National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for gas pipeline capacity

  1. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Pipeline Capacity and Utilization

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

    Pipeline Utilization & Capacity About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity & Utilization Overview | Utilization Rates | Integration of Storage | Varying Rates of Utilization | Measures of Utilization Overview of Pipeline Utilization Natural gas pipeline companies prefer to operate their systems as close to full capacity as possible to maximize their revenues. However, the average

  2. Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in the Northeast United States - November 2013 Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in the...

  3. Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in the

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Northeast United States - November 2013 | Department of Energy Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in the Northeast United States - November 2013 Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in the Northeast United States - November 2013 In 2005-06, the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE) conducted a study on the adequacy of interstate natural gas pipeline capacity serving the northeastern United States to meet natural gas demand

  4. Status of Natural Gas Pipeline System Capacity Entering the 2000-2001 Heating Season

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2000-01-01

    This special report looks at the capabilities of the national natural gas pipeline network in 2000 and provides an assessment of the current levels of available capacity to transport supplies from production areas to markets throughout the United States during the upcoming heating season. It also examines how completion of currently planned expansion projects and proposed new pipelines would affect the network.

  5. AGA totes up new U. S. gas-pipeline mileage, storage capacity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-04

    More than 8,000 miles of new US natural-gas transmission line or pipeline looping have been built, are under construction, or are proposed in 1993--94, the American Gas Association, Arlington, Va., states in its latest annual report on new construction. Additionally, AGA lists 47 proposed natural-gas storage projects in various stages of development to add more than 500 bcf of working-gas storage capacity and, if constructed, would increase total US working-gas storage capacity by nearly 20%. Throughout 1993 and 1994, more than $9 billion of new gas-pipeline construction projects have been in various stages of development. AGA classifies these projects as either built in 1993 or 1994 and operational, or currently under construction, or proposed and pending. In aggregate, the projects total 8,087 miles of new pipeline and pipeline looping, 1,098,940 hp of additional compression, and 15.3 bcfd of additional capacity. A table shows the regional breakout.

  6. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Largest Natural Gas Pipeline Systems

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Interstate Pipelines Table About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Thirty Largest U.S. Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Systems, 2008 (Ranked by system capacity) Pipeline Name Market Regions Served Primary Supply Regions States in Which Pipeline Operates Transported in 2007 (million dekatherm)1 System Capacity (MMcf/d) 2 System Mileage Columbia Gas Transmission Co. Northeast Southwest, Appalachia DE, PA, MD, KY, NC, NJ, NY,

  7. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Generalized Natural Gas Pipeline

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

    Capacity Design Schematic Generalized Design Schematic About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines- Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Generalized Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity Design Schematic Generalized Natural Gas Pipeline Capcity Design Schematic

  8. “Assessment of the Adequacy of Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity in the Northeast United States” Report Now Available

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In 2013, OE conducted an assessment to determine how changes to the Northeast gas market may have affected the ability of the interstate pipeline system to meet natural gas demand for “essential human needs” in the event of a disruption in pipeline capacity.

  9. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Pipeline Mileage...

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

    Mileage by State About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Estimated Natural Gas Pipeline Mileage in the...

  10. Natural gas pipeline technology overview.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Folga, S. M.; Decision and Information Sciences

    2007-11-01

    The United States relies on natural gas for one-quarter of its energy needs. In 2001 alone, the nation consumed 21.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. A large portion of natural gas pipeline capacity within the United States is directed from major production areas in Texas and Louisiana, Wyoming, and other states to markets in the western, eastern, and midwestern regions of the country. In the past 10 years, increasing levels of gas from Canada have also been brought into these markets (EIA 2007). The United States has several major natural gas production basins and an extensive natural gas pipeline network, with almost 95% of U.S. natural gas imports coming from Canada. At present, the gas pipeline infrastructure is more developed between Canada and the United States than between Mexico and the United States. Gas flows from Canada to the United States through several major pipelines feeding U.S. markets in the Midwest, Northeast, Pacific Northwest, and California. Some key examples are the Alliance Pipeline, the Northern Border Pipeline, the Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, the TransCanada Pipeline System, and Westcoast Energy pipelines. Major connections join Texas and northeastern Mexico, with additional connections to Arizona and between California and Baja California, Mexico (INGAA 2007). Of the natural gas consumed in the United States, 85% is produced domestically. Figure 1.1-1 shows the complex North American natural gas network. The pipeline transmission system--the 'interstate highway' for natural gas--consists of 180,000 miles of high-strength steel pipe varying in diameter, normally between 30 and 36 inches in diameter. The primary function of the transmission pipeline company is to move huge amounts of natural gas thousands of miles from producing regions to local natural gas utility delivery points. These delivery points, called 'city gate stations', are usually owned by distribution companies, although some are owned by transmission companies. Compressor stations at required distances boost the pressure that is lost through friction as the gas moves through the steel pipes (EPA 2000). The natural gas system is generally described in terms of production, processing and purification, transmission and storage, and distribution (NaturalGas.org 2004b). Figure 1.1-2 shows a schematic of the system through transmission. This report focuses on the transmission pipeline, compressor stations, and city gates.

  11. Additions to Capacity on the U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Network...

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

    ... for Providing Appropriate Access to Geospatial Data in Response to Security Concerns. Source: Energy Information Administration, GasTran Gas Transportation Information ...

  12. GAS PIPELINE PIGABILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ted Clark; Bruce Nestleroth

    2004-04-01

    In-line inspection equipment is commonly used to examine a large portion of the long distance transmission pipeline system that transports natural gas from well gathering points to local distribution companies. A piece of equipment that is inserted into a pipeline and driven by product flow is called a ''pig''. Using this term as a base, a set of terms has evolved. Pigs that are equipped with sensors and data recording devices are called ''intelligent pigs''. Pipelines that cannot be inspected using intelligent pigs are deemed ''unpigable''. But many factors affect the passage of a pig through a pipeline, or the ''pigability''. The pigability pipeline extend well beyond the basic need for a long round hole with a means to enter and exit. An accurate assessment of pigability includes consideration of pipeline length, attributes, pressure, flow rate, deformation, cleanliness, and other factors as well as the availability of inspection technology. All factors must be considered when assessing the appropriateness of ILI to assess specific pipeline threats.

  13. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline...

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

    SoCal and PG&E are two of the largest distribution companies in the entire United States. ... Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline Companies -spreadsheet Other Natural Gas ...

  14. Expansion of the U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Network

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2009-01-01

    Additions in 2008 and Projects through 2011. This report examines new natural gas pipeline capacity added to the U.S. natural gas pipeline system during 2008. In addition, it discusses and analyzes proposed natural gas pipeline projects that may be developed between 2009 and 2011, and the market factors supporting these initiatives.

  15. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Pipeline Development &

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

    Expansion Pipelinesk > Development & Expansion About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipeline Development and Expansion Timing | Determining Market Interest | Expansion Options | Obtaining Approval | Prefiling Process | Approval | Construction | Commissioning Timing and Steps for a New Project An interstate natural gas pipeline construction or expansion project takes an average of about three years

  16. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Pipeline Compressor...

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

    Gas Pipeline Compressor Stations Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil ... The EIA has determined that the informational map displays here do not raise security ...

  17. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Interstate Pipelines Segment

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

    natural gas (Tcf) was transported by interstate pipeline companies on behalf of shippers. ... The 30 largest interstate pipeline companies own about 77 percent of all interstate ...

  18. Florida products pipeline set to double capacity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    True, W.R.

    1995-11-13

    Directional drilling has begun this fall for a $68.5 million, approximately 110,000 b/d expansion of Central Florida Pipeline Co.`s refined products line from Tampa to Orlando. The drilling started in August and is scheduled to conclude this month, crossing under seven water bodies in Hillsborough, Polk, and Osceola counties. The current 6 and 10-in. system provides more than 90% of the petroleum products used in Central Florida, according to Central Florida Pipeline. Its additional capacity will meet the growing region`s demand for gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. The new pipeline, along with the existing 10-in. system, will increase total annual capacity from 30 million bbl (82,192 b/d) to approximately 70 million bbl (191,781 b/d). The older 6-in. line will be shutdown when the new line is operating fully. The steps of pipeline installation are described.

  19. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Combined Natural Gas Transportation

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Maps Combined Natural Gas Transportation Maps About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Network Map of U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Network Major Natural Gas Supply Basins Relative to Natural Gas Pipeline Transportation Corridors Map of Major Natural Gas Supply Basins Relative to Natural Gas Pipeline Transportation Corridors see related text enlarge see related text enlarge U.S. Regional Breakdown

  20. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Midwest Region

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Midwest Region About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipelines in the Midwest Region Overview | Domestic Gas | Canadian Imports | Regional Pipeline Companies & Links Overview Twenty-six interstate and at least eight intrastate natural gas pipeline companies operate within the Midwest Region (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin). The principal sources of natural gas supply for the

  1. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  2. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Central Region

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Central Region About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipelines in the Central Region Overview | Domestic Gas | Exports | Regional Pipeline Companies & Links Overview Twenty-two interstate and at least thirteen intrastate natural gas pipeline companies (see Table below) operate in the Central Region (Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming). Twelve

  3. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Northeast Region

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Northeast Region About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipelines in the Northeast Region Overview | Domestic Gas | Canadian Imports | Regional Pipeline Companies & Links Overview Twenty interstate natural gas pipeline systems operate within the Northeast Region (Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and West Virginia). These

  4. About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2007-01-01

    This information product provides the interested reader with a broad and non-technical overview of how the U.S. natural gas pipeline network operates, along with some insights into the many individual pipeline systems that make up the network. While the focus of the presentation is the transportation of natural gas over the interstate and intrastate pipeline systems, information on subjects related to pipeline development, such as system design and pipeline expansion, are also included.

  5. Deliverability on the interstate natural gas pipeline system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-05-01

    Deliverability on the Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline System examines the capability of the national pipeline grid to transport natural gas to various US markets. The report quantifies the capacity levels and utilization rates of major interstate pipeline companies in 1996 and the changes since 1990, as well as changes in markets and end-use consumption patterns. It also discusses the effects of proposed capacity expansions on capacity levels. The report consists of five chapters, several appendices, and a glossary. Chapter 1 discusses some of the operational and regulatory features of the US interstate pipeline system and how they affect overall system design, system utilization, and capacity expansions. Chapter 2 looks at how the exploration, development, and production of natural gas within North America is linked to the national pipeline grid. Chapter 3 examines the capability of the interstate natural gas pipeline network to link production areas to market areas, on the basis of capacity and usage levels along 10 corridors. The chapter also examines capacity expansions that have occurred since 1990 along each corridor and the potential impact of proposed new capacity. Chapter 4 discusses the last step in the transportation chain, that is, deliverability to the ultimate end user. Flow patterns into and out of each market region are discussed, as well as the movement of natural gas between States in each region. Chapter 5 examines how shippers reserve interstate pipeline capacity in the current transportation marketplace and how pipeline companies are handling the secondary market for short-term unused capacity. Four appendices provide supporting data and additional detail on the methodology used to estimate capacity. 32 figs., 15 tabs.

  6. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Southeast Region

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Southeast Region About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipelines in the Southeast Region Overview | Transportation to Atlantic & Gulf States | Gulf of Mexico Transportation Corridor | Transportation to the Northern Tier | Regional Pipeline Companies & Links Overview Twenty-three interstate, and at least eight intrastate, natural gas pipeline companies operate within the Southeast Region (Alabama,

  7. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Southwest Region

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Southwest Region About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipelines in the Southwest Region Overview | Export Transportation | Intrastate | Connection to Gulf of Mexico | Regional Pipeline Companies & Links Overview Most of the major onshore interstate natural gas pipeline companies (see Table below) operating in the Southwest Region (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas) are primarily

  8. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Western Region

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Western Region About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Pipelines in the Western Region Overview | Transportation South | Transportation North | Regional Pipeline Companies & Links Overview Ten interstate and nine intrastate natural gas pipeline companies provide transportation services to and within the Western Region (Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington), the fewest number serving

  9. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Regional Definitions

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

    Definitions Map About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Regional Definitions The regions defined in the...

  10. Natural Gas Compressor Stations on the Interstate Pipeline Network: Developments Since 1996

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2007-01-01

    This special report looks at the use of natural gas pipeline compressor stations on the interstate natural gas pipeline network that serves the lower 48 states. It examines the compression facilities added over the past 10 years and how the expansions have supported pipeline capacity growth intended to meet the increasing demand for natural gas.

  11. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Transmission...

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

    Transmission Path Diagram About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Natural Gas Transmission Path Natural...

  12. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage

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

    Storage About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Underground Natural Gas Storage Overview | Regional Breakdowns Overview Underground natural gas storage provides pipelines, local distribution companies, producers, and pipeline shippers with an inventory management tool, seasonal supply backup, and access to natural gas needed to avoid imbalances between receipts and deliveries on a pipeline network. There are three

  13. Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure...

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

    Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure for HydrogenMixed Gas Service Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure for HydrogenMixed...

  14. California Natural Gas Pipelines: A Brief Guide

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neuscamman, Stephanie; Price, Don; Pezzola, Genny; Glascoe, Lee

    2013-01-22

    The purpose of this document is to familiarize the reader with the general configuration and operation of the natural gas pipelines in California and to discuss potential LLNL contributions that would support the Partnership for the 21st Century collaboration. First, pipeline infrastructure will be reviewed. Then, recent pipeline events will be examined. Selected current pipeline industry research will be summarized. Finally, industry acronyms are listed for reference.

  15. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Transportation Process ...

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

    Peak Shaving - System design methodology permitting a natural gas pipeline to meet short-term surges in customer demands with minimal infrastructure. Peaks can be handled by using ...

  16. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline System - Links to U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Systems Links About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Links to U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Information - The links below will either direct the user to a narrative describing the system, a pipeline system map, a FERC prescribed "Informational Postings" page, or a FERC Tariff Sheet. Pipeline Name Type of System Regions of Operations Acadian Gas Pipeline System Intrastate Southwest Algonquin Gas Transmission Co

  17. EIS-0164: Pacific Gas Transmission/Pacific Gas and Electric and Altamont Natural Gas Pipeline Project

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has prepared the PGT/PG&E and Altamont Natural Gas Pipeline Projects Environmental Impact Statement to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. This project addresses the need to expand the capacity of the pipeline transmission system to better transfer Canadian natural gas to Southern California and the Pacific Northwest. The U.S. Department of Energy cooperated in the preparation of this statement because Section 19(c) of the Natural Gas Act applies to the Department’s action of authorizing import/export of natural gas, and adopted this statement by the spring of 1992. "

  18. Evaluation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials for Hydrogen Science...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Evaluation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials for Hydrogen Science Evaluation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials for Hydrogen Science Presentation by 04-Adams to DOE Hydrogen...

  19. Pipeline issues shape southern FSU oil, gas development

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-05-22

    To future production from southern republics of the former Soviet Union (FSU), construction and revitalization of pipelines are as important as the supply of capital. Export capacity will limit production and slow development activity in the region until new pipelines are in place. Plenty of pipeline proposals have come forward. The problem is politics, which for every proposal so far complicates routing or financing or both. Russia has made clear its intention to use pipeline route decisions to retain influence in the region. As a source of external pressure, it is not alone. Iran and Turkey also have made strong bids for the southern FSU`s oil and gas transport business. Diplomacy thus will say as much as commerce does about how transportation issues are settled and how quickly the southern republics move toward their potentials to produce oil and gas. The paper discusses possible routes and the problems with them, the most likely proposal, and future oil flows.

  20. Natural Gas Pipeline and System Expansions

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1997-01-01

    This special report examines recent expansions to the North American natural gas pipeline network and the nature and type of proposed pipeline projects announced or approved for construction during the next several years in the United States. It includes those projects in Canada and Mexico that tie in with U.S. markets or projects.

  1. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Supply Basins...

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

    Corridors About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates U.S. Natural Gas Supply Basins Relative to Major Natural...

  2. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Imports/Exports Pipelines

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

    Export Pipelines About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Natural Gas Import/Export Pipelines As of the close of 2008 the United States has 58 locations where natural gas can be exported or imported. 24 locations are for imports only 18 locations are for exports only 13 locations are for both imports and exports 8 locations are liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facilities Imported natural gas in 2007 represented almost 16

  3. Development Of A Centrifugal Hydrogen Pipeline Gas Compressor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Di Bella, Francis A.

    2015-04-16

    Concepts NREC (CN) has completed a Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored project to analyze, design, and fabricate a pipeline capacity hydrogen compressor. The pipeline compressor is a critical component in the DOE strategy to provide sufficient quantities of hydrogen to support the expected shift in transportation fuels from liquid and natural gas to hydrogen. The hydrogen would be generated by renewable energy (solar, wind, and perhaps even tidal or ocean), and would be electrolyzed from water. The hydrogen would then be transported to the population centers in the U.S., where fuel-cell vehicles are expected to become popular and necessary to relieve dependency on fossil fuels. The specifications for the required pipeline hydrogen compressor indicates a need for a small package that is efficient, less costly, and more reliable than what is available in the form of a multi-cylinder, reciprocating (positive displacement) compressor for compressing hydrogen in the gas industry.

  4. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Regulatory Authorities

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

    Regulatory Authorities About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates U.S. Natural Gas Regulatory Authorities Beginning | Regulations Today | Coordinating Agencies | Regulation of Mergers and Acquisitions Beginning of Industry Restructuring In April 1992, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued its Order 636 and transformed the interstate natural gas transportation segment of the industry forever. Under it,

  5. Evaluation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials for Hydrogen Science |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Department of Energy Evaluation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials for Hydrogen Science Evaluation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials for Hydrogen Science Presentation by 04-Adams to DOE Hydrogen Pipeline R&D Project Review Meeting held January 5-6, 2005 at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. PDF icon 04_adams_nat_gas.pdf More Documents & Publications Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure for Hydrogen/Mixed Gas Service Hydrogen

  6. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Largest Natural Gas Pipeline...

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

    ... ND, MN, IA, IL 632 2,053 888 Kern River Gas Transmission Co. Western Central CA, NV, UT, ... 1 This figure, found on Line 19 of Gas Accounts in FERC Form 2, Page ...

  7. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    of capacity that may understate the amount that can actually be stored. Working Gas Design Capacity: This measure estimates a natural gas facility's working gas capacity, as...

  8. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Transportation Corridors

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

    Map Corridors > Major U.S. Natural Gas Transportation Corridors Map About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Major U.S. Natural Gas Transportation Corridors, 2008

  9. Energy Department Moves Forward on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Moves Forward on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Loan Guarantee Program Energy Department Moves Forward on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Loan Guarantee Program May 26, 2005 - 1:03pm...

  10. Detroit, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Million...

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

    data. Release Date: 09302015 Next Release Date: 10302015 Referring Pages: U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports by Point of Entry Detroit, MI Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from...

  11. Detroit, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars...

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

    Date: 09302015 Next Release Date: 10302015 Referring Pages: U.S. Price of Natural Gas Pipeline Imports by Point of Entry Detroit, MI Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from...

  12. Deliverability on the Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline System

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1998-01-01

    Examines the capability of the national pipeline grid to transport natural gas to various U.S. markets.

  13. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Regional Overview and Links

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

    Overview and Links About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Regional Overviews and Links to Pipeline Companies Through a series of interconnecting interstate and intrastate pipelines the transportation of natural gas from one location to another within the United States has become a relatively seamless operation. While intrastate pipeline systems often transports natural gas from production areas directly to consumers in

  14. Look at Western Natural Gas Infrastructure During the Recent El Paso Pipeline Disruption, A

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2000-01-01

    This special report looks at the capabilities of the national natural gas pipeline network in 2000 and provides an assessment of the current levels of available capacity to transport supplies from production areas to markets throughout the United States during the upcoming heating season. It also examines how completion of currently planned expansion projects and proposed new pipelines would affect the network.

  15. Permafrost problems as they affect gas pipelines (the frost heave problem)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lipsett, G.B.

    1980-01-01

    The major problems associated with the construction of a large diameter gas pipeline in a permafrost region are outlined in this presentation. Data pertains to the design and construction of the Alaska Highway Gas Pipeline Project. One of the main problems is maintaining the permafrost in its frozen state. Large diameter pipelines operating at high capacity are heat generators. Therefore, it is necessary to refrigerate the gas to ensure that it remains below 0/sup 0/C at all points in the pipeline system. The pipeline also passes through unfrozen ground where the potential for frost heave exists. The conditions under which frost heave occurs are listed. The extent and location of potential frost heave problem areas must be determined and a frost heave prediction method must be established before construction begins. Another task involves development of design criteria for the pipeline/soil interaction analysis. Remedial methods for use during the operational phase are also discussed. (DMC)

  16. Gas supplies of interstate/natural gas pipeline companies 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-12-18

    This publication provides information on the interstate pipeline companies' supply of natural gas during calendar year 1989, for use by the FERC for regulatory purposes. It also provides information to other Government agencies, the natural gas industry, as well as policy makers, analysts, and consumers interested in current levels of interstate supplies of natural gas and trends over recent years. 5 figs., 18 tabs.

  17. Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review...

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

    extend from the Rocky Mountain region. This study assesses the potential to deliver hydrogen through the existing natural gas pipeline network as a hydrogen and natural gas...

  18. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Major Natural Gas Transportation

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

    Corridors Major Natural Gas Transportation Corridors About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Major Natural Gas Transportation Corridors Corridors from the Southwest | From Canada | From Rocky Mountain Area | Details about Transportation Corridors The national natural gas delivery network is intricate and expansive, but most of the major transportation routes can be broadly categorized into 11 distinct corridors or flow

  19. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage

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

    Facilities Map Storage > U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Facilities Map About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Facilities, Close of 2007 more recent map U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Facilities, 2008 The EIA has determined that the informational map displays here do not raise security concerns, based on the application of the Federal Geographic Data Committee's

  20. Analysis of gas chilling alternatives for Arctic pipelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dvoiris, A.; McMillan, D.K.; Taksa, B.

