National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for generator gas consumption

  1. ,"Total Natural Gas Consumption

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

    Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet)",,,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"Total ","Space Heating","Water Heating","Cook- ing","Other","Total ","Space...

  2. ,"Natural Gas Consumption",,,"Natural Gas Expenditures"

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

    Census Division, 1999" ,"Natural Gas Consumption",,,"Natural Gas Expenditures" ,"per Building (thousand cubic feet)","per Square Foot (cubic feet)","per Worker (thousand cubic...

  3. ,"Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  4. ,"Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  5. ,"Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  6. ,"Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  7. ,"Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  8. ,"Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  9. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release...

  10. ,"New York Natural Gas Residential Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Residential Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","92015" ,"Release...

  11. Table 3a. Total Natural Gas Consumption per Effective Occupied...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3a. Natural Gas Consumption per Sq Ft Table 3a. Total Natural Gas Consumption per Effective Occupied Square Foot, 1992 Building Characteristics All Buildings Using Natural Gas...

  12. Table 11.5a Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Total (All Sectors), 1989-2010 (Sum of Tables 11.5b and 11.5c; Metric Tons of Gas)

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

    a Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Total (All Sectors), 1989-2010 (Sum of Tables 11.5b and 11.5c; Metric Tons of Gas) Year Carbon Dioxide 1 Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Geo- thermal 5 Non- Biomass Waste 6 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total 1989 1,573,566,415 218,383,703 145,398,976 363,247 5,590,014 1,943,302,355 14,468,564 1,059 984,406

  13. Table 11.5b Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Electric Power Sector, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas)

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

    b Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Electric Power Sector, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas) Year Carbon Dioxide 1 Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Geo- thermal 5 Non- Biomass Waste 6 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total 1989 1,520,229,870 169,653,294 133,545,718 363,247 4,365,768 1,828,157,897 13,815,263 832 809,873 6,874

  14. Table 11.5c Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas)

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

    c Emissions From Energy Consumption for Electricity Generation and Useful Thermal Output: Commercial and Industrial Sectors, 1989-2010 (Subset of Table 11.5a; Metric Tons of Gas) Year Carbon Dioxide 1 Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Geo- thermal 5 Non- Biomass Waste 6 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Coal 2 Natural Gas 3 Petroleum 4 Other 7 Total Commercial Sector 8<//td> 1989 2,319,630 1,542,083 637,423 [ –] 803,754 5,302,890 37,398 4

  15. Fact #749: October 15, 2012 Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption...

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

    9: October 15, 2012 Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption for Transportation by State, 2010 Fact 749: October 15, 2012 Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption for Transportation by...

  16. Federal Offshore -- Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption...

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

    -- Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore -- Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  17. Displacing Natural Gas Consumption and Lowering Emissions

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

    Combustion System for Refinery and Chemical Plant Process Heaters ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Displacing Natural Gas Consumption and Lowering Emissions By enabling process heaters to utilize opportunity gaseous fuels with a fuel-flexible combustion system, this technol- ogy lowers carbon and nitrogen oxide (NO x ) emissions and reduces energy costs for industry. Introduction The refning and chemical sectors account for more than 40% of total industrial natural gas use. Prior to the completion

  18. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Residential Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Gas Residential Consumption (MMcf)" 32523,6946 32554,5655 32582,6202 32613,3723 32643,1899 32674,1020 32704,744 32735,695 32766,745 32796,1338 32827,2823 32857,6866 32888,8535...

  19. ,"Total Natural Gas Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,,,"Natural...

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

    Gas Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (thousand Btusquare foot)" ,"Total ","Space Heating","Water Heating","Cook- ing","Other","Total ","Space...

  20. Reducing Light Duty Vehicle Fuel Consumption and Greenhouse Gas...

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

    and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Combined Potential of Hybrid Technology and Behavioral Adaptation Title Reducing Light Duty Vehicle Fuel Consumption and Greenhouse Gas...

  1. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal...

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

    Buildings Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings Document details Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy...

  2. Reducing gas generators and methods for generating a reducing gas

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Scotto, Mark Vincent; Perna, Mark Anthony

    2015-11-03

    One embodiment of the present invention is a unique reducing gas generator. Another embodiment is a unique method for generating a reducing gas. Other embodiments include apparatuses, systems, devices, hardware, methods, and combinations for generating reducing gas. Further embodiments, forms, features, aspects, benefits, and advantages of the present application will become apparent from the description and figures provided herewith.

  3. Trends in U.S. Residential Natural Gas Consumption

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2010-01-01

    This report presents an analysis of residential natural gas consumption trends in the United States through 2009 and analyzes consumption trends for the United States as a whole (1990 through 2009) and for each Census division (1998 through 2009).

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

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

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

  6. Texas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  11. New York Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million...

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

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

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  13. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  14. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  15. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1998 ,"Release...

  16. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","930...

  17. South Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

  18. A structural analysis of natural gas consumption by income class from 1987 to 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poyer, D.A.

    1996-12-01

    This study had two major objectives: (1) assess and compare changes in natural gas consumption between 1987 and 1993 by income group and (2) assess the potential influence of energy policy on observed changes in natural gas consumption over time and across income groups. This analysis used U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) data files and involved both the generation of simple descriptive statistics and the use of multivariate regression analysis. The consumption of natural gas by the groups was studied over a six-year period. The results showed that: (1) natural gas use was substantially higher for the highest income group than for the two lower income groups and (2) natural gas consumption declined for the lowest and middle income quintiles and increased for the highest income quintile between 1987 and 1990; between 1990 and 1993, consumption increased for the lowest and middle income quintile, but remained relatively constant for the highest income quintile. The relative importance of the structural and variable factors in explaining consumption changes between survey periods varies by income group. The analysis provides two major energy policy implications: (1) natural gas intensity has been the highest for the lowest income group, indicating that this group is more vulnerable to sudden changes in demand-indicator variables, in particular weather-related variables, than increase natural gas consumption, and (2) the fall in natural gas intensity between 1987 and 1993 may indicate that energy policy has had some impact on reducing natural gas consumption. 11 refs., 4 figs., 16 tabs.

  19. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal

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

    Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings | Department of Energy Buildings Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings Document details Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings in a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. File fossilfuel.docx More Documents & Publications Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption

  20. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal...

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

    Buildings OIRA Comparison Document Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings OIRA Comparison Document...

  1. EIA - Analysis of Natural Gas Consumption

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

    natural gas industry restructuring in each state, focusing on the residential customer class. (Status by State as of December 2009) 2009 Revisions in Natural Gas Monthly...

  2. Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without...

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

    Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman and Secretary of Agriculture Edward T. Schafer sent a letter on June ...

  3. Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal

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

    Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings OIRA Comparison Document | Department of Energy Buildings OIRA Comparison Document Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings OIRA Comparison Document Document details the Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings in an OIRA Comparison Document. File fossilfuel_compare2014.docx More

  4. Natural Gas Consumption and Prices Short-Term Energy Outlook

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Natural Gas Consumption and Prices Short-Term Energy Outlook June 2015 Independent Statistics & Analysis www.eia.gov U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Consumption and Prices - Short-Term Energy Outlook Model i This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of

  5. Missouri Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

  6. Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 53 30 21 16 13 11 9 9 8 2000's 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 2010's 4 3 4 3 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

  7. Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 6 3 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 148 145 150 142 128 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption

  8. Maryland Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  14. Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 7 7 6 5 6 5 35 1990's 71 45 41 49 61 57 58 51 46 35 2000's 36 40 58 18 25 23 23 20 20 17 2010's 19 17 12 4 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  15. Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 21 27 33 2000's 37 46 46 56 63 9 6 5 4 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

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

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

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

  17. Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 34 35 30 19 31 21 13 1990's 0 14 9 0 3 2 3 7 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Plant Fuel

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 21 27 33 2000's 37 46 46 56 63 9 6 5 4 1 2010's 1 1 1 1 1 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to

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

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

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

  3. Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012...

  4. Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 982 966 7,077 4,709 6,270 6,646 7,646 1990's 637 188 268 352 467 468 451 508 405 405 2000's 441 653 890 504 490 433 509 404 470 489 2010's 529 423 622 797 871 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  5. Illinois Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 29 47 39 54 47 38 35 1990's 22 10 9 10 10 7 7 6 5 4 2000's 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 39 41 62 2010's 50 101 122 122 70 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  6. Montana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 439 457 542 437 449 474 519 1990's 557 518 423 295 206 168 168 188 208 235 2000's 218 396 249 512 606 697 820 816 788 771 2010's 800 604 612 645 657 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  7. Nebraska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 60 70 57 40 43 26 21 1990's 26 17 31 56 86 58 43 38 37 29 2000's 31 29 295 286 302 236 176 182 395 359 2010's 331 287 194 194 62 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  8. Ohio Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 50 63 71 69 96 88 87 1990's 14 14 16 20 36 32 37 39 40 42 2000's 43 40 37 17 18 12 8 5 0 0 2010's 0 0 127 202 468 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  9. Oregon Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 120 131 130 115 59 1990's 93 60 68 118 95 66 40 0 0 0 2000's 49 42 40 43 27 21 24 23 26 26 2010's 31 39 44 44 25 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  10. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 158 171 148 171 205 191 218 1990's 156 159 341 235 116 181 217 253 222 274 2000's 208 272 251 343 395 483 549 495 575 599 2010's 881 963 2,529 9,200 11,602 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  11. South Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 61 76 93 70 125 123 112 1990's 158 393 451 452 437 404 424 911 848 864 2000's 1,003 538 495 553 562 545 508 573 545 568 2010's 562 594 866 916 827 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  12. Tennessee Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 113 153 138 98 93 60 45 1990's 68 41 39 49 44 47 37 45 31 26 2000's 29 48 80 47 46 68 66 109 161 235 2010's 214 231 335 335 142 - = 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. Washington Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 440 326 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  14. Indiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4 12 11 10 7 12 10 1990's 13 5 5 6 2 5 8 12 13 18 2000's 23 26 51 38 74 97 108 101 161 211 2010's 283 433 506 506 177 - = 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. Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 7,025 7,165 6,940 4,056 852 830 627 1990's 657 702 707 689 611 702 682 641 548 641 2000's 419 475 535 536 617 698 653 691 587 391 2010's 772 278 641 280 278 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  16. Revisions in Natural Gas Monthly Consumption and Price Data, 2004 - 2007

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2009-01-01

    This report summarizes the method in which natural gas consumption data are collected and processed for publication and details the most notable revisions in natural gas consumption data for the period 2004 to 2007. It is intended to assist data users in evaluating the quality of the monthly consumption and price data for residential, commercial, and industrial consumers of natural gas.

  17. Reduction of Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation ...

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

    Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation -- What the Industry Does and What the Government Can Do Reduction of Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation -- What the ...

