1,873,279 2,121,838 2,295,499 2,667,254 2,980,557 2,987,364 2,964,734 2,966,461 2,950,502 2000's 3,123,599 2,984,807 2,997,824 2,447,017 2,680,859 3,089,229 2,665,742 2,965,956 2,901,760 2,830,034

  6. Arkansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 93,452 88,011 56,190 1970's 37,816 31,387 17,946 26,135 19,784 17,918 20,370 18,630 18,480 1980's 29,003 31,530 33,753 34,572 258,648 174,872 197,781 213,558 228,157 1990's 272,278 224,625 156,573 198,074 218,710 100,720 219,477 185,244 198,148 179,524 2000's 207,045 207,352 12,635 13,725 10,139 16,756 13,702 11,532 6,531 2,352

  7. Mississippi Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 46,068 44,510 0 1970's 50,509 44,732 29,538 29,081 24,568 29,694 0 0 0 1980's 34,337 38,315 29,416 29,705 23,428 21,955 12,131 9,565 8,353 1990's 7,887 7,649 4,822 4,892 5,052 4,869 4,521 4,372 3,668 135,773 2000's 205,106 239,830 263,456 283,675 283,763 292,023 278,436 224,596 174,573 215,951 2010's 218,840 126,859 6,865 4,527

  8. Montana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 60,500 59,058 57,793 1970's 59,193 57,105 61,757 56,960 146,907 156,203 0 0 0 1980's 11,825 13,169 15,093 16,349 19,793 16,212 14,177 15,230 15,475 1990's 14,629 14,864 12,697 11,010 10,418 9,413 10,141 8,859 8,715 5,211 2000's 5,495 5,691 6,030 6,263 6,720 10,057 12,685 13,646 13,137 12,415 2010's 12,391 11,185 12,727 14,575 14,751

  9. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,038,103 1,122,692 1,167,150 1970's 1,183,273 1,123,614 1,116,872 1,175,548 1,092,487 1,033,003 1,072,992 1,057,326 1,069,293 1980's 1,063,256 1,112,740 1,023,057 1,118,403 1,137,463 1,103,062 1,127,780 1,301,673 1,145,688 1990's 1,102,301 1,100,812 1,071,426 1,082,452 1,092,734 1,015,965 1,054,123 1,014,008 947,177 892,396 2000's

  10. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,247 2,390 1,708 1970's 1,418 1,112 1,711 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 2,001 2,393 5,432 6,115 5,407 6,356 6,459 6,126 6,518 1990's 6,613 10,244 11,540 10,263 7,133 10,106 10,341 11,661 11,366 11,261 2000's 7,758 9,928 7,033 9,441 9,423 11,462 12,386 13,367 18,046 22,364 2010's 56,162 131,959 236,817 396,726 301,514 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  11. Louisiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 3,383,334 3,728,717 4,465,379 1970's 5,237,519 5,994,431 6,337,328 6,524,729 6,273,136 5,831,487 5,749,783 5,709,535 5,561,040 1980's 5,197,429 4,770,095 4,190,105 4,439,430 3,811,852 3,794,464 3,880,364 3,918,236 4,002,843 1990's 4,220,068 4,340,531 4,466,425 4,315,312 4,200,126 4,604,292 4,652,677 4,767,965 4,610,969 4,687,261

  12. UGE Scheduler Cycle Time

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

    UGE Scheduler Cycle Time UGE Scheduler Cycle Time Genepool Cycle Time Genepool Daily Genepool Weekly Phoebe Cycle Time Phoebe Daily Phoebe Weekly What is the Scheduler Cycle? The...

  13. Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 4,402 2,902...

  14. Crosby, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Crosby, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 02/29/2016 Next Release Date: 03/31/2016 Referring Pages: U.S.

  15. A novel Stirling engine with an elliptic drive

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fang, H.W.; Herold, K.E.; Holland, H.M.; Beach, E.H.

    1996-12-31

    The concept of the Stirling cycle seems quite simple when presented as a cycle involving two constant temperature and two constant volume processes. The reality of machines that have evolved from the Stirling concept is considerably more complicated. Most real machines employ a drive mechanism that approximates a sinusoidal volume variation for each of the cylinders. This results in an overall volume variation that only poorly approximates the constant volume processes postulated in the classic definition of a Stirling cycle. The difficulties of achieving the piston motions necessary to attain the discontinuous motions of the classic cycle are well known and, as a result, the sinusoidal motions are widely accepted as an inevitable compromise. It is noted that free piston Stirling machines are not constrained in the same manner. However, the discussion here focuses on kinematic drive machines. In the current study, a Rider-type engine with an elliptic drive is modeled with the objective of clarifying the potential of a more ideal volume variation. This drive mechanism is the subject of a US Patent filed with Serial Number 08/360,052 on 20 December 1994.

  16. Rotary drive mechanism

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kenderdine, E.W.

    1991-10-08

    This patent describes a rotary drive mechanism which includes a rotary solenoid having a stator and multi-poled rotor. A moving member rotates with the rotor and is biased by a biasing device. The biasing device causes a further rotational movement after rotation by the rotary solenoid. Thus, energization of the rotary solenoid moves the member in one direction to one position and biases the biasing device against the member. Subsequently, de- energization of the rotary solenoid causes the biasing device to move the member in the same direction to another position from where the moving member is again movable by energization and de-energization of the rotary solenoid. Preferably, the moving member is a multi-lobed cam having the same number of lobes as the rotor has poles. An anti- overdrive device is also preferably provided for preventing overdrive in the forward direction or a reverse rotation of the moving member and for precisely aligning the moving member.

  17. Rotary drive mechanism

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kenderdine, Eugene W. (Albuquerque, NM)

    1991-01-01

    A rotary drive mechanism includes a rotary solenoid having a stator and multi-poled rotor. A moving member rotates with the rotor and is biased by a biasing device. The biasing device causes a further rotational movement after rotation by the rotary solenoid. Thus, energization of the rotary solenoid moves the member in one direction to one position and biases the biasing device against the member. Subsequently, de-energization of the rotary solenoid causes the biasing device to move the member in the same direction to another position from where the moving member is again movable by energization and de-energization of the rotary solenoid. Preferably, the moving member is a multi-lobed cam having the same number of lobes as the rotor has poles. An anti-overdrive device is also preferably provided for preventing overdrive in the forward direction or a reverse rotation of the moving member and for precisely aligning the moving member.