    1994-12-31

    The operation of buried natural gas pipelines in Arctic regions requires installation of gas chilling facilities at compressor stations. These facilities are required in order to cool compressed pipeline gases to temperatures below that of permanently frozen surrounding soil. If these pipeline gas temperatures are too high, the frozen ground around the pipelines will eventually thaw. This is undesirable for many reasons amongst which are ground settlement and possible catastrophic failure of the pipeline. This paper presents the results of a study which compared several alternative methods of gas chilling for possible application at one of the compressor stations on the proposed new Yamal-Center gas pipeline system in the Russian Arctic. This technical and economic study was performed by Gulf Interstate Engineering (GIE) for GAZPROM, the gas company in Russia that will own and operate this new pipeline system. Geotechnical, climatical and other information provided by GAZPROM, coupled with information developed by GIE, formed the basis for this study.

  1. Natural Gas Pipeline Network: Changing and Growing

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1996-01-01

    This chapter focuses upon the capabilities of the national natural gas pipeline network, examining how it has expanded during this decade and how it may expand further over the coming years. It also looks at some of the costs of this expansion, including the environmental costs which may be extensive. Changes in the network as a result of recent regional market shifts are also discussed.

  2. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Aquifer Storage Reservoir

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Configuration Aquifer Storage Reservoir Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Aquifer Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Aquifer Underground Natural Gas Well

  3. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Supply Basins Relative to

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

    Major Natural Gas Pipeline Transportation Corridors Corridors About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates U.S. Natural Gas Supply Basins Relative to Major Natural Gas Pipeline Transportation Corridors, 2008 U.S. Natural Gas Transporation Corridors out of Major Supply Basins

  4. Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure for

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

    Hydrogen/Mixed Gas Service | Department of Energy Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure for Hydrogen/Mixed Gas Service Evalutation of Natural Gas Pipeline Materials and Infrastructure for Hydrogen/Mixed Gas Service Objectives: To assist DOE-EE in evaluating the feasibility of using the existing natural gas transmission and distribution piping network for hydrogen/mixed gas delivery PDF icon hpwgw_natgas_adams.pdf More Documents & Publications Evaluation of

  5. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Depleted Reservoir Storage

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Configuration Depleted Reservoir Storage Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Depleted Production Reservoir Underground Natural Gas Storage Well Configuration Depleted Production Reservoir Storage

  6. The 14th Pipeline and Gas Journal 500 report. [Statistical dimensions of leading US pipeline companies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Congram, G.E.

    1994-09-01

    This article presents compiled data on oil and gas pipeline systems in the US and includes specific information on mileage, volume of transported fluids, and cost information. It lists the rankings based on miles of pipeline, units of gas sold, number of customers, units of petroleum sold, and utility by production sales. Information is also presented in alphabetical format.

  7. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Expansion Process Flow Diagram

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Development & Expansion > Development and Expansion Process Figure About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Development and Expansion Process For Natural Gas Pipeline Projects Figure showing the expansion process

  8. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price...

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

    ies","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  9. ,"New Jersey Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price...

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

    eries","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Jersey Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  10. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price...

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

    s","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  11. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price...

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

    ies","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  12. ,"New Hampshire Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price...

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

    es","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Hampshire Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  13. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price...

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

    eries","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  14. ,"New York Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars...

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

    Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2005 ,"Release Date:","9...

  15. EIA - Analysis of Natural Gas Imports/Exports & Pipelines

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

    trends, offshore production shut-ins caused by infrastructure problems and hurricanes, imports and exports of pipeline and liquefied natural gas, and the above-average...

  16. ,"Alamo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (MMcf)"

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

    Alamo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data...

  17. ,"Detroit, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (MMcf...

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Detroit, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  18. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - States Dependent on Interstate...

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

    Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates States in grey which are at least 85% dependent on the interstate pipeline network for their natural...

  19. California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  20. Washington Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  1. Mississippi Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  2. Pennsylvania Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May...

  3. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Salt Caverns Storage Capacity Aquifers Storage Capacity Depleted Fields Storage Capacity Total Working Gas Capacity Working Gas Capacity of Salt Caverns Working Gas Capacity of Aquifers Working Gas Capacity of Depleted Fields Total Number of Existing Fields Number of Existing Salt Caverns Number of Existing Aquifers Number of Depleted Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data

  4. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

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

    Salt Caverns Storage Capacity Aquifers Storage Capacity Depleted Fields Storage Capacity Total Working Gas Capacity Working Gas Capacity of Salt Caverns Working Gas Capacity of Aquifers Working Gas Capacity of Depleted Fields Total Number of Existing Fields Number of Existing Salt Caverns Number of Existing Aquifers Number of Depleted Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data

  5. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (MMcf)"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01292016 9:45:31 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N9102CN2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas...

  6. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (MMcf)"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01292016 9:45:32 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N9102MX2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas...

  7. Virtual Pipeline System Testbed to Optimize the U.S. Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirby S. Chapman; Prakash Krishniswami; Virg Wallentine; Mohammed Abbaspour; Revathi Ranganathan; Ravi Addanki; Jeet Sengupta; Liubo Chen

    2005-06-01

    The goal of this project is to develop a Virtual Pipeline System Testbed (VPST) for natural gas transmission. This study uses a fully implicit finite difference method to analyze transient, nonisothermal compressible gas flow through a gas pipeline system. The inertia term of the momentum equation is included in the analysis. The testbed simulate compressor stations, the pipe that connects these compressor stations, the supply sources, and the end-user demand markets. The compressor station is described by identifying the make, model, and number of engines, gas turbines, and compressors. System operators and engineers can analyze the impact of system changes on the dynamic deliverability of gas and on the environment.

  8. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Network Configuration & System Design

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Network Configuration & System Design About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Network Configuration and System Design Overview | Transmission/Storage | Design Criteria | Importance of Storage| Overall Pipeline System Configuration Overview A principal requirement of the natural gas transmission system is that it be capable of meeting the peak demand of its shippers who have contracts for firm service. To meet this

  9. Hawaii Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet) Hawaii Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 2 2 2 3 2 2 2010's 2 2 3 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 Pipeline & Distribution Use Hawaii Natural Gas

  10. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    Capacity Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity Released: September 3, 2010 for data as of April 2010 Next Release: August 2011 References Methodology Definitions...

  11. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Configuration Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Source: PB Energy Storage Services Inc.

  12. El Paso, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million...

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

    Million Cubic Feet) El Paso, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's...

  13. El Paso, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars...

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

    Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) El Paso, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  14. Penitas, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Penitas, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  15. Alamo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per...

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

    Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alamo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  16. Illinois user sues pipeline on refusal to transport gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barber, J.

    1985-12-02

    An Illinois steel company filed suit against Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co. for refusing to transport natural gas after its gas transportation program ended on November 1. The company is asking for three times the amount it is losing, which is $7,000 per day, since being forced to purchase from a higher priced distribution company. The suit claims that Panhandle's refusal violates federal and state anti-trust laws and threatens the plant's continued operation. This is the first legal action by a single industrial user, but consumer groups have named over 20 major interstate pipelines for the same allegation when pipelines declined to participate in open access transportation under Order 436.

  17. Natural Gas Exports by Pipeline out of the U.S. Form | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Exports by Pipeline out of the U.S. Form Natural Gas Exports by Pipeline out of the U.S. Form File Excel Version of Natural Gas Exports by Pipeline out of the U.S. Form.xlsx PDF icon PDF Version of Natural Gas Exports by Pipeline out of the U.S. Form More Documents & Publications In-Transit Natural Gas Form Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline into the U.S. Form Idaho Operations AMWTP Fact Sheet

  18. Alaskan Natural Gas Pipeline Developments (released in AEO2007)

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2007-01-01

    The Annual Energy Outlook 2007 reference case projects that an Alaska natural gas pipeline will go into operation in 2018, based on the Energy Information Administration's current understanding of the projects time line and economics. There is continuing debate, however, about the physical configuration and the ownership of the pipeline. In addition, the issue of Alaskas oil and natural gas production taxes has been raised, in the context of a current market environment characterized by rising construction costs and falling natural gas prices. If rates of return on investment by producers are reduced to unacceptable levels, or if the project faces significant delays, other sources of natural gas, such as unconventional natural gas production and liquefied natural gas imports, could fulfill the demand that otherwise would be served by an Alaska pipeline.

  19. Pipeline transportation of natural gas from the Gulf Coast to the Northeast

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boehm, J.C.

    1980-01-01

    Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.'s national gas pipeline system from the Gulf Coast producing area (where 75% of its supply lies offshore) extends for 1832 mi along the Gulf Coast through the southeastern Piedmont and north to terminate in New York City. It serves high-priority markets in 11 southern and Atlantic seaboard states with a daily flowing capacity of 3.0 billion cu ft/day and an additional 1.5 billion cu ft/day available from storage. Also discussed are gas conditioning for the removal of hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, water vapor and entrained salt water and solids, and measurement of gas volume with a meter and gravitometer and of heating value with a calorimeter; gas transmission through 9,295 mi of pipeline, made up mostly of four, 30-42 in. dia parallel pipelines with 1,062,452 hp of compression capacity; LNG storage, including unique facilities at the Eminence, Miss., Salt Dome Storage facility and the Carlstadt, N.J., LNG plant; odorization; operations; and pipeline protection against third-party damage and against corrosion.

  20. Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline into the U.S. Form | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    by Pipeline into the U.S. Form Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline into the U.S. Form File Excel Version of Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline into the U.S. Form.xlsx PDF icon PDF Version of Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline into the U.S. Form More Documents & Publications Idaho Operations AMWTP Fact Sheet DOE's Petition for Interlocutory Review Natural Gas Exports by Pipeline out of the U.S. Form

  1. Panel 2, Hydrogen Delivery in the Natural Gas Pipeline Network

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

    in the Natural Gas Pipeline Network DOE'S HYDROGEN ENERGY STORAGE FOR GRID AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WORKSHOP Sacramento, CA May 14, 2014 Brian Weeks Gas Technology Institute 2 2 Topics for Today >GTI Introduction >Natural Gas Infrastructure is Undergoing Changes >Questions that have been addressed >Two Scenarios >Unanswered Questions >CEC's Mobile Hydrogen Station 3 3 Company Overview ESTABLISHED 1941 > Independent, not-for-profit company established by natural gas

  2. Worldwide pipelines and contractors directory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1999-11-01

    This directory contains information on the following: pipeline contractors; US natural gas pipelines; US crude oil pipelines; US product pipelines; Canadian pipelines and foreign pipelines.

  3. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

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

    Pipeline and Distribution Use Price Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Vehicle Fuel Price Electric Power Price Proved Reserves as of 12/31 Reserves Adjustments Reserves Revision Increases Reserves Revision Decreases Reserves Sales Reserves Acquisitions Reserves Extensions Reserves New Field Discoveries New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields Estimated Production Number of Producing Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From

  4. ,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  5. ,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","9...

  6. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Previous Articles Previous Articles Estimates of Peak Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States, 2009 Update (Released, 8312009) Estimates of Peak Underground...

  7. Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Methodology

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ... changed to active. References Methodology Related Links Storage Basics Field Level Annual Capacity Data Map of Storage Facilities Natural Gas Data Tables Short-Term Energy Outlook

  8. ,"Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity "

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

    ...orcapaepg0sacmmcfm.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ... 1: Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity " "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NGMEP...

  9. Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key

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

    Issues | Department of Energy Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues The United States has 11 distinct natural gas pipeline corridors: five originate in the Southwest, four deliver natural gas from Canada, and two extend from the Rocky Mountain region. This study assesses the potential to deliver hydrogen through the existing natural gas pipeline network as a hydrogen and

  10. Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Melaina, M. W.; Antonia, O.; Penev, M.

    2013-03-01

    The United States has 11 distinct natural gas pipeline corridors: five originate in the Southwest, four deliver natural gas from Canada, and two extend from the Rocky Mountain region. This study assesses the potential to deliver hydrogen through the existing natural gas pipeline network as a hydrogen and natural gas mixture to defray the cost of building dedicated hydrogen pipelines.

  11. New Hampshire Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 24 22 2 2000's 32 24 60 24 22 22 20 17 9 13 2010's 247 202 27 67 81 - = 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 Pipeline & Distribution Use

  12. Sweetgrass, MT Liquefied Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Liquefied Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet) Sweetgrass, MT Liquefied Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 2 2013 3 5 4 6 9 8 5 8 7 5 7 5 2014 8 11 10 8 8 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 2015 5 4 5 5 5 4 - = 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

  13. Vermont Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 9 8 8 2000's 15 14 14 14 14 14 15 16 15 17 2010's 16 53 114 89 124 - = 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 Pipeline & Distribution Use Vermont Natural

  14. EIS-0140: Ocean State Power Project, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission prepared this statement to evaluate potential impacts of construction and operation of a new natural gas-fired, combined-cycle power plant which would be located on a 40.6-acre parcel in the town of Burrillville, Rhode Island, as well as construction of a 10-mile pipeline to transport process and cooling water to the plant from the Blackstone River and a 7.5-mile pipeline to deliver No. 2 fuel oil to the site for emergency use when natural gas may not be available. The Economic Regulatory Administration adopted the EIS on 7/15/1988.

  15. Delaware Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 13 15 45 2000's 62 23 49 34 39 40 18 16 18 22 2010's 140 464 1,045 970 1,040 - = 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 Pipeline & Distribution Use

  16. Maine Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 808 1,164 877 859 658 585 494 753 943 837 2010's 1,753 2,399 762 844 1,300 - = 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 Pipeline & Distribution Use

  17. Price of San Elizario, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Price of San Elizario, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Price of San Elizario, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico (Dollars per...

  18. Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues

    Fuel Cell Technologies Publication and Product Library (EERE)

    This study assesses the potential to deliver hydrogen through the existing natural gas pipeline network as a hydrogen and natural gas mixture to defray the cost of building dedicated hydrogen pipeline

  19. Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks. A Review of Key Issues

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Melaina, M. W.; Antonia, O.; Penev, M.

    2013-03-01

    This study assesses the potential to deliver hydrogen through the existing natural gas pipeline network as a hydrogen and natural gas mixture to defray the cost of building dedicated hydrogen pipelines. Blending hydrogen into the existing natural gas pipeline network has also been proposed as a means of increasing the output of renewable energy systems such as large wind farms.

  20. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Import/Export Locations

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    List Pipelines > Import/Export Location List About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 2007/2008 with selected updates Currently, there are 58 locations at which natural gas can be exported or imported into the United States, including 9 LNG (liquefied natural gas) facilities in the continental United States and Alaska (There is a tenth U.S. LNG import facility located in Puerto Rico). At 28 of these locations natural gas or LNG currently can only

  1. Nevada Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 656 782 801 2000's 876 863 851 1,689 2,256 2,224 2,737 2,976 3,013 2,921 2010's 2,992 4,161 6,256 4,954 4,912 - = 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 Pipeline

  2. Expansion and Change on the U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Network...

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

    ... to the 2000-2001 energy crisis in that region, resulted ... New U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Systems, 1990 - 2002 Major transfers of pipeline assets occurred in 2002 as the financial ...

  3. Montana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  4. New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  5. Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  6. West Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May...

  7. Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  8. Oregon Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  9. Arkansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  10. Alaska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  11. Oklahoma Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  12. Nebraska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  13. Michigan Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  14. Minnesota Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  15. Utah Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  16. Missouri Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  17. Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  18. Maryland Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  19. Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  20. Ohio Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  1. Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  2. Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  3. Kentucky Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  4. Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  5. Louisiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  6. Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

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

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  7. New York Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New York Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  8. Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2013 2014 View History Total Storage Capacity 83,592 83,592 2013-2014 Depleted Fields 83,592 83,592 2013-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 67,915 67,915 2013-2014 Depleted Fields 67,915 67,915 2013-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 5 5 2013-2014 Depleted Fields 5 5 2013

  9. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Market Centers...

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

    Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas, Natural Gas Division, ... The EIA has determined that the informational map displays here do not raise security ...

  10. Huge natural gas reserves central to capacity work, construction plans in Iran

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-11

    Questions about oil production capacity in Iran tend to mask the country's huge potential as a producer of natural gas. Iran is second only to Russia in gas reserves, which National Iranian Gas Co. estimates at 20.7 trillion cu m. Among hurdles to Iran's making greater use of its rich endowment of natural gas are where and how to sell gas not used inside the country. The marketing logistics problem is common to other Middle East holders of gas reserves and a reason behind the recent proliferation of proposals for pipeline and liquefied natural gas schemes targeting Europe and India. But Iran's challenges are greater than most in the region. Political uncertainties and Islamic rules complicate long-term financing of transportation projects and raise questions about security of supply. As a result, Iran has remained mostly in the background of discussions about international trade of Middle Eastern gas. The country's huge gas reserves, strategic location, and existing transport infrastructure nevertheless give it the potential to be a major gas trader if the other issues can be resolved. The paper discusses oil capacity plans, gas development, gas injection for enhanced oil recovery, proposals for exports of gas, and gas pipeline plans.

  11. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Regional Overview and Links

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

    ... Interstate - Pipeline systems that cross one or more States Intrastate - Pipeline systems that operate only within State boundaries Network Design - Basic concepts and parameters ...

  12. Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    43,600 43,600 43,600 43,600 43,600 43,600 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 33,150 33,150 33,150 33,150 33,150 33,150 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2

  13. Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 2013-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 67,915 67,915 67,915 67,915 67,915 67,915 2013-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 5 5 5 5 5 5

  14. Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    39,210 41,309 43,673 46,900 46,900 46,900 1988-2014 Aquifers 39,210 41,309 43,673 46,900 46,900 46,900 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 0 0 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 23,514...

  15. Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1

  16. Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    1,079,462 1,070,462 1,070,462 1,071,630 1,071,630 1,071,630 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 682,569 682,569 682,569 685,726 685,726 685,726 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 44 44 44 44 44 44

  17. Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2

  18. Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    31,301 331,301 331,301 331,812 331,812 331,812 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 200,903 200,903 200,903 201,388 201,388 201,388 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 12 12 12 12 12 12

  19. Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6

  20. Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    76,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 5 5 5 5 5 5

  1. New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    245,779 245,779 245,779 245,779 245,779 245,779 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 126,871 126,871 126,871 126,871 126,871 126,871 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 26 26 26 26 26 26

  2. Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    575,794 575,794 575,794 575,794 575,794 575,794 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 230,828 230,828 230,828 230,828 230,828 230,828 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 24 24 24 24 24 24

  3. Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    376,435 376,435 374,735 375,135 375,135 375,143 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 190,955 190,955 189,255 189,455 189,455 191,455 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 13 13 13 13 13 13

  4. Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    29,565 29,565 29,565 29,565 29,565 29,565 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,935 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 7 7 7 7 7 7

  5. Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    771,422 771,422 771,422 771,422 771,422 771,422 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 429,796 429,796 429,796 429,796 429,796 429,796 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 49 49 49 49 49 49

  6. Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    832,644 832,644 832,644 832,644 832,644 834,965 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 528,445 528,335 528,335 528,335 528,335 528,335 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 36 36 36 36 36 36

  7. Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    124,518 124,518 124,509 124,509 124,509 124,509 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 54,942 54,942 54,942 54,942 54,942 54,942 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 3 3 3 3 3 3

  8. Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2

  9. California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    603,012 603,012 603,012 601,808 601,808 601,808 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 376,996 376,996 376,996 375,496 375,496 375,496 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 14 14 14 14 14 14

  10. Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    130,186 130,186 130,186 130,186 130,186 130,186 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 63,774 63,774 63,774 63,774 63,774 63,774 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 10 10 10 10 10 10

  11. Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    ,004,598 1,004,598 1,003,899 1,004,100 1,004,100 1,004,100 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 304,312 304,312 303,613 303,613 303,613 303,613 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 28 28 28 28 28 28

  12. Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    10,749 110,749 110,749 110,749 111,581 111,581 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 32,760 32,760 32,760 32,760 33,592 33,592 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 21 21 21 21 21 21

  13. Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    288,210 288,210 288,210 288,210 288,210 288,210 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 90,313 90,313 90,313 90,313 90,313 90,313 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 4 4 4 4 4 4

  14. Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    82,984 282,984 282,984 282,984 282,984 282,984 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 122,980 122,980 122,980 122,980 122,980 122,980 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 17 17 17 17 17 17

  15. Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    21,723 221,723 221,723 221,722 221,722 221,722 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 107,600 107,600 107,572 107,571 107,571 107,571 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 23 23 23 23 23 23

  16. Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    742,627 742,627 749,867 749,867 749,867 749,867 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 452,359 452,359 457,530 457,530 457,530 457,530 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 19 19 19 19 19 19

  17. West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    528,637 528,637 528,637 528,637 528,637 528,637 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 259,324 259,324 259,324 259,321 259,321 259,315 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 30 30 30 30 30 30

  18. Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    157,985 157,985 157,985 157,985 157,985 157,985 2002-2015 Total Working Gas Capacity 73,705 73,705 73,705 73,705 73,705 73,705 2012-2015 Total Number of Existing Fields 9 9 9 9 9 9

  19. District of Columbia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) District of Columbia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 246 256 244 2000's 243 236 242 470 466 487 464 238 203 177 2010's 213 1,703 1,068 1,434 1,305 - = 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:

  20. International Falls, MN Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars

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

    per Thousand Cubic Feet) Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) International Falls, MN Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.71 2.03 2.00 2.33 2000's 2.77 4.85 3.01 -- -- 11.20 -- - = 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.

  1. International Falls, MN Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Million Cubic Feet) International Falls, MN Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (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 6,373 6,544 6,103 4,857 2000's 3,022 617 602 0 0 22 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: U.S.

  2. Danish sour-gas pipeline has subsea safety system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thygesen, J.E. )

    1990-06-04

    Dansk Olie og Gasproduktion A/S has gained valuable experience installing a subsea safety system on a 30-in., 215-km (134-mile) subsea sour-gas pipeline. The system is designed to reduce the risk of explosion or suffocation of personnel aboard a nearby platform. It consists of a subsea check valve and a fullbore ball valve. Experience from operation of the system has been gained in pigging through the check valve, scour around the installation, repairs, and function tests. This is the basis for recommendations for operators intending to install subsea safety systems of the same or similar type.

  3. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Natural Gas Import/Export...

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

    Natural Gas Import and Export Locations Source: Energy Information Administration, Office ... The EIA has determined that the informational map displays here do not raise security ...