  18. Hawaii Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Hawaii Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 51 43 44 47 46 46 50 47 39 41 37 42 2002 42 40 39 42 43 36 47 42 36 35 35 37 2003 40 36 40 38 35 36 38 37 36 36 34 39 2004 37 36 39 38 33 38 38 38 35 36 40 37 2005 38 35 38 36 40 38 34 37 34 35 36 38 2006 39 34 37 34 38 37 36 38 45 40 35 37 2007 46 29 37 34 48 44 47 37 33 50 51 45 2008 40 36 45 45 41 42 46 34 27 26 23 27 2009 25 28 29 36 27 28

  19. Hawaii Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Hawaii Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 51 52 50 50 47 49 46 42 45 43 46 46 1990 49 52 55 50 45 49 48 39 44 42 45 48 1991 50 50 49 51 46 45 40 39 44 42 44 46 1992 51 50 48 46 47 46 45 42 43 42 42 50 1993 51 51 52 48 44 47 46 41 42 42 46 47 1994 53 53 52 51 48 49 46 42 45 43 47 50 1995 53 52 52 50 49 50 47 43 45 44 43 45 1996 49 51 53 49 44 45 42 40 41 39 41 44 1997 51 49

  20. Delaware Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 1,257 1,153 1,223 793 466 272 192 189 207 275 485 1,085 1990 1,613 1,069 1,008 797 449 260 183 166 190 222 483 830 1991 1,249 1,217 1,079 795 409 211 169 186 175 261 547 892 1992 1,303 1,417 1,158 948 528 301 197 179 183 307 628 1,044 1993 1,304 1,386 1,487 1,019 448 243 185 167 185 289 609 974 1994 1,579 1,836 1,480 879 397 281

  1. District of Columbia Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) District of Columbia Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 2,903 2,556 2,762 1,663 1,025 649 507 483 494 655 1,099 2,637 1990 3,258 2,193 1,984 1,522 849 596 490 433 435 542 1,005 1,828 1991 2,703 2,543 2,076 1,493 804 503 460 432 463 587 1,220 2,001 1992 2,683 2,829 2,172 1,820 948 630 469 420 446 642 1,314 2,213 1993 2,768 2,823 2,867 1,641 825 546 437 419 427 588

  2. Florida Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 1,709 1,445 1,834 1,207 817 707 674 617 641 637 974 1,825 1990 2,829 1,470 1,262 1,048 810 699 661 603 618 633 905 1,438 1991 1,595 1,811 1,568 1,078 766 714 653 610 646 659 1,130 1,677 1992 2,206 2,345 1,478 1,340 936 733 674 627 636 685 956 1,766 1993 1,652 1,868 1,923 1,480 963 772 679 618 669 706 1,007 1,605 1994 2,725 2,089

  3. Alabama Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,600 4,154 4,227 4,139 5,314 5,021 4,277 1990's 6,171 4,907 8,391 8,912 9,381 10,468 10,492 7,020 7,650 9,954 2000's 10,410 9,593 9,521 11,470 11,809 11,291 12,045 11,345 11,136 10,460 2010's 10,163 10,367 12,389 12,456 10,055 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  4. Alabama Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,129 1,178 1,249 1,303 1,564 1,634 1,875 1990's 3,710 3,720 4,477 4,453 3,747 3,806 2,827 2,468 2,391 5,336 2000's 5,377 3,491 4,148 3,293 3,914 3,740 6,028 6,269 6,858 6,470 2010's 6,441 6,939 6,616 6,804 6,462 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  5. Alaska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 96,603 109,333 62,341 71,104 112,404 151,280 189,702 1990's 166,155 187,106 197,975 202,199 200,809 253,695 255,500 230,578 242,271 224,355 2000's 226,659 229,206 241,469 255,701 237,530 259,829 218,153 227,374 211,878 219,161 2010's 211,918 208,531 214,335 219,190 219,451 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  6. Alaska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,225 1,736 1,807 1,582 4,278 2,390 2,537 1990's 27,720 36,088 36,741 35,503 37,347 39,116 40,334 40,706 39,601 41,149 2000's 42,519 42,243 44,008 44,762 44,016 43,386 38,938 41,197 40,286 39,447 2010's 37,316 35,339 37,397 36,638 36,707 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  7. Arkansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,402 4,956 5,362 4,353 5,720 5,469 3,940 1990's 6,464 1,218 5,570 6,053 4,283 5,083 5,124 6,349 7,980 1,822 2000's 1,468 849 536 615 1,364 1,288 1,351 1,502 2,521 4,091 2010's 5,340 6,173 6,599 6,605 6,452 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  8. Kentucky Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 227,931 205,129 218,399 2000's 225,168 208,974 227,920 223,226 225,470 234,080 211,049 229,799 225,295 206,833 2010's 232,099 223,034 225,924 229,983 254,244 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  9. Louisiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,661,061 1,569,190 1,495,478 2000's 1,536,725 1,219,013 1,341,444 1,233,505 1,281,428 1,254,370 1,217,871 1,289,421 1,238,661 1,189,744 2010's 1,354,641 1,420,264 1,482,343 1,396,261 1,460,031 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  10. Maine Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 6,290 5,716 6,572 2000's 44,779 95,733 101,536 70,832 72,565 57,835 49,605 63,183 70,146 70,334 2010's 77,575 71,690 68,266 64,091 60,661 - = 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

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 212,017 188,552 196,350 2000's 212,133 178,376 196,276 197,024 194,725 202,509 182,294 201,053 196,067 196,510 2010's 212,020 193,986 208,946 197,356 207,527 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  12. Massachusetts Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 402,629 358,846 344,790 2000's 343,314 349,103 393,194 403,991 372,532 378,068 370,664 408,704 406,719 395,852 2010's 432,297 449,194 416,350 421,001 418,526 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  13. Michigan Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 994,342 876,444 951,143 2000's 963,136 906,001 966,354 924,819 916,629 913,827 803,336 798,126 779,602 735,340 2010's 746,748 776,466 790,642 814,635 850,974 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  14. Minnesota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 354,092 330,513 344,591 2000's 362,025 340,911 371,583 371,261 359,898 367,825 352,570 388,335 425,352 394,136 2010's 422,968 420,770 422,263 467,874 473,310 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  15. Mississippi Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 255,475 241,342 306,733 2000's 300,652 332,589 343,890 265,842 282,051 301,663 307,305 364,067 355,006 364,323 2010's 438,733 433,538 494,016 420,594 412,979 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  16. Missouri Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 283,294 258,652 265,798 2000's 284,763 283,793 275,629 262,529 263,945 268,040 252,697 272,536 296,058 264,867 2010's 280,181 272,583 255,875 276,967 296,605 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  17. Montana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 59,851 59,840 62,129 2000's 67,955 65,051 69,532 68,473 66,829 68,355 73,879 73,822 76,422 75,802 2010's 72,025 78,217 73,399 79,670 78,010 - = 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. Nebraska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 132,221 130,730 121,487 2000's 126,962 121,984 120,333 118,922 115,011 119,070 129,885 150,808 171,005 163,474 2010's 168,944 171,777 158,757 173,376 172,749 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

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

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 132,128 148,539 154,689 2000's 189,170 176,835 176,596 185,846 214,984 227,149 249,608 254,406 264,596 275,468 2010's 259,251 249,971 273,502 272,965 252,097 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  20. New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 20,848 19,127 20,313 2000's 24,950 23,398 24,901 54,147 61,172 70,484 62,549 62,132 71,179 59,950 2010's 60,378 69,978 72,032 54,028 57,017 - = 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:

  1. California Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,146,211 2,309,883 2,339,521 2000's 2,508,797 2,464,565 2,273,193 2,269,405 2,406,889 2,248,256 2,315,721 2,395,674 2,405,266 2,328,504 2010's 2,273,128 2,153,186 2,403,494 2,415,571 2,344,977 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  2. Colorado Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 314,486 330,259 333,085 2000's 367,920 463,738 459,397 436,253 440,378 470,321 450,832 504,775 504,783 523,726 2010's 501,350 466,680 443,750 467,798 480,747 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  3. Delaware Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 46,511 40,809 56,013 2000's 48,387 50,113 52,216 46,177 48,057 46,904 43,190 48,155 48,162 50,148 2010's 54,825 79,715 101,676 95,978 100,776 - = 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:

  4. District of Columbia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) District of Columbia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 34,105 30,409 32,281 2000's 33,468 29,802 32,898 32,814 32,227 32,085 29,049 32,966 31,880 33,177 2010's 33,251 32,862 28,561 32,743 34,057 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  5. Florida Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 522,116 503,844 559,366 2000's 541,847 543,143 689,337 689,986 734,178 778,209 891,611 917,244 942,699 1,055,340 2010's 1,158,452 1,217,689 1,328,463 1,225,676 1,231,957 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  6. Georgia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 371,376 368,579 337,576 2000's 413,845 351,109 383,546 379,761 394,986 412,560 420,469 441,107 425,043 462,799 2010's 530,030 522,897 615,771 625,283 652,230 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  7. Hawaii Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Hawaii Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,894 2,654 3,115 2000's 2,841 2,818 2,734 2,732 2,774 2,795 2,783 2,850 2,702 2,607 2010's 2,627 2,619 2,689 2,855 2,928 - = 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. Idaho Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 68,669 69,277 70,672 2000's 72,697 80,279 71,481 69,868 75,335 74,540 75,709 81,937 88,515 85,197 2010's 83,326 82,544 89,004 104,783 91,514 - = 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. Illinois Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,844 4,379 4,198 3,944 3,378 24 17 1990's 109 132 98 106 101 90 75 80 84 83 2000's 73 60 66 58 63 56 45 45 48 41 2010's 4,559 4,917 4,896 4,917 288 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  10. Illinois Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,077,139 957,254 1,004,281 2000's 1,030,604 951,616 1,049,878 998,486 953,207 969,642 893,997 965,591 1,000,501 956,068 2010's 966,678 986,867 940,367 1,056,826 1,092,999 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  11. Indiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 556,624 521,748 556,932 2000's 570,558 501,711 539,034 527,037 526,701 531,111 496,303 535,796 551,424 506,944 2010's 573,866 630,669 649,921 672,751 710,838 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  12. Iowa Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 254,489 232,057 230,691 2000's 232,565 224,336 226,457 230,161 226,819 241,340 238,454 293,274 325,772 315,186 2010's 311,075 306,909 295,183 326,140 330,433 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  13. Kansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 338,231 326,674 302,932 2000's 312,369 272,500 304,992 281,346 256,779 255,123 264,253 286,538 282,904 286,973 2010's 275,184 279,724 262,316 283,177 285,969 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  14. Michigan Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,135 4,574 4,053 3,778 5,251 4,354 3,862 1990's 5,882 6,252 4,178 4,889 6,399 6,198 5,478 9,386 6,160 5,954 2000's 7,689 6,799 10,925 6,309 5,755 8,276 7,932 7,588 5,447 6,841 2010's 6,626 5,857 7,428 7,248 5,948 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  15. Michigan Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,995 4,136 4,142 3,831 4,365 3,896 4,141 1990's 3,212 3,343 3,096 3,282 3,367 3,337 3,011 2,674 3,073 2,912 2000's 2,455 2,587 2,445 2,798 2,419 2,318 2,363 2,076 1,982 1,686 2010's 1,684 1,303 1,174 1,071 1,152 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  16. Mississippi Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 5,777 6,372 5,655 5,971 7,706 6,802 4,741 1990's 6,636 3,877 4,372 4,291 3,169 3,108 3,202 3,280 3,347 3,283 2000's 2,962 3,304 3,818 4,243 4,559 4,718 5,473 7,068 8,976 9,090 2010's 10,388 2,107 3,667 2,663 1,487 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  17. Mississippi Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 8,582 9,158 8,521 1970's 7,893 5,840 9,153 6,152 5,357 7,894 4,836 4,979 5,421 8,645 1980's 4,428 4,028 7,236 6,632 7,202 6,296 6,562 8,091 7,100 5,021 1990's 7,257 4,585 4,945 4,829 3,632 3,507 3,584 3,652 3,710 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  18. Mississippi Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 855 830 641 591 385 298 280 1990's 621 708 573 538 463 399 382 372 363 638 2000's 786 722 758 251 895 1,018 1,138 1,196 1,140 1,150 2010's 1,155 1,042 1,111 1,103 1,310 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