  18. Sequenced drive for rotary valves

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Mittell, Larry C. (Palos Verdes Estates, CA)

    1981-01-01

    A sequenced drive for rotary valves which provides the benefits of applying rotary and linear motions to the movable sealing element of the valve. The sequenced drive provides a close approximation of linear motion while engaging or disengaging the movable element with the seat minimizing wear and damage due to scrubbing action. The rotary motion of the drive swings the movable element out of the flowpath thus eliminating obstruction to flow through the valve.

  19. Distribution Drive | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    navigation, search Name: Distribution Drive Place: Dallas, Texas Zip: 75205 Product: Biodiesel fuel distributor. Coordinates: 32.778155, -96.795404 Show Map Loading map......

  20. Test Drive: Honda FCX Clarity

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A member of the Energy Empowers team takes the Honda FCX Clarity for a drive outside the U.S. Department of Energy in Washington, D.C.

  1. Traction Drive Systems Breakout Group

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

    TRACTION DRIVE SYSTEM BREAKOUT GROUP EV Everywhere Workshop July 24, 2012 Breakout Session 1 - Discussion of Performance Targets and Barriers Comments on the Achievability of the...

  2. ORC Closed Loop Control Systems for Transient and Steady State Duty Cycles

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    System-level models using iterative concept analysis are being used on a closed loop controlled, waste heat recovery system running automatically over various drive cycles.

  3. ,"Compressed U.S. Natural Gas Imports (Million Cubic Feet)"

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

    586-8800",,,"01292016 9:46:16 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Compressed U.S. Natural Gas Imports (Million Cubic Feet)" "Sourcekey","NGMEPG0INCNUS-Z00MMCF"...

  4. Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 2,664 2015 2,805 2,728 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not...

  5. Babb, MT Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 5 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W Withheld...

  6. Laredo, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 1 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W Withheld...

  7. Portal, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 2 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W Withheld...

  8. Buffalo, NY Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 1 1 1 1 - No Data Reported; -- Not Applicable; NA Not Available; W ...

  9. Nebraska Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  10. Arizona Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 0

  11. Illinois Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  12. Tennessee Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  13. Ohio Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  14. Oklahoma Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 0

  15. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0

  16. Montana Natural Gas Processed in Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Processed in Wyoming (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 785 656 622 631 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Montana-Wyoming

  17. Ohio Natural Gas Processed in Ohio (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Ohio (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Processed in Ohio (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 2,211 32,760 344,073 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Ohio-Ohio

  18. Ohio Natural Gas Processed in West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Processed in West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 271 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Ohio-West Virginia

  19. Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 178 151 175 168 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Colorado-Kansas

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  1. Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 804 775 703 248 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Kansas-Oklahoma

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 142 141 121 88 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Kansas-Texas

  3. Louisiana Offshore Natural Gas Processed in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Offshore Natural Gas Processed in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 151,301 99,910 94,790 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  4. Alabama Offshore Natural Gas Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Offshore Natural Gas Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 53,348 53,771 49,474 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  6. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed in Ohio (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    in Ohio (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed in Ohio (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 51,023 5,826 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Pennsylvania-Ohio

  7. South Dakota Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Processed (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 113 86 71 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed South Dakota Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas Processed

  8. Sumas, WA Liquefied Natural Gas Imports (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Sumas, WA Liquefied Natural Gas Imports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 5 2015 4 4 2 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Imports by Point of Entry Sumas, WA LNG Imports from All Countries

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  10. Wyoming Natural Gas Processed in Colorado (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Colorado (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Processed in Colorado (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 69,827 75,855 136,964 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Wyoming-Colorado

  11. Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 331 428 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators Wisconsin Underground Natural Gas

  12. Magnetic compression laser driving circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Ball, D.G.; Birx, D.; Cook, E.G.

    1993-01-05

    A magnetic compression laser driving circuit is disclosed. The magnetic compression laser driving circuit compresses voltage pulses in the range of 1.5 microseconds at 20 kilovolts of amplitude to pulses in the range of 40 nanoseconds and 60 kilovolts of amplitude. The magnetic compression laser driving circuit includes a multi-stage magnetic switch where the last stage includes a switch having at least two turns which has larger saturated inductance with less core material so that the efficiency of the circuit and hence the laser is increased.

  13. Magnetic compression laser driving circuit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Ball, Don G. (Livermore, CA); Birx, Dan (Brentwood, CA); Cook, Edward G. (Livermore, CA)

    1993-01-01

    A magnetic compression laser driving circuit is disclosed. The magnetic compression laser driving circuit compresses voltage pulses in the range of 1.5 microseconds at 20 Kilovolts of amplitude to pulses in the range of 40 nanoseconds and 60 Kilovolts of amplitude. The magnetic compression laser driving circuit includes a multi-stage magnetic switch where the last stage includes a switch having at least two turns which has larger saturated inductance with less core material so that the efficiency of the circuit and hence the laser is increased.

  14. Model-Based Analysis of Electric Drive Options for Medium-Duty Parcel Delivery Vehicles: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnitt, R. A.; Brooker, A. D.; Ramroth, L.

    2010-12-01

    Medium-duty vehicles are used in a broad array of fleet applications, including parcel delivery. These vehicles are excellent candidates for electric drive applications due to their transient-intensive duty cycles, operation in densely populated areas, and relatively high fuel consumption and emissions. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted a robust assessment of parcel delivery routes and completed a model-based techno-economic analysis of hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle configurations. First, NREL characterized parcel delivery vehicle usage patterns, most notably daily distance driven and drive cycle intensity. Second, drive-cycle analysis results framed the selection of drive cycles used to test a parcel delivery HEV on a chassis dynamometer. Next, measured fuel consumption results were used to validate simulated fuel consumption values derived from a dynamic model of the parcel delivery vehicle. Finally, NREL swept a matrix of 120 component size, usage, and cost combinations to assess impacts on fuel consumption and vehicle cost. The results illustrated the dependency of component sizing on drive-cycle intensity and daily distance driven and may allow parcel delivery fleets to match the most appropriate electric drive vehicle to their fleet usage profile.

  15. Upgrading coal plant damper drives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hood, N.R.; Simmons, K. [Alamaba Power (United States)

    2009-11-15

    The replacement of damper drives on two coal-fired units at the James H. Miller Jr. electric generating plant by Intelligent Contrac electric rotary actuators is discussed. 2 figs.