  4. Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 4,938 5,564 7,250 2000's 7,365 5,070 4,363 4,064 3,798 2,617 2,825 2,115 2,047 2,318 2010's 3,284 3,409 3,974 544 309 - = 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

  5. Remote laser detection of natural gas leakages from pipelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Petukhov, V O; Gorobets, V A; Andreev, Yu M; Lanskii, G V

    2010-02-28

    A differential absorption lidar based on a tunable TEA CO{sub 2} laser emitting at 42 lines of the 'hot' 01{sup 1}1 - 11{sup 1}0 band in the range from 10.9 to 11.4 {mu}m is developed for detecting natural gas leakages from oil pipelines by measuring the ethane content in the atmosphere. The ethane detection sensitivity is 0.9 ppm km. The presence of methane does not distort the measurement results. The developed lidar can detect the natural gas leakage from kilometre heights at the flying velocities up to 200 km h{sup -1} and a probe pulse repetition rate of 5 Hz. (laser applications and other topics in quantum electronics)

  6. Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 1988-2014 Aquifers 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2008-2014...

  7. Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    10,889 11,502 13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 1988-2014 Aquifers 10,889 11,502 13,845 13,845 13,845 13,845 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 3,040 3,656 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000...

  8. Natural gas productive capacity for the lower 48 states 1984 through 1996, February 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-02-09

    This is the fourth wellhead productive capacity report. The three previous ones were published in 1991, 1993, and 1994. This report should be of particular interest to those in Congress, Federal and State agencies, industry, and the academic community, who are concerned with the future availability of natural gas. The EIA Dallas Field Office has prepared five earlier reports regarding natural gas productive capacity. These reports, Gas Deliverability and Flow Capacity of Surveillance Fields, reported deliverability and capacity data for selected gas fields in major gas producing areas. The data in the reports were based on gas-well back-pressure tests and estimates of gas-in-place for each field or reservoir. These reports use proven well testing theory, most of which has been employed by industry since 1936 when the Bureau of Mines first published Monograph 7. Demand for natural gas in the United States is met by a combination of natural gas production, underground gas storage, imported gas, and supplemental gaseous fuels. Natural gas production requirements in the lower 48 States have been increasing during the last few years while drilling has remained at low levels. This has raised some concern about the adequacy of future gas supplies, especially in periods of peak heating or cooling demand. The purpose of this report is to address these concerns by presenting a 3-year projection of the total productive capacity of natural gas at the wellhead for the lower 48 States. Alaska is excluded because Alaskan gas does not enter the lower-48 States pipeline system. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) generates this 3-year projection based on historical gas-well drilling and production data from State, Federal, and private sources. In addition to conventional gas-well gas, coalbed gas and oil-well gas are also included.

  9. Natural gas productive capacity for the lower 48 States, 1980 through 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-14

    The purpose of this report is to analyze monthly natural gas wellhead productive capacity in the lower 48 States from 1980 through 1992 and project this capacity from 1993 through 1995. For decades, natural gas supplies and productive capacity have been adequate to meet demand. In the 1970`s the capacity surplus was small because of market structure (split between interstate and intrastate), increasing demand, and insufficient drilling. In the early 1980`s, lower demand, together with increased drilling, led to a large surplus capacity as new productive capacity came on line. After 1986, this large surplus began to decline as demand for gas increased, gas prices fell, and gas well completions dropped sharply. In late December 1989, the decline in this surplus, accompanied by exceptionally high demand and temporary weather-related production losses, led to concerns about the adequacy of monthly productive capacity for natural gas. These concerns should have been moderated by the gas system`s performance during the unusually severe winter weather in March 1993 and January 1994. The declining trend in wellhead productive capacity is expected to be reversed in 1994 if natural gas prices and drilling meet or exceed the base case assumption. This study indicates that in the low, base, and high drilling cases, monthly productive capacity should be able to meet normal production demands through 1995 in the lower 48 States (Figure ES1). Exceptionally high peak-day or peak-week production demand might not be met because of physical limitations such as pipeline capacity. Beyond 1995, as the capacity of currently producing wells declines, a sufficient number of wells and/or imports must be added each year in order to ensure an adequate gas supply.

  10. Illinois Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.21 0.20 0.20 1970's 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.27 0.29 0.54 0.58 0.83 0.98 1.11 1980's 1.78 2.12 2.56 3.07 2.88 2.97 2.73 2.68 2.53 2.17 1990's 2.06 2.29 2.44 1.97 1.88 1.66 2.63 2.68 2.27 2.48 2000's 3.12 3.94 NA -- -- -- - = No Data

  11. Power line fault current coupling to nearby natural gas pipelines: Volume 3, Analysis of pipeline coating impedance: Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dabkowski, J.; Frazier, M. J.

    1988-08-01

    This report is a compilation of results obtained from two research programs. The response of a pipeline and coating at the higher voltage excitation levels encountered under power line fault conditions appears to be dominated by conduction at holiday sites in the coating. A simple analytical model was developed for predicting the resistance of a pipeline coating holiday as a function of the voltage produced across the pipeline coating by a nearby faulted power transmission line. The model was initially validated using coated pipeline samples stressed by a capacitive discharge voltage. Additional validation tests were then performed at the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's High Voltage Engineering Research Facility using high voltage ac waveforms for fault simulation. The principle program objective was to develop, both by laboratory and controlled field testing, an electrical resistance characterization for the pipeline coating as a function of the applied voltage level. The development of this model will allow a more accurate prediction of coupled voltage levels to a pipeline during fault current conditions. 54 figs, 3 tabs.

  12. International Falls, MN Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from Canada

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 View History Pipeline Volumes 617 602 0 0 22 0 1996-2006 Pipeline Prices 4.85 3.01 -- -- 11.20 -- 1996-2006

  13. Alabama Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 20,689 19,948 22,109 2000's 22,626 19,978 21,760 18,917 15,911 14,982 14,879 15,690 16,413 18,849 2010's 22,124 23,091 25,349 22,166 18,688 - = 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

  14. Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.35 0.57 0.58 0.50 0.14 1980's 0.73 1.13 0.60 0.86 0.61 0.63 0.61 0.65 1.01 1.13 1990's 1.08 1.32 1.12 1.11 1.11 1.24 1.17 1.34 1.23 0.82 2000's 1.34 1.84 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  15. Arizona Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 18,597 19,585 18,570 2000's 20,657 22,158 20,183 18,183 15,850 17,558 20,617 20,397 22,207 20,846 2010's 15,447 13,158 12,372 12,619 13,484 - = 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

  16. Arkansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 11,591 10,192 8,979 2000's 8,749 8,676 7,854 8,369 7,791 8,943 10,630 10,235 9,927 9,125 2010's 9,544 11,286 10,606 11,437 11,580 - = 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

  17. Illinois Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 14,517 12,995 11,328 2000's 13,244 10,861 13,195 10,461 11,176 10,855 10,869 11,407 13,275 24,636 2010's 19,864 21,831 24,738 26,936 30,263 - = 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

  18. Iowa Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 11,309 8,770 7,748 2000's 8,266 8,988 10,975 9,898 10,194 11,622 12,525 12,320 14,101 13,846 2010's 11,042 10,811 10,145 11,398 12,650 - = 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

  19. Massachusetts Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,356 1,903 2,655 2000's 2,391 3,187 4,222 1,988 1,755 1,810 1,499 1,737 1,157 1,093 2010's 3,827 4,657 3,712 2,759 6,258 - = 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

  20. Michigan Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 23,776 20,733 22,355 2000's 26,359 22,036 26,685 27,129 27,198 27,742 25,532 25,961 23,518 23,468 2010's 24,904 23,537 20,496 18,713 19,347 - = 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

  1. Minnesota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 19,509 20,095 22,019 2000's 21,037 19,044 23,060 20,252 20,491 22,252 20,313 19,907 17,584 12,559 2010's 15,465 15,223 12,842 11,626 12,657 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  2. Mississippi Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 44,979 36,329 31,594 2000's 30,895 30,267 26,997 26,003 21,869 21,496 22,131 27,316 28,677 28,951 2010's 28,117 28,828 48,497 23,667 19,787 - = 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

  3. Missouri Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 7,456 5,495 6,744 2000's 7,558 1,918 2,555 3,003 3,237 2,556 2,407 2,711 7,211 3,892 2010's 5,820 7,049 4,973 5,626 6,184 - = 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. Montana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 3,436 3,746 5,968 2000's 7,652 7,483 7,719 8,344 8,224 7,956 7,592 7,810 7,328 5,047 2010's 7,442 6,888 6,979 6,769 4,126 - = 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

  5. Nebraska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 4,084 2,853 2,922 2000's 3,140 3,021 2,611 5,316 3,983 4,432 4,507 5,373 9,924 6,954 2010's 7,329 9,270 7,602 6,949 7,066 - = 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:

  6. Nevada Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.46 1980's 3.26 3.73 4.32 4.53 4.35 3.88 3.20 2.16 2.14 2.14 1990's 1.70 1.74 1.77 1.79 1.87 1.79 1.35 2.09 1.98 2.22 2000's 3.65 3.66 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  7. North Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 7,265 6,666 6,553 2000's 7,171 6,567 6,038 6,108 4,982 4,292 4,653 4,980 5,301 7,906 2010's 7,978 7,322 5,436 4,029 3,877 - = 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

  8. Ohio Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 19,453 17,641 17,441 2000's 18,490 15,502 16,215 14,872 12,757 13,356 12,233 13,740 11,219 16,575 2010's 15,816 14,258 9,559 10,035 12,661 - = 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

  9. Oklahoma Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 26,130 24,242 23,833 2000's 21,001 23,537 23,340 30,396 30,370 31,444 31,333 28,463 27,581 28,876 2010's 30,611 30,948 32,838 41,813 45,391 - = 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

  10. Oregon Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 12,481 13,345 10,242 2000's 11,775 10,990 9,117 7,098 9,707 7,264 8,238 9,532 7,354 8,073 2010's 6,394 5,044 4,554 4,098 3,686 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  11. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 39,173 32,532 36,597 2000's 38,486 33,013 37,143 33,556 28,989 30,669 27,406 34,849 37,223 41,417 2010's 47,470 51,220 37,176 37,825 36,323 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  12. South Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,940 3,163 3,589 2000's 3,461 2,919 3,156 2,807 2,503 2,427 2,292 2,609 2,604 2,847 2010's 3,452 3,408 3,416 2,529 2,409 - = 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. Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 22,559 16,440 15,208 2000's 13,808 13,757 11,480 12,785 10,486 9,182 8,696 9,988 10,238 11,720 2010's 10,081 11,655 9,880 6,660 5,913 - = 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

  14. Texas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 82,115 65,800 70,397 2000's 62,014 69,598 88,973 56,197 55,587 81,263 85,262 89,666 109,488 117,219 2010's 79,817 85,549 138,429 294,316 274,451 - = 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. Utah Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,935 2,788 2,561 2000's 2,674 4,161 5,984 7,347 8,278 8,859 11,156 11,970 11,532 10,239 2010's 10,347 11,374 12,902 13,441 14,061 - = 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. Vermont Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 5.25 4.00 4.17 4.00 2.80 2.64 1990's 2.85 2.86 2.96 2.89 2.89 1.05 1.09 1.09 1.40 1.86 2000's 4.39 5.09 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  17. Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 7,387 6,856 8,005 2000's 7,975 7,542 7,851 6,854 5,452 4,954 5,412 6,905 8,461 8,829 2010's 10,091 13,957 9,443 8,475 7,424 - = 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:

  18. Washington Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 8,836 9,087 7,645 2000's 6,036 9,053 6,356 6,527 8,822 8,174 6,554 7,402 6,605 7,497 2010's 7,587 6,644 9,184 10,144 8,933 - = 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:

  19. California Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 22,493 8,587 9,341 2000's 9,698 10,913 9,610 8,670 12,969 10,775 7,023 8,994 7,744 6,386 2010's 9,741 10,276 12,906 10,471 22,897 - = 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

  20. Colorado Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 12,371 9,240 8,380 2000's 9,282 10,187 10,912 9,647 10,213 13,305 12,945 13,850 15,906 17,065 2010's 14,095 13,952 10,797 9,107 8,451 - = 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

  1. Connecticut Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,492 833 2,943 2000's 3,020 2,948 2,515 3,382 3,383 3,327 3,178 4,361 4,225 5,831 2010's 6,739 6,302 4,747 4,381 4,698 - = 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:

  2. Delaware Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 2.00 1.33 1980's 3.67 3.68 3.91 3.80 4.00 3.75 2.71 2.95 3.10 1990's 3.10 2.88 3.01 3.19 3.02 3.02 3.51 2.98 2.40 2.22 2000's 4.29 3.58 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  3. District of Columbia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price

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

    (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) District of Columbia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 3.94 4.73 4.37 4.16 3.61 3.02 2.94 3.03 1990's 2.99 2.78 2.95 2.58 2.13 1.97 3.02 2.97 2.52 2.39 2000's 4.63 5.36 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  4. Florida Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 5,644 3,830 6,822 2000's 7,087 6,531 11,096 9,562 10,572 9,370 11,942 10,092 9,547 10,374 2010's 22,798 13,546 16,359 12,494 3,468 - = 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

  5. Georgia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 7,973 7,606 8,846 2000's 5,636 7,411 7,979 7,268 6,235 5,708 6,092 5,188 5,986 6,717 2010's 8,473 10,432 10,509 7,973 6,977 - = 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:

  6. Idaho Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 5,186 5,496 4,512 2000's 5,939 6,556 5,970 4,538 5,763 5,339 6,507 7,542 6,869 7,031 2010's 7,679 5,201 5,730 5,940 3,867 - = 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

  7. Indiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 10,773 7,327 7,274 2000's 5,617 6,979 5,229 6,647 6,842 6,599 6,313 7,039 7,060 6,597 2010's 8,679 10,259 7,206 7,428 7,025 - = 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. Kansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 39,109 32,902 31,753 2000's 29,330 25,606 36,127 33,343 28,608 28,752 25,050 24,773 23,589 26,479 2010's 24,305 23,225 19,842 22,586 22,588 - = 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

  9. Kentucky Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 22,854 15,750 16,632 2000's 13,826 14,912 11,993 14,279 10,143 8,254 6,510 11,885 12,957 12,558 2010's 13,708 12,451 8,604 7,157 8,426 - = 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

  10. Louisiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 71,523 60,400 48,214 2000's 50,647 48,257 50,711 47,019 44,963 41,812 47,979 52,244 53,412 49,937 2010's 46,892 51,897 49,235 36,737 45,762 - = 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. Maryland Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 3,124 2,968 3,207 2000's 3,239 2,765 2,511 2,743 2,483 2,173 2,346 2,339 2,454 2,521 2010's 6,332 6,065 7,397 4,125 6,327 - = 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:

  12. West Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 32,318 30,868 29,829 2000's 32,572 30,254 33,731 18,177 18,742 19,690 18,923 20,864 18,289 22,131 2010's 21,589 21,447 31,913 29,578 29,160 - = 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. Wisconsin Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 4,544 4,284 4,151 2000's 4,058 2,869 3,812 3,526 3,302 3,700 3,109 2,851 2,654 1,648 2010's 2,973 2,606 1,780 2,803 3,629 - = 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:

  14. Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 10,461 11,535 13,736 2000's 14,092 13,161 13,103 14,312 12,545 14,143 13,847 14,633 17,090 19,446 2010's 20,807 17,898 16,660 15,283 14,990 - = 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. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    1,200 0 NA NA 1998-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 1,200 0 0 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 860 0 0 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 860 0 0 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1 1998-2014 Depleted Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1

  16. World pipeline construction patterns shifting away from big North American gas lines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Koen, A.D.; True, W.R.

    1992-02-10

    The pattern of world pipeline construction has begun to shift away from large diameter gas lines in North America. Total miles of gas pipelines planned this year and beyond have registered big increases in Europe and Asia- Pacific regions, more than offsetting decreased mileage of planned U.S. and Canadian gas projects. World products pipeline construction planned in 1992 and beyond shows the largest year to year gain, paced by projects in Latin America. Those are among highlights of this article. Many projects only under study or unlikely to be built are excluded from final mileage tallies.

  17. Mississippi's ratable-take rule preempted: Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp. v. State Oil and Gas Board

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Box, A.L.

    1986-01-01

    While the Court's objections to Mississippi's ratable-take rules as applied to interstate pipelines are clear, conservation lawyers have concerns about the impact of the Transco decision upon state interests in oil and gas conservation and because the decision does not clarify the limits of preemption of state conservation legislation. A variety of state regulatory legislation challenges will likely result in different contexts. These could affect interest on royalties, payment procedures, and could even lead to conflicting regulations.

  18. A probe for in situ, remote, detection of defects in buried plastic natural gas pipelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mathur, M.P.; Spenik, J.L.; Condon, C.M.; Monazam, E.R.; Fincham, W.L.

    2007-12-18

    Several techniques are available to determine the integrity of in situ metal pipeline but very little is available in the literature to determine the integrity of plastic pipelines. Since the decade of the 1970s much of the newly installed gas distribution and transmission lines in the United States are fabricated from polyethylene or other plastic. A probe has been developed to determine the in situ integrity of plastic natural gas pipelines that can be installed on a traversing mechanism (pig) to detect abnormalities in the walls of the plastic natural gas pipeline from the interior. This probe has its own internal power source and can be deployed into existing natural gas supply lines. Utilizing the capacitance parameter, the probe inspects the pipe for flaws and records the data internally which can be retrieved later for analysis.

  19. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports Price (Dollars per Thousand...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01292016 9:45:32 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)" "Sourcekey","N9102US3"...

  20. ,"Price of U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars...

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

    Feet)" "Sourcekey","N9102MX3" "Date","Price of U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)" 33984 34015 34043 34074 34104 34135 34165 34196...

  1. McAllen, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars...

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

    Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) McAllen, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  2. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports Price (Dollars per Thousand...

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

    586-8800",,,"01292016 9:45:32 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Imports Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)" "Sourcekey","N9102US3" "Date","U.S....

  3. Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    776,964 776,822 776,845 774,309 774,309 774,309 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 776,964 776,822 776,845 774,309 774,309 774,309 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 431,137 431,086 433,110 434,179 433,214 433,214 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 942 938 938 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 431,137 431,086 433,110 433,236 432,276 432,276 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 51 51 51 51 51 51 1989-2014 Aquifers 1 1 1 2012-2014 Depleted Fields

  4. Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    766,768 783,579 812,394 831,190 842,072 834,124 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 182,725 196,140 224,955 246,310 253,220 254,136 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 584,042 587,439 587,439 584,881 588,852 579,988 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 504,524 509,961 532,336 533,336 541,161 528,485 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 123,664 130,621 152,102 164,439 168,143 167,546 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 380,859 379,340 380,234 368,897 373,018 360,938 2008-2014 Total Number of

  5. Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    20,368 221,751 221,751 221,751 221,723 221,723 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 9,567 6,567 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 210,801 212,184 212,184 212,184 212,156 215,156 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 103,484 107,600 107,600 107,600 107,600 107,600 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 6,629 6,629 6,629 6,629 6,629 4,619 2008-2014 Depleted Fields 96,855 100,971 100,971 100,971 100,971 102,981 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 23 23 23 23 23

  6. Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    51,968 670,880 690,295 699,646 733,939 745,029 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 123,341 142,253 161,668 297,020 213,039 224,129 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 528,626 528,626 528,626 402,626 520,900 520,900 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 369,031 384,864 397,627 412,482 446,713 454,140 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 84,487 100,320 111,849 200,702 154,333 161,260 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 284,544 284,544 285,779 211,780 292,380 292,880 2008-2014 Total Number of

  7. Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    4,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 64,000 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1

  8. Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    210,128 235,638 240,241 289,416 303,522 331,469 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 62,301 82,411 90,452 139,627 153,733 181,810 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 147,827 153,227 149,789 149,789 149,789 149,659 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 108,978 127,248 131,091 168,602 180,654 201,250 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 43,758 56,928 62,932 100,443 109,495 130,333 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 65,220 70,320 68,159 68,159 71,159 70,917 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields

  9. Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    76,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 376,301 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 197,508 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 197,508 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 197,501 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 5 5 5 5 5 5 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 5 5 5 5 5 5

  10. Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    129,480 129,480 124,465 124,465 124,465 124,465 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 11,980 11,980 4,265 4,265 4,265 4,265 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 117,500 117,500 120,200 120,200 120,200 120,200 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 52,198 52,189 54,889 54,898 54,898 54,898 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 948 939 939 948 948 948 2008-2014 Depleted Fields 51,250 51,250 53,950 53,950 53,950 53,950 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 3 3 3 3 3 3 1989-2014 Aquifers 2 2

  11. Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    111,120 111,120 106,764 124,937 157,985 157,985 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 10,000 10,000 6,733 6,705 6,705 6,705 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 101,120 101,120 100,030 118,232 151,280 151,280 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 42,140 42,134 41,284 48,705 73,705 73,705 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 836 830 830 836 836 836 2008-2014 Depleted Fields 41,304 41,304 40,454 47,869 72,869 72,869 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 8 8 8 9 9 9 1989-2014 Aquifers 1 1

  12. Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    4,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 34,850 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 13,619 14,819 14,819 14,819 14,819 14,819 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 13,619 14,819 14,819 14,819 14,819 14,819 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1

  13. New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    80,000 84,300 84,300 89,100 89,100 89,100 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 80,000 84,300 84,300 89,100 89,100 89,100 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 55,300 59,000 59,000 63,300 59,738 59,738 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 55,300 59,000 59,000 63,300 59,738 59,738 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 1989-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2

  14. New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    245,579 245,579 245,579 245,579 245,779 245,779 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 2,340 2,340 2,340 0 2,340 2,340 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 243,239 243,239 243,239 245,579 243,439 243,439 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 128,976 128,976 128,976 129,026 129,551 129,551 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 1,450 1,450 1,450 0 1,450 1,450 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 127,526 127,526 127,526 129,026 128,101 128,101 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 26 26 26 26 26 26

  15. Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    580,380 580,380 580,380 577,944 577,944 577,944 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 580,380 580,380 580,380 577,944 577,944 577,944 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 225,154 228,350 230,350 230,350 230,828 230,828 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 225,154 228,350 230,350 230,350 230,828 230,828 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 24 24 24 24 24 24 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 24 24 24 24 24 24