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

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,531 1,612 1,596 1,371 1,639 1,520 1,247 1990's 1,705 1,162 1,448 2,084 2,037 2,070 2,233 2,089 1,792 798 2000's 2,360 2,644 3,113 3,543 3,933 4,502 4,864 4,327 4,067 3,371 2010's 3,265 2,613 3,845 3,845 1,793 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  20. New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 26,231 29,787 27,294 20,497 28,958 23,288 20,828 1990's 32,573 11,826 14,805 12,832 18,476 16,134 17,901 18,476 17,728 16,738 2000's 38,944 37,094 34,686 36,339 40,977 41,815 44,880 47,525 49,753 49,655 2010's 49,070 47,556 47,696 47,018 49,406 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  1. New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 21,399 20,875 19,415 15,118 19,180 18,418 21,396 1990's 33,316 32,940 38,892 36,826 36,310 36,455 63,850 45,982 41,926 39,345 2000's 41,863 39,501 38,973 37,620 42,601 35,508 33,435 35,600 36,571 36,827 2010's 35,289 38,331 37,195 33,121 35,269 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  2. North Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2,014 2,398 2,494 2,017 2,457 1,902 1,383 1990's 2,104 6,806 3,709 3,522 6,247 6,800 7,320 4,152 3,838 4,153 2000's 4,724 4,528 4,786 4,889 3,237 2,488 2,644 2,699 3,472 2,986 2010's 3,753 3,200 4,595 6,486 8,683 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  3. North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2,086 2,165 2,216 1,957 2,737 2,112 2,005 1990's 4,835 4,777 4,753 4,734 5,059 4,542 4,283 4,420 4,471 4,553 2000's 4,738 3,874 5,141 4,548 4,602 4,816 4,364 4,323 4,283 4,521 2010's 4,294 5,473 5,887 6,707 5,736 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  4. Ohio Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,327 5,678 5,371 5,174 5,706 4,781 3,789 1990's 5,115 1,462 1,434 1,346 1,296 1,251 1,193 1,162 1,085 1,035 2000's 986 983 972 936 894 833 855 872 840 879 2010's 773 781 836 1,079 4,247 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  5. Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 49,480 60,470 57,064 54,495 68,664 60,418 51,833 1990's 72,318 46,200 53,278 60,658 55,607 45,946 37,803 51,042 35,509 32,868 2000's 41,032 38,916 30,281 40,292 35,875 35,989 36,396 38,229 42,250 40,164 2010's 39,489 40,819 43,727 45,581 50,621 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  6. Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 29,750 31,237 31,121 29,705 35,751 40,508 38,392 1990's 39,249 42,166 39,700 39,211 35,432 34,900 35,236 30,370 26,034 25,055 2000's 25,934 28,266 25,525 26,276 27,818 27,380 28,435 28,213 27,161 24,089 2010's 23,238 24,938 27,809 32,119 36,231 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  7. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,385 5,065 4,427 4,544 5,594 4,792 4,549 1990's 5,875 3,343 3,040 3,910 3,136 2,888 3,082 2,022 1,484 3,675 2000's 5,111 5,469 6,154 4,156 4,277 4,341 5,855 5,112 6,801 11,753 2010's 19,805 46,784 79,783 115,630 112,847 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  8. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,270 1,530 1,924 1970's 2,251 2,419 2,847 2,725 1,649 1,760 3,043 3,210 2,134 2,889 1980's 1,320 1,580 3,278 3,543 5,236 4,575 4,715 5,799 4,983 4,767 1990's 6,031 3,502 3,381 4,145 3,252 3,069 3,299 2,275 1,706 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  9. Utah Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,806 5,621 6,286 6,775 8,970 7,970 6,596 1990's 10,573 4,597 3,866 3,241 3,322 18,520 18,570 16,478 19,481 15,930 2000's 16,394 14,578 17,163 16,398 15,802 17,216 20,221 21,715 18,169 20,222 2010's 22,022 23,209 28,165 28,165 25,336 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  10. Utah Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2,732 2,754 2,715 6,514 8,701 8,919 9,615 1990's 9,146 9,141 8,745 9,285 9,951 8,492 8,549 8,141 7,985 7,880 2000's 8,276 5,436 4,534 4,481 3,370 3,914 3,739 2,779 2,206 1,573 2010's 1,616 3,063 3,031 5,996 4,782 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  11. Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 124 272 443 438 669 536 425 1990's 489 327 653 1,120 1,102 1,296 1,183 1,330 1,243 1,519 2000's 1,820 1,641 3,000 2,108 3,307 2,749 3,809 3,143 4,406 6,040 2010's 6,121 7,206 8,408 8,408 7,252 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  12. Alabama Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 324,158 329,134 337,270 2000's 353,614 332,693 379,343 350,345 382,367 353,156 391,093 418,512 404,157 454,456 2010's 534,779 598,514 666,712 615,407 634,678 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  13. Alaska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 425,393 434,871 422,816 2000's 427,288 408,960 419,131 414,234 406,319 432,972 373,850 369,967 341,888 342,261 2010's 333,312 335,458 343,110 332,298 327,428 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  14. Arizona Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 134,706 158,355 165,076 2000's 205,235 240,812 250,734 272,921 349,622 321,584 358,069 392,954 399,188 369,739 2010's 330,914 288,802 332,068 332,073 307,946 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  15. Arkansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 260,113 266,485 252,853 2000's 251,329 227,943 242,325 246,916 215,124 213,609 233,868 226,439 234,901 244,193 2010's 271,515 284,076 296,132 282,120 268,453 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  16. Tennessee Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 282,395 279,070 278,841 2000's 270,658 255,990 255,515 257,315 231,133 230,338 221,626 221,118 229,935 216,945 2010's 257,443 264,231 277,127 279,441 303,996 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

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

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 717,011 679,619 715,630 2000's 605,275 564,923 598,602 612,890 620,806 602,388 547,206 618,965 614,908 620,790 2010's 654,458 660,743 652,060 682,247 762,200 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  18. New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 256,464 245,823 236,264 2000's 266,469 266,283 235,098 221,021 223,575 220,717 223,636 234,236 246,665 241,194 2010's 241,137 246,418 243,961 245,502 246,178 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  19. North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 56,179 49,541 56,418 2000's 56,528 60,819 66,726 60,907 59,986 53,050 53,336 59,453 63,097 54,564 2010's 66,395 72,463 72,740 81,593 83,330 - = 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. Ohio Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 897,693 811,384 841,966 2000's 890,962 804,243 830,955 848,388 825,753 825,961 742,359 806,350 792,247 740,925 2010's 784,293 823,548 842,959 912,403 1,000,231 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  1. Oklahoma Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 567,050 575,855 538,329 2000's 538,563 491,458 508,298 540,103 538,576 582,536 624,400 658,379 687,989 659,305 2010's 675,727 655,919 691,661 658,569 640,607 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  2. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 706,230 644,017 688,740 2000's 702,847 634,794 675,583 689,992 696,175 691,591 659,754 752,401 749,884 809,707 2010's 879,365 965,742 1,037,979 1,121,696 1,203,418 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  3. Rhode Island Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 117,707 130,751 118,001 2000's 88,419 95,607 87,805 78,456 72,609 80,764 77,204 87,972 89,256 92,743 2010's 94,110 100,455 95,476 85,537 88,673 - = 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:

  4. South Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 153,917 159,458 162,926 2000's 160,436 141,785 184,803 146,641 163,787 172,032 174,806 175,701 170,077 190,928 2010's 220,235 229,497 244,850 232,297 231,863 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  5. South Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 36,115 33,042 35,794 2000's 37,939 37,077 41,577 43,881 41,679 42,555 40,739 53,938 65,258 66,185 2010's 72,563 73,605 70,238 81,986 79,964 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  6. Wyoming Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 100,950 109,188 96,726 2000's 101,314 98,569 112,872 115,358 107,060 108,314 108,481 140,912 142,705 142,793 2010's 150,106 156,455 153,333 149,820 135,678 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  7. California Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 14,569 17,498 17,575 15,868 18,066 14,370 11,065 1990's 14,754 96,442 84,220 80,210 63,251 62,160 63,297 69,386 68,370 61,810 2000's 60,757 49,766 41,878 39,452 37,337 37,865 57,234 56,936 64,689 63,127 2010's 64,931 44,379 51,154 49,846 54,288 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  8. California Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 100,497 93,074 82,996 1970's 92,119 75,241 68,738 72,574 71,686 84,843 78,967 79,425 69,624 65,787 1980's 62,824 53,655 22,275 22,231 25,213 25,274 22,973 26,846 22,778 19,586 1990's 22,712 104,251 92,228 87,306 69,639 66,447 67,817 74,182 72,881 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  9. California Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 7,662 7,715 7,699 7,105 8,780 8,408 8,521 1990's 7,958 7,809 8,008 7,096 6,388 4,287 4,520 4,796 4,511 4,212 2000's 3,572 2,893 2,781 2,568 2,760 2,875 2,475 2,540 2,318 2,611 2010's 2,370 2,253 2,417 2,834 2,361 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  10. Colorado Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,943 5,500 5,586 4,991 6,380 6,081 5,630 1990's 8,888 14,802 8,936 12,969 11,865 11,570 12,598 17,150 18,874 23,695 2000's 23,790 26,907 27,708 32,886 34,178 35,866 38,088 39,347 44,231 64,873 2010's 66,083 78,800 76,462 71,105 74,402 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  11. Colorado Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 5,057 5,060 5,243 4,406 5,715 5,541 6,591 1990's 8,455 9,081 12,233 11,863 12,482 13,560 14,894 12,435 12,200 12,863 2000's 13,064 13,871 15,904 15,927 17,093 15,641 16,347 16,218 18,613 21,288 2010's 25,090 28,265 29,383 25,806 30,873 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  12. Florida Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 668 422 392 278 313 241 208 1990's 250 2,413 3,819 476 653 620 2,049 2,321 2,200 2,240 2000's 2,307 2,154 1,262 1,133 1,178 987 896 654 897 94 2010's 4,512 4,896 6,080 5,609 6,551 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  13. Florida Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 7,852 7,425 6,782 5,878 7,250 7,034 8,734 1990's 1,466 1,338 1,315 1,241 167 145 125 113 129 147 2000's 157 127 124 112 102 286 796 671 83 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 272 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  14. Kansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 12,471 14,232 15,160 13,269 15,701 16,571 13,965 1990's 18,415 13,814 17,424 20,363 15,623 18,772 18,752 20,641 13,068 11,611 2000's 13,338 11,598 17,693 10,861 8,589 11,734 13,681 10,232 12,803 15,169 2010's 13,461 12,781 17,017 17,110 14,851 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  15. Kansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 25,430 25,873 27,297 25,616 28,804 29,357 29,665 1990's 22,499 30,800 26,312 36,294 28,988 28,510 30,444 26,205 20,921 19,321 2000's 16,664 10,928 11,723 9,706 6,460 8,100 7,541 5,439 2,331 2,126 2010's 2,102 2,246 2,268 2,189 1,983 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  16. Kentucky Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,336 1,873 2,155 2,279 2,402 2,112 1,718 1990's 2,492 1,730 2,105 2,573 2,162 1,945 1,744 1,816 1,777 1,615 2000's 2,075 1,980 3,442 2,278 2,044 2,879 3,524 2,676 3,914 4,862 2010's 5,626 5,925 6,095 6,095 4,388 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  17. Louisiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 153,850 179,291 153,777 141,098 178,271 150,519 121,991 1990's 175,439 111,793 134,088 147,888 140,571 133,825 144,486 156,387 131,595 111,203 2000's 130,550 37,811 34,285 51,254 48,308 45,543 49,124 61,368 52,941 56,656 2010's 59,336 80,983 54,463 57,549 58,034 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  18. Louisiana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 121,848 123,993 104,292 102,185 123,008 121,936 134,132 1990's 82,828 83,733 86,623 74,925 66,600 75,845 69,235 71,155 63,368 68,393 2000's 69,174 63,137 63,031 56,018 55,970 45,837 46,205 51,499 42,957 39,002 2010's 40,814 42,633 42,123 34,179 30,527 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