  16. Direct drive field actuator motors

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Grahn, Allen R. (Salt Lake City, UT)

    1998-01-01

    A positive-drive field actuator motor including a stator carrying at least one field actuator which changes in dimension responsive to application of an energy field, and at least one drive shoe movable by the dimensional changes of the field actuator to contact and move a rotor element with respect to the stator. Various embodiments of the motor are disclosed, and the rotor element may be moved linearly or arcuately.

  17. ARM - SGP Rural Driving Hazards

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

    Rural Driving Hazards SGP Related Links Virtual Tour Facilities and Instruments Central Facility Boundary Facility Extended Facility Intermediate Facility Radiometric Calibration Facility Geographic Information ES&H Guidance Statement Operations Science Field Campaigns Visiting the Site SGP Fact Sheet Images Information for Guest Scientists Contacts SGP Rural Driving Hazards The rural location of the Southern Great Plains (SGP) site facilities requires that visitors travel on unpaved, dirt

  18. Direct drive field actuator motors

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Grahn, A.R.

    1998-03-10

    A positive-drive field actuator motor is described which includes a stator carrying at least one field actuator which changes in dimension responsive to application of an energy field, and at least one drive shoe movable by the dimensional changes of the field actuator to contact and move a rotor element with respect to the stator. Various embodiments of the motor are disclosed, and the rotor element may be moved linearly or arcuately. 62 figs.

  19. Low backlash direct drive actuator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kuklo, T.C.

    1994-10-25

    A low backlash direct drive actuator is described which comprises a motor such as a stepper motor having at least 200 steps per revolution; a two part hub assembly comprising a drive hub coaxially attached to the shaft of the motor and having a plurality of drive pins; a driven hub having a plurality of bores in one end thereof in alignment with the drive pins in the drive hub and a threaded shaft coaxially mounted in an opposite end of the driven hub; and a housing having a central bore therein into which are fitted the drive hub and driven hub, the housing having a motor mount on one end thereof to which is mounted the stepper motor, and a closed end portion with a threaded opening therein coaxial with the central bore in the housing and receiving therein the threaded shaft attached to the driven hub. Limit switches mounted to the housing cooperate with an enlarged lip on the driven hub to limit the lateral travel of the driven hub in the housing, which also acts to limit the lateral travel of the threaded shaft which functions as a lead screw. 10 figs.

  20. Low backlash direct drive actuator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kuklo, Thomas C. (Oakland, CA)

    1994-01-01

    A low backlash direct drive actuator is described which comprises a motor such as a stepper motor having at least 200 steps per revolution; a two part hub assembly comprising a drive hub coaxially attached to the shaft of the motor and having a plurality of drive pins; a driven hub having a plurality of bores in one end thereof in alignment with the drive pins in the drive hub and a threaded shaft coaxially mounted in an opposite end of the driven hub; and a housing having a central bore therein into which are fitted the drive hub and driven hub, the housing having a motor mount on one end thereof to which is mounted the stepper motor, and a closed end portion with a threaded opening therein coaxial with the central bore in the housing and receiving therein the threaded shaft attached to the driven hub. Limit switches mounted to the housing cooperate with an enlarged lip on the driven hub to limit the lateral travel of the driven hub in the housing, which also acts to limit the lateral travel of the threaded shaft which functions as a lead screw.

  1. Driving Green com | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Driving Green com Jump to: navigation, search Name: Driving Green.com Place: Melbourne, Florida Zip: 32904 Sector: Vehicles Product: Driving green.com is a website that allows...

  2. Driving Accountability for Program Performance Using Measured...

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

    Driving Accountability for Program Performance Using Measured Energy Savings (201) Driving Accountability for Program Performance Using Measured Energy Savings (201) Better ...

  3. Marketing & Driving Demand Collaborative - Social Media Tools...

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

    Marketing & Driving Demand Collaborative - Social Media Tools & Strategies Presentation slides from the Better Buildings webinar on January 6, 2011. PDF icon Marketing & Driving ...

  4. Marketing & Driving Demand: Social Media Tools & Strategies ...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Marketing & Driving Demand: Social Media Tools & Strategies - January 16, 2011 (Text Version) Marketing & Driving Demand: Social Media Tools & Strategies - January 16, 2011 (Text...

  5. Cone Drive Operations Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    enveloping worm gear technology. The company supplies azimuth and elevation drives for solar tracking applications. References: Cone Drive Operations Inc1 This article is a...

  6. Grand Challenge Portfolio: Driving Innovations in Industrial...

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

    Grand Challenge Portfolio: Driving Innovations in Industrial Energy Efficiency, January 2011 Grand Challenge Portfolio: Driving Innovations in Industrial Energy Efficiency, January ...

  7. Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles | Department of Energy

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

    PDF icon arravt039tischwendeman2012o.pdf More Documents & Publications Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles Energy & Manufacturing Workforce...

  8. Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles | Department of Energy

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

    PDF icon arravt039tischwendeman2011p.pdf More Documents & Publications Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles 2010 DOE EERE Vehicle...

  9. Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles | Department of Energy

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

    D.C. PDF icon tiarravt039schwendeman2010o.pdf More Documents & Publications Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles Advanced Electric Drive Vehicles Energy & Manufacturing Workforce...

  10. Computer-Aided Engineering for Electric-Drive Vehicle Batteries

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

    Computer-Aided Engineering for Electric-Drive Vehicle Batteries - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle

  11. Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition

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

    Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition Print Microbial decomposition of plant debris ("litter") is a keystone ecosystem process because it regulates nutrient availability, ecosystem productivity, and carbon (C) cycling. Historically, climate (primarily temperature and precipitation) has been thought to regulate the rate of litter decomposition, which then influences the rate at which nutrients become available and C contained in the litter is released back into

  12. Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition

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

    Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition Print Microbial decomposition of plant debris ("litter") is a keystone ecosystem process because it regulates nutrient availability, ecosystem productivity, and carbon (C) cycling. Historically, climate (primarily temperature and precipitation) has been thought to regulate the rate of litter decomposition, which then influences the rate at which nutrients become available and C contained in the litter is released back into