  16. Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    371,338 371,338 372,838 370,838 370,535 375,935 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 170 170 170 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 371,338 371,338 372,838 370,668 370,365 375,765 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 176,868 179,858 183,358 180,858 181,055 188,455 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 31 31 31 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 176,868 179,858 183,358 180,828 181,025 188,425 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 13 13 13 13 13 13 1989-2014 Aquifers 1 1 1 2012-2014 Depleted

  17. Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    29,565 29,565 29,565 28,750 29,565 29,565 1989-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 29,565 29,565 29,565 28,750 29,565 29,565 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,510 15,935 15,935 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 15,935 15,935 15,935 15,510 15,935 15,935 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 7 7 7 7 7 7 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 7 7 7 7 7 7

  18. California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    513,005 542,511 570,511 592,411 599,711 599,711 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 12,000 12,000 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 513,005 542,511 570,511 592,411 587,711 587,711 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 296,096 311,096 335,396 349,296 374,296 374,296 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 10,000 10,000 2009-2014 Depleted Fields 296,096 311,096 335,396 349,296 364,296 364,296 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 13 13 13 14 14 14 1989-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0

  19. Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    105,768 105,768 105,858 124,253 122,086 130,186 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 105,768 105,768 105,858 124,253 122,086 130,186 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 48,129 49,119 48,709 60,582 60,582 63,774 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 48,129 49,119 48,709 60,582 60,582 63,774 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 9 9 9 10 10 10 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 9 9 9 10 10 10

  20. Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    989,454 990,487 997,364 999,931 1,000,281 1,004,547 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 885,848 772,381 777,294 779,862 974,362 978,624 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 103,606 218,106 220,070 220,070 25,920 25,923 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 303,761 303,500 302,385 302,962 303,312 304,312 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 252,344 216,132 215,017 215,594 291,544 292,544 2008-2014 Depleted Fields 51,418 87,368 87,368 87,368 11,768 11,768 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing

  1. Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    114,274 111,271 111,313 110,749 110,749 110,749 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 81,328 81,268 81,310 80,746 80,746 80,746 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 32,946 30,003 30,003 30,003 30,003 30,003 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 32,157 32,982 33,024 33,024 33,024 33,024 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 19,367 19,437 19,479 19,215 19,215 19,215 2008-2014 Depleted Fields 12,791 13,545 13,545 13,809 13,809 13,809 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 22 22 22 22 22 22

  2. Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    82,300 284,821 284,731 284,905 283,974 282,984 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 931 931 931 931 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 281,370 283,891 283,800 283,974 283,974 282,984 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 119,339 123,190 123,225 123,343 122,970 122,980 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 375 375 375 375 0 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 118,964 122,814 122,850 122,968 122,970 122,980 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 19 19 19 19 18 17 1989-2014 Salt Caverns 1 1 1 1 0

  3. Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1,760 21,760 21,359 21,853 21,853 21,853 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 21,760 21,760 21,359 21,853 21,853 21,853 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 13,898 13,898 12,036 12,178 12,178 12,178 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 2012-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 13,898 13,898 12,036 12,178 12,178 12,178 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 1989-2014 Depleted Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2

  4. Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

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

    Total Working Gas Capacity Total Number of Existing Fields Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. 9,228,173 9,219,173 9,224,005 9,225,079 9,225,911 9,228,240 1989-2015 Alaska 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 83,592 2013-2015 Lower 48 States 9,144,581 9,135,581 9,140,412 9,141,486 9,142,319 9,144,648

  5. North Troy, VT Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from Canada

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

    Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 View History Pipeline Volumes 11,207 11,319 2,250 NA NA NA 1996-2002 Pipeline Prices 2.96 2.75 2.27 NA NA NA 1996-2002

  6. Alabama Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.19 0.20 0.20 1970's 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.26 0.29 0.32 0.47 0.72 1.10 1.32 1980's 1.84 2.59 3.00 3.10 3.15 3.12 3.11 2.37 2.30 2.60 1990's 2.17 3.02 2.24 2.34 2.13 1.93 2.63 2.95 2.55 2.21 2000's 3.13 4.90 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  7. Arizona Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.15 0.15 0.15 1970's 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.28 0.36 0.44 0.64 0.75 1.29 1980's 1.62 2.22 2.86 3.16 2.83 2.79 2.22 1.49 1.79 1.50 1990's 1.65 1.26 1.25 1.68 1.28 1.19 1.80 2.20 1.90 2.08 2000's 3.61 3.96 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  8. Arkansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.18 0.18 0.18 1970's 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.30 0.43 0.52 0.71 0.86 1.12 1980's 1.78 2.12 2.63 2.94 2.97 2.78 2.46 2.64 2.07 2.30 1990's 2.17 2.06 1.78 1.64 1.61 1.45 2.41 2.42 1.58 1.38 2000's 2.41 4.09 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  9. Massachusetts Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.23 0.26 0.25 1970's 0.32 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.62 0.68 0.94 1.24 1980's 1.65 2.30 4.29 4.11 3.36 3.60 3.22 2.14 2.46 2.71 1990's 2.67 2.79 2.91 2.71 2.13 2.00 2.74 2.67 2.27 1.86 2000's 2.14 3.06 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  10. Michigan Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.27 0.27 0.27 1970's 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.35 0.46 0.56 0.71 0.98 1.67 1.60 1980's 2.98 3.73 3.63 3.86 3.95 3.54 2.95 2.64 2.39 2.03 1990's 1.86 0.50 0.57 0.26 0.20 0.54 1.04 0.95 0.69 0.78 2000's 1.32 1.76 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  11. Minnesota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.26 0.22 0.22 1970's 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.28 0.33 0.55 0.60 1.24 1.28 2.20 1980's 1.26 4.27 4.43 4.14 3.99 3.45 2.68 2.19 1.81 1.77 1990's 1.89 0.56 0.61 0.47 0.47 0.37 0.68 0.63 0.54 0.82 2000's 1.50 1.40 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  12. Mississippi Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.19 0.20 0.19 1970's 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.28 0.36 0.46 0.73 0.88 1.28 1980's 1.75 2.34 2.91 3.06 2.94 2.92 2.44 1.99 1.87 2.09 1990's 2.11 2.33 2.34 2.37 1.98 1.82 2.63 2.62 2.33 2.19 2000's 3.37 4.28 NA -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  13. Missouri Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.20 0.20 1970's 0.21 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.29 0.39 0.48 0.80 0.87 1.20 1980's 1.71 2.12 2.81 3.04 2.92 2.86 2.61 2.41 2.78 1.94 1990's 1.77 2.05 2.31 2.01 0.91 1.19 2.34 2.43 2.02 2.14 2000's 2.48 4.86 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  14. Montana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.12 0.11 0.11 1970's 0.11 0.12 0.17 0.21 0.23 0.42 0.46 0.73 0.83 1.16 1980's 1.29 1.90 2.87 3.00 3.04 2.51 2.28 1.86 1.65 1.57 1990's 1.75 1.76 1.63 2.15 1.53 1.16 1.44 1.77 1.72 2.12 2000's 2.96 2.48 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  15. Nebraska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.14 0.15 0.15 1970's 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.24 0.32 0.42 0.57 0.73 1.10 1980's 1.36 1.81 2.35 2.56 2.55 2.51 2.40 2.20 1.77 1.86 1990's 1.70 1.43 1.54 1.79 1.34 1.33 2.10 2.54 2.01 1.96 2000's 2.81 3.56 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  16. Oklahoma Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.15 0.15 1.65 1970's 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.22 0.26 0.27 0.36 0.58 0.66 0.99 1980's 1.45 1.83 2.53 2.75 2.71 2.48 2.30 2.06 2.10 1.83 1990's 1.85 1.62 1.79 1.72 1.64 1.36 2.12 2.34 1.90 2.04 2000's 3.49 3.21 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  17. Oregon Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.22 0.21 0.22 1970's 0.22 0.32 0.28 0.35 0.47 0.61 0.82 1.77 1.98 2.53 1980's 4.41 4.75 4.90 4.19 3.90 3.13 2.35 2.00 1.90 2.09 1990's 2.16 2.32 2.16 1.71 1.86 1.77 1.77 1.80 1.84 1.98 2000's 2.74 2.91 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  18. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.25 0.24 0.24 1970's 0.25 0.29 0.31 0.32 0.40 0.54 0.60 0.92 0.94 1.42 1980's 1.89 2.34 3.02 3.20 3.09 3.06 2.63 2.38 2.36 2.35 1990's 2.57 2.41 2.41 2.83 2.47 2.00 2.71 2.72 2.08 1.97 2000's 3.59 4.76 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  19. Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.20 0.20 1970's 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.28 0.36 0.49 0.73 0.89 1.26 1980's 1.73 2.25 2.96 3.19 2.94 3.01 2.29 1.85 1.78 1.97 1990's 1.94 2.61 2.44 2.23 1.88 1.59 2.57 2.52 2.17 2.04 2000's 3.44 4.13 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  20. Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.20 0.20 1970's 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.38 0.53 0.81 1.49 1.40 1980's 2.09 2.81 3.33 3.59 3.49 3.35 3.37 2.68 2.59 2.63 1990's 2.05 1.86 1.93 2.27 2.14 1.83 2.60 3.22 2.59 2.20 2000's 2.66 5.05 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  1. Washington Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.22 0.21 0.22 1970's 0.22 0.24 0.28 0.33 0.44 0.65 0.78 1.67 1.92 2.38 1980's 3.92 4.34 4.72 3.98 3.72 3.12 2.52 2.11 1.99 2.06 1990's 2.04 1.98 1.89 1.37 1.84 1.78 1.77 1.89 1.76 2.03 2000's 3.07 2.82 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  2. California Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.25 0.24 0.30 1970's 0.29 0.35 0.35 0.39 0.45 0.47 0.69 0.73 0.85 1.75 1980's 2.16 2.90 3.30 4.14 4.13 3.70 3.56 3.02 2.55 2.39 1990's 2.40 2.19 1.40 0.53 0.33 1.01 1.63 1.47 1.93 2.08 2000's 3.62 4.70 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  3. Colorado Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.17 0.17 0.17 1970's 0.18 0.19 0.21 0.22 0.27 0.49 0.72 1.00 1.31 1.53 1980's 2.17 2.58 2.78 2.78 2.81 2.62 2.71 2.57 2.24 1.75 1990's 1.75 1.79 1.89 1.86 1.78 1.45 1.97 2.44 1.98 1.66 2000's 3.89 3.86 NA -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  4. Connecticut Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.35 0.68 0.30 1970's 0.32 0.32 0.35 0.40 0.50 0.58 0.59 1.50 2.60 2.53 1980's 2.76 2.94 3.53 3.30 3.18 3.71 2.53 2.52 2.13 2.97 1990's 3.68 3.08 2.95 3.53 2.62 2.20 3.50 1.54 3.00 0.59 2000's 4.82 4.93 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  5. Florida Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.19 0.18 0.20 1970's 1.98 0.21 0.24 0.30 0.34 0.36 0.49 0.72 0.85 1.35 1980's 1.77 2.38 2.58 2.65 2.90 2.80 1.79 2.11 1.85 2.00 1990's 2.17 2.11 2.06 2.85 1.50 1.55 2.37 2.38 2.38 2.33 2000's 3.81 3.45 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  6. Georgia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.19 0.19 0.19 1970's 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.25 0.28 0.32 0.36 0.67 0.90 1.35 1980's 2.10 2.78 3.11 3.22 3.26 3.23 3.32 2.50 2.41 2.69 1990's 2.19 2.08 2.08 2.24 2.14 1.93 2.62 3.09 2.48 2.18 2000's 3.30 4.57 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  7. Indiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.21 0.21 1970's 0.21 0.23 0.25 0.27 0.28 0.38 0.45 0.81 0.86 1.21 1980's 1.73 2.18 2.91 3.21 3.02 3.11 2.78 2.52 2.69 2.17 1990's 2.17 2.46 2.51 1.38 1.03 1.05 2.47 2.58 2.27 2.16 2000's 3.69 4.18 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  8. Kansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.16 0.17 0.17 1970's 0.18 0.19 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.33 0.41 0.51 0.61 1.14 1980's 1.57 1.95 2.45 2.76 2.71 2.55 2.29 2.05 2.14 1.80 1990's 1.59 1.69 5.24 1.56 1.20 1.15 1.83 1.81 1.39 1.65 2000's 2.57 3.01 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  9. Kentucky Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.33 0.27 0.23 1970's 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.29 0.37 0.48 0.60 0.57 1.26 1980's 1.67 2.18 2.85 3.05 2.93 2.89 2.44 1.97 1.77 2.00 1990's 2.12 2.35 2.51 2.67 1.95 1.83 2.63 2.51 2.45 2.11 2000's 3.27 3.96 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  10. Louisiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.19 0.19 0.05 1970's 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.28 0.39 0.50 0.81 0.96 1.30 1980's 1.81 2.36 2.91 3.13 3.00 2.90 2.48 1.97 1.96 2.07 1990's 1.98 2.25 2.25 2.40 1.44 1.61 2.58 2.59 2.22 1.98 2000's 3.10 3.76 NA -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.19 0.19 1970's 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.27 0.38 0.50 0.69 0.84 1.25 1980's 2.41 2.74 3.08 3.28 3.29 3.17 3.19 2.37 2.27 2.72 1990's 2.15 1.94 1.94 2.08 2.01 1.81 2.48 2.98 2.41 2.30 2000's 3.30 4.75 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  12. Wisconsin Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.26 0.23 0.23 1970's 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.30 0.44 0.54 1.74 2.09 1.61 1980's 4.50 2.83 3.53 3.52 3.52 3.30 2.79 2.29 2.12 2.04 1990's 2.14 1.31 1.26 0.96 1.36 0.36 1.20 1.16 0.95 2.56 2000's 3.32 3.67 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  13. Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.14 0.16 0.16 1970's 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.24 0.24 0.51 0.65 0.69 1.36 1.59 1980's 2.05 2.51 2.91 3.05 2.99 2.76 2.56 2.36 2.06 1.88 1990's 1.95 1.85 2.48 1.92 1.52 1.31 1.54 1.84 1.86 1.87 2000's 3.21 3.04 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  14. Microsoft Word - 2012-01-27 JAD Natural Gas Pipeline.doc

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

    835 Terminal Drive, Suite 101 Richland, Washington 99354 (301) 828-7342 www.jadenvironmental.com For Immediate Release January 27, 2012 JAD Environmental Selected to Study Environmental Impacts of Energy Department's Natural Gas Pipeline Project RICHLAND, Wash. - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has selected JAD Environmental, LLC, to support the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) regarding its proposed natural gas pipeline extension to support facilities at its Hanford

  15. Galvan Ranch, TX Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from Mexico

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    225 501 314 1,046 1,426 933 2007-2015 Pipeline Prices 3.52 3.12 1.87 2.66 3.45 1.71 2007

  16. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","9...

  17. Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    1,069,405 1,069,898 1,075,472 1,078,979 1,079,424 1,079,462 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 3,821 3,834 3,834 3,834 3,834 3,834 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 1,065,583 1,066,064 1,071,638 1,075,145 1,075,590 1,075,629 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 666,636 667,065 672,632 673,200 674,967 675,003 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 2,150 2,159 2,159 2,159 2,159 2,159 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 664,486 664,906 670,473 671,041 672,808 672,844 2008-2014 Total Number of

  18. Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 1998-2014 Salt Caverns 6,200 6,200 6,200 6,200 6,200 6,200 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 2009-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 1998-2014 Salt Caverns 1 1 1 1 1 1

  19. Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6,900 32,900 35,400 35,400 35,400 43,600 1995-2014 Salt Caverns 15,900 21,900 21,900 21,900 21,900 30,100 1999-2014 Aquifers 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 11,000 11,000 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 1999-2014 Total Working Gas Capacity 20,900 25,150 27,350 27,350 27,350 33,150 2008-2014 Salt Caverns 11,900 16,150 16,150 16,150 16,150 21,950 2008-2014 Aquifers 0 0 2012-2014 Depleted Fields 9,000 9,000 11,200 11,200 11,200 11,200 2008-2014 Total Number of Existing Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 1995-2014 Salt

  20. Crosby, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet) Crosby, ND Liquefied Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (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. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports by Point of Exit Crosby, ND Liquefied Natural Gas to Canada

  1. A Global R&D Network Driving GE's Oil & Gas Technology Pipeline | GE Global

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

    Research A Global R&D Network Driving GE's Oil & Gas Technology Pipeline Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window) Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Click to share (Opens in new window) Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) A Global R&D Network Driving GE's Oil & Gas Technology Pipeline As we break ground on GE's newest Global Research Oil & Gas Technology Center, work is happening 24/7 at our

  2. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Aquifer Storage Reservoir...

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

    Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Aquifer Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Aquifer Underground Natural Gas Well

  3. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Regional/State Underground...

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

    ... Totals may not sum due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration, GasTran Natural Gas Transportation Information System, Underground Natural Gas Storage ...

  4. Whitlash, MT Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from Canada

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

    7,707 7,062 6,571 5,387 5,128 4,651 1996-2015 Pipeline Prices 3.88 3.65 2.35 3.07 4.04 2.13

  5. Alamo, TX Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from Mexico

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

    3,678 27,479 48,850 72,039 76,111 78,866 1998-2014 Pipeline Prices 3.95 4.50 4.10 2.86 3.81 4.63 1998...

  6. Mechanical Characteristics of Submerged Arc Weldment in API Gas Pipeline Steel of Grade X65

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hashemi, S. H.; Mohammadyani, D.

    2011-01-17

    The mechanical properties of submerged arc weldment (SAW) in gas transportation pipeline steel of grade API X65 (65 ksi yield strength) were investigated. This steel is produced by thermo mechanical control rolled (TMC), and is largely used in Iran gas piping systems and networks. The results from laboratory study on three different regions; i.e. base metal (BM), fusion zone (FZ) and heat affected zone (HAZ) were used to compare weldment mechanical characteristics with those specified by API 5L (revision 2004) standard code. Different laboratory experiments were conducted on test specimens taken from 48 inch outside diameter and 14.3 mm wall thickness gas pipeline. The test results showed a gradient of microstructure and Vickers hardness data from the centerline of FZ towards the unaffected MB. Similarly, lower Charpy absorbed energy (compared to BM) was observed in the FZ impact specimens. Despite this, the API specifications were fulfilled in three tested zones, ensuring pipeline structural integrity under working conditions.

  7. ,"U.S. Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline Systems"

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

    Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline Systems" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Intratstate Natural Gas Pipelines By Region",1,"Periodic",2007 ,"Release Date:","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,"Next Release Date:","application/vnd.ms-excel"

  8. Rhode Island Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 837 336 243 2000's 295 281 332 383 308 695 804 822 865 900 2010's 1,468 1,003 1,023 1,087 2,824 - = 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 Pipeline &

  9. Competition in the natural gas pipeline industry: An economic policy analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gallick, E.C.

    1993-01-01

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) currently regulates the price at which natural gas can be sold by regulated interstate natural gas pipelines. Whether pipelines should be deregulated depends, to an important extent, on the competitive nature of the market. The key question is whether pipelines can successfully raise price (i.e., the transport fee) and reduce output if the market is deregulated. In most natural gas pipeline markets, there are a small number of current suppliers. Opponents of deregulation argue that the unrestrained market power of pipelines in many local markets will introduce inefficiencies in the sale of natural gas. Implicit in their arguments is a narrow view of competition: the number of current suppliers. The competitive effect of potential entry is largely ignored. These commentators would argue that without potential entry, it may be true that the net social cost of deregulation exceeds the costs of maintaining present regulation. A study was conducted to determine the extent to which potential entry might constrain the exercise of market power by natural gas pipelines if price and entry regulation is removed. Potential entrants are defined in the context of antitrust markets. That is, these markets are consistent with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Merger Guidelines. The study attempts to quantify the effects of potential entry on the market power of current suppliers. The selection of potential entrants therefore considers a number of factors (such as the size of the nearby supplier and the distance to the market) that are expected to affect the likelihood of collision in a deregulated market. The policy implications of the study are reviewed.

  10. Microsoft Word - Rockies Pipelines and Prices.doc

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

    07 1 September 2007 Short-Term Energy Outlook Supplement: Natural Gas in the Rocky Mountains: Developing Infrastructure 1 Highlights * Recent natural gas spot market volatility in the Rocky Mountain States of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming has been the result of increased production while consumption and pipeline export capacity have remained limited. This Supplement analyzes current natural gas production, pipeline and storage infrastructure in the Rocky Mountains, as well as prospective pipeline

  11. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Depleted Reservoir Storage...

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

    Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Depleted Production Reservoir Underground Natural Gas Storage Well Configuration Depleted Production Reservoir Storage

  12. Natural Gas Compressor Stations on the Interstate Pipeline Network...

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

    ... Data in Response to Security Concerns. Source: Energy Information Administration, Natural Gas Division, Natural Gas Transportation Information System, Compressor Station Database. ...

  13. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir...

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

    Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Source: PB Energy Storage Services Inc.

  14. AIRBORNE, OPTICAL REMOTE SENSNG OF METHANE AND ETHANE FOR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE LEAK DETECTION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jerry Myers

    2005-04-15

    Ophir Corporation was awarded a contract by the U. S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory under the Project Title ''Airborne, Optical Remote Sensing of Methane and Ethane for Natural Gas Pipeline Leak Detection'' on October 14, 2002. The scope of the work involved designing and developing an airborne, optical remote sensor capable of sensing methane and, if possible, ethane for the detection of natural gas pipeline leaks. Flight testing using a custom dual wavelength, high power fiber amplifier was initiated in February 2005. Ophir successfully demonstrated the airborne system, showing that it was capable of discerning small amounts of methane from a simulated pipeline leak. Leak rates as low as 150 standard cubic feet per hour (scf/h) were detected by the airborne sensor.

  15. ,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"

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

    012015 7:00:34 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity" "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NA1393NUS2","NA1392NUS2","NA1391NUS2","NGAEP...

  16. ,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"

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

    012015 7:00:34 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity" "Sourcekey","N5290US2","NGAEPG0SACW0NUSMMCF","NA1394NUS8"...