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

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 165,253 169,776 159,889 2000's 164,557 159,299 163,379 154,125 155,891 160,275 187,399 219,700 224,188 214,220 2010's 219,213 222,227 223,039 247,285 242,457 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  20. Vermont Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 8,061 7,735 8,033 2000's 10,426 7,919 8,367 8,400 8,685 8,372 8,056 8,867 8,624 8,638 2010's 8,443 8,611 8,191 9,602 10,678 - = 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. Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 248,960 260,332 276,793 2000's 268,770 237,853 258,202 262,970 277,434 299,746 274,175 319,913 299,364 319,134 2010's 375,421 373,444 410,106 418,506 419,615 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  2. Washington Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 256,366 290,229 287,302 2000's 286,653 312,114 233,716 249,599 262,485 264,754 263,395 272,613 298,140 310,428 2010's 285,726 264,589 264,540 318,292 307,021 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  3. West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 159,504 142,860 139,961 2000's 147,854 141,090 146,455 126,986 122,267 117,136 113,084 115,974 111,480 109,652 2010's 113,179 115,361 129,753 142,082 150,766 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  4. Wisconsin Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 400,651 368,022 380,560 2000's 393,601 359,784 385,310 394,711 383,316 410,250 372,462 398,370 409,377 387,066 2010's 372,898 393,734 402,656 442,544 462,627 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  5. Idaho Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 1,619 1,672 1,206 747 368 306 160 146 221 329 768 1,241 1990 1,445 1,419 1,078 630 475 360 173 160 186 349 896 1,397 1991 2,145 1,469 1,059 909 696 393 194 179 217 314 1,088 1,559 1992 1,843 1,361 944 730 445 247 233 183 274 428 1,024 1,946 1993 2,265 1,959 1,705 1,044 692 334 302 251 310 481 1,159 2,057 1994 1,929 1,926 1,432 1,001

  6. Mississippi Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 3,995 4,030 4,077 2,195 1,282 929 864 829 894 1,043 1,933 4,241 1990 6,060 3,307 2,793 2,205 1,266 922 850 809 798 948 2,070 3,018 1991 4,628 4,348 3,390 1,903 1,117 882 846 811 824 1,024 2,357 3,625 1992 4,724 4,551 2,850 2,440 1,287 963 896 817 856 979 1,927 4,198 1993 4,474 4,388 4,396 2,961 1,465 947 830 788 815 933 2,518

  7. Montana Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 2,803 2,778 2,544 1,666 965 680 426 435 568 1,084 1,728 2,518 1990 2,625 2,421 1,900 1,459 1,104 701 389 392 450 1,040 1,694 2,673 1991 3,533 2,139 2,087 1,585 1,244 608 455 382 559 977 2,218 2,626 1992 2,529 2,180 1,620 1,371 837 541 485 421 727 1,106 1,792 3,065 1993 3,658 2,509 2,611 1,686 1,005 644 608 530 741 1,172 2,236

  8. West Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,720 4,377 4,270 3,849 5,480 5,017 4,203 1990's 6,427 4,353 4,807 3,749 4,815 4,846 4,292 4,500 4,549 3,705 2000's 6,720 6,384 7,420 4,881 4,277 6,729 8,339 6,483 8,423 11,348 2010's 11,348 15,571 21,569 28,682 27,853 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  9. West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2,106 2,855 2,920 2,809 3,355 3,326 3,679 1990's 3,204 3,391 3,290 3,316 3,272 3,199 2,262 2,710 2,344 2,209 2000's 2,505 2,342 2,186 1,361 723 281 315 309 283 698 2010's 810 1,153 1,812 3,429 6,776 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  10. Maine Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 1,331 855 872 874 1,248 616 552 696 891 1,135 1,160 701 2002 464 2,399 466 2,084 2,025 3,030 24 2,661 20 3,011 3,868 3,620 2003 434 338 282 234 210 206 283 222 219 273 323 291 2004 1,931 1,739 1,589 1,316 1,158 941 1,111 1,057 1,087 1,332 1,384 1,589 2005 750 578 653 478 481 397 386 504 636 561 513 563 2006 1,206 1,426 2,121 1,243

  11. Maine Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 92 84 92 66 49 27 12 19 21 35 46 95 1990 109 86 82 67 48 30 20 19 22 27 56 83 1991 106 105 94 76 46 32 24 19 26 36 56 102 1992 128 139 122 96 66 37 24 22 17 41 70 111 1993 144 153 114 71 38 30 22 22 27 62 88 129 1994 171 135 116 69 49 32 23 22 30 51 78 117 1995 130 139 112 81 48 28 24 24 31 48 97 151 1996 159 143 137 81 49 29 25 23

  12. Wyoming Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 15,438 18,274 17,619 16,966 25,122 23,252 20,541 1990's 29,233 20,988 27,382 7,592 4,676 4,570 4,252 4,099 3,477 3,125 2000's 3,236 4,032 4,369 4,590 4,823 5,010 5,279 33,309 35,569 36,290 2010's 34,459 39,114 33,826 32,004 21,811 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  13. Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 12,572 16,185 17,090 13,633 16,249 17,446 19,820 1990's 12,182 14,154 13,217 13,051 13,939 14,896 15,409 15,597 16,524 19,272 2000's 20,602 20,991 25,767 28,829 24,053 24,408 23,868 25,276 23,574 25,282 2010's 27,104 28,582 29,157 27,935 25,782 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

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

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

    Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

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

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

    Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

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

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

    Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  18. Fact #749: October 15, 2012 Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption for

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

    Transportation by State, 2010 | Department of Energy 9: October 15, 2012 Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption for Transportation by State, 2010 Fact #749: October 15, 2012 Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption for Transportation by State, 2010 The map below shows the amount of petroleum and natural gas consumed in the transportation sector by state for 2010. The pie charts for each state are scaled based on total consumption of petroleum and natural gas. The yellow slice of the pie chart

  19. Consumption

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

    5. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  20. Consumption

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

    3. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using Fuel Oil...

  1. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Climate Zonea for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  2. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Climate Zonea for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  3. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Building Size for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  4. Consumption

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

    3. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity, 1999" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using Electricity (million square...

  5. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 1" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  6. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Building Size for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  7. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003: Part 1" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total...

  8. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003: Part 2" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total...

  9. Consumption

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

    9A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 3" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  10. Consumption

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

    Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using Electricity...

  11. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  12. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,,"Total Floorspace of...

  13. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  14. Consumption

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

    4. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed, 1999" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings Using...

  15. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 2" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  16. Consumption

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

    A. Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total Floorspace of...

  17. Consumption

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

    . Electricity Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003: Part 3" ,"Total Electricity Consumption (billion kWh)",,,"Total...

  18. Consumption

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

    A. Fuel Oil Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,"Total Floorspace of Buildings...

  19. The Chemistry of Flammable Gas Generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ZACH, J.J.

    2000-10-30

    The document collects information from field instrumentation, laboratory tests, and analytical models to provide a single source of information on the chemistry of flammable gas generation at the Hanford Site. It considers the 3 mechanisms of formation: radiolysis, chemical reactions, and thermal generation. An assessment of the current models for gas generation is then performed. The results are that the various phenomena are reasonably understood and modeled compared to field data.

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

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle

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

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Delivered to Vehicle

  2. Georgia Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 11,025 10,991 12,416 12,284 10,980 10,558 10,974 12,062 11,624 12,533 11,239 11,212 2002 12,320 11,739 13,039 11,629 11,929 11,381 11,441 12,306 11,390 11,650 12,080 12,247 2003 14,903 14,274 13,044 13,382 13,121 11,350 11,925 12,763 12,912 14,159 13,309 14,265 2004 14,458 14,427 13,755 13,178 12,893 12,329 12,563 12,941 12,907

  3. Georgia Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 15,116 16,389 9,603 7,211 4,629 3,050 2,988 2,792 3,466 5,190 11,110 22,137 1990 16,238 11,794 10,094 6,398 3,781 3,153 2,914 2,900 2,979 5,357 9,115 15,540 1991 18,493 13,332 10,872 5,129 3,781 3,092 2,984 2,965 2,893 4,829 12,479 15,812 1992 19,167 14,531 12,768 7,360 4,718 3,536 3,170 2,981 3,211 5,284 12,934 18,555 1993 17,952

  4. Delaware Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 1,989 2,006 1,830 1,718 1,229 1,429 1,454 1,433 1,557 1,971 1,804 1,639 2002 1,550 1,301 1,328 1,111 857 804 1,053 1,166 1,778 1,965 2,120 2,600 2003 2,167 1,702 1,251 847 748 850 828 969 1,095 1,212 1,668 1,836 2004 1,938 1,515 1,466 1,176 1,290 964 1,027 911 1,043 1,164 1,571 1,960 2005 2,068 1,465 1,558 1,055 1,185 825 804 930

  5. Colorado Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 17,268 13,981 12,731 14,667 10,985 9,633 9,063 9,888 8,555 8,139 11,955 10,843 2002 10,256 10,606 12,835 11,039 9,828 10,392 12,914 9,205 9,597 12,317 9,933 11,415 2003 11,626 11,414 9,920 7,462 10,331 7,436 9,508 9,023 7,330 7,354 9,958 10,976 2004 11,434 10,376 8,694 9,635 8,728 7,987 8,460 8,200 7,683 8,441 8,231 14,305 2005 12,086 10,602

  6. Colorado Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 14,966 15,278 13,652 8,580 5,694 3,947 2,778 2,279 2,601 3,750 6,975 11,066 1990 15,699 13,559 12,631 9,873 7,248 4,191 2,478 2,357 2,331 3,450 7,142 10,956 1991 17,902 15,114 11,686 9,187 7,108 3,600 2,569 2,283 2,367 3,541 8,076 14,007 1992 16,198 14,400 11,499 8,789 5,005 3,963 2,809 2,438 2,644 3,547 7,607 15,715 1993 18,551

  7. Florida Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 7,915 7,333 7,528 7,465 8,401 7,285 8,899 7,721 8,196 8,140 7,811 8,016 2002 7,262 7,044 7,671 8,047 7,119 5,988 6,469 6,798 6,548 7,102 6,751 6,768 2003 6,976 6,327 6,236 6,325 6,434 5,724 5,837 5,951 5,864 6,209 5,645 5,805 2004 5,990 5,630 6,086 5,814 5,716 4,795 4,979 5,118 4,135 4,753 4,918 5,668 2005 6,333 5,502 5,781 6,271 5,999 5,194

  8. Connecticut Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 2,225 2,099 2,243 2,115 2,331 2,168 2,517 1,977 1,952 2,104 2,118 1,773 2002 2,982 2,873 2,953 2,080 2,249 2,098 2,273 1,936 2,029 2,388 2,516 2,673 2003 2,442 2,098 2,170 2,119 1,737 1,511 1,686 1,897 1,715 2,072 1,813 2,294 2004 2,264 2,166 2,044 1,742 1,431 1,342 1,330 1,300 1,519 1,483 2,003 1,906 2005 2,172 2,173 2,136

  9. Connecticut Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 6,412 5,891 5,717 3,694 2,231 1,296 1,114 996 1,138 1,986 3,221 6,991 1990 6,690 5,673 5,000 3,708 2,203 1,345 1,100 931 1,119 1,660 3,201 4,817 1991 6,359 5,707 5,011 3,432 1,976 1,173 915 938 1,086 1,943 3,433 5,209 1992 6,675 6,571 5,777 4,284 2,417 1,394 1,125 996 1,155 2,271 3,876 5,855 1993 6,726 7,402 6,255 4,043 1,947