  13. Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition

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

    Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition Print Microbial decomposition of plant debris ("litter") is a keystone ecosystem process because it regulates nutrient availability, ecosystem productivity, and carbon (C) cycling. Historically, climate (primarily temperature and precipitation) has been thought to regulate the rate of litter decomposition, which then influences the rate at which nutrients become available and C contained in the litter is released back into

  14. Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition

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

    Manganese Reduction-Oxidation Drives Plant Debris Decomposition Print Microbial decomposition of plant debris ("litter") is a keystone ecosystem process because it regulates nutrient availability, ecosystem productivity, and carbon (C) cycling. Historically, climate (primarily temperature and precipitation) has been thought to regulate the rate of litter decomposition, which then influences the rate at which nutrients become available and C contained in the litter is released back into

  15. Drive reconfiguration mechanism for tracked robotic vehicle

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Willis, W. David (Idaho Falls, ID)

    2000-01-01

    Drive reconfiguration apparatus for changing the configuration of a drive unit with respect to a vehicle body may comprise a guide system associated with the vehicle body and the drive unit which allows the drive unit to rotate about a center of rotation that is located at about a point where the drive unit contacts the surface being traversed. An actuator mounted to the vehicle body and connected to the drive unit rotates the drive unit about the center of rotation between a first position and a second position.

  16. South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 2 5 7 5 4 4 10 8 10 2000's 10 13 13 16 18 0 W 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

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

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

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

  18. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 100 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle Fuel Consumers Maine Natural

  19. Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 2 2 4 6 8 13 40 31 38 2000's 43 53 54 66 74 4 2 1 1 1 2010's 1 0 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  20. Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 0 0 2000's 0 1 1 1 1 0 W 1 1 2010's 1 3 3 3 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle Fuel Consumers Vermont

  1. North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 1 3 8 8 12 15 41 40 49 2000's 54 67 68 83 93 3 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

  2. Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -589 739 -295 -493 431 -234 3,636 621 4,442 -462 1990's 44 -70 213 466 630 -985 2,128 -29 -36 312 2000's -964 265 -160 81 128 -588 93 82 65 703 2010's 54 22 -545 255 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  4. Miscellaneous States Shale Gas Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Gas Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Miscellaneous States Shale Gas Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 66 58 134 2010's 121 75 52 25 123 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Miscellaneous Shale Gas

  5. Mississippi (with State off) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  6. Mississippi (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Mississippi (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 19 37 19 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 Mississippi Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  7. Mississippi Natural Gas Processed in Mississippi (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    in Mississippi (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Processed in Mississippi (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 5,415 5,021 4,527 5,633 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Mississippi-Mississippi Natural Gas Plant Processing

  8. Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 -26 -13 -14 47 -10 5 10 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  10. Montana Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 887 926 825 1980's 1,287 1,321 847 896 802 857 803 780 819 867 1990's 899 831 859 673 717 782 796 762 782 841 2000's 885 898 906 1,059 995 986 1,057 1,052 1,000 976 2010's 944 778 602 575 667 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  11. Montana Natural Gas Processed in Montana (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Montana (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Processed in Montana (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 11,185 11,206 12,493 12,507 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Montana-Montana

  12. Montana Natural Gas Processed in North Dakota (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    North Dakota (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Processed in North Dakota (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 176 865 1,460 1,613 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Montana-North Dakota

  13. Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 95 -54 -286 162 -70 -136 -48 14 132 -204 1990's 339 -119 111 65 26 -134 127 122 -351 176 2000's -132 348 -31 -83 -8 121 -122 18 -15 -10 2010's 39 -73 -140 280 -202 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  14. Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 53 30 21 16 13 11 9 9 8 2000's 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 2010's 4 3 4 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Nevada Natural Gas Gross

  15. Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 289 149 68 89 110 256 -170 205 1990's -548 728 -71 9 -30 31 72 61 -31 -29 2000's -17 1 6 21 -1 8 -55 -73 17 -76 2010's -69 -42 -63 -57 16 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  17. New Mexico Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 32 2,479 8,607 5,497 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed New Mexico-Texas

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  19. New Mexico--East Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico--East Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 2 0 1 2010's 3 5 10 13 25 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production NM, East Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  1. New Mexico--West Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  2. North Dakota Natural Gas Processed in Illinois (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Illinois (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Processed in Illinois (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 15,727 30,603 38,066 35,829 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed North Dakota-Illinois

  3. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 8,527 9,029 8,794 8,481 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Oklahoma-Kansas

  4. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 1,121,999 1,282,707 1,349,870 1,670,265 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Oklahoma-Oklahoma

  5. Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 16,462 18,595 18,455 17,361 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Oklahoma-Texas

  6. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed in Pennsylvania (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Pennsylvania (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed in Pennsylvania (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 131,959 226,544 159,840 194,075 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Pennsylvania-Pennsylvania

  7. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed in West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Processed in West Virginia (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 10,273 236,886 101,613 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Pennsylvania-West Virginia

  8. Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas

  9. Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Colorado (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Colorado (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Colorado (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 1,507,467 1,460,433 1,368,677 1,491,693 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Colorado-Colorado

  10. Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Utah (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Utah (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Processed in Utah (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 286 3,677 4,194 3,499 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Colorado-Utah

  11. Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -820 701 -1,356 -385 544 -187 198 121 75 -604 1990's 822 -103 -355 -29 -61 -373 680 94 66 -66 2000's -471 -169 182 140 -91 -240 -286 102 207 164 2010's 178 129 260 -68 -327 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  12. Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 113 -3 -3 -29 39 7 -71 -60 4 -38 1990's 6 7 -5 3 23 -1 11 -8 8 31 2000's 83 10 -43 -28 -10 7 -1 -6 17 3 2010's -2 -31 51 -68 29 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  13. Florida Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Florida Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 151 119 77 1980's 84 69 64 49 65 55 49 49 51 46 1990's 45 38 47 50 98 92 96 96 88 84 2000's 82 84 91 79 78 77 45 108 1 7 2010's 56 6 16 15 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  14. Gulf Of Mexico Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Gulf Of Mexico Natural Gas Processed (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 1,317,031 1,002,608 1,000,964 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Plant Processing Natural Gas Processed (Summary)