  17. U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1973 1,373 1,275 1,391 1,232 1,187...

  18. West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    531,456 531,480 524,324 524,324 524,337 528,637 1988-2014 Salt Caverns 0 0 1999-2014 Depleted Fields 531,456 531,480 524,324 524,324 524,337 528,637 1999-2014 Total Working Gas...

  19. Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

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

    284,747 284,811 288,010 288,210 288,210 288,210 1988-2013 Aquifers 284,747 284,811 288,010 288,210 288,210 288,210 1999-2013 Depleted Fields 0 0 1999-2013 Total Working Gas...

  20. Operational Challenges in Gas-To-Liquid (GTL) Transportation Through Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Godwin A. Chukwu; Santanu Khataniar; Shirish Patil; Abhijit Dandekar

    2006-06-30

    Oil production from Alaskan North Slope oil fields has steadily declined. In the near future, ANS crude oil production will decline to such a level (200,000 to 400,000 bbl/day) that maintaining economic operation of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) will require pumping alternative products through the system. Heavy oil deposits in the West Sak and Ugnu formations are a potential resource, although transporting these products involves addressing important sedimentation issues. One possibility is the use of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) technology. Estimated recoverable gas reserves of 38 trillion cubic feet (TCF) on the North Slope of Alaska can be converted to liquid with GTL technology and combined with the heavy oils for a product suitable for pipeline transport. Issues that could affect transport of this such products through TAPS include pumpability of GTL and crude oil blends, cold restart of the pipeline following a prolonged winter shutdown, and solids deposition inside the pipeline. This study examined several key fluid properties of GTL, crude oil and four selected blends under TAPS operating conditions. Key measurements included Reid Vapor Pressure, density and viscosity, PVT properties, and solids deposition. Results showed that gel strength is not a significant factor for the ratios of GTL-crude oil blend mixtures (1:1; 1:2; 1:3; 1:4) tested under TAPS cold re-start conditions at temperatures above - 20 F, although Bingham fluid flow characteristics exhibited by the blends at low temperatures indicate high pumping power requirements following prolonged shutdown. Solids deposition is a major concern for all studied blends. For the commingled flow profile studied, decreased throughput can result in increased and more rapid solid deposition along the pipe wall, resulting in more frequent pigging of the pipeline or, if left unchecked, pipeline corrosion.

  1. Sample Format Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline Monthly Sales and...

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

    are: Northeast, Midwest, South, West Send to: The Office of Fossil Energy, Natural Gas Regulatory Activities, U.S. Dept. of Energy, FE-34, P.O. Box 44375 Washington, D.C....

  2. "Changing Natural Gas Pipeline Throughputs in Canada"

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Changing Natural Gas Pipeline Throughputs in Canada" Presented at 2015 EIA Energy Conference June 15, 2015 Margaret Skwara, National Energy Board Abha Bhargava, National Energy Board * National Energy Board Act * LNG Export and Import Licence Applications (summary and links to LNG export licence applications) * Market Snapshots (energy information updates; weekly updates) * Energy Futures Report (long term projections of supply and demand; Nov 2015 new release) * Regulatory Document Index

  3. Penitas, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Million Cubic Feet) Penitas, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 253 40 NA 2000's NA NA 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: U.S.

  4. Havre, MT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Million Cubic Feet) Havre, MT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (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 NA NA 2000's 1,309 NA NA 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: U.S.

  5. Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp. v. Oil and Gas Board of Mississippi: the demise of state ratable-take requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Frankenburg, K.M.

    1988-01-01

    Natural gas was not widely used until the 1930s when the development of seamless pipe enabled gas to be delivered at high compression to markets far from the wellhead. Now the availability and relatively low cost of natural gas have resulted in its widespread use in both home heating and industry. Regulation of this important fuel is consequently a hotly debated issue. The scope and fundamental purpose of the Natural Gas and Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA) was recently the subject of the Supreme Court's opinion in Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp v. Oil and Gas Board of Mississippi (Transcontinental). In a five-to-four decision, the Court held that the NGPA pre-empted the enforcement of a state ratable-take requirement. This Note examines Justice Blackmun's majority opinion and the persuasive dissent presented by Justice Rehnquist in the court's decision. The effects of the decision, the Court's first interpretation of NPGA, will undoubtedly be quite significant.

  6. Nitrogen expander cycles for large capacity liquefaction of natural gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chang, Ho-Myung; Park, Jae Hoon; Gwak, Kyung Hyun; Choe, Kun Hyung

    2014-01-29

    Thermodynamic study is performed on nitrogen expander cycles for large capacity liquefaction of natural gas. In order to substantially increase the capacity, a Brayton refrigeration cycle with nitrogen expander was recently added to the cold end of the reputable propane pre-cooled mixed-refrigerant (C3-MR) process. Similar modifications with a nitrogen expander cycle are extensively investigated on a variety of cycle configurations. The existing and modified cycles are simulated with commercial process software (Aspen HYSYS) based on selected specifications. The results are compared in terms of thermodynamic efficiency, liquefaction capacity, and estimated size of heat exchangers. The combination of C3-MR with partial regeneration and pre-cooling of nitrogen expander cycle is recommended to have a great potential for high efficiency and large capacity.

  7. Gas Shale Plays? The Global Transition

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

    and transportation capacity in the Horn River Basin is being expanded to provide improved market access for its growing shale gas production. Pipeline infrastructure is being...

  8. Natural Gas Market Centers: A 2008 Update

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

    ... This minimal growth reflects the stabilization of natural gas pipeline capacity originating in western Canada, which serves the west coast of the United States, primarily ...

  9. Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues

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

    Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues M. W. Melaina, O. Antonia, and M. Penev Technical Report NREL/TP-5600-51995 March 2013 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, Colorado 80401 303-275-3000 * www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Blending Hydrogen

  10. Alamo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Million Cubic Feet) Alamo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA 12,651 2000's 8,390 2,984 571 0 0 2,656 3,880 22,197 20,653 13,279 2010's 4,685 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: U.S.

  11. McAllen, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Million Cubic Feet) McAllen, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 2000's 1,118 NA 402 0 0 5,322 7,902 26,605 20,115 12,535 2010's 2,520 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: U.S.

  12. North Troy, VT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) North Troy, VT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars per Thousand 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 3.00 2.96 2.75 2.27 2000's NA NA 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: U.S. Price of

  13. North Troy, VT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Million Cubic Feet) North Troy, VT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (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 11,024 11,207 11,319 2,250 2000's NA NA 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: U.S.

  14. Havre, MT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Havre, MT Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada (Dollars per Thousand 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 NA NA 2000's 3.66 NA 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: U.S. Price of

  15. Hidalgo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Million Cubic Feet) Hidalgo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 13,609 17,243 13,496 41,879 2000's 2,093 7,292 782 0 0 1,342 967 5,259 1,201 284 2010's 62 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: U.S.

  16. Questions and Issues on Hydrogen Pipelines: Pipeline Transmission of

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

    Hydrogen | Department of Energy Questions and Issues on Hydrogen Pipelines: Pipeline Transmission of Hydrogen Questions and Issues on Hydrogen Pipelines: Pipeline Transmission of Hydrogen Pipping of GH2 Pipeline. Background: FG 64 built in 50ies, KP added in 70ies, active mining area over total length PDF icon hpwgw_questissues_campbell.pdf More Documents & Publications Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues Hydrogen Pipeline Discussion EIS-0487:

  17. AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 4,737,921 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,501 4,727,446 4,727,446 4,727,446 4,727,509 1995 4,730,109 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,647,791 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 4,593,948 1996 4,593,948

  18. AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 2,026,828 2,068,220 2,068,220 2,068,428 2,068,428 2,068,428 2,074,428 2,082,928 2,082,928 2,082,928 2,082,928 2,082,928 1995 2,082,928 2,096,611 2,096,611 2,096,176 2,096,176 2,096,176 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 2,090,331 1996 2,095,131 2,106,116

  19. AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 1,226,103 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1,232,392 1995 1,232,392 1,233,637 1,233,637 1,233,637 1,233,637 1,243,137 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1996 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446 1,237,446

  20. Midwest Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Midwest Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,721,231 2,723,336 2,725,497 2,725,535 2015 2,725,587 2,725,587 2,725,587 2,725,587 2,725,587 2,725,587 2,725,587 2,716,587 2,715,888 2,717,255 2,718,087 2,718,087 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  1. South Central Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) South Central Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 2,578,946 2,577,866 2,578,498 2,578,547 2,590,575 2,599,184 2,611,335 2,616,178 2,612,570 2,613,746 2,635,148 2,634,993 2015 2,631,717 2,630,903 2,631,616 2,631,673 2,631,673 2,631,444 2,631,444 2,631,444 2,636,984 2,637,895 2,637,895 2,640,224 - = No Data Reported; -- =

  2. Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 8,842,950 8,854,720 8,854,720 8,882,728 8,905,843 8,919,139 8,922,097 8,940,010 8,979,317 8,991,571 8,990,535 8,992,535 2013 8,965,468 8,971,280 8,986,201 8,988,916 9,020,589 9,027,650 9,033,704 9,048,658 9,087,425 9,093,741 9,090,861 9,089,358 2014 9,081,309 9,080,229 9,080,862 9,080,910

  3. Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - U.S. Energy Information

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Administration Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity With Data for November 2015 | Release Date: March 16, 2016 | Next Release Date: February 2017 Previous Issues Year: 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 prior issues Go Natural gas storage capacity nearly unchanged nationally, but regions vary U.S. natural gas working storage capacity (in terms of design capacity and demonstrated maximum working gas volumes) as of November 2015 was essentially flat compared to November 2014, with some

  4. Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States 1985 - 2003

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

    Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States 1985 - 2003 EIA Home > Natural Gas > Natural Gas Analysis Publications Natural Gas Productive Capacity for the Lower-48 States 1985 - 2003 Printer-Friendly Version gascapdata.xls ratiodata.xls wellcountdata.xls Executive Summary This analysis examines the availability of effective productive capacity to meet the projected wellhead demand for natural gas through 2003. Effective productive capacity is defined as the maximum production available

  5. Mapco's NGL Rocky Mountain pipeline

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Isaacs, S.F.

    1980-01-01

    The Rocky Mountain natural gas liquids (NGL) pipeline was born as a result of major producible gas finds in the Rocky Mountain area after gas deregulation. Gas discoveries in the overthurst area indicated considerable volumes of NGL would be available for transportation out of the area within the next 5 to 7 years. Mapco studied the need for a pipeline to the overthrust, but the volumes were not substantial at the time because there was little market and, consequently, little production for ethane. Since that time crude-based products for ethylene manufacture have become less competitive as a feed product on the world plastics market, and ethane demand has increased substantially. This change in the market has caused a major modification in the plans of the NGL producers and, consequently, the ethane content of the NGL stream for the overthrust area is expected to be 30% by volume at startup and is anticipated to be at 45% by 1985. These ethane volumes enhance the feasibility of the pipeline. The 1196-mile Rocky Mountain pipeline will be installed from the existing facility in W. Texas, near Seminole, to Rock Springs, Wyoming. A gathering system will connect the trunk line station to various plant locations. The pipeline development program calls for a capacity of 65,000 bpd by the end of 1981.

  6. AIRBORNE, OPTICAL REMOTE SENSING OF METHANE AND ETHANE FOR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE LEAK DETECTION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jerry Myers

    2003-05-13

    Ophir Corporation was awarded a contract by the U. S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory under the Project Title ''Airborne, Optical Remote Sensing of Methane and Ethane for Natural Gas Pipeline Leak Detection'' on October 14, 2002. This six-month technical report summarizes the progress for each of the proposed tasks, discusses project concerns, and outlines near-term goals. Ophir has completed a data survey of two major natural gas pipeline companies on the design requirements for an airborne, optical remote sensor. The results of this survey are disclosed in this report. A substantial amount of time was spent on modeling the expected optical signal at the receiver at different absorption wavelengths, and determining the impact of noise sources such as solar background, signal shot noise, and electronic noise on methane and ethane gas detection. Based upon the signal to noise modeling and industry input, Ophir finalized the design requirements for the airborne sensor, and released the critical sensor light source design requirements to qualified vendors. Responses from the vendors indicated that the light source was not commercially available, and will require a research and development effort to produce. Three vendors have responded positively with proposed design solutions. Ophir has decided to conduct short path optical laboratory experiments to verify the existence of methane and absorption at the specified wavelength, prior to proceeding with the light source selection. Techniques to eliminate common mode noise were also evaluated during the laboratory tests. Finally, Ophir has included a summary of the potential concerns for project success and has established future goals.

  7. Pipeline transportation and underground storage are vital and complementary components of the U

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

    Pipeline and Underground Storage Expansions in 2003 Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas, September 2004 1 Figure 1. Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas, Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity and Construction Databases. 8,460 10,423 6,787 6,517 6,983 9,262 12,848 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 1998 1999 2000 2,001 2002 2003 2004 (Scheduled) Million Cubic Feet per Day Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity Additions, 1998-2004 Figure 1. Source:

  8. Rainfall-ground movement modelling for natural gas pipelines through landslide terrain

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O`Neil, G.D.; Simmonds, G.R.; Grivas, D.A.; Schultz, B.C.

    1996-12-31

    Perhaps the greatest challenge to geotechnical engineers is to maintain the integrity of pipelines at river crossings where landslide terrain dominates the approach slopes. The current design process at NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) has developed to the point where this impact can be reasonably estimated using in-house models of pipeline-soil interaction. To date, there has been no method to estimate ground movements within unexplored slopes at the outset of the design process. To address this problem, rainfall and slope instrumentation data have been processed to derive rainfall-ground movement relationships. Early results indicate that the ground movements exhibit two components: a steady, small rate of movement independent of the rainfall, and, increased rates over short periods of time following heavy amounts of rainfall. Evidence exists of a definite threshold value of rainfall which has to be exceeded before any incremental movement is induced. Additional evidence indicates a one-month lag between rainfall and ground movement. While these models are in the preliminary stage, results indicate a potential to estimate ground movements for both initial design and planned maintenance actions.

  9. U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.20 0.21 1970's 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.25 0.30 0.40 0.51 0.77 0.90 1.32 1980's 1.85 2.39 2.97 3.15 3.04 2.92 2.52 2.17 2.10 2.01 1990's 1.95 1.87 2.07 1.97 1.70 1.49 2.27 2.29 2.01 1.88 2000's 2.97 3.55 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- =

  10. Iowa Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.17 0.16 0.17 1970's 0.17 0.19 0.20 0.22 0.26 0.34 0.52 0.73 0.99 1.17 1980's 1.55 1.89 2.50 2.73 2.71 2.83 2.57 2.75 2.01 2.02 1990's 1.52 1.54 1.71 1.25 1.39 1.40 2.37 2.46 2.06 2.16 2000's 3.17 3.60 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- =

  11. Natural Gas Transportation - Infrastructure Issues and Operational Trends

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2001-01-01

    This report examines how well the current national natural gas pipeline network has been able to handle today's market demand for natural gas. In addition, it identifies those areas of the country where pipeline utilization is continuing to grow rapidly and where new pipeline capacity is needed or is planned over the next several years.

  12. Overview of Two Hydrogen Energy Storage Studies: Wind Hydrogen in California and Blending in Natural Gas Pipelines (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Melaina, M. W.

    2013-05-01

    This presentation provides an overview of two NREL energy storage studies: Wind Hydrogen in California: Case Study and Blending Hydrogen Into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues. The presentation summarizes key issues, major model input assumptions, and results.

  13. New Hampshire Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2.73 2.32 4.82 5.95 6.00 3.77 6.23 5.29 3.33 3.26 1990's 3.67 3.40 3.81 3.79 3.88 3.42 4.17 4.20 3.88 3.97 2000's 0.00 0.00 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  14. New Jersey Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 3,407 2,700 4,116 2000's 2,898 3,741 1,444 1,533 1,466 1,234 955 1,514 1,889 1,678 2010's 5,359 5,655 4,603 5,559 5,070 - = 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. New Mexico Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 61,772 52,424 48,570 2000's 45,850 45,512 41,611 29,268 27,112 19,663 17,462 13,441 13,481 11,624 2010's 8,597 7,067 7,467 8,782 8,561 - = 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

  16. New York Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 7,477 7,317 7,815 2000's 7,422 5,096 8,012 7,206 7,418 10,350 11,471 12,823 12,587 12,372 2010's 15,122 18,836 17,610 16,819 24,923 - = 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

  17. North Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (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 4,744 413 9,506 2000's 10,567 13,563 14,230 14,109 14,035 13,306 13,023 13,317 11,484 8,870 2010's 13,745 13,575 15,619 14,931 14,604 - = 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

  18. South Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,910 2,805 6,020 2000's 6,269 5,774 6,065 6,318 6,217 5,751 5,421 5,690 4,686 3,240 2010's 5,806 6,692 6,402 6,888 5,221 - = 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:

  19. Hidalgo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Hidalgo, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.26 2.31 2.03 2.09 2000's 5.85 4.61 2.26 -- -- 8.10 5.53 6.23 5.55 4.40 2010's 4.21 -- -- -- -- - = 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

  20. Maine Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.42 1980's 2.63 3.20 4.92 4.60 5.40 4.36 3.88 2.24 4.60 3.41 1990's 3.73 3.59 3.97 3.91 3.50 5.50 -- 2000's 4.65 3.69 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  1. Minimum separation distances for natural gas pipeline and boilers in the 300 area, Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daling, P.M.; Graham, T.M.

    1997-08-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is proposing actions to reduce energy expenditures and improve energy system reliability at the 300 Area of the Hanford Site. These actions include replacing the centralized heating system with heating units for individual buildings or groups of buildings, constructing a new natural gas distribution system to provide a fuel source for many of these units, and constructing a central control building to operate and maintain the system. The individual heating units will include steam boilers that are to be housed in individual annex buildings located at some distance away from nearby 300 Area nuclear facilities. This analysis develops the basis for siting the package boilers and natural gas distribution systems to be used to supply steam to 300 Area nuclear facilities. The effects of four potential fire and explosion scenarios involving the boiler and natural gas pipeline were quantified to determine minimum separation distances that would reduce the risks to nearby nuclear facilities. The resulting minimum separation distances are shown in Table ES.1.

  2. Hydrogen Pipelines | Department of Energy

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

    Gaseous Hydrogen » Hydrogen Pipelines Hydrogen Pipelines Photo of a hydrogen pipeline. Gaseous hydrogen can be transported through pipelines much the way natural gas is today. Approximately 1,500 miles of hydrogen pipelines are currently operating in the United States. Owned by merchant hydrogen producers, these pipelines are located where large hydrogen users, such as petroleum refineries and chemical plants, are concentrated such as the Gulf Coast region. Transporting gaseous hydrogen via

  3. AIRBORNE, OPTICAL REMOTE SENSING OF METHANE AND ETHANE FOR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE LEAK DETECTION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jerry Myers

    2003-11-12

    Ophir Corporation was awarded a contract by the U. S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory under the Project Title ''Airborne, Optical Remote Sensing of Methane and Ethane for Natural Gas Pipeline Leak Detection'' on October 14, 2002. This second six-month technical report summarizes the progress made towards defining, designing, and developing the hardware and software segments of the airborne, optical remote methane and ethane sensor. The most challenging task to date has been to identify a vendor capable of designing and developing a light source with the appropriate output wavelength and power. This report will document the work that has been done to identify design requirements, and potential vendors for the light source. Significant progress has also been made in characterizing the amount of light return available from a remote target at various distances from the light source. A great deal of time has been spent conducting laboratory and long-optical path target reflectance measurements. This is important since it helps to establish the overall optical output requirements for the sensor. It also reduces the relative uncertainty and risk associated with developing a custom light source. The data gathered from the optical path testing has been translated to the airborne transceiver design in such areas as: fiber coupling, optical detector selection, gas filters, and software analysis. Ophir will next, summarize the design progress of the transceiver hardware and software development. Finally, Ophir will discuss remaining project issues that may impact the success of the project.

  4. S. 1429: A Bill to amend the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968, as amended, and the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of 1979, as amended, to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1992 and 1993, and for other purposes, introduced in the Senate of the United States, One Hundred Second Congress, First Session, June 28, 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-01-01

    This bill would further amend the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 and the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of 1979 to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1992 and 1993. The bill authorizes $5,562,000 as appropriations for the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act and $1,391,000 as appropriations for the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act for fiscal year ending September 30, 1992 and such sums as may be necessary for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1993.

  5. Estimate of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States: 2007 Update

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2007-01-01

    This report provides an update to an estimate for U.S. aggregate natural gas storage capacity that was released in 2006.

  6. The unusual construction aspects of China`s Yacheng 13-1 gas pipeline -- The world`s second longest subsea pipeline

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Woolgar, A.F.; Wilburn, J.S.; Zhao, X.

    1996-12-31

    There are many unusual construction aspects relating to China`s Yacheng 13-1 Pipeline. Initially planned as an onshore pipeline it was later to become Asia`s longest subsea pipeline. The route chosen resulted in an offshore pipeline requiring many unique and innovative construction techniques as well as unusual pipeline installation constraints. The pipeline was installed in two phases. The first phase of 707 km was to be the longest pipeline ever constructed within one lay season and with one lay vessel in a continuous program. Upon completion of the second phase of pipelay works, the world`s longest ever subsea pipeline flooding in one run of 778 kms was to follow. The Yacheng 13-1 construction requirements for pipelay and post installation works, including testing and commissioning were extremely demanding. This paper details how these requirements were met. It covers route selection constraints, construction techniques utilized and the demanding pigging and pre-commissioning operations performed.

  7. Port of Del Bonita, MT Natural Gas Imports by Pipeline from Canada

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

    10 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Pipeline Volumes 424 265 257 241 200 206 1996-2015 Pipeline Prices 4.19 4.21 2.85 3.46 4.39 2.16 1996-2015

  8. Magnetic flux leakage inspection of gas pipelines: Experience with a collapsible tool. Final report, July 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Scrivner, R.W.