  10. Iowa Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 9,174 8,509 8,666 7,687 7,439 6,610 6,490 6,582 6,852 7,846 8,268 8,465 2002 8,979 8,036 8,306 7,943 7,429 6,094 6,095 6,628 6,589 7,622 9,370 9,132 2003 8,957 10,155 8,270 7,315 7,108 6,661 6,665 6,380 7,288 7,710 8,640 8,708 2004 9,207 9,312 8,522 7,541 6,876 6,676 6,354 6,568 6,673 7,660 9,564 8,936 2005 10,425 10,143 7,559 8,502

  11. Iowa Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 12,794 12,643 12,215 7,244 3,943 2,063 1,647 1,527 1,790 3,225 5,912 12,401 1990 14,120 10,664 9,604 7,337 4,172 2,452 1,633 1,529 1,599 2,866 5,772 9,631 1991 16,033 11,730 9,458 5,924 3,559 1,991 1,473 1,511 1,757 4,082 8,906 12,377 1992 12,381 11,637 8,482 6,857 3,335 2,186 1,546 1,668 1,885 3,725 8,350 12,827 1993 15,138 13,050

  12. Louisiana Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 59,442 59,434 64,182 60,893 56,959 53,080 57,884 64,447 64,571 69,233 69,913 73,048 2002 70,512 65,911 67,135 60,540 59,376 59,591 64,331 64,681 62,517 67,104 76,062 77,070 2003 72,726 62,959 66,109 65,699 64,719 53,203 61,688 63,784 62,246 62,280 64,440 70,346 2004 71,841 68,808 68,634 66,085 66,036 63,882 68,547 67,912 66,218 68,354 69,066

  13. Louisiana Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 8,279 8,546 8,377 4,724 2,816 2,321 2,189 2,026 2,035 2,513 4,166 9,714 1990 12,359 6,495 5,729 4,263 2,775 2,264 2,028 1,973 2,033 2,349 4,380 6,745 1991 10,169 8,812 6,321 3,668 2,540 2,264 1,911 1,900 1,974 2,267 5,200 7,567 1992 9,861 9,220 5,650 4,544 2,799 2,288 2,067 1,960 2,014 2,222 4,185 8,411 1993 8,577 8,402 7,933

  14. Kansas Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 9,002 8,035 8,007 7,187 5,497 6,335 8,627 10,037 9,467 6,721 7,176 7,259 2002 7,922 7,346 7,976 6,741 7,964 7,812 9,890 13,216 11,270 8,045 10,155 10,049 2003 10,045 9,012 8,326 7,215 8,177 7,265 10,127 9,127 10,209 8,954 7,754 8,580 2004 8,778 7,435 7,869 7,557 7,828 7,713 8,023 8,936 8,734 10,148 8,704 9,084 2005 9,237 8,405 7,922 7,223 7,497

  15. Kansas Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 12,686 13,761 11,948 6,518 3,436 2,203 1,845 1,687 1,955 2,901 5,398 11,694 1990 15,037 10,951 9,080 7,528 4,486 2,458 1,819 1,678 1,770 2,515 5,082 8,922 1991 16,989 12,186 8,833 5,415 3,570 1,982 1,737 1,634 1,689 2,494 7,289 11,008 1992 12,653 10,939 7,890 6,917 3,788 2,609 1,932 1,740 1,798 2,421 6,102 12,732 1993 15,743 13,423

  16. Kentucky Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 11,054 8,742 7,395 9,901 6,629 6,460 6,740 6,597 7,074 7,364 8,090 8,851 2002 10,214 9,404 9,297 8,186 8,277 7,314 7,074 6,669 7,743 9,145 9,856 9,932 2003 11,702 9,996 8,913 7,847 7,552 6,781 6,777 7,226 7,568 8,569 8,686 10,655 2004 11,629 10,760 10,598 9,045 8,910 8,413 8,094 8,712 8,332 9,496 9,776 10,526 2005 11,242 10,146 10,519 9,307

  17. Kentucky Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 9,700 10,403 8,293 5,319 3,161 1,809 1,332 1,337 1,446 3,109 6,141 13,034 1990 9,736 8,409 6,367 5,007 2,448 1,599 1,376 1,288 1,375 3,306 5,741 9,412 1991 11,629 9,644 7,168 3,430 1,805 1,378 1,278 1,168 1,487 3,120 7,676 9,682 1992 11,805 8,511 7,813 4,179 2,626 1,835 1,326 1,416 1,413 3,376 6,997 10,617 1993 11,143 11,145

  18. Idaho Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 3,074 2,803 2,755 2,621 2,499 2,410 2,413 2,093 2,150 2,413 2,536 2,669 2002 2,888 2,668 2,675 2,483 2,400 2,157 1,830 1,872 2,281 2,490 2,451 2,533 2003 2,492 2,203 2,403 2,209 2,008 2,005 1,632 1,544 1,909 2,062 2,109 2,113 2004 2,435 2,255 2,117 2,006 1,694 1,885 1,724 1,618 1,736 2,215 2,081 2,142 2005 2,269 2,201 1,970 1,920

  19. Illinois Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 30,126 27,294 28,116 22,192 19,913 18,238 19,905 20,406 19,383 24,125 23,899 23,695 2002 28,312 26,992 27,788 25,387 23,234 20,581 20,901 19,953 18,993 24,645 25,907 27,786 2003 31,254 28,899 26,298 21,911 19,034 17,861 17,230 18,104 18,657 20,858 24,087 26,077 2004 29,852 27,792 26,094 21,637 18,997 17,420 17,806 17,754 17,735 20,119 22,025

  20. Illinois Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 74,796 76,868 64,320 40,575 24,582 12,602 10,775 9,958 13,627 26,027 51,490 94,362 1990 71,107 64,322 52,008 37,441 23,464 12,361 10,424 10,802 12,633 30,333 40,903 76,365 1991 92,323 62,627 54,680 32,273 18,197 11,041 10,168 10,122 16,099 27,231 61,099 71,109 1992 80,315 63,013 59,187 40,752 22,488 12,963 10,391 11,171 13,758

  1. Indiana Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 26,677 23,164 24,258 19,456 18,831 18,369 17,553 20,171 17,971 21,014 20,330 22,971 2002 24,441 23,170 23,714 20,750 18,770 17,297 19,398 20,664 19,688 22,268 23,322 25,579 2003 27,047 24,384 21,994 19,376 18,238 16,652 16,774 17,813 18,398 20,589 22,780 24,621 2004 28,155 25,447 25,012 21,558 19,052 18,264 18,325 19,767 19,514 20,781 22,067

  2. Indiana Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 23,991 23,940 20,950 12,801 7,660 3,832 2,894 2,868 3,957 8,198 15,187 29,656 1990 25,597 20,159 17,227 13,294 7,054 3,980 3,042 3,116 3,684 8,499 13,130 21,711 1991 28,978 22,309 18,772 10,680 5,630 3,174 2,936 2,947 3,906 7,584 16,912 22,617 1992 26,077 22,018 18,963 14,093 7,584 4,627 3,484 3,312 3,960 8,361 15,953 24,261 1993

  3. Minnesota Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 9,110 8,557 8,841 7,676 6,052 6,046 6,202 7,183 7,926 7,945 9,056 7,858 2002 9,366 8,391 9,188 7,661 7,001 6,431 6,011 7,494 6,376 8,535 9,542 9,675 2003 9,539 9,625 8,206 7,310 6,802 6,487 6,575 6,769 6,284 8,202 9,271 9,703 2004 9,787 8,941 8,594 7,829 6,637 7,549 6,968 6,623 7,309 7,714 9,582 9,571 2005 10,057 8,561 7,940 6,667

  4. Minnesota Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 18,926 19,064 16,511 9,806 5,523 3,121 2,388 2,269 2,682 5,430 11,067 20,120 1990 18,979 16,064 13,558 9,519 5,540 3,296 2,372 2,281 2,621 5,611 9,947 17,178 1991 22,882 16,115 14,249 8,351 5,656 2,804 2,303 2,268 3,236 6,654 14,101 18,529 1992 18,895 15,904 14,009 10,391 5,136 3,130 2,702 2,525 3,021 6,449 12,857 18,543 1993

  5. Mississippi Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 10,677 6,909 9,399 8,347 8,233 7,961 7,703 7,984 8,097 7,304 8,146 8,580 2002 8,485 8,021 8,941 7,960 8,002 7,800 8,401 8,207 7,668 8,724 8,987 9,761 2003 9,949 8,529 7,392 7,250 6,818 7,414 6,619 6,544 6,475 7,002 7,111 8,618 2004 8,198 8,208 9,033 8,529 8,545 8,657 8,384 8,535 7,419 7,376 8,781 9,338 2005 9,767 8,472 8,624 8,362 8,012

  6. Missouri Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 8,526 7,720 5,601 5,511 4,509 4,386 4,772 4,809 4,386 4,954 5,329 7,342 2002 7,089 5,945 6,709 5,703 5,620 4,458 4,410 4,486 4,255 6,007 5,966 6,319 2003 7,084 6,868 6,028 4,820 4,273 3,942 3,396 4,833 4,317 4,659 5,254 6,070 2004 7,377 6,846 5,989 5,220 4,565 4,624 4,193 4,543 4,470 4,690 5,183 6,783 2005 7,534 6,457 6,449 5,350 4,758 4,701

  7. Missouri Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 21,508 22,300 19,809 11,192 5,793 3,615 3,008 2,732 3,111 5,047 9,441 21,588 1990 24,889 16,807 14,381 11,838 6,241 3,783 2,946 2,713 2,876 4,467 9,332 15,677 1991 27,020 20,480 15,212 7,969 4,851 3,001 2,751 2,597 2,764 4,433 12,195 17,407 1992 20,977 18,433 13,548 11,044 5,858 3,838 2,931 2,681 2,942 4,259 10,344 19,801 1993

  8. Montana Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 2,448 2,226 2,224 1,871 1,230 1,230 1,497 1,337 1,241 1,558 2,089 1,972 2002 2,134 2,136 1,938 2,296 1,672 1,554 1,351 1,409 1,696 1,920 2,215 1,547 2003 2,105 1,990 1,859 1,842 1,310 1,413 1,122 1,086 1,234 1,701 2,238 2,294 2004 2,487 2,030 1,804 1,456 1,444 1,206 1,129 1,277 1,387 1,883 2,095 2,283 2005 2,438 1,968 2,138 1,678 1,466 1,274

  9. Maryland Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 2,601 2,365 2,538 2,053 2,019 2,312 2,204 2,437 1,999 2,117 2,701 2,065 2002 2,389 2,374 2,739 2,107 1,755 2,047 2,242 2,271 1,836 2,161 2,776 2,485 2003 2,121 2,157 2,041 2,422 1,445 1,361 1,395 1,420 1,487 1,373 2,102 2,505 2004 2,595 2,075 2,209 1,837 1,694 1,943 1,767 1,711 1,518 1,818 1,933 2,261 2005 2,150 2,038 2,319 1,477 2,034 1,988

  10. Maryland Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 12,209 10,880 11,186 7,032 4,320 2,681 2,241 2,070 2,177 3,134 5,131 12,076 1990 13,718 8,971 8,796 6,861 3,558 2,659 2,203 1,986 2,069 2,672 4,832 8,102 1991 11,849 10,304 9,016 5,908 3,199 2,317 2,173 2,031 2,161 3,691 6,625 9,961 1992 12,442 11,583 9,717 7,087 4,007 2,577 2,153 2,068 2,027 4,038 6,855 10,567 1993 11,900 12,922