  15. Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 19 132 -16 -52 -634 -932 -86 334 165 1990's 23 113 -47 51 182 -29 -25 32 -460 492 2000's -361 307 -42 91 120 143 -140 -99 -147 387 2010's 70 -19 139 -259 -676 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  16. Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -41 22 47 -530 653 -205 -270 -96 69 -579 1990's 580 -229 222 -31 9 -12 -289 -200 -351 241 2000's -370 231 -283 -548 -58 402 119 132 -381 -260 2010's 74 127 419 -322 -442 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. Illinois Natural Gas Processed in Illinois (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  18. Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -129 204 1,991 -498 1,878 429 615 541 6,077 344 1990's 230 595 -339 738 -95 -239 -234 653 486 582 2000's -480 223 -376 -28 -187 236 -275 86 -766 -590 2010's 835 -380 -977 -81 771 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  19. Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -609 -259 726 -1,220 1,015 -813 -496 -208 -171 292 1990's 541 1,343 412 75 346 -651 1,978 241 280 72 2000's -53 -411 -743 -1,077 761 219 -899 -115 -166 -244 2010's 146 14 428 -151 -647 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  1. Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Processed in Kansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 256,268 258,649 189,679 190,698 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Kansas-Kansas

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  3. Kentucky Natural Gas Processed in Kentucky (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Kentucky (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Processed in Kentucky (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 60,941 67,568 61,463 56,226 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Kentucky-Kentucky

  4. Louisiana (with State Offshore) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana (with State Offshore) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1 23 293 2010's 1,232 2,084 2,204 1,510 1,191 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Louisiana Shale Gas Proved

  5. Louisiana (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 6 858 9,307 2010's 20,070 21,950 13,523 11,483 12,792 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  10. Louisiana--North Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1 23 293 2010's 1,232 2,084 2,204 1,509 1,169 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production North Louisiana Shale Gas Proved Reserves,

  11. Louisiana--North Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--North Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 6 858 9,307 2010's 20,070 21,950 13,523 11,473 12,611 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 North Louisiana Shale

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  16. Lower 48 States Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 23,304 34,428 60,644 2010's 97,449 131,616 129,396 159,115 199,684 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31

  17. Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -86 15 -85 5 12 6 0 0 4 1990's -4 1 4 -2 5 3 4 -2 17 15 2000's 12 0 6 51 22 34 18 -21 0 -33 2010's -25 -18 2 1 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net

  18. Michigan Natural Gas Processed in Michigan (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    in Michigan (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Processed in Michigan (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 21,518 21,243 21,416 18,654 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Michigan-Michigan Natural Gas Plant Processing

  19. Alabama (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  20. Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 185 30 66 -580 459 -459 132 -46 164 -422 1990's 456 -19 239 215 448 -164 -303 425 32 -219 2000's -285 -136 298 -47 19 114 -7 -209 -73 178 2010's -21 -75 -22 63 -206 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  2. Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -2,581 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's -1 1 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  4. Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 14 -19 -11 -34 36 -8 4 9 -12 -32 1990's 106 -11 -1 9 5 -27 -85 -11 2 -1 2000's -1 -2 4 52 -36 -20 12 -3 -21 -24 2010's 2 -7 9 12 14 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  5. Arkansas Natural Gas Processed in Arkansas (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    in Arkansas (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Processed in Arkansas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 5,611 6,872 7,781 8,058 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Arkansas-Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Processing

  6. California (with State off) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    off) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California (with State off) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 101 90 89 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production California Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

  7. California (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California (with State off) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 855 777 756 44 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 California Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  8. California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -916 -105 19 -430 -335 -207 -5 0 -11 0 1990's 0 32 -38 -24 -80 -33 -13 -58 -114 -59 2000's 234 -1 4 3 -1 -31 -16 10 -1 -5 2010's 2 7 -5 3 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  10. Tennessee Natural Gas Processed in Tennessee (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    in Tennessee (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Processed in Tennessee (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 6,200 6,304 5,721 5,000 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Tennessee-Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Processing

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  12. Texas (with State Offshore) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas (with State Offshore) Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 988 1,503 1,789 2010's 2,218 2,900 3,649 3,876 4,156 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production Texas Shale Gas Proved

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  14. Texas--RRC District 1 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 1 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 11 2010's 41 156 362 630 822 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production TX, RRC District 1 Shale Gas Proved Reserves,

  15. Texas--RRC District 10 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  16. Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 5 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 437 769 954 2010's 1,053 1,266 1,256 1,128 1,022 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production TX, RRC District 5 Shale Gas

  17. Texas--RRC District 6 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 6 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 3 28 2010's 219 382 486 409 270 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production TX, RRC District 6 Shale Gas Proved Reserves,

  18. Texas--RRC District 8 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 8 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1 4 3 2010's 7 5 22 62 78 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production TX, RRC District 8 Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves

  19. Texas--RRC District 9 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 9 Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 460 586 643 2010's 725 612 626 619 639 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Estimated Production TX, RRC District 9 Shale Gas Proved

  20. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 237 3 0 264 0 431 253 379 21 0 2010's 148 383 21 183 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Alabama Dry Natural Gas

  1. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 7 -12 -27 1980's 30 42 1990's 197 605 159 -644 27 -45 -44 -31 5 -17 2000's -56 36 72 -36 34 -27 -11 12 -71 46 2010's 32 -49 112 -274 502 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  2. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 24 42 46 1980's 64 85 1990's 104 146 256 281 391 360 373 376 394 376 2000's 359 345 365 350 327 300 287 274 257 254 2010's 223 218 214 175 176 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  3. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 50 42 44 1980's 64 12 1990's 1,014 229 35 378 80 118 177 34 19 1 2000's 175 169 289 315 131 85 146 123 59 20 2010's 28 3 0 0 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring

  4. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 14 45 41 1980's 116 89 1990's 938 207 191 159 2,128 286 97 54 313 140 2000's 69 218 155 122 155 60 208 35 732 328 2010's 173 157 254 75 41 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  5. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 18 35 129 1980's 69 119 1990's 759 773 545 44 2,101 481 502 348 309 215 2000's 74 78 130 588 162 135 234 163 283 99 2010's 206 455 99 67 140 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  6. Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Alabama Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 140 1 6 246 29 419 188 302 10 2 2010's 263 573 11 357 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Alabama Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry

  7. Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 655 908 754 353 838 512 581 465 607 512 1990's 893 511 501 612 944 524 979 960 501 564 2000's 729 504 871 655 509 493 704 868 1,003 1,676 2010's 946 754 562 822 1,664 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  8. Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 470 878 688 933 379 971 449 511 444 934 1990's 437 530 262 396 497 688 1,282 535 469 783 2000's 1,014 641 573 607 528 606 698 1,078 1,076 1,498 2010's 968 829 583 759 1,869 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  9. Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 4,348 0 13 0 0 98 0 6 0 0 2010's 0 221 0 272 193 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Alaska Dry Natural Gas Proved