    1996-07-01

    The Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) technique is the most commonly used method to inspect transmission pipelines for corrosion. A typical MFL tool operates in pipelines which have no restrictions. Reduced size valves, a 24 inch valve in a 30 inch pipeline, are one such restriction. A collapsible MFL tool was developed to allow pipelines with reduced size valves to be inspected without expensive valve replacement. The first use, in 1995, of a 30 inch tool succeeded in passing through the valves and inspecting the pipeline. The first use of a 36 inch tool railed due to a partially closed valve, damaging the tool. The tool was ultimately run after some repairs to the tool and most of the reduced size valves were replaced with full size valves. The results of the final run were very good. Additional use of the tools in 1996 has provided excellent results.

  9. New Jersey Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.25 0.21 0.21 1970's 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.27 0.33 0.41 0.63 0.85 1.29 1980's 1.96 2.75 3.07 3.37 3.68 3.40 2.94 2.53 2.73 2.74 1990's 2.62 2.48 2.62 2.93 2.66 2.59 3.15 3.11 2.93 1.79 2000's 4.00 4.74 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  10. New Mexico Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.16 0.15 0.15 1970's 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.22 0.30 0.39 0.41 0.68 0.79 1.36 1980's 1.78 2.25 2.80 3.10 3.24 2.86 2.31 1.66 1.70 1.63 1990's 1.67 1.36 1.31 1.79 1.61 1.13 1.59 1.94 1.89 1.03 2000's 1.80 1.74 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  11. New York Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.26 0.23 0.25 1970's 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.31 0.39 0.54 0.85 1.07 1.44 1980's 1.95 2.41 3.15 3.44 3.23 3.15 2.53 2.47 2.33 2.64 1990's 2.59 2.71 2.86 3.15 2.21 1.52 2.23 1.89 1.38 1.31 2000's 2.25 2.94 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  12. North Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.18 0.19 0.20 1970's 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.31 0.46 0.62 0.84 1.30 1980's 1.96 2.89 3.11 3.24 3.28 3.25 3.39 2.43 2.36 2.74 1990's 2.03 1.83 1.86 2.08 2.08 1.77 2.43 3.23 2.61 2.26 2000's 2.42 4.92 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  13. North Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.27 0.17 0.17 1970's 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.29 0.31 0.51 0.57 0.75 0.95 1.55 1980's 1.81 2.34 4.11 3.80 3.42 2.77 2.56 2.40 2.49 2.03 1990's 1.61 1.35 1.28 1.84 1.34 1.01 1.70 2.07 1.77 2.12 2000's 3.62 2.14 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  14. Ohio Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.22 0.23 0.23 1970's 0.23 0.27 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.43 0.53 0.87 1.01 1.37 1980's 1.92 2.33 3.04 3.42 3.28 3.28 2.79 2.64 2.43 2.54 1990's 2.61 2.66 2.83 2.53 2.50 2.03 2.88 2.80 3.20 2.63 2000's 3.41 5.18 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  15. Rhode Island Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.73 0.33 0.39 1970's 0.33 0.38 0.38 0.42 0.41 0.55 0.75 1.67 2.08 2.06 1980's 2.92 4.74 4.53 4.74 4.05 4.53 3.55 2.87 2.20 4.19 1990's 3.74 3.41 2.94 3.31 2.69 2.21 3.35 3.15 3.00 2.53 2000's 4.67 5.20 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  16. South Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.20 0.20 0.21 1970's 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.49 0.52 0.59 0.85 1.52 1980's 2.02 2.91 3.17 3.32 3.37 3.18 3.37 2.82 2.40 2.75 1990's 2.06 1.87 1.94 2.08 2.06 1.80 2.54 3.28 2.55 2.24 2000's 2.54 4.91 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  17. South Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.24 0.22 0.20 1970's 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.33 0.31 0.50 0.55 0.63 0.78 1.20 1980's 1.71 2.20 2.91 3.31 3.32 3.46 2.69 2.17 2.05 1.91 1990's 2.13 1.42 1.22 1.80 1.36 1.03 1.75 2.13 1.68 2.12 2000's 3.76 3.28 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  18. Texas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.16 0.17 0.17 1970's 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.28 0.37 0.51 0.68 0.73 1.19 1980's 1.56 2.24 3.09 3.11 2.98 2.80 2.18 2.01 1.98 1.81 1990's 1.74 1.62 1.66 1.82 1.64 1.64 2.40 2.36 2.02 1.99 2000's 2.99 3.13 NA -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  19. Utah Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.21 0.21 0.21 1970's 0.21 0.22 0.28 0.29 0.34 0.54 0.67 1.40 1.72 1.88 1980's 2.94 3.17 2.67 2.94 2.99 3.19 2.93 2.66 2.84 2.18 1990's 2.25 2.51 2.25 1.91 1.94 1.57 1.68 2.20 2.05 1.92 2000's 3.19 2.97 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  20. Idaho Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand

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

    Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.21 0.21 0.22 1970's 0.22 0.24 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.60 0.72 1.65 1.95 2.45 1980's 3.93 3.95 4.19 3.69 3.55 3.15 2.67 2.08 2.00 2.05 1990's 2.06 1.99 1.89 1.76 1.86 1.78 1.79 1.83 1.67 2.04 2000's 3.52 3.49 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  1. West Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Price (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use Price (Dollars per Thousand 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 0.34 0.33 1970's 0.32 0.33 0.38 0.39 0.45 0.59 0.69 1.12 1.29 0.85 1980's 2.24 2.62 3.35 3.75 3.71 3.85 3.44 2.85 2.89 2.97 1990's 2.86 2.49 2.93 3.57 3.54 1.87 3.19 2.97 2.69 2.54 2000's 3.70 5.42 NA -- -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA

  2. Estimate of Maximum Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2006-01-01

    This report examines the aggregate maximum capacity for U.S. natural gas storage. Although the concept of maximum capacity seems quite straightforward, there are numerous issues that preclude the determination of a definitive maximum volume. The report presents three alternative estimates for maximum capacity, indicating appropriate caveats for each.

  3. Efforts to Harmonize Gas Pipeline Operations with the Demands of the Electricity Sector

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Costello, Ken

    2006-12-15

    A possible future course of action is for pipelines to continue their efforts to provide new services with FERC approval. Over time, pipelines could satisfy power generators by giving them the flexibility and services they desire and for which they are willing to pay. Another possibility is that FERC will enact new rules governing regional electricity markets that would function similarly to nationwide business practices. (author)

  4. Natural Gas Citygate Price

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  5. Natural Gas Industrial Price

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  6. Financing is next step in Brazil-Bolivia natural gas project. [Economic costs and benefits of a new natural gas pipeline project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cajueiro Costa, A.S. )

    1993-11-01

    This paper reviews a new four billion dollar arrangement which would start a major gas network between Brazil and Bolivia. The proposed 2,200 mile long, 28 and 14 inch pipeline network would connect Bolivian reserves with the undeserved markets of southern Brazil. The paper briefly reviews the economic involvement and impacts on both countries and the current market for natural gas in Brazil. Because most of Brazil's energy is currently from hydroelectric power or petroleum, the new distribution network will have dramatic effects on industries which need this high-grade fuel source for operation. Financing of this project will be by Petrobras and 49 percent through stock options.

  7. Mountain Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 904,787 904,787 904,787 904,787 904,787 904,787 909,887 912,887 912,887...

  8. Mountain Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 461,243 461,243 461,243 461,243 461,243 461,243 461,243 464,435 464,435...

  9. Pacific Region Natural Gas Total Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 676,176 676,176 676,176 676,176 676,176 676,176 676,176 676,176 676,176...

  10. Pacific Region Natural Gas Working Underground Storage Capacity...

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

    Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 414,831 414,831 414,831 414,831 414,831 414,831 414,831 414,831 414,831...

  11. Technique of estimation of actual strength of a gas pipeline section at its deformation in landslide action zone

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tcherni, V.P.

    1996-12-31

    The technique is given which permits determination of stress and strain state (SSS) and estimation of actual strength of a section of a buried main gas pipeline (GP) in the case of its deformation in a landslide action zone. The technique is based on the use of three-dimensional coordinates of axial points of the deformed GP section. These coordinates are received by a full-scale survey. The deformed axis of the surveyed GP section is described by the polynomial. The unknown coefficients of the polynomial can be determined from the boundary conditions at points of connection with contiguous undeformed sections as well as by use of minimization methods in mathematical processing of full-scale survey results. The resulting form of GP section`s axis allows one to determine curvatures and, accordingly, bending moments along all the length of the considered section. The influence of soil resistance to longitudinal displacements of a pipeline is used to determine longitudinal forces. Resulting values of bending moments and axial forces as well as the known value of internal pressure are used to analyze all necessary components of an actual SSS of pipeline section and to estimate its strength by elastic analysis.

  12. FERC approves Northwest pipeline expansion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-06-15

    Northwest Pipeline Co., Salt Lake City, Utah, received a final permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for a $373.4 million main gas line expansion. This paper reports that it plans to begin construction of the 443 MMcfd expansion in mid-July after obtaining further federal, state, and local permits. The expanded system is to be fully operational by second quarter 1993. When the expansion is complete, total Northwest system mileage will be 3,936 miles and system capacity about 2.49 bcfd.

  13. Natural Gas Electric Power Price

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  14. Industry Research for Pipeline Systems Panel

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. DOE Natural Gas Infrastructure R&D and Methane Emissions Mitigation Workshop -Industry Research for Pipeline Systems Panel Mike Whelan Director, Research Operations November 12, 2014 2 www.prci.org Pipeline Research Council Int'l. Overview  Founded in 1952 - Current Membership  39 Pipelines, over 350,000 miles of transmission pipe * Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquids Pipelines * 27 members are North American based - Remainder: Europe,

  15. INTERNAL REPAIR OF PIPELINES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robin Gordon; Bill Bruce; Nancy Porter; Mike Sullivan; Chris Neary

    2003-05-01

    The two broad categories of deposited weld metal repair and fiber-reinforced composite repair technologies were reviewed for potential application for internal repair of gas transmission pipelines. Both are used to some extent for other applications and could be further developed for internal, local, structural repair of gas transmission pipelines. Preliminary test programs were developed for both deposited weld metal repairs and for fiber-reinforced composite repair. To date, all of the experimental work pertaining to the evaluation of potential repair methods has focused on fiber-reinforced composite repairs. Hydrostatic testing was also conducted on four pipeline sections with simulated corrosion damage: two with composite liners and two without.

  16. Successful revegetation of a gas pipeline right-of-way in a Gulf Coast barrier island ecosystem

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hinchman, R.R.; George, J.F.; Gaynor, A.J.

    1987-01-01

    This study evaluates the revegetation of a 30-m-wide right-of-way (ROW) following construction of a 76-cm-diameter natural gas pipeline across Padre Island, Texas, a Gulf Coast barrier island. ROW construction activities were completed in 1979 and included breaching of the foredunes, grading, trenching, pipeline installation, and leveling - which effectively removed all existing vegetation from the full length of the ROW. Following construction, the foredunes were rebuilt, fertilized, and sprigged with Panicum amarum, a native dune grass known as bitter panicum. The remainder of the ROW across the mid-island flats was allowed to revegetate naturally. Plant cover by species and total vegetative cover was measured on paired permanent transects on the ROW and in the adjacent undisturbed vegetation. These cover data show that the disturbed ROW underwent rapid vegetative recovery during the first two growing seasons, attaining 54% of the cover on the undisturbed controls. By 1984, the percent vegetative cover and plant species diversity on the ROW and the adjacent undisturbed control area were not significantly different and the ROW vegetation was visually indistinguishable from the surrounding plant communities. 9 refs., 3 figs., 2 tabs.

  17. Comparing Existing Pipeline Networks with the Potential Scale of Future U.S. CO2 Pipeline Networks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dooley, James J.; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.

    2009-04-20

    There is growing interest regarding the potential size of a future U.S. dedicated carbon dioxide (CO2) pipeline infrastructure if carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies are commercially deployed on a large scale within the United States. This paper assesses the potential scale of the CO2 pipeline system needed under two hypothetical climate policies (so called WRE450 and WRE550 stabilization scenarios) and compares this to the extant U.S. pipeline infrastructures used to deliver CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), and to move natural gas and liquid hydrocarbons from areas of production and importation to markets. The analysis reveals that between 11,000 and 23,000 additional miles of dedicated CO2 pipeline might be needed in the U.S. before 2050 across these two cases. While that is a significant increase over the 3,900 miles that comprise the existing national CO2 pipeline infrastructure, it is critically important to realize that the demand for additional CO2 pipeline capacity will unfold relatively slowly and in a geographically dispersed manner as new dedicated CCS-enabled power plants and industrial facilities are brought online. During the period 2010-2030, the growth in the CO2 pipeline system is on the order of a few hundred to less than a thousand miles per year. In comparison during the period 1950-2000, the U.S. natural gas pipeline distribution system grew at rates that far exceed these projections in growth in a future dedicated CO2 pipeline system. This analysis indicates that the need to increase the size of the existing dedicated CO2 pipeline system should not be seen as a major obstacle for the commercial deployment of CCS technologies in the U.S. Nevertheless, there will undoubtedly be some associated regulatory and siting issues to work through but these issues should not be unmanageable based on the size of infrastructure requirements alone.

  18. U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (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 396,950 396,092 2010's 364,228 363,521 367,108 453,054 452,044 - = 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: Working Gas

  19. U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Salt Caverns Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (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 230,456 271,785 2010's 312,003 351,017 488,268 455,729 488,698 - = 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: Working Gas

  20. Hydrogen Delivery Technologies and Systems- Pipeline Transmission of Hydrogen

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Hydrogen Delivery Technologies and Systems - Pipeline Transmission of Hydrogen. Design and operations standards and materials for hydrogen and natural gas pipelines.

  1. U.S. LPG pipeline begins deliveries to Pemex terminal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bodenhamer, K.C.

    1997-08-11

    LPG deliveries began this spring to the new Mendez LPG receiving terminal near Juarez, State of Chihuahua, Mexico. Supplying the terminal is the 265-mile, 8-in. Rio Grande Pipeline that includes a reconditioned 217-mile, 8-in. former refined-products pipeline from near Odessa, Texas, and a new 48-mile, 8-in. line beginning in Hudspeth County and crossing the US-Mexico border near San Elizario, Texas. Capacity of the pipeline is 24,000 b/d. The LPG supplied to Mexico is a blend of approximately 85% propane and 15% butane. Before construction and operation of the pipeline, PGPB blended the propane-butane mix at a truck dock during loading. Demand for LPG in northern Mexico is strong. Less than 5% of the homes in Juarez have natural gas, making LPG the predominant energy source for cooking and heating in a city of more than 1 million. LPG also is widely used as a motor fuel.

  2. Future of Natural Gas

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

    of Natural Gas Bill Eisele, CEM SC Electric & Gas Co Hosted by: FEDERAL UTILITY PARTNERSHIP WORKING GROUP SEMINAR November 5-6, 2014 Cape Canaveral. Florida Agenda * Gas Facts * Supply vs. Capacity * Sources * Consumption * Pipeline system * Gas Interruptions - Operational Flow Orders * Pricing Federal Utility Partnership Working Group November 5-6, 2014 Cape Canaveral, FL Sources of Natural Gas * Mine * Import * Remove from storage Federal Utility Partnership Working Group November 5-6,

  3. ,"Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mt2m.xls"

  4. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ne2m.xls"

  5. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290nm2m.xls"

  6. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ny2m.xls"

  7. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290oh2m.xls"

  8. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ok2m.xls"

  9. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290or2m.xls"

  10. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290tn2m.xls"

  12. ,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290tx2m.xls"

  13. ,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ut2m.xls"

  14. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290va2m.xls"

  15. ,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290wa2m.xls"

  16. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290wy2m.xls"

  18. U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Number

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

    of Elements) Acquifers Capacity (Number of Elements) U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 49 2000's 49 39 38 43 43 44 44 43 43 43 2010's 43 43 44 47 46 - = 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: Number of

  19. U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity

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

    (Number of Elements) Depleted Fields Capacity (Number of Elements) U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 335 2000's 336 351 340 318 320 320 322 326 324 331 2010's 331 329 330 332 333 - = 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. U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity

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

    (Number of Elements) Salt Caverns Capacity (Number of Elements) U.S. Natural Gas Number of Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 29 2000's 28 28 29 30 30 30 31 31 34 35 2010's 37 38 40 40 39 - = 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:

  1. U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (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 3,583,786 3,659,968 2010's 3,733,993 3,769,113 3,720,980 3,839,852 3,844,927 - = 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

  2. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290al2m.xls"

  3. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ar2m.xls"

  5. ,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ca2m.xls"

  6. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290co2m.xls"

  7. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290il2m.xls"

  8. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290in2m.xls"

  9. ,"Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ia2m.xls"

  10. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ks2m.xls"

  11. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ky2m.xls"

  12. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290la2m.xls"

  13. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290md2m.xls"

  14. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mi2m.xls"

  15. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mn2m.xls"

  16. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290ms2m.xls"

  17. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    Capacity (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","n5290mo2m.xls"

  18. Analysis of CO2 Separation from Flue Gas, Pipeline Transportation, and Sequestration in Coal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eric P. Robertson

    2007-09-01

    This report was written to satisfy a milestone of the Enhanced Coal Bed Methane Recovery and CO2 Sequestration task of the Big Sky Carbon Sequestration project. The report begins to assess the costs associated with separating the CO2 from flue gas and then injecting it into an unminable coal seam. The technical challenges and costs associated with CO2 separation from flue gas and transportation of the separated CO2 from the point source to an appropriate sequestration target was analyzed. The report includes the selection of a specific coal-fired power plant for the application of CO2 separation technology. An appropriate CO2 separation technology was identified from existing commercial technologies. The report also includes a process design for the chosen technology tailored to the selected power plant that used to obtain accurate costs of separating the CO2 from the flue gas. In addition, an analysis of the costs for compression and transportation of the CO2 from the point-source to an appropriate coal bed sequestration site was included in the report.

  19. Natural Gas Weekly Update

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

    more from the system than they nominate. Other pipeline companies, such as CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company and Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Corporation, both...

  20. Natural Gas Weekly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    that had been in place since February 1. Other pipeline companies, such as CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company and Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Corporation, both...

  1. Feasibility study of Northeast Thailand Gas Pipeline Project. Final report. Part 2. Compressed natural gas. Export trade information

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-09-01

    The volume is the second part of a three part study submitted to the Petroleum Authority of Thailand. Part II analyzes the potential use of compressed natural gas (CNG) as a transportation fuel for high mileage vehicles traveling the highway system of Thailand. The study provides an initial estimate of buses and trucks that are potential candidates for converting to natural gas vehicles (NGV). CNG technology is briefly reviewed. The types of refueling stations that may be sited along the highway are discussed. The estimated capital investments and typical layouts are presented. The report also discusses the issues involved in implementing a CNG program in Thailand, such as safety, user acceptability and the government's role.

  2. U.S. interstate pipelines ran more efficiently in 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    True, W.R.

    1995-11-27

    Regulated US interstate pipelines began 1995 under the momentum of impressive efficiency improvements in 1994. Annual reports filed with the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) show that both natural-gas and petroleum liquids pipeline companies increased their net incomes last year despite declining operating revenues. This article discusses trends in the pipeline industry and gives data on the following: pipeline revenues, incomes--1994; current pipeline costs; pipeline costs--estimated vs. actual; current compressor construction costs; compressor costs--estimated vs. actual; US interstate mileage; investment in liquids pipelines; 10-years of land construction costs; top 10 interstate liquids pipelines; top 10 interstate gas pipelines; liquids pipeline companies; and gas pipeline companies.

  3. Injections of Natural Gas into Storage (Annual Supply & Disposition)

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

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  4. U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Acquifers Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,263,106 2000's 1,263,711 1,195,141 1,234,007 1,237,132 1,238,158 1,350,689 1,356,323 1,347,516 1,351,832 1,340,633 2010's 1,233,017 1,231,897 1,237,269 1,443,769 1,445,031 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  5. U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Depleted Fields Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity (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 6,780,700 2000's 6,788,130 6,768,622 6,747,108 6,733,983 6,776,894 6,667,222 6,711,656 6,801,291 6,805,490 6,917,547 2010's 7,074,773 7,104,948 7,038,245 7,074,916 7,085,773 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  6. U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Salt Caverns Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Salt Caverns Capacity (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 185,451 2000's 189,043 218,483 225,958 234,601 239,990 250,532 261,988 253,410 341,213 397,560 2010's 456,009 512,279 715,821 654,266 702,548 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  7. OMAE 1993: Proceedings. Volume 5: Pipeline technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yoon, M.; Murray, A.; Thygesen, J.

    1993-01-01

    This volume of conference proceedings is volume five of a five volume series dealing with offshore and arctic pipeline, marine riser, platforms, and ship design and engineering. This volume is a result of increased use of pipeline transportation for oil, gas, and liquid products and the resultant need for lower design and operating costs. Papers in this conference cover topics on environmental considerations, pipeline automation, computer simulation techniques, materials testing, corrosion protection, permafrost problems, pipeline integrity, geotechnical concerns, and offshore engineering problems.

  8. Natural Gas Weekly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    34 pipelines. Over this period, capacity release volumes receiving prices over the price cap were 2 percent of total capacity release volumes. Capacity release volumes and prices...

  9. Pipeline Safety Research, Development and Technology

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Pipeline Safety Research, Development and Technology Natural Gas Infrastructure R&D and Methane Emissions Mitigation Workshop Nov 2014 U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Thank You! * We appreciate the opportunity to share! * Much to share about DOT natural gas infrastructure R&D * Many facets to the fugitive methane issue * DOT/DOE - We would like to restart the

  10. US pipelines report mixed results for 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    True, W.R.

    1994-11-21

    US natural gas pipelines started 1994 in generally better conditions than a year earlier. These companies' operational and financial results for 1993 indicate modest but continuing improvement. Petroleum liquids pipelines, on the other hand, suffered reduced revenues and incomes last: increased deliveries and trunkline movement of liquid petroleum products failed fully to offset fewer barrels of crude oil moving through the companies' pipeline systems. Revenues, incomes, mileage operated, and other data are tracked in Oil and Gas Journal's exclusive Economics Report. Additionally, this report contains extensive data on actual costs of pipeline construction compared with what companies expected to spend at the time of projects' approvals. The paper also discusses the continuing shift of natural gas pipelines as merchants to role of transporter; what was spent; the US interstate network; pipeline mileage; deliveries; the top 10 companies; construction activities; cost trends; and cost components.