  11. Massachusetts Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 9,223 9,199 6,246 8,282 6,935 5,213 5,613 6,996 5,547 6,493 4,811 6,625 2002 8,237 8,719 9,197 7,344 6,115 6,321 4,184 7,865 6,085 6,264 7,442 8,179 2003 6,407 5,586 5,349 4,041 3,162 2,280 1,505 1,400 1,279 6,410 2,015 4,694 2004 5,947 6,303 5,074 4,289 2,798 2,262 1,946 1,570 1,779 2,266 5,077 4,234 2005 6,342 6,707 6,262

  12. Massachusetts Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 17,593 16,517 16,940 11,858 7,552 4,053 3,006 2,683 2,901 4,839 7,495 16,224 1990 20,092 15,721 14,900 11,633 7,192 4,891 3,161 2,635 2,990 3,726 7,713 12,157 1991 16,305 16,628 14,673 11,075 6,325 3,761 3,014 2,723 3,036 4,492 8,070 12,854 1992 17,599 19,067 16,712 13,384 8,475 4,822 3,453 3,203 3,369 5,342 10,056 14,189

  13. Michigan Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 25,494 22,752 22,291 20,181 16,240 15,260 16,263 15,666 14,433 16,600 18,669 20,006 2002 23,016 23,762 20,891 21,878 19,293 18,230 17,903 17,019 15,021 15,825 19,810 23,485 2003 26,081 25,855 22,526 19,100 15,427 13,472 13,400 14,298 13,093 14,244 16,883 18,873 2004 24,023 23,433 23,399 18,226 15,843 14,028 13,355 13,293 13,411 13,883 17,417

  14. Michigan Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Residential Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1989 55,928 52,459 51,163 34,224 20,415 9,803 8,052 7,957 9,726 19,994 31,679 60,266 1990 55,931 48,164 43,437 31,606 19,275 11,093 7,779 8,253 9,336 17,937 29,517 45,069 1991 61,349 49,685 43,914 29,081 18,655 10,014 7,555 6,594 9,297 18,491 33,409 49,160 1992 56,513 52,668 46,640 36,421 21,545 11,927 8,773 8,655 9,435 20,856 34,278

  15. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  16. Label Building Natural Gas Usage Form 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS)

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

    Natural Gas Usage Form 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) 1. Timely submission of this report is mandatory under Public Law 93-275, as amended. 2. This completed questionnaire is due by 3. Data reported on this questionnaire are for the entire building identified in the label to the right. 4. Data may be submitted directly on this questionnaire or in any other format, such as a computer-generated listing, which provides the same i nformation and is conve nient for y our

  17. Consumption

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

    . Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Building Size for Sum of Major Fuels for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Sum of Major Fuel Consumption (trillion Btu)",,,"Total Floorspace...

  18. the District of Columbia Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) the District of Columbia Natural Gas Industrial Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 0 0

  19. State policies affecting natural gas consumption (Notice of inquiry issued on August 14, 1992)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lemon, R.; Kamphuis-Zatopa, W.

    1993-03-25

    On August 14, 1992, the United States Department of Energy issued a Request for Comments Concerning State Policies Affecting Natural Gas Consumption. This Notice of (NOI) noted the increasing significance of the role played by states and sought to gain better understanding of how state policies impact the gas industry. The general trend toward a. more competitive marketplace for natural gas, as well as recent regulatory and legislative changes at the Federal level, are driving State regulatory agencies to reevaluate how they regulate natural gas. State action is having a significant impact on the use of natural gas for generating electricity, as well as affecting the cost-effective trade-off between conservation expenditures and gas use. Additionally, fuel choice has an impact upon the environment and national energy security. In light of these dimensions, the Department of Energy initiated this study of State regulation. The goals of this NOI are: (1) help DOE better understand the impact of State policies on the efficient use of gas; (2) increase the awareness of the natural gas industry and Federal and State officials to the important role of State policies and regulations; (3) create an improved forum for dialogue on State and Federal natural gas issues; and, (4) develop a consensus on an analytical agenda that would be most helpful in addressing the regulatory challenges faced by the States. Ninety-seven parties filed comments, and of these ninety-seven, fifteen parties filed reply comments. Appendix One lists these parties. This report briefly syntheses the comments received. The goal is to assist parties to judging the extent of consensus on the problems posed and the remedies suggested, aid in identifying future analytical analyses, and assist parties in assessing differences in strategies and regulatory philosophies which shape these issues and their resolution.

  20. Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    | Department of Energy Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels June 11, 2008 - 1:30pm Addthis Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman and Secretary of Agriculture Edward T. Schafer sent a letter on June 11, 2008 to Senator Jeff Bingaman addressing a number of questions related to biofuels, food, and gasoline and diesel prices. Read the letter. Without Biofuels, Gas Prices Would Increase $.20 to

  1. Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    | Department of Energy Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman and Secretary of Agriculture Edward T. Schafer sent a letter on June 11, 2008 to Senator Jeff Bingaman addressing a number of questions related to biofuels, food, and gasoline and diesel prices. This is a fact sheet on how biofuels are reducing America's dependence on oil. PDF icon Fact Sheet: Gas

  2. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"North- east","Mid- west","South","West","North- east","Mid-...

  3. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"West South Central","Moun- tain","Pacific","West South Central","Moun-...

  4. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"New England","Middle Atlantic","East North Central","New England","Middle...

  5. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"West North Central","South Atlantic","East South Central","West North...

  6. NEXT GENERATION GAS TURBINE SYSTEMS STUDY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Benjamin C. Wiant; Ihor S. Diakunchak; Dennis A. Horazak; Harry T. Morehead

    2003-03-01

    Under sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory, Siemens Westinghouse Power Corporation has conducted a study of Next Generation Gas Turbine Systems that embraces the goals of the DOE's High Efficiency Engines and Turbines and Vision 21 programs. The Siemens Westinghouse Next Generation Gas Turbine (NGGT) Systems program was a 24-month study looking at the feasibility of a NGGT for the emerging deregulated distributed generation market. Initial efforts focused on a modular gas turbine using an innovative blend of proven technologies from the Siemens Westinghouse W501 series of gas turbines and new enabling technologies to serve a wide variety of applications. The flexibility to serve both 50-Hz and 60-Hz applications, use a wide range of fuels and be configured for peaking, intermediate and base load duty cycles was the ultimate goal. As the study progressed the emphasis shifted from a flexible gas turbine system of a specific size to a broader gas turbine technology focus. This shift in direction allowed for greater placement of technology among both the existing fleet and new engine designs, regardless of size, and will ultimately provide for greater public benefit. This report describes the study efforts and provides the resultant conclusions and recommendations for future technology development in collaboration with the DOE.

  7. Reduced Energy Consumption through the Development of Fuel-Flexible Gas Turbines

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

    Development of Fuel-Flexible Combustion Systems Utilizing Opportunity Fuels in Gas Turbines ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Reduced Energy Consumption through the Development of Fuel-Flexible Gas Turbines Introduction Gas turbines-heat engines that use high-temperature and high-pressure gas as the combustible fuel-are used extensively throughout U.S. industry to power industrial processes. The majority of turbines are operated using natural gas because of its availability, low cost, and

  8. Gas turbine power generation from biomass gasification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paisley, M.A.; Litt, R.D.; Overend, R.P.; Bain, R.L.

    1994-12-31

    The Biomass Power Program of the US Department of Energy (DOE) has as a major goal the development of cost-competitive technologies for the production of power from renewable biomass crops. The gasification of biomass provides the potential to meet this goal by efficiently and economically producing a renewable source of a clean gaseous fuel suitable for use in high efficiency gas turbines or as a substitute fuel in other combustion devices such as boilers, kilns, or other natural gas fired equipment. This paper discusses the development of the use of the Battelle high-throughput gasification process for power generation systems. Projected process economics are presented along with a description of current experimental operations coupling a gas turbine power generation system to the research scale gasifier.

  9. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"1959 or Before","1960 to 1989","1990 to 2003","1959 or Before","1960 to...

  10. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"Zone 1","Zone 2","Zone 3","Zone 4","Zone 5","Zone 1","Zone 2","Zone 3","Zone...

  11. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"1,001 to 10,000 Square Feet","10,001 to 100,000 Square Feet","Over 100,000...

  12. Consumption

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

    Using Natural Gas (million square feet)",,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"1959 or Before","1960 to 1989","1990 to 1999","1959 or Before","1960 to...

  13. Enabling Clean Consumption of Low Btu and Reactive Fuels in Gas Turbines

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

    Fuel-Flexible, Low-Emissions Catalytic Combustor for Opportunity Fuels ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Enabling Clean Combustion of Low-Btu and Reactive Fuels in Gas Turbines By enabling ultralow-emission, lean premixed combustion of a wide range of gaseous opportunity fuels, this unique, fuel- fexible catalytic combustor for gas turbines can reduce natural gas consumption in industry. Introduction Gas turbines are commonly used in industry for onsite power and heating needs because of their high

  14. Short-Term Energy Outlook Model Documentation: Electricity Generation and Fuel Consumption Models

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

    Model Documentation: Electricity Generation and Fuel Consumption Models January 2014 Independent Statistics & Analysis www.eia.gov U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 U.S. Energy Information Administration | STEO Model Documentation: Electricity Generation and Fuel Consumption Models i This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts

  15. Changes in Natural Gas Monthly Consumption Data Collection and the Short-Term Energy Outlook

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2010-01-01

    Beginning with the December 2010 issue of the Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), the Energy Information Administration (EIA) will present natural gas consumption forecasts for the residential and commercial sectors that are consistent with recent changes to the Form EIA-857 monthly natural gas survey.

  16. Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Consumption by End Use

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

    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 Total Consumption 103,976 108,490 101,217 93,985 95,207 93,855 1999-2014 Lease Fuel 103,976 108,490 101,217 93,985 95,207 93,855 1999-2014 Plant Fuel 0 2014-2014

  17. Gas Generation from Actinide Oxide Materials

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    George Bailey; Elizabeth Bluhm; John Lyman; Richard Mason; Mark Paffett; Gary Polansky; G. D. Roberson; Martin Sherman; Kirk Veirs; Laura Worl

    2000-12-01

    This document captures relevant work performed in support of stabilization, packaging, and long term storage of plutonium metals and oxides. It concentrates on the issue of gas generation with specific emphasis on gas pressure and composition. Even more specifically, it summarizes the basis for asserting that materials loaded into a 3013 container according to the requirements of the 3013 Standard (DOE-STD-3013-2000) cannot exceed the container design pressure within the time frames or environmental conditions of either storage or transportation. Presently, materials stabilized and packaged according to the 3013 Standard are to be transported in certified packages (the certification process for the 9975 and the SAFKEG has yet to be completed) that do not rely on the containment capabilities of the 3013 container. Even though no reliance is placed on that container, this document shows that it is highly likely that the containment function will be maintained not only in storage but also during transportation, including hypothetical accident conditions. Further, this document, by summarizing materials-related data on gas generation, can point those involved in preparing Safety Analysis Reports for Packages (SARPs) to additional information needed to assess the ability of the primary containment vessel to contain the contents and any reaction products that might reasonably be produced by the contents.