  10. Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 -17 -62 1980's 38 -213 11 1 4 -359 -298 202 176 16 1990's -320 -7 289 57 49 -393 145 19 -172 133 2000's 23 -11 35 1 -1 -2 -46 1 -3 3 2010's 1 -1 -2 -5 -21 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  11. Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 206 216 228 1980's 213 235 261 273 324 312 324 349 400 401 1990's 339 353 414 393 423 396 446 475 513 459 2000's 506 461 460 478 478 469 408 388 354 358 2010's 317 327 299 285 304 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  12. Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 67 1,324 231 1980's 104 61 22 742 395 552 757 67 24,751 136 1990's 99 239 21 109 49 51 171 99 125 3,525 2000's 2,093 335 118 235 207 154 376 112 4,068 108 2010's 452 206 339 2,400 685 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  13. Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Alaska Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 4,531 0 13 0 0 96 0 10 0 5 2010's 131 36 2 91 165 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Alaska Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry Natural

  14. Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,581 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 159 319 467 697 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied

  15. Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 2000's 1 158 319 467 697 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from

  16. Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 7 7 6 5 6 5 35 1990's 71 45 41 49 61 57 58 51 46 35 2000's 36 40 58 18 25 23 23 20 20 17 2010's 19 17 12 4 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  17. Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 343 5 80 82 52 30 5 280 5 36 2010's 807 6,880 6 9 80 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Arkansas Dry Natural Gas

  18. Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -1 22 -2 1980's -7 39 93 -15 90 -127 55 26 124 -46 1990's 94 110 183 -62 95 64 33 -21 -1 -48 2000's -3 28 27 21 13 8 -26 -27 -64 5 2010's -34 728 -743 -78 -3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  19. Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 109 120 100 1980's 117 121 158 206 188 175 123 129 159 166 1990's 164 173 204 188 186 182 200 189 170 163 2000's 154 160 157 166 170 174 188 269 456 698 2010's 951 1,079 1,151 1,140 1,142 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  20. Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 175 32 58 1980's 89 76 116 157 167 178 262 229 232 288 1990's 118 195 175 123 95 92 108 101 653 376 2000's 48 88 107 134 91 142 113 146 189 621 2010's 301 324 6,610 284 1,094 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  1. Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 50 76 48 1980's 116 61 87 181 146 105 180 215 118 202 1990's 100 163 182 98 147 107 96 205 596 761 2000's 207 128 114 148 200 122 101 321 1,249 1,912 2010's 1,072 631 1,754 560 171 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  2. Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 336 8 66 63 24 31 4 298 19 54 2010's 393 6,760 1 4 248 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Arkansas Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry

  3. Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 14 5 21 0 44 18 22 52 42 30 1990's 128 38 50 53 73 29 0 57 64 52 2000's 52 50 85 36 76 72 45 54 51 27 2010's 42 47 57 52 56 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  4. Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 24 32 34 8 26 18 43 54 62 1990's 23 49 51 44 68 56 85 68 62 53 2000's 52 52 81 88 40 51 57 57 72 51 2010's 40 53 48 40 42 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  5. Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 982 966 7,077 4,709 6,270 6,646 7,646 1990's 637 188 268 352 467 468 451 508 405 405 2000's 441 653 890 504 490 433 509 404 470 489 2010's 529 423 622 797 871 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  6. Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 21 27 33 2000's 37 46 46 56 63 9 6 5 4 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  7. Illinois Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 29 47 39 54 47 38 35 1990's 22 10 9 10 10 7 7 6 5 4 2000's 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 39 41 62 2010's 50 101 122 122 70 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  8. Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -1 153 -182 1980's 297 -191 23 205 -106 -26 -32 35 -124 55 1990's 3 240 95 94 155 327 581 177 105 12 2000's 217 653 82 65 -97 1 112 -45 -48 -279 2010's 243 8 -104 -62 -47 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  9. Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 135 149 134 1980's 160 139 133 125 138 132 128 130 126 129 1990's 120 155 145 141 150 163 208 221 240 234 2000's 333 239 242 220 207 211 197 184 157 153 2010's 154 139 138 133 124 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  10. Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 35 84 38 1980's 39 35 53 24 28 20 80 257 47 48 1990's 40 20 29 22 15 33 17 50 12 2 2000's 143 63 287 74 90 55 86 29 21 16 2010's 1 0 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  11. Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 99 209 106 1980's 71 98 144 100 105 132 78 157 261 283 1990's 170 311 248 202 48 315 152 124 288 478 2000's 176 524 276 235 360 163 291 210 430 406 2010's 378 267 1,062 139 90 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  12. Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 94 83 118 1980's 64 87 146 115 184 98 105 160 239 228 1990's 87 281 148 164 191 79 453 252 538 624 2000's 422 263 383 303 205 141 460 780 143 367 2010's 260 210 541 388 290 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  13. Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Michigan Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 479 24 35 201 13 104 48 1,043 0 0 2010's 529 643 0 11 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Michigan Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry

  14. Minnesota Natural Gas Exports to All Countries (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Exports to All Countries (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Exports to All Countries (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 2000's 0 0 71 172 2,193 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 3,975 11,768 16,209 5,474 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: U.S. Natural Gas Exports Minnesota

  15. Minnesota Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 48 106 337 1 3 11 2 1 385 315 1990's 56 49 52 78 289 194 709 172 50 64 2000's 101 118 13 42 71 154 13 54 46 47 2010's 12 20 9 22 66 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  16. Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 35 29 33 29 9 54 30 78 4 2 2010's 13 10 109 90 82 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Mississippi Dry Natural Gas

  17. Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 9 104 -18 1980's 29 399 24 11 7 8 51 5 -1 17 1990's 82 106 -102 68 -1 31 13 -16 -19 34 2000's -20 53 81 -26 20 5 -26 37 12 26 2010's 1 109 65 29 -15 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  18. Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 341 108 68 1980's 103 73 42 31 49 79 71 32 31 57 1990's 20 11 9 2 2 30 43 48 109 11 2000's 53 43 54 81 27 75 119 146 155 132 2010's 33 24 4 5 9 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  19. Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 96 34 29 42 18 17 44 24 2 17 2010's 31 11 159 39 115 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Mississippi Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