  11. Changes in the Pipeline Transportation Market

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1999-01-01

    This analysis assesses the amount of capacity that may be turned back to pipeline companies, based on shippers' actions over the past several years and the profile of contracts in place as of July 1, 1998. It also examines changes in the characteristics of contracts between shippers and pipeline companies.

  12. Algeria LPG pipeline is build by Bechtel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Horner, C.

    1984-08-01

    The construction of the 313 mile long, 24 in. LPG pipeline from Hassi R'Mel to Arzew, Algeria is described. The pipeline was designed to deliver 6 million tons of LPG annually using one pumping station. Eventually an additional pumping station will be added to raise the system capacity to 9 million tons annually.

  13. Hydrogen Permeability and Integrity of Hydrogen Delivery Pipelines

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Project Objectives: To gain basic understanding of hydrogen permeation behavior and its impact on hydrogen embrittlement of pipeline steels under high gaseous pressures relevant to hydrogen gas transmission pipeline

  14. U.S. pipelines continue gains into 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    True, W.R.

    1996-11-25

    US interstate natural gas, crude oil, and petroleum product pipelines turned in health performances for 1995, continuing impressive efficiency improvements that were evident in 1994. Revenues and incomes earned from operations along with volumes moved are among data annually submitted to FERC and tracked by Oil and Gas Journal year to year in this exclusive report. This year`s report expands coverage of plans for new construction and completed-cost figures by including Canadian activity for the same 12-month period: July 1, 1995, to June 30, 1996. The paper includes data on the following: pipeline revenues, incomes--1995; North American pipeline costs, estimated; US pipeline costs, estimated vs. actual; North American compressor-construction costs; US compressor costs, estimated vs. actual; Canadian pipeline construction costs, actual; US interstate mileage; investment in liquids pipelines; 10 years of land construction costs; to 10 interstate liquids lines; top 10 interstate gas lines; liquids pipeline companies; and gas pipeline companies.

  15. Pipeline Expansions

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    1999-01-01

    This appendix examines the nature and type of proposed pipeline projects announced or approved for construction during the next several years in the United States. It also includes those projects in Canada and Mexico that tie-in with the U.S. markets or projects.

  16. Hydrogen Pipeline Working Group Workshop: Code for Hydrogen Pipelines...

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

    Working Group Workshop: Code for Hydrogen Pipelines Hydrogen Pipeline Working Group Workshop: Code for Hydrogen Pipelines Code for Hydrogen Piping and Pipelines. B31 Hydrogen...

  17. Natural Gas Weekly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    of the Alaska gas pipeline. The opening of ANWR might reduce the gas resource risk of building an Alaska gas pipeline, as the area has an estimated 3.6 trillion cubic...

  18. Weather, construction inflation could squeeze North American pipelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    True, W.R.

    1998-08-31

    Major North American interstate and interprovincial pipeline companies appear headed for a squeeze near-term: 1997 earnings from operations were down for the second straight year even as the companies expected new construction to begin this year or later to cost more. The effects of warmer-than-normal weather during 1997 in North America made a showing in annual reports filed by US regulated interstate oil and gas pipeline companies with the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This paper contains data on the following: pipeline revenues, incomes--1997; North American pipeline costs; North American pipeline costs (estimated vs. actual); North American compressor construction costs; US compressor costs (estimated vs. actual); US interstate mileage; investment in liquids pipelines; 10 years of land construction costs; top 10 interstate liquids lines; top 10 interstate gas lines; liquids pipeline companies; and gas pipeline companies.

  19. Instrumented Pipeline Initiative

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas Piro; Michael Ream

    2010-07-31

    This report summarizes technical progress achieved during the cooperative agreement between Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) and U.S. Department of Energy to address the need for a for low-cost monitoring and inspection sensor system as identified in the Department of Energy (DOE) National Gas Infrastructure Research & Development (R&D) Delivery Reliability Program Roadmap.. The Instrumented Pipeline Initiative (IPI) achieved the objective by researching technologies for the monitoring of pipeline delivery integrity, through a ubiquitous network of sensors and controllers to detect and diagnose incipient defects, leaks, and failures. This report is organized by tasks as detailed in the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO). The sections all state the objective and approach before detailing results of work.

  20. Assessment of Factors Influencing Effective CO{sub 2} Storage Capacity and Injectivity in Eastern Gas Shales

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Godec, Michael

    2013-06-30

    Building upon advances in technology, production of natural gas from organic-rich shales is rapidly developing as a major hydrocarbon supply option in North America and around the world. The same technology advances that have facilitated this revolution - dense well spacing, horizontal drilling, and hydraulic fracturing - may help to facilitate enhanced gas recovery (EGR) and carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) storage in these formations. The potential storage of CO {sub 2} in shales is attracting increasing interest, especially in Appalachian Basin states that have extensive shale deposits, but limited CO{sub 2} storage capacity in conventional reservoirs. The goal of this cooperative research project was to build upon previous and on-going work to assess key factors that could influence effective EGR, CO{sub 2} storage capacity, and injectivity in selected Eastern gas shales, including the Devonian Marcellus Shale, the Devonian Ohio Shale, the Ordovician Utica and Point Pleasant shale and equivalent formations, and the late Devonian-age Antrim Shale. The project had the following objectives: (1) Analyze and synthesize geologic information and reservoir data through collaboration with selected State geological surveys, universities, and oil and gas operators; (2) improve reservoir models to perform reservoir simulations to better understand the shale characteristics that impact EGR, storage capacity and CO{sub 2} injectivity in the targeted shales; (3) Analyze results of a targeted, highly monitored, small-scale CO{sub 2} injection test and incorporate into ongoing characterization and simulation work; (4) Test and model a smart particle early warning concept that can potentially be used to inject water with uniquely labeled particles before the start of CO{sub 2} injection; (5) Identify and evaluate potential constraints to economic CO{sub 2} storage in gas shales, and propose development approaches that overcome these constraints; and (6) Complete new basin-level characterizations for the CO{sub 2} storage capacity and injectivity potential of the targeted eastern shales. In total, these Eastern gas shales cover an area of over 116 million acres, may contain an estimated 6,000 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of gas in place, and have a maximum theoretical storage capacity of over 600 million metric tons. Not all of this gas in-place will be recoverable, and economics will further limit how much will be economic to produce using EGR techniques with CO{sub 2} injection. Reservoir models were developed and simulations were conducted to characterize the potential for both CO{sub 2} storage and EGR for the target gas shale formations. Based on that, engineering costing and cash flow analyses were used to estimate economic potential based on future natural gas prices and possible financial incentives. The objective was to assume that EGR and CO{sub 2} storage activities would commence consistent with the historical development practices. Alternative CO{sub 2} injection/EGR scenarios were considered and compared to well production without CO{sub 2} injection. These simulations were conducted for specific, defined model areas in each shale gas play. The resulting outputs were estimated recovery per typical well (per 80 acres), and the estimated CO{sub 2} that would be injected and remain in the reservoir (i.e., not produced), and thus ultimately assumed to be stored. The application of this approach aggregated to the entire area of the four shale gas plays concluded that they contain nearly 1,300 Tcf of both primary production and EGR potential, of which an estimated 460 Tcf could be economic to produce with reasonable gas prices and/or modest incentives. This could facilitate the storage of nearly 50 Gt of CO{sub 2} in the Marcellus, Utica, Antrim, and Devonian Ohio shales.

  1. EIS-0517: Port Arthur Liquefaction Project and Port Arthur Pipeline...

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

    natural gas marine terminal along the Sabine-Neches ship channel (Jefferson County, Texas), about 35 miles of new pipeline, and associated facilities. DOE, Office of Fossil...

  2. DOE Launches Natural Gas Infrastructure R&D Program Enhancing Pipeline and Distribution System Operational Efficiency, Reducing Methane Emissions

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Following the White House and the Department of Energy Capstone Methane Stakeholder Roundtable on July 29th, DOE announced a series of actions, partnerships, and stakeholder commitments to help modernize the nation’s natural gas transmission and distribution systems and reduce methane emissions. Through common-sense standards, smart investments, and innovative research, DOE seeks to advance the state of the art in natural gas system performance. DOE’s effort is part of the larger Administration’s Climate Action Plan Interagency Strategy to Reduce Methane Emissions.

  3. Natural Gas Weekly Update, Printer-Friendly Version

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

    that had been in place since February 1. Other pipeline companies, such as CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company and Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Corporation, both...

  4. Natural Gas Weekly Update, Printer-Friendly Version

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

    more from the system than they nominate. Other pipeline companies, such as CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company and Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Corporation, both...

  5. Fusion, mechanical joining methods pros, cons--Part 2. [Natural gas pipelines use of mechanical and fusion joints

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gunther, K.M. )

    1993-10-01

    Two basic techniques accepted by gas distribution utility companies for joining polyethylene pipe underground are fusion methods and mechanical joining. Washington Gas Light Co., uses the fusion methods for the most part and uses mechanical joints for repair and final tie-ins where fusion methods are impractical or impossible to use. Fusion methods used by gas industry users of plastic pipe are: butt fusion; socket fusion; saddle fusion; electrofusion. Mechanical pipe joining techniques or procedures include: factory made mechanical joints such as meter risers and transition fittings; hydraulic compression couplings; bolted and screwed compression couplings; stab type compression couplings; interior seal couplings. Every joining method has strengths, weaknesses, pitfalls and ways they can fail in service. The key is making the best selection based on such factors as location, temperature, conditions, available equipment, personnel training level and cost. No one method will do it all or every company would be using that particular method. Part 2 focuses on strengths, weaknesses, pitfalls and failure possibilities of the five mechanical techniques.

  6. INTERNAL REPAIR OF PIPELINES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bill Bruce; Nancy Porter; George Ritter; Matt Boring; Mark Lozev; Ian Harris; Bill Mohr; Dennis Harwig; Robin Gordon; Chris Neary; Mike Sullivan

    2005-07-20

    The two broad categories of fiber-reinforced composite liner repair and deposited weld metal repair technologies were reviewed and evaluated for potential application for internal repair of gas transmission pipelines. Both are used to some extent for other applications and could be further developed for internal, local, structural repair of gas transmission pipelines. Principal conclusions from a survey of natural gas transmission industry pipeline operators can be summarized in terms of the following performance requirements for internal repair: (1) Use of internal repair is most attractive for river crossings, under other bodies of water, in difficult soil conditions, under highways, under congested intersections, and under railway crossings. (2) Internal pipe repair offers a strong potential advantage to the high cost of horizontal direct drilling when a new bore must be created to solve a leak or other problem. (3) Typical travel distances can be divided into three distinct groups: up to 305 m (1,000 ft.); between 305 m and 610 m (1,000 ft. and 2,000 ft.); and beyond 914 m (3,000 ft.). All three groups require pig-based systems. A despooled umbilical system would suffice for the first two groups which represents 81% of survey respondents. The third group would require an onboard self-contained power unit for propulsion and welding/liner repair energy needs. (4) The most common size range for 80% to 90% of operators surveyed is 508 mm (20 in.) to 762 mm (30 in.), with 95% using 558.8 mm (22 in.) pipe. Evaluation trials were conducted on pipe sections with simulated corrosion damage repaired with glass fiber-reinforced composite liners, carbon fiber-reinforced composite liners, and weld deposition. Additional un-repaired pipe sections were evaluated in the virgin condition and with simulated damage. Hydrostatic failure pressures for pipe sections repaired with glass fiber-reinforced composite liner were only marginally greater than that of pipe sections without liners, indicating that this type of liner is only marginally effective at restoring the pressure containing capabilities of pipelines. Failure pressures for larger diameter pipe repaired with a semi-circular patch of carbon fiber-reinforced composite lines were also marginally greater than that of a pipe section with un-repaired simulated damage without a liner. These results indicate that fiber reinforced composite liners have the potential to increase the burst pressure of pipe sections with external damage Carbon fiber based liners are viewed as more promising than glass fiber based liners because of the potential for more closely matching the mechanical properties of steel. Pipe repaired with weld deposition failed at pressures lower than that of un-repaired pipe in both the virgin and damaged conditions, indicating that this repair technology is less effective at restoring the pressure containing capability of pipe than a carbon fiber-reinforced liner repair. Physical testing indicates that carbon fiber-reinforced liner repair is the most promising technology evaluated to-date. In lieu of a field installation on an abandoned pipeline, a preliminary nondestructive testing protocol is being developed to determine the success or failure of the fiber-reinforced liner pipeline repairs. Optimization and validation activities for carbon-fiber repair methods are ongoing.

  7. Task 4 - natural gas storage - end user interaction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-02-18

    New opportunities have been created for underground gas storage as a result of recent regulatory developments in the energy industry. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 636 directly changed the economics of gas storage nationwide. Pipelines have been required to {open_quotes}unbundle{close_quotes} their various services so that pipeline users can select only what they need from among the transportation, storage, balancing and the other traditional pipeline services. At the same time, the shift from Modified Fixed Variable (MFV) rate design to Straight Fixed Variable (SFV) rate design has increased the costs of pipeline capacity relative to underground storage and other supply options. Finally, the ability of parties that have contracted for pipeline and storage services to resell their surplus capacities created by Order 636 gives potential gas users more flexibility in assembling combinations of gas delivery services to create reliable gas deliverability. In response to Order 636, the last two years have seen an explosion in proposals for gas storage projects.

  8. Rio Grande pipeline introduces LPG to Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-06-01

    Rio Grande Pipeline, a joint venture between Mid-America Pipeline Co., Amoco Pipeline Co. and Navajo Pipeline Co., has broken new ground in the energy industry as the first LPG pipeline to cross the US-Mexico border. Plans for the project were announced in November 1995 and first deliveries started three months ago on March 21, 1997. The 8-inch, 265-mile pipeline originates near Odessa, TX, where it receives an 85-15 propane-butane mix via a connection to Mid-America Pipeline. From Odessa, product moves west through the Texas desert and crosses the Rio Grande River about 15 miles south of El Paso near Clint, TX and extends 20 miles into Mexico. Capacity of the line is 24,000 bpd and it has been averaging about 22,000 bpd since line-fill. All in all, it sounded like a reasonably feasible, routine project. But perceptions can be deceiving, or at least misleading. In other words, the project can be summarized as follows: one river, two cultures and a world of difference. The official border crossing for pipeline construction took place on Dec. 2, 1996, with a directional drill under the Rio Grande River, but in actuality, the joint venture partners were continually bridging differences in language, laws, customs and norms with Pemex and contracted workers from Mexico.

  9. Lynn Dahlberg, Director of Marketing, Williams Northwest Pipeline LLC

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

    Lynn Dahlberg, Director of Marketing, Williams Northwest Pipeline LLC Quadrennial Energy Review Public Meeting Gas-Electricity Interdependence Denver, CO - July 28, 2014 Coordination Efforts, Regional Issues and Remaining Challenges My name is Lynn Dahlberg and I am here on behalf of Williams. I am director of marketing for Williams' Northwest Pipeline LLC. Northwest Pipeline is a primary artery for the transmission of natural gas to the Pacific Northwest and Intermountain Region. Northwest

  10. North West Shelf pipeline. Part 2 (conclusion). Laying Australia's North West Shelf pipeline

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Seymour, E.V.; Craze, D.J.; Ruinen, W.

    1984-05-14

    Details of the construction of Australia's North West Shelf gas pipeline cover the pipelaying operation, trunkline-to-riser tie-in, posttrenching, backfilling, slugcatcher construction, connection with the shore terminal, and hydrostatic testing.

  11. World pipeline work set for rapid growth

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-08-01

    This paper reports on international pipeline construction which has entered a fast-growth period, accelerated by the new political and economic realities around the world and increasing demand for natural gas, crude oil and refined petroleum products. Many projects are under way or in planning for completion in the mid- to late 1990s in Europe, South America, Asia and the Middle East. Pipeline And Gas Journal's projection calls for construction or other work on 30,700 miles of new natural gas, crude oil and refined products pipelines in the 1992-93 period outside Canada and the U.S. These projects will cost an estimated $30 billion-plus. Natural gas pipelines will comprise most of the mileage, accounting for almost 23,000 miles at an estimated cost of $26.3 billion. Products pipelines, planned or under construction, will add another 5,800 miles at a cost of $2.8 billion. Crude oil pipelines, at a minimum, will total 1,900 new miles at a cost of slightly under $1 billion.

  12. Components in the Pipeline

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gorton, Ian; Wynne, Adam S.; Liu, Yan; Yin, Jian

    2011-02-24

    Scientists commonly describe their data processing systems metaphorically as software pipelines. These pipelines input one or more data sources and apply a sequence of processing steps to transform the data and create useful results. While conceptually simple, pipelines often adopt complex topologies and must meet stringent quality of service requirements that place stress on the software infrastructure used to construct the pipeline. In this paper we describe the MeDICi Integration Framework, which is a component-based framework for constructing complex software pipelines. The framework supports composing pipelines from distributed heterogeneous software components and provides mechanisms for controlling qualities of service to meet demanding performance, reliability and communication requirements.

  13. Implications of Disruption to Natural Gas Deliverability

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Science Applications International

    2008-09-30

    This project was sponsored by Department of Energy/Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability and managed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory. The primary purpose of the project was to analyze the capability of the natural gas production, transmission and supply systems to continue to provide service in the event of a major disruption in capacity of one or more natural gas transmission pipelines. The project was specifically designed to detail the ability of natural gas market to absorb facility losses and efficiently reallocate gas supplies during a significant pipeline capacity disruption in terms that allowed federal and state agencies and interests to develop effective policies and action plans to prioritize natural gas deliveries from a regional and national perspective. The analyses for each regional study were based on four primary considerations: (1) operating conditions (pipeline capacity, storage capacity, local production, power dispatch decision making and end user options); (2) weather; (3) magnitude and location of the disruption; and, (4) normal versus emergency situation. The detailed information contained in the region reports as generated from this project are Unclassified Controlled Information; and as such are subject to disclosure in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. Therefore, this report defines the regions that were analyzed and the basic methodologies and assumptions used to completing the analysis.

  14. U.S., Canada pipeline work shows gain in 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Watts, J.

    1994-01-01

    Pipeline construction activity in the US and Canada is expected to be down slightly during 1994 from 1993 mileage, even though natural gas pipeline work remains steady on both sides of the border. Pipeline and Gas Journal and Pipeline and Utilities Construction estimate that a total of 3.638 miles of new gas, crude oil and refined products pipeline will be installed during 1994 in the US, down from a total of 4.278 miles built in 1993. Canadian 1994 work remains essentially unchanged in 1994, with 1,094 new miles compared to 1,091 miles in 1993. This paper reviews the proposed construction by region and company. It includes information on mileage, type pipeline, and estimated completion date.

  15. Seadrift/UCAR pipelines achieve ISO registration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arrieta, J.R.; Byrom, J.A.; Gasko, H.M. )

    1992-10-01

    Proper meter station design using gas orifice meters must include consideration of a number of factors to obtain the best accuracy available. This paper reports that Union Carbide's Seadrift/UCAR Pipelines has become the world's first cross-country pipelines to comply with the International Standards Organization's quality criteria for transportation and distribution of ethylene. Carbide's organization in North America and Europe, with 22 of the corporation's businesses having the internationally accepted quality system accredited by a third-party registrar.

  16. EIS-0152: Iroquois/Tennessee Phase I Pipeline Project

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission prepared this statement to asses the environmental impacts of constructing and operating an interstate natural gas pipeline and associated infrastructure to transport gas from Canada and domestic sources to the New England Market, as proposed by the Iroquois Gas Transmission System and the Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company. The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy was a cooperating agency during statement development and adopted the statement on 9/1/1990.

  17. Keystone XL pipeline update

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Questions have been raised recently about the Keystone XL pipeline project, so we wanted to make some points clear.

  18. INTERNAL REPAIR OF PIPELINES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robin Gordon; Bill Bruce; Ian Harris; Dennis Harwig; Nancy Porter; Mike Sullivan; Chris Neary

    2004-04-12

    The two broad categories of deposited weld metal repair and fiber-reinforced composite liner repair technologies were reviewed for potential application for internal repair of gas transmission pipelines. Both are used to some extent for other applications and could be further developed for internal, local, structural repair of gas transmission pipelines. Preliminary test programs were developed for both deposited weld metal repair and for fiber-reinforced composite liner repair. Evaluation trials have been conducted using a modified fiber-reinforced composite liner provided by RolaTube and pipe sections without liners. All pipe section specimens failed in areas of simulated damage. Pipe sections containing fiber-reinforced composite liners failed at pressures marginally greater than the pipe sections without liners. The next step is to evaluate a liner material with a modulus of elasticity approximately 95% of the modulus of elasticity for steel. Preliminary welding parameters were developed for deposited weld metal repair in preparation of the receipt of Pacific Gas & Electric's internal pipeline welding repair system (that was designed specifically for 559 mm (22 in.) diameter pipe) and the receipt of 559 mm (22 in.) pipe sections from Panhandle Eastern. The next steps are to transfer welding parameters to the PG&E system and to pressure test repaired pipe sections to failure. A survey of pipeline operators was conducted to better understand the needs and performance requirements of the natural gas transmission industry regarding internal repair. Completed surveys contained the following principal conclusions: (1) Use of internal weld repair is most attractive for river crossings, under other bodies of water, in difficult soil conditions, under highways, under congested intersections, and under railway crossings. (2) Internal pipe repair offers a strong potential advantage to the high cost of horizontal direct drilling (HDD) when a new bore must be created to solve a leak or other problem. (3) Typical travel distances can be divided into three distinct groups: up to 305 m (1,000 ft.); between 305 m and 610 m (1,000 ft. and 2,000 ft.); and beyond 914 m (3,000 ft.). All three groups require pig-based systems. A despooled umbilical system would suffice for the first two groups which represents 81% of survey respondents. The third group would require an onboard self-contained power unit for propulsion and welding/liner repair energy needs. (4) Pipe diameter sizes range from 50.8 mm (2 in.) through 1,219.2 mm (48 in.). The most common size range for 80% to 90% of operators surveyed is 508 mm to 762 mm (20 in. to 30 in.), with 95% using 558.8 mm (22 in.) pipe. An evaluation of potential repair methods clearly indicates that the project should continue to focus on the development of a repair process involving the use of GMAW welding and on the development of a repair process involving the use of fiber-reinforced composite liners.