  18. Table 2.3 Manufacturing Energy Consumption for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation by End Use, 2006

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

    Manufacturing Energy Consumption for Heat, Power, and Electricity Generation by End Use, 2006 End-Use Category Net Electricity 1 Residual Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil LPG 2 and NGL 3 Natural Gas Coal 4 Total 5 Million Kilowatthours Million Barrels Billion Cubic Feet Million Short Tons Indirect End Use (Boiler Fuel) 12,109 21 4 2 2,059 25 – – Conventional Boiler Use 12,109 11 3 2 1,245 6 – – CHP 6 and/or Cogeneration Process – – 10 1 (s) 814 19 – – Direct End Use All Process Uses 657,810

  19. U.S. Natural Gas Consumption by End Use

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

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History Total Consumption 24,086,797 24,477,425 25,538,487 26,155,071 26,698,068 27,472,867 1949-2015 Lease and Plant Fuel 1,285,627 1,322,588 1,396,273 1,483,085 1,500,181 1,580,997 1930-2015 Lease Fuel 916,797 938,340 987,957 1,068,289 1,074,943 1983-2014 Plant Fuel 368,830 384,248 408,316 414,796

  20. Missouri Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 494 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas

  1. Nevada Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 53 30 21 16 1 11 9 9 - = 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

  2. Delaware Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease and

  3. Idaho Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 38 5 6 22 4 1980's 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Lease and

  4. A Review of Operational Water Consumption and Withdrawal Factors for Electricity Generating Technologies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Macknick, Jordan; Newmark, Robin; Heath, Garvin; Hallett, K. C.

    2011-03-01

    This report provides estimates of operational water withdrawal and water consumption factors for electricity generating technologies in the United States. Estimates of water factors were collected from published primary literature and were not modified except for unit conversions. The presented water factors may be useful in modeling and policy analyses where reliable power plant level data are not available.

  5. FUEL CONSUMPTION AND COST SAVINGS OF CLASS 8 HEAVY-DUTY TRUCKS POWERED BY NATURAL GAS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gao, Zhiming; LaClair, Tim J; Daw, C Stuart; Smith, David E

    2013-01-01

    We compare the fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of natural gas and diesel heavy-duty (HD) class 8 trucks under consistent simulated drive cycle conditions. Our study included both conventional and hybrid HD trucks operating with either natural gas or diesel engines, and we compare the resulting simulated fuel efficiencies, fuel costs, and payback periods. While trucks powered by natural gas engines have lower fuel economy, their CO2 emissions and costs are lower than comparable diesel trucks. Both diesel and natural gas powered hybrid trucks have significantly improved fuel economy, reasonable cost savings and payback time, and lower CO2 emissions under city driving conditions. However, under freeway-dominant driving conditions, the overall benefits of hybridization are considerably less. Based on payback period alone, non-hybrid natural gas trucks appear to be the most economic option for both urban and freeway driving environments.

  6. Fuel cell generator containing a gas sealing means

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Makiel, J.M.

    1987-02-03

    A high temperature solid electrolyte electrochemical generator is made, operating with flowing fuel gas and oxidant gas, the generator having a thermal insulation layer, and a sealing means contacting or contained within the insulation, where the sealing means is effective to control the contact of the various gases utilized in the generator. 5 figs.

  7. Fuel cell generator containing a gas sealing means

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Makiel, Joseph M. (Monroeville, PA)

    1987-01-01

    A high temperature solid electrolyte electrochemical generator is made, operating with flowing fuel gas and oxidant gas, the generator having a thermal insulation layer, and a sealing means contacting or contained within the insulation, where the sealing means is effective to control the contact of the various gases utilized in the generator.

  8. ,"Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Nevada Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nevada Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Nevada Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nevada Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"New Hampshire Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Hampshire Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_snh_2a.xls"

  15. ,"New Hampshire Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Hampshire Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"New Jersey Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Jersey Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_snj_2a.xls"

  18. ,"New Jersey Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Jersey Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (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 Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_snm_2a.xls"

  1. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"New York Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (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 Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_sny_2a.xls" ,"Available

  4. ,"New York Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_snc_2a.xls"

  7. ,"North Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_snd_2a.xls"

  10. ,"North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Ohio Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oklahoma Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_sri_2a.xls"

  19. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"South Carolina Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"South Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_ssc_2a.xls"

  2. ,"South Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"South Dakota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"South Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_ssd_2a.xls"

  5. ,"South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"Utah Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Utah Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Utah Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Vermont Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Total Consumption (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 Total Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1490_swv_2a.xls"

  15. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (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 Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Wisconsin Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wisconsin Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Wisconsin Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wisconsin Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. Arizona Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 33 20 34 1970's 50 50 44 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 222 7 7 7 6 5 6 5 35 1990's 71 45 41 49 61 57 58 51 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

  20. Oregon Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 32 30 37 30 30 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 120 131 130 115 59 1990's 93 60 68 118 95 66 40 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

  1. Rhode Island Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Natural

  2. South Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 0 0 63 61 76 93 70 125 123 112 1990's 158 393 451 452 437 404 424 911 848 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  3. Tennessee Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 355 753 986 1970's 1,265 1,524 1,150 1,263 1,087 387 537 509 516 616 1980's 0 0 78 113 153 138 98 93 60 45 1990's 74 44 39 49 44 47 37 45 31 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  4. Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 0 128 211 1970's 252 213 157 170 307 168 157 157 191 266 1980's 240 361 181 124 272 443 438 669 536 425 1990's 489 327 653 1,120 1,102 1,296 1,183 1,330 1,243 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  5. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"Arizona Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arizona Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Arizona Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arizona Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"California Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Connecticut Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Connecticut Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Connecticut Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Connecticut Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Delaware Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Delaware Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Delaware Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Florida Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Florida Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Georgia Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Georgia Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Georgia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Georgia Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Hawaii Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"Idaho Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Idaho Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  4. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  5. ,"Iowa Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  6. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  7. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kansas Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  8. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  9. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Kentucky Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  10. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  12. ,"Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maine Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  13. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  14. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  15. ,"Massachusetts Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Massachusetts Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  16. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Michigan Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  17. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  18. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  19. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Mississippi Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  1. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)"

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

    Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/2015" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  2. ,"Montana Natural Gas Consumption by End Use"

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

    Consumption by End Use" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Montana Natural Gas Consumption by End Use",6,"Monthly","12/2015","1/15/1989" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  3. Indiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5 0 0 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1980's 7 51 10 4 12 11 10 7 12 10 1990's 13 5 5 6 2 5 8 12 13 - = 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. Maryland Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 257 310 381 1970's 319 451 67 474 392 277 415 342 889 2,488 1980's 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1990's 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 3 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  5. State policies affecting natural gas consumption (Notice of inquiry issued on August 14, 1992). Summary of comments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lemon, R.; Kamphuis-Zatopa, W.

    1993-03-25

    On August 14, 1992, the United States Department of Energy issued a Request for Comments Concerning State Policies Affecting Natural Gas Consumption. This Notice of (NOI) noted the increasing significance of the role played by states and sought to gain better understanding of how state policies impact the gas industry. The general trend toward a. more competitive marketplace for natural gas, as well as recent regulatory and legislative changes at the Federal level, are driving State regulatory agencies to reevaluate how they regulate natural gas. State action is having a significant impact on the use of natural gas for generating electricity, as well as affecting the cost-effective trade-off between conservation expenditures and gas use. Additionally, fuel choice has an impact upon the environment and national energy security. In light of these dimensions, the Department of Energy initiated this study of State regulation. The goals of this NOI are: (1) help DOE better understand the impact of State policies on the efficient use of gas; (2) increase the awareness of the natural gas industry and Federal and State officials to the important role of State policies and regulations; (3) create an improved forum for dialogue on State and Federal natural gas issues; and, (4) develop a consensus on an analytical agenda that would be most helpful in addressing the regulatory challenges faced by the States. Ninety-seven parties filed comments, and of these ninety-seven, fifteen parties filed reply comments. Appendix One lists these parties. This report briefly syntheses the comments received. The goal is to assist parties to judging the extent of consensus on the problems posed and the remedies suggested, aid in identifying future analytical analyses, and assist parties in assessing differences in strategies and regulatory philosophies which shape these issues and their resolution.

  6. Concentrating Solar Power Commercial Application Study: Reducing Water Consumption of Concentrating Solar Power Electricity Generation

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

    Concentrating Solar Power Commercial Application Study: Reducing Water Consumption of Concentrating Solar Power Electricity Generation Report to Congress U.S. Department of Energy This report is being disseminated by the Department of Energy. As such, the document was prepared in compliance with Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554) and information quality guidelines issued by the Department of Energy. Though this report

  7. Estimating Monthly 1989-2000 Data for Generation, Consumption, and Stocks

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Review, Section 7: Estimating Monthly 1989-2000 Data for Generation, Consumption, and Stocks For 1989-2000, monthly and annual data were collected for electric utilities; however, during this time period, only annual data were collected for independent power producers, commercial plants, and industrial plants. To obtain 1989-2000 monthly estimates for the Electric Power, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors, electric utility patterns were used for each energy source (MonthX = MonthUtility *

  8. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1992...

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

    Consumption and Expenditures Electricity Consumption Natural Gas Consumption Wood and Solar Energy Consumption Fuel Oil and District Heat Consumption Energy Consumption in...

  9. Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore--Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0 2000's 0 114,017 109,277 98,372 90,025 78,139 102,242 115,528 102,389 103,976 2010's 108,490 101,217 93,985 95,207 93,855 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  10. U.S. Total Consumption of Heat Content of Natural Gas (BTU per Cubic Foot)

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

    Consumption of Heat Content of Natural Gas (BTU per Cubic Foot) U.S. Total Consumption of Heat Content of Natural Gas (BTU per Cubic Foot) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 1,028 1,026 1,028 1,028 1,027 1,027 1,025 2010's 1,023 1,022 1,024 1,027 1,032 - = 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:

  11. Developing a tool to estimate water withdrawal and consumption in electricity generation in the United States.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wu, M.; Peng, J.

    2011-02-24

    Freshwater consumption for electricity generation is projected to increase dramatically in the next couple of decades in the United States. The increased demand is likely to further strain freshwater resources in regions where water has already become scarce. Meanwhile, the automotive industry has stepped up its research, development, and deployment efforts on electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Large-scale, escalated production of EVs and PHEVs nationwide would require increased electricity production, and so meeting the water demand becomes an even greater challenge. The goal of this study is to provide a baseline assessment of freshwater use in electricity generation in the United States and at the state level. Freshwater withdrawal and consumption requirements for power generated from fossil, nonfossil, and renewable sources via various technologies and by use of different cooling systems are examined. A data inventory has been developed that compiles data from government statistics, reports, and literature issued by major research institutes. A spreadsheet-based model has been developed to conduct the estimates by means of a transparent and interactive process. The model further allows us to project future water withdrawal and consumption in electricity production under the forecasted increases in demand. This tool is intended to provide decision makers with the means to make a quick comparison among various fuel, technology, and cooling system options. The model output can be used to address water resource sustainability when considering new projects or expansion of existing plants.

  12. Onboard Plasmatron Generation of Hydrogen rich Gas for Diesel

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

    Aftertreatment and Other Applications | Department of Energy Onboard Plasmatron Generation of Hydrogen rich Gas for Diesel Aftertreatment and Other Applications Onboard Plasmatron Generation of Hydrogen rich Gas for Diesel Aftertreatment and Other Applications 2002 DEER Conference Presentation: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PDF icon 2002_deer_bromberg.pdf More Documents & Publications Plasmatron Fuel Reformer Development and Internal Combustion Engine Vehicle Applications

  13. Microsoft Word - Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels

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

    For Immediate Release June 11, 2008 202-586-4940 Fact Sheet: Gas Prices and Oil Consumption Would Increase Without Biofuels Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman and Secretary of Agriculture Edward T. Schafer sent a letter on June 11, 2008 to Senator Jeff Bingaman addressing a number of questions related to biofuels, food, and gasoline and diesel prices. The letter is available at http://www.energy.gov Without Biofuels, Gas Prices Would Increase $.20 to $.35 per Gallon. * The U.S. Department of

  14. Transition metal catalysis in the generation of natural gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mango, F.D.