  20. Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 7 26 29 57 21 28 58 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural

  1. Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 33 39 43 10 31 23 48 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Withdrawals of Liquefied

  2. Missouri Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

  3. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 12 59 6 326 3 9 17 39 95 3 2010's 30 44 4 4 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Montana Dry Natural Gas Proved

  4. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 -91 -74 1980's 573 30 -448 75 -74 56 -61 -25 83 -106 1990's 29 -27 58 -154 142 -4 16 33 -12 42 2000's 13 51 58 -28 -56 3 13 9 -3 135 2010's -19 -59 38 3 39 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  5. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 49 44 47 1980's 61 86 45 49 46 49 42 42 60 43 1990's 48 48 52 50 49 51 52 55 51 41 2000's 67 73 77 86 95 100 117 112 114 113 2010's 93 75 65 62 58 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  6. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 31 71 47 1980's 45 60 33 31 38 3 7 2 1 126 1990's 40 17 16 0 1 0 2 22 6 15 2000's 57 36 96 146 131 130 144 81 75 32 2010's 86 14 37 36 77 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  7. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 25 21 86 1980's 189 83 95 79 77 40 31 16 33 25 1990's 32 33 21 11 76 14 12 133 43 55 2000's 133 90 109 26 124 122 78 74 56 210 2010's 100 97 191 49 54 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  8. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 112 120 45 1980's 72 102 72 58 54 65 60 57 48 91 1990's 34 20 22 29 26 133 59 99 119 98 2000's 130 82 40 46 73 63 65 92 41 132 2010's 103 43 31 113 89 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  9. Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Montana Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 9 57 10 225 3 6 20 41 90 3 2010's 40 44 30 72 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Montana Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry Natural

  10. Montana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 439 457 542 437 449 474 519 1990's 557 518 423 295 206 168 168 188 208 235 2000's 218 396 249 512 606 697 820 816 788 771 2010's 800 604 612 645 657 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  11. Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 2 2 4 6 8 13 40 31 38 2000's 43 53 54 66 74 4 2 1 1 1 2010's 1 0 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

  12. Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 225 119 7 283 65 4 81 130 299 210 1990's 493 92 283 287 393 115 915 505 0 377 2000's 288 598 187 601 449 185 303 214 159 165 2010's 346 147 1 407 481 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  13. Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 130 173 293 121 135 140 129 115 167 414 1990's 155 211 173 222 367 248 788 383 351 201 2000's 421 251 217 518 441 306 181 196 174 175 2010's 308 220 141 128 683 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  14. Nebraska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 60 70 57 40 43 26 21 1990's 26 17 31 56 86 58 43 38 37 29 2000's 31 29 295 286 302 236 176 182 395 359 2010's 331 287 194 194 62 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  15. Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 34 35 30 19 31 21 13 1990's 0 14 9 0 3 2 3 7 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel

  16. Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,170 794 598 1970's 555 599 539 474 460 313 259 226 168 139 1980's 126 153 133 137 132 115 77 81 59 29 1990's 0 13 3 8 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Dry Natural Gas Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 53 30 21 16 13 11 9 9 8 2000's 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 2010's 4 3 4 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Nevada Natural Gas Gross

  18. Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 294 241 133 419 217 441 213 696 1990's 356 767 83 253 241 259 180 276 92 206 2000's 153 211 181 193 199 587 316 202 174 106 2010's 125 112 82 153 227 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  19. Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 5 92 65 330 107 185 383 491 1990's 904 39 155 244 271 228 109 214 124 235 2000's 170 210 174 214 198 595 261 275 157 182 2010's 195 154 146 210 211 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  20. Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 53 30 21 16 13 11 9 9 8 2000's 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 2010's 4 3 4 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

  1. New Hampshire Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Exports (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 64 0 2010's 0 336 199 95 373 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: U.S. Natural Gas Exports New Hampshire U.S. Natural Gas Imports & Exports Natural Gas Exports

  2. New Hampshire Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 774 720 582 328 681 509 362 464 492 592 1990's 205 128 96 154 160 90 147 102 103 111 2000's 180 86 66 58 91 84 92 9 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  3. New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 5 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 29 80 138 99 27 101 45 82 2010's 33 112 65 124 185 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Additions of

  4. New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 27 11 21 84 0 0 100 91 142 213 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 102 37 0 82 137 100 26 103 44 73 2010's 35 108 71 124 185 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  5. New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,087 307 1,052 852 1,323 1,238 6,278 376 192 292 2010's 419 1,078 115 594 62 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  6. New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 13 -20 -37 1980's -282 866 -779 -135 -78 131 -176 -76 249 255 1990's 342 683 313 -124 -641 284 -106 -664 -48 394 2000's 18 9 199 -104 126 44 91 136 -6 525 2010's -89 73 153 -202 555 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  7. New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 649 312 1,029 652 682 963 6,248 570 402 287 2010's 145 1,016 311 705 15 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales New Mexico Dry Natural Gas

  8. New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 150 878 1,170 1,050 836 1,073 777 892 370 595 1990's 303 309 363 440 835 886 1,262 760 260 454 2000's 938 575 822 1,988 913 635 597 656 717 1,025 2010's 705 671 584 528 1,194 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  9. North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 9 5 42 6 22 22 40 43 26 1 2010's 136 169 206 384 322 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions North Dakota Dry

  10. North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 16 -23 1980's -7 31 -1 -9 21 -31 6 -3 6 29 1990's 56 -93 44 49 -47 -2 22 -2 -31 -13 2000's 21 17 18 25 -29 -10 18 12 -7 47 2010's -2 -3 -56 -208 -31 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  11. North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2 5 37 1980's 31 69 60 23 28 17 10 5 51 8 1990's 16 11 17 21 7 2 5 25 25 1 2000's 3 3 8 5 7 49 30 59 102 401 2010's 442 572 834 1,523 1,161 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  12. North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 7 8 46 1 11 1 53 39 25 2 2010's 47 113 237 13 557 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales North Dakota Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

  13. North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 1 3 8 8 12 15 41 40 49 2000's 54 67 68 83 93 3 1 1 1 2010's 1 1 1 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered

  14. Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 115 62 2 0 0 7 83 0 32 79 2010's 239 4 71 0 40 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Ohio Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