  19. Natural Gas Weekly Update

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

    prices using spot prices from producing areas, plus an allowance for interstate natural gas pipeline and local distribution company charges to transport the gas to market. Such a...

  20. Natural Gas Infrastructure Implications of Increased Demand from the Electric Sector

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This report examines the potential infrastructure needs of the U.S. interstate natural gas pipeline transmission system across a range of future natural gas demand scenarios that drive increased electric power sector natural gas use. To perform this analysis, the U.S. Department of Energy commissioned Deloitte MarketPoint to examine scenarios in its North American Integrated Model (NAIM), which simultaneously models the electric power and the natural gas sectors. This study concludes that, under scenarios in which natural gas demand from the electric power sector increases, the incremental increase in interstate natural gas pipeline expansion is modest, relative to historical capacity additions. Similarly, capital expenditures on new interstate pipelines in the scenarios considered here are projected to be significantly less than the capital expenditures associated with infrastructure expansion over the last 15 years.

  1. Fiber Reinforced Composite Pipelines

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

    Rawls Savannah River National Laboratory This presentation does not contain proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information Fiber Reinforced Composite Pipelines Hydrogen Transmission and Distribution Workshop February 25, 2014 Fiber Reinforced Piping for H 2 Delivery * Impact: * Composite pipeline technology has the potential to reduce installation costs and improve reliability for hydrogen pipelines. * Fiber Reinforced Piping * The FRP product form consists of an inner

  2. INTERNAL REPAIR OF PIPELINES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robin Gordon; Bill Bruce; Ian Harris; Dennis Harwig; George Ritter; Bill Mohr; Matt Boring; Nancy Porter; Mike Sullivan; Chris Neary

    2004-08-17

    The two broad categories of fiber-reinforced composite liner repair and deposited weld metal repair technologies were reviewed and evaluated for potential application for internal repair of gas transmission pipelines. Both are used to some extent for other applications and could be further developed for internal, local, structural repair of gas transmission pipelines. Principal conclusions from a survey of natural gas transmission industry pipeline operators can be summarized in terms of the following performance requirements for internal repair: (1) Use of internal repair is most attractive for river crossings, under other bodies of water, in difficult soil conditions, under highways, under congested intersections, and under railway. (2) Internal pipe repair offers a strong potential advantage to the high cost of horizontal direct drilling when a new bore must be created to solve a leak or other problem. (3) Typical travel distances can be divided into three distinct groups: up to 305 m (1,000 ft.); between 305 m and 610 m (1,000 ft. and 2,000 ft.); and beyond 914 m (3,000 ft.). All three groups require pig-based systems. A despooled umbilical system would suffice for the first two groups which represents 81% of survey respondents. The third group would require an onboard self-contained power unit for propulsion and welding/liner repair energy needs. (4) The most common size range for 80% to 90% of operators surveyed is 508 mm (20 in.) to 762 mm (30 in.), with 95% using 558.8 mm (22 in.) pipe. Evaluation trials were conducted on pipe sections with simulated corrosion damage repaired with glass fiber-reinforced composite liners, carbon fiber-reinforced composite liners, and weld deposition. Additional un-repaired pipe sections were evaluated in the virgin condition and with simulated damage. Hydrostatic failure pressures for pipe sections repaired with glass fiber-reinforced composite liner were only marginally greater than that of pipe sections without liners, indicating that this type of liner is only marginally effective at restoring the pressure containing capabilities of pipelines. Failure pressures for larger diameter pipe repaired with a semi-circular patch of carbon fiber-reinforced composite lines were also marginally greater than that of a pipe section with un-repaired simulated damage without a liner. These results indicate that fiber reinforced composite liners have the potential to increase the burst pressure of pipe sections with external damage Carbon fiber based liners are viewed as more promising than glass fiber based liners because of the potential for more closely matching the mechanical properties of steel. Pipe repaired with weld deposition failed at pressures lower than that of un-repaired pipe in both the virgin and damaged conditions, indicating that this repair technology is less effective at restoring the pressure containing capability of pipe than a carbon fiber-reinforced liner repair. Physical testing indicates that carbon fiber-reinforced liner repair is the most promising technology evaluated to-date. Development of a comprehensive test plan for this process is recommended for use in the field trial portion of this program.

  3. INTERNAL REPAIR OF PIPELINES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robin Gordon; Bill Bruce; Ian Harris; Dennis Harwig; George Ritter; Bill Mohr; Matt Boring; Nancy Porter; Mike Sullivan; Chris Neary

    2004-12-31

    The two broad categories of fiber-reinforced composite liner repair and deposited weld metal repair technologies were reviewed and evaluated for potential application for internal repair of gas transmission pipelines. Both are used to some extent for other applications and could be further developed for internal, local, structural repair of gas transmission pipelines. Principal conclusions from a survey of natural gas transmission industry pipeline operators can be summarized in terms of the following performance requirements for internal repair: (1) Use of internal repair is most attractive for river crossings, under other bodies of water, in difficult soil conditions, under highways, under congested intersections, and under railway crossings. (2) Internal pipe repair offers a strong potential advantage to the high cost of horizontal direct drilling when a new bore must be created to solve a leak or other problem. (3) Typical travel distances can be divided into three distinct groups: up to 305 m (1,000 ft.); between 305 m and 610 m (1,000 ft. and 2,000 ft.); and beyond 914 m (3,000 ft.). All three groups require pig-based systems. A despooled umbilical system would suffice for the first two groups which represents 81% of survey respondents. The third group would require an onboard self-contained power unit for propulsion and welding/liner repair energy needs. (4) The most common size range for 80% to 90% of operators surveyed is 508 mm (20 in.) to 762 mm (30 in.), with 95% using 558.8 mm (22 in.) pipe. Evaluation trials were conducted on pipe sections with simulated corrosion damage repaired with glass fiber-reinforced composite liners, carbon fiber-reinforced composite liners, and weld deposition. Additional un-repaired pipe sections were evaluated in the virgin condition and with simulated damage. Hydrostatic failure pressures for pipe sections repaired with glass fiber-reinforced composite liner were only marginally greater than that of pipe sections without liners, indicating that this type of liner is only marginally effective at restoring the pressure containing capabilities of pipelines. Failure pressures for larger diameter pipe repaired with a semi-circular patch of carbon fiber-reinforced composite lines were also marginally greater than that of a pipe section with un-repaired simulated damage without a liner. These results indicate that fiber reinforced composite liners have the potential to increase the burst pressure of pipe sections with external damage Carbon fiber based liners are viewed as more promising than glass fiber based liners because of the potential for more closely matching the mechanical properties of steel. Pipe repaired with weld deposition failed at pressures lower than that of un-repaired pipe in both the virgin and damaged conditions, indicating that this repair technology is less effective at restoring the pressure containing capability of pipe than a carbon fiber-reinforced liner repair. Physical testing indicates that carbon fiber-reinforced liner repair is the most promising technology evaluated to-date. The first round of optimization and validation activities for carbon-fiber repairs are complete. Development of a comprehensive test plan for this process is recommended for use in the field trial portion of this program.

  4. Subsea pipeline connection

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Langner, C. G.

    1985-12-17

    A method and apparatus are provided for laying an offshore pipeline or flowline bundle to a deepwater subsea structure. The pipeline or flowline bundle is laid along a prescribed path, preferably U-shape, such that a pullhead at the terminus of the pipeline or flowline bundle falls just short of the subsea structure. A pull-in tool connected to the pipeline or flowline bundle by a short length of pull cable is then landed on and latched to the subsea structure, and the pipeline or flowline bundle is pulled up to the subsea structure by the pull-in tool and pull cable.

  5. Final EIS Keystone Pipeline Project Appendix E Pipeline Restrictive Layer

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    E Pipeline Restrictive Layer Areas Crossings Final EIS Keystone Pipeline Project Appendix F Soil Associations along the Keystone Pipeline Project Route Final EIS Keystone Pipeline Project Appendix F Soil Associations along the Keystone Pipeline Project Route Appendix G Public Water Supply Wells Within One Mile of the Proposed Keystone Pipeline Project Centerline (Note: This appendix is Table 3.5-6, taken directly from the Environmental Report for the Keystone Pipeline Project [TransCanada

  6. Natural Gas Weekly Update, Printer-Friendly Version

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

    34 pipelines. Over this period, capacity release volumes receiving prices over the price cap were 2 percent of total capacity release volumes. Capacity release volumes and prices...

  7. Overview of interstate hydrogen pipeline systems.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gillette, J .L.; Kolpa, R. L

    2008-02-01

    The use of hydrogen in the energy sector of the United States is projected to increase significantly in the future. Current uses are predominantly in the petroleum refining sector, with hydrogen also being used in the manufacture of chemicals and other specialized products. Growth in hydrogen consumption is likely to appear in the refining sector, where greater quantities of hydrogen will be required as the quality of the raw crude decreases, and in the mining and processing of tar sands and other energy resources that are not currently used at a significant level. Furthermore, the use of hydrogen as a transportation fuel has been proposed both by automobile manufacturers and the federal government. Assuming that the use of hydrogen will significantly increase in the future, there would be a corresponding need to transport this material. A variety of production technologies are available for making hydrogen, and there are equally varied raw materials. Potential raw materials include natural gas, coal, nuclear fuel, and renewables such as solar, wind, or wave energy. As these raw materials are not uniformly distributed throughout the United States, it would be necessary to transport either the raw materials or the hydrogen long distances to the appropriate markets. While hydrogen may be transported in a number of possible forms, pipelines currently appear to be the most economical means of moving it in large quantities over great distances. One means of controlling hydrogen pipeline costs is to use common rights-of-way (ROWs) whenever feasible. For that reason, information on hydrogen pipelines is the focus of this document. Many of the features of hydrogen pipelines are similar to those of natural gas pipelines. Furthermore, as hydrogen pipeline networks expand, many of the same construction and operating features of natural gas networks would be replicated. As a result, the description of hydrogen pipelines will be very similar to that of natural gas pipelines. The following discussion will focus on the similarities and differences between the two pipeline networks. Hydrogen production is currently concentrated in refining centers along the Gulf Coast and in the Farm Belt. These locations have ready access to natural gas, which is used in the steam methane reduction process to make bulk hydrogen in this country. Production centers could possibly change to lie along coastlines, rivers, lakes, or rail lines, should nuclear power or coal become a significant energy source for hydrogen production processes. Should electrolysis become a dominant process for hydrogen production, water availability would be an additional factor in the location of production facilities. Once produced, hydrogen must be transported to markets. A key obstacle to making hydrogen fuel widely available is the scale of expansion needed to serve additional markets. Developing a hydrogen transmission and distribution infrastructure would be one of the challenges to be faced if the United States is to move toward a hydrogen economy. Initial uses of hydrogen are likely to involve a variety of transmission and distribution methods. Smaller users would probably use truck transport, with the hydrogen being in either the liquid or gaseous form. Larger users, however, would likely consider using pipelines. This option would require specially constructed pipelines and the associated infrastructure. Pipeline transmission of hydrogen dates back to late 1930s. These pipelines have generally operated at less than 1,000 pounds per square inch (psi), with a good safety record. Estimates of the existing hydrogen transmission system in the United States range from about 450 to 800 miles. Estimates for Europe range from about 700 to 1,100 miles (Mohipour et al. 2004; Amos 1998). These seemingly large ranges result from using differing criteria in determining pipeline distances. For example, some analysts consider only pipelines above a certain diameter as transmission lines. Others count only those pipelines that transport hydrogen from a producer to a customer (e.g., t

  8. Comparing Existing Pipeline Networks with the Potential Scale of Future U.S. CO2 Pipeline Networks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dooley, James J.; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.

    2008-02-29

    There is growing interest regarding the potential size of a future U.S. dedicated CO2 pipeline infrastructure if carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies are commercially deployed on a large scale. In trying to understand the potential scale of a future national CO2 pipeline network, comparisons are often made to the existing pipeline networks used to deliver natural gas and liquid hydrocarbons to markets within the U.S. This paper assesses the potential scale of the CO2 pipeline system needed under two hypothetical climate policies and compares this to the extant U.S. pipeline infrastructures used to deliver CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), and to move natural gas and liquid hydrocarbons from areas of production and importation to markets. The data presented here suggest that the need to increase the size of the existing dedicated CO2 pipeline system should not be seen as a significant obstacle for the commercial deployment of CCS technologies.

  9. World`s developing regions provide spark for pipeline construction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Koen, A.D.; True, W.R.

    1996-02-05

    This paper reviews the proposed construction of oil and gas pipelines which are underway or proposed to be started in 1996. It breaks down the projects by region of the world, type of product to be carried, and diameter of pipeline. It also provides mileage for each category of pipeline. Major projects in each region are more thoroughly discussed giving details on construction expenditures, construction problems, and political issues.

  10. Structural monitoring helps assess deformations in Arctic pipelines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nyman, K.J.; Lara, P.F.

    1986-11-10

    Advanced structural monitoring systems can play an important role in the evaluation of arctic pipeline distortions along the alignment. These systems can influence pipeline design requirements, reduce capital costs, and improve operating reliability. Differential soil movements resulting from terrain instabilities are the main features which threaten a pipeline's structural integrity and affect the design of buried pipeline systems in the Arctic. Economic, aesthetic, and safety concerns make conventional buried construction an optimum design choice for an arctic crude-oil or gas-pipeline transportation system. However, variable frozen and thawed soil conditions underlying the pipeline along a discontinuous permafrost corridor pose a challenge to the design and operation of such systems. Crude-oil pipelines which must operate at elevated temperatures can be installed in unfrozen soils or in permafrost soils where initially frozen segments will exhibit limited settlement under the thawed conditions imposed by pipeline construction and operation. Ice-rich portions of the frozen alignment may have an unacceptable settlement potential for a warm buried pipeline. In contrast, natural-gas pipelines can be operated cold to increase throughput capability and to prevent the problems associated with thawing permafrost.

  11. Natural gas monthly, July 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-07-01

    This document presents information pertaining to the natural gas industry. Data are included on production, consumption, distribution, and pipeline activities.

  12. Bayou pipeline crossing requires helical pilings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-01-01

    This paper discusses a routine inspection by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. which revealed the approximately 100 ft of its 30-in gas pipeline in St. Landry Parish, La., had become suspended. The situation occurred in the West Atchafalaya Floodway after periods of heavy rain produced strong currents that scoured the soil from around and below the pipeline. To protect the pipeline from possible damage from overstressing, Transco awarded a lump-sum contract to Energy Structures Inc., Houston, to design and install pipeline supports. The pipeline supports engineered by ESI used helical-screw pilings instead of conventional driven pilings. The helical piles were manufactured by A.B. Chance Co., Centralia, Mo. Typically, helical pilings consist of steel pipe ranging from 3.5- to 8-in. diameter pipe with one or more helixes welded onto the pipe. Selection of the proper piling cross-section was based on design loads and soil conditions at the project locations. length was determined by the amount of pipeline suspension and on-site soil conditions.

  13. Pipeline Decommissioning Trial AWE Berkshire UK - 13619

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Agnew, Kieran

    2013-07-01

    This Paper details the implementation of a 'Decommissioning Trial' to assess the feasibility of decommissioning the redundant pipeline operated by AWE located in Berkshire UK. The paper also presents the tool box of decommissioning techniques that were developed during the decommissioning trial. Constructed in the 1950's and operated until 2005, AWE used a pipeline for the authorised discharge of treated effluent. Now redundant, the pipeline is under a care and surveillance regime awaiting decommissioning. The pipeline is some 18.5 km in length and extends from AWE site to the River Thames. Along its route the pipeline passes along and under several major roads, railway lines and rivers as well as travelling through woodland, agricultural land and residential areas. Currently under care and surveillance AWE is considering a number of options for decommissioning the pipeline. One option is to remove the pipeline. In order to assist option evaluation and assess the feasibility of removing the pipeline a decommissioning trial was undertaken and sections of the pipeline were removed within the AWE site. The objectives of the decommissioning trial were to: - Demonstrate to stakeholders that the pipeline can be removed safely, securely and cleanly - Develop a 'tool box' of methods that could be deployed to remove the pipeline - Replicate the conditions and environments encountered along the route of the pipeline The onsite trial was also designed to replicate the physical prevailing conditions and constraints encountered along the remainder of its route i.e. working along a narrow corridor, working in close proximity to roads, working in proximity to above ground and underground services (e.g. Gas, Water, Electricity). By undertaking the decommissioning trial AWE have successfully demonstrated the pipeline can be decommissioned in a safe, secure and clean manor and have developed a tool box of decommissioning techniques. The tool box of includes; - Hot tapping - a method of breaching the pipe while maintaining containment to remove residual liquids, - Crimp and shear - remote crimping, cutting and handling of pipe using the excavator - Pipe jacking - a way of removing pipes avoiding excavations and causing minimal disturbance and disruption. The details of the decommissioning trial design, the techniques employed, their application and effectiveness are discussed and evaluated here in. (authors)

  14. Natural Gas Weekly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    capacity according to service priority. Northwest Pipeline also reported that the Jackson Prairie storage facility in Chehalis, Washington will upgrade its control system...

  15. Natural Gas Weekly Update

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    operations. For example, it can test the thickness and roundness; and detect leaks, corrosion, and many other defects along the interior of a pipeline. Available capacity at the...

  16. Model documentation: Natural gas transmission and distribution model of the National Energy Modeling System. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-02-17

    The Natural Gas Transmission and Distribution Model (NGTDM) is the component of the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) that is used to represent the domestic natural gas transmission and distribution system. NEMS was developed in the Office of integrated Analysis and Forecasting of the Energy information Administration (EIA). NEMS is the third in a series of computer-based, midterm energy modeling systems used since 1974 by the EIA and its predecessor, the Federal Energy Administration, to analyze domestic energy-economy markets and develop projections. The NGTDM is the model within the NEMS that represents the transmission, distribution, and pricing of natural gas. The model also includes representations of the end-use demand for natural gas, the production of domestic natural gas, and the availability of natural gas traded on the international market based on information received from other NEMS models. The NGTDM determines the flow of natural gas in an aggregate, domestic pipeline network, connecting domestic and foreign supply regions with 12 demand regions. The methodology employed allows the analysis of impacts of regional capacity constraints in the interstate natural gas pipeline network and the identification of pipeline capacity expansion requirements. There is an explicit representation of core and noncore markets for natural gas transmission and distribution services, and the key components of pipeline tariffs are represented in a pricing algorithm. Natural gas pricing and flow patterns are derived by obtaining a market equilibrium across the three main elements of the natural gas market: the supply element, the demand element, and the transmission and distribution network that links them. The NGTDM consists of four modules: the Annual Flow Module, the Capacity F-expansion Module, the Pipeline Tariff Module, and the Distributor Tariff Module. A model abstract is provided in Appendix A.

  17. Total Crude by Pipeline

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

    Product: Total Crude by All Transport Methods Domestic Crude by All Transport Methods Foreign Crude by All Transport Methods Total Crude by Pipeline Domestic Crude by Pipeline Foreign Crude by Pipeline Total Crude by Tanker Domestic Crude by Tanker Foreign Crude by Tanker Total Crude by Barge Domestic Crude by Barge Foreign Crude by Barge Total Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Domestic Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Foreign Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Total Crude by Trucks Domestic Crude by Trucks Foreign

  18. Total Working Gas Capacity

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

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 4,327,844 4,410,224 4,483,650 4,576,356 4,748,636 4,785,669 2008-2014 Alaska 67,915 67,915 2013-2014 Alabama 20,900 25,150 27,350 27,350 27,350 33,150 2008-2014 Arkansas 13,898 13,898 12,036 12,178 12,178 12,178 2008-2014 California 296,096 311,096 335,396 349,296 374,296 374,296 2008-2014

  19. Cascading of Fluctuations in Interdependent Energy Infrastructures. Gas-Grid Coupling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chertkov, Michael; Lebedev, Vladimir; Backhaus, Scott N.

    2014-09-05

    The revolution of hydraulic fracturing has dramatically increased the supply and lowered the cost of natural gas in the United States driving an expansion of natural gas-fired generation capacity in many electrical grids. Unrelated to the natural gas expansion, lower capital costs and renewable portfolio standards are driving an expansion of intermittent renewable generation capacity such as wind and photovoltaic generation. These two changes may potentially combine to create new threats to the reliability of these interdependent energy infrastructures. Natural gas-fired generators are often used to balance the fluctuating output of wind generation. However, the time-varying output of these generators results in time-varying natural gas burn rates that impact the pressure in interstate transmission pipelines. Fluctuating pressure impacts the reliability of natural gas deliveries to those same generators and the safety of pipeline operations. We adopt a partial differential equation model of natural gas pipelines and use this model to explore the effect of intermittent wind generation on the fluctuations of pressure in natural gas pipelines. The mean square pressure fluctuations are found to grow linearly in time with points of maximum deviation occurring at the locations of flow reversals.

  20. Should we transport coal, gas, or electricity: cost, efficiency, and environmental implications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Joule A. Bergerson; Lester B. Lave

    2005-08-15

    The authors examine the life cycle costs, environmental discharges, and deaths of moving coal via rail, coal to synthetic natural gas via pipeline, and electricity via wire from the Powder River Basin (PRB) in Wyoming to Texas. Which method has least social cost depends on how much additional investment in rail line, transmission, or pipeline infrastructure is required, as well as how much and how far energy is transported. If the existing rail lines have unused capacity, coal by rail is the cheapest method (up to 200 miles of additional track could be added). If no infrastructure exists, greater distances and larger amounts of energy favor coal by rail and gasified coal by pipeline over electricity transmission. For 1,000 miles and 9 gigawatts of power, a gas pipeline is cheapest, has less environmental discharges, uses less land, and is least obtrusive. 28 refs., 4 figs., 3 tabs.