    1995-12-31

    The view that natural gas is thermolytic, coming from decomposing organic debris, has remained almost unchallenged for nearly half a century. Disturbing contradictions exist, however: Oil is found at great depth, at temperatures where only gas should exist and oil and gas deposits show no evidence of the thermolytic debris indicative of oil decomposing to gas. Moreover, laboratory attempts to duplicate the composition of natural gas, which is typically between 60 and 95+ wt% methane in C{sub 1}-C{sub 4}, have produced insufficient amounts of methane (10 to 60%). It has been suggested that natural gas may be generated catalytically, promoted by the transition metals in carbonaceous sedimentary rocks. This talk will discuss experimental results that support this hypothesis. Various transition metals, as pure compounds and in source rocks, will be shown to generate a catalytic gas that is identical to natural gas. Kinetic results suggest robust catalytic activity under moderate catagenetic conditions.

  15. BIOMASS GASIFICATION AND POWER GENERATION USING ADVANCED GAS TURBINE SYSTEMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Liscinsky

    2002-10-20

    A multidisciplined team led by the United Technologies Research Center (UTRC) and consisting of Pratt & Whitney Power Systems (PWPS), the University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), KraftWork Systems, Inc. (kWS), and the Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority (CRRA) has evaluated a variety of gasified biomass fuels, integrated into advanced gas turbine-based power systems. The team has concluded that a biomass integrated gasification combined-cycle (BIGCC) plant with an overall integrated system efficiency of 45% (HHV) at emission levels of less than half of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) is technically and economically feasible. The higher process efficiency in itself reduces consumption of premium fuels currently used for power generation including those from foreign sources. In addition, the advanced gasification process can be used to generate fuels and chemicals, such as low-cost hydrogen and syngas for chemical synthesis, as well as baseload power. The conceptual design of the plant consists of an air-blown circulating fluidized-bed Advanced Transport Gasifier and a PWPS FT8 TwinPac{trademark} aeroderivative gas turbine operated in combined cycle to produce {approx}80 MWe. This system uses advanced technology commercial products in combination with components in advanced development or demonstration stages, thereby maximizing the opportunity for early implementation. The biofueled power system was found to have a levelized cost of electricity competitive with other new power system alternatives including larger scale natural gas combined cycles. The key elements are: (1) An Advanced Transport Gasifier (ATG) circulating fluid-bed gasifier having wide fuel flexibility and high gasification efficiency; (2) An FT8 TwinPac{trademark}-based combined cycle of approximately 80 MWe; (3) Sustainable biomass primary fuel source at low cost and potentially widespread availability-refuse-derived fuel (RDF); (4) An overall integrated system that exceeds the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) goal of 40% (HHV) efficiency at emission levels well below the DOE suggested limits; and (5) An advanced biofueled power system whose levelized cost of electricity can be competitive with other new power system alternatives.

  16. Radiolytic gas generation in crystalline silicotitanate slurries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walker, D.D.

    1999-12-15

    This study measured the impact of crystalline silicotitanate (CST) solids on the rate of formation and composition of radiolytically generated gases in simulated Savannah River Site liquid waste.

  17. Next Generation Natural Gas Vehicle Activity: Natural Gas Engine and Vehicle Research & Development (Fact Sheet)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2003-09-01

    This fact sheet describes the status of the Next Generation Natural Gas Vehicle (NGNGV) activity, including goals, R&D progress, NGV implementation, and the transition to hydrogen.

  18. Alabama Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 162 152 150 1970's 214 476 1,070 1,329 1,301 1,968 2,714 5,444 3,371 21,454 1980's 9,990 5,804 5,037 4,729 5,332 5,476 5,442 6,878 6,655 6,152 1990's 9,881 8,627 12,868 13,365 0 14,274 13,319 9,488 10,041 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  19. Alaska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,659 2,240 6,864 1970's 4,748 8,459 16,056 15,217 14,402 17,842 15,972 17,336 15,895 12,153 1980's 30,250 15,249 94,232 97,828 111,069 64,148 72,686 116,682 153,670 192,239 1990's 193,875 223,194 234,716 237,702 238,156 292,811 295,834 271,284 281,872 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  20. Arkansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 10,267 4,027 6,268 1970's 9,184 6,433 4,740 3,000 4,246 4,200 4,049 4,032 3,760 7,661 1980's 1,949 2,549 5,096 5,384 5,922 12,439 9,062 11,990 12,115 11,586 1990's 7,101 1,406 5,838 6,405 4,750 5,551 5,575 6,857 8,385 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  1. Michigan Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,798 2,012 2,074 1970's 3,440 2,145 2,143 2,551 3,194 8,420 7,647 8,022 11,076 14,695 1980's 6,494 3,461 9,699 8,130 8,710 8,195 7,609 9,616 8,250 8,003 1990's 9,094 9,595 7,274 8,171 9,766 9,535 8,489 12,060 9,233 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  2. Montana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5,904 5,188 6,183 1970's 5,091 6,148 5,924 4,281 3,683 2,315 2,754 2,972 2,792 4,796 1980's 3,425 1,832 2,012 1,970 2,069 2,138 1,808 2,088 1,994 1,766 1990's 2,262 1,680 1,871 2,379 2,243 2,238 2,401 2,277 2,000 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  3. Nebraska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,164 1,945 1,877 1970's 1,650 1,275 814 1,809 1,194 1,036 708 695 1,160 1,867 1980's 3,779 132 107 94 105 87 59 74 47 34 1990's 26 31 40 56 89 60 46 45 37 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  4. New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 46,793 46,331 45,309 1970's 47,998 46,114 48,803 52,553 43,452 38,604 49,160 43,751 37,880 50,798 1980's 36,859 22,685 55,722 47,630 50,662 46,709 35,615 48,138 41,706 42,224 1990's 65,889 44,766 53,697 49,658 54,786 52,589 81,751 64,458 59,654 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  5. North Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 17,133 16,163 14,691 1970's 14,067 13,990 12,773 12,462 11,483 12,008 15,998 13,697 12,218 3,950 1980's 1,017 13,759 3,514 4,100 4,563 4,710 3,974 5,194 4,014 3,388 1990's 6,939 11,583 8,462 8,256 11,306 11,342 11,603 8,572 8,309 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  6. Ohio Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,656 3,505 2,879 1970's 3,140 4,302 3,397 3,548 2,957 2,925 2,742 2,814 3,477 22,094 1980's 1,941 1,776 3,671 4,377 5,741 5,442 5,243 5,802 4,869 3,876 1990's 5,129 1,476 1,450 1,366 1,332 1,283 1,230 1,201 1,125 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  7. Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 65,167 84,259 103,361 1970's 98,417 101,126 98,784 80,233 80,780 79,728 84,025 77,631 82,046 128,475 1980's 59,934 56,785 91,465 79,230 91,707 88,185 84,200 104,415 100,926 90,225 1990's 111,567 88,366 92,978 99,869 91,039 80,846 73,039 81,412 61,543 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  8. U.S. Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Lease Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 595,172 687,356 598,475 573,793 741,268 697,703 640,633 1990's 807,735 672,314 710,250 723,118 699,842 792,315 799,629 776,306 771,366 679,480 2000's 746,889 747,411 730,579 758,380 731,563 756,324 782,992 861,063 864,113 913,229 2010's 916,797 938,340 987,957 1,068,289 1,074,943 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  9. U.S. Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 383,077 389,525 367,572 348,731 408,115 398,180 429,269 1990's 428,657 456,954 460,571 448,822 423,878 427,853 450,033 426,873 401,314 399,509 2000's 404,059 371,141 382,503 363,903 366,341 355,193 358,985 365,323 355,590 362,009 2010's 368,830 384,248 408,316 414,796 425,238 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  10. Utah Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,956 1,503 2,113 1970's 633 2,115 1,978 2,435 4,193 7,240 9,150 7,585 8,325 14,123 1980's 7,594 511 5,965 4,538 8,375 9,001 13,289 17,671 16,889 16,211 1990's 19,719 13,738 12,611 12,526 13,273 27,012 27,119 24,619 27,466 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  11. Colorado Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,668 2,361 2,604 1970's 2,726 3,231 4,676 7,202 5,822 7,673 7,739 9,124 10,619 21,610 1980's 7,041 7,093 13,673 10,000 10,560 10,829 9,397 12,095 11,622 12,221 1990's 17,343 23,883 21,169 24,832 24,347 25,130 27,492 29,585 31,074 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available;

  12. Florida Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 210 201 176 1970's 234 294 1,782 3,027 2,700 6,304 6,306 4,890 5,314 7,628 1980's 8,284 9,035 10,603 8,520 7,847 7,174 6,156 7,563 7,275 8,942 1990's 1,716 3,751 5,134 1,717 820 765 2,174 2,434 2,329 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  13. Kansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 7,842 15,867 17,587 1970's 20,841 27,972 28,183 32,663 35,350 27,212 31,044 29,142 30,491 48,663 1980's 24,521 19,665 41,392 37,901 40,105 42,457 38,885 44,505 45,928 43,630 1990's 40,914 44,614 43,736 56,657 44,611 47,282 49,196 46,846 33,989 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  14. Kentucky Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,828 1,992 2,277 1970's 2,317 2,212 1,509 1,238 1,206 1,218 1,040 1,107 1,160 1,214 1980's 989 1,040 9,772 8,361 9,038 9,095 6,335 3,254 2,942 2,345 1990's 3,149 2,432 2,812 3,262 2,773 2,647 2,426 2,457 2,325 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  15. Louisiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 195,990 212,134 273,213 1970's 287,222 292,589 312,145 336,832 347,098 301,816 556,772 591,292 558,877 305,181 1980's 196,033 180,687 337,398 275,698 303,284 258,069 243,283 301,279 272,455 256,123 1990's 258,267 195,526 220,711 222,813 207,171 209,670 213,721 227,542 194,963 - = No Data

  16. West Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,052 2,276 0 1970's 2,551 3,043 3,808 2,160 1,909 1,791 1,490 1,527 1,233 1,218 1980's 2,482 2,515 6,426 5,826 7,232 7,190 6,658 8,835 8,343 7,882 1990's 9,631 7,744 8,097 7,065 8,087 8,045 6,554 7,210 6,893 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  17. Wyoming Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 15,722 17,271 19,964 1970's 19,625 20,348 22,402 21,151 14,302 15,102 16,726 16,601 20,363 31,081 1980's 17,763 17,527 26,559 28,010 34,459 34,709 30,599 41,371 40,698 40,361 1990's 41,415 35,142 40,599 20,643 18,615 19,466 19,661 19,696 20,001 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  18. Next Generation Natural Gas Vehicle (NGNGV) Program Fact Sheet

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walkowicz, K.

    2002-05-01

    Fact sheet describing U. S. DOE and NREL's development of next generation natural gas vehicles (NGVs) as a key element in its strategy to reduce oil import and vehicle pollutants.

  19. Next Generation Natural Gas Vehicle (NGNGV) Program Brochure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Elling, J.

    2000-10-26

    The Department of Energy's Office of Transportation Technologies is initiating the Next Generation Natural Gas Vehicle (NGNGV) Program to develop commercially viable medium- and heavy-duty natural gas vehicles. These new vehicles will incorporate advanced alternative fuel vehicle technologies that were developed by DOE and others.

  20. U.S. Natural Gas Average Consumption per Commercial Consumer (Thousand

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Commercial Consumer (Thousand Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Average Consumption per Commercial Consumer (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 637 665 699 1970's 737 751 777 779 734 730 789 745 784 811 1980's 739 693 696 625 672 634 587 606 647 652 1990's 619 626 636 641 639 654 669 675 595 608 2000's 635 605 621 617 609 577 537 568 579 586 2010's 585 593 540 613 640 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA =

  1. NEW APPROACH TO ADDRESSING GAS GENERATION IN RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL PACKAGING