  15. Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -3 121 615 1980's -56 -676 268 1,075 -363 -77 264 -260 302 142 1990's 42 88 89 36 87 40 101 -71 -179 -75 2000's 1 31 148 97 -138 -78 129 138 210 70 2010's 127 -99 -41 -328 -426 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  16. Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Estimated Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 60 65 105 1980's 137 85 99 179 169 140 149 117 132 130 1990's 127 132 117 121 119 115 121 105 94 94 2000's 79 84 87 82 82 76 78 71 79 79 2010's 73 76 85 166 477 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 11 40 108 1980's 87 44 55 63 56 62 94 35 37 20 1990's 16 22 27 19 16 13 42 75 118 113 2000's 156 287 139 127 64 111 112 198 333 43 2010's 59 38 162 158 1,490 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  18. Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 48 30 114 1980's 33 12 32 10 26 29 51 45 20 45 1990's 34 26 21 36 27 39 91 101 276 401 2000's 243 129 186 121 103 166 49 144 135 70 2010's 68 17 180 530 1,548 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  19. Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Ohio Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 124 87 19 7 0 54 11 0 31 196 2010's 374 0 0 12 20 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Ohio Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves Dry Natural Gas

  20. Ohio Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 50 63 71 69 96 88 87 1990's 14 14 16 20 36 32 37 39 40 42 2000's 43 40 37 17 18 12 8 5 0 0 2010's 0 0 127 202 468 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  1. Ohio Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 20 23 29 41 67 68 50 44 46 1990's 58 49 72 95 104 94 85 83 78 78 2000's 78 86 72 68 58 29 5 9 0 0 2010's 0 0 155 2,116 33,332 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  2. Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,325 671 845 1,864 763 728 1,202 1,567 599 387 2010's 1,519 2,459 975 738 1,210 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions

  3. Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 36 615 -138 1980's -1,099 1,017 891 -323 -337 -500 835 559 203 202 1990's 838 -451 -121 -94 374 -67 122 82 106 -1,233 2000's 424 196 904 226 -113 297 -149 13 99 984 2010's -394 -368 -686 -622 816 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  4. Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,243 480 767 1,598 511 539 821 1,545 395 600 2010's 219 2,995 1,133 733 1,088 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Oklahoma Dry Natural

  5. Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 251 265 28 649 304 461 0 183 803 940 1990's 754 609 376 1,137 860 790 693 889 757 540 2000's 997 1,234 594 977 1,193 1,733 1,078 613 1,315 683 2010's 343 336 299 276 822 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  6. Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 264 268 29 773 272 283 346 305 243 890 1990's 1,003 389 409 1,360 1,117 675 939 841 1,014 468 2000's 789 1,215 664 992 1,190 1,950 959 749 1,537 436 2010's 396 361 315 326 711 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  7. Oregon Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 120 131 130 115 59 1990's 93 60 68 118 95 66 40 0 0 0 2000's 49 42 40 43 27 21 24 23 26 26 2010's 31 39 44 44 25 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  8. Other States Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Repressuring (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 867 758 881 1992 718 641 691 666 662 642 653 653 645 697 694 725 1993 680 609 662 635 644 618 635 636 626 670 673 706 1994 656 588 637 610 620 596 612 613 603 644 645 676 1995 683 612 665 636 646 620 637 638 627 671 674 706 1996 196 185 205 187 218 212 192 191 193 201 218 156 1997 208 194 204 211 200 187 148 162 151 158 148 169 1998 126 117 123

  9. Other States Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Other States Natural Gas Vented and Flared (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1991 408 1992 501 530 501 1993 501 522 515 533 536 531 583 546 1994 533 616 623 620 629 654 1995 667 594 663 634 643 626 643 663 603 553 567 578 1996 549 538 625 620 693 703 709 715 676 708 682 690 1997 133 124 135 142 147 142 149 177 160 150 159 161 1998 147 134 150 148 132 117 126 132 124 121 121 123 1999 754 406 686 588 693 611 708 340 590

  10. Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 160 32 6 1 29 139 234 41 168 600 2010's 930 1,884 12 351 1,295 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Acquisitions Pennsylvania

  11. Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 67 689 1980's -589 226 60 517 -551 -111 -36 164 488 -367 1990's 191 41 28 190 -19 -240 139 60 -9 -9 2000's -194 3 206 314 -188 186 -117 181 -201 65 2010's -373 -224 -240 664 1,266 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  12. Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 71 149 103 1980's 86 154 111 104 176 218 127 137 66 79 1990's 78 19 24 29 16 3 38 82 19 23 2000's 11 108 170 149 123 275 359 358 489 2,774 2010's 5,779 10,264 12,805 15,544 11,146 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  13. Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet)

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

    Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 124 11 5 30 28 78 6 4 275 52 2010's 678 799 4 103 504 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Dry Natural Gas Reserves Sales Pennsylvania Dry Natural Gas Proved

  14. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 158 171 148 171 205 191 218 1990's 156 159 341 235 116 181 217 253 222 274 2000's 208 272 251 343 395 483 549 495 575 599 2010's 881 963 2,529 9,200 11,602 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  15. Port Huron, MI Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Port Huron, MI Liquefied Natural Gas Exports (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 1 2014 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2015 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 02/29/2016 Next Release Date: 03/31/2016 Referring Pages: U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports by Point of Exit Port Huron, MI LNG Exports to All Countries

  16. Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 61 265 243 47 97 147 20 65 174 164 1990's 142 749 796 462 1,156 857 850 1,056 102 162 2000's 174 72 254 1,290 971 850 390 1,093 656 698 2010's 468 430 517 624 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  17. Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 316 192 260 55 66 120 36 295 143 202 1990's 188 355 1,216 800 996 908 1,603 1,533 851 139 2000's 986 413 301 1,205 1,058 786 411 1,089 730 954 2010's 698 436 457 645 879 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  18. South Carolina Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Input Supplemental Fuels (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 74 184 63 73 62 87 31 22 191 201 1990's 17 47 26 34 154 62 178 10 0 18 2000's 63 6 3 15 2 86 75 0 2010's 0 0 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  19. South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 342 546 401 292 258 293 342 481 547 547 1990's 247 396 323 752 682 754 910 461 406 493 2000's 1,194 651 488 718 622 757 892 987 1,847 1,268 2010's 1,574 1,183 491 914 1,252 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  20. South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Additions (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 44 83 2000's 70 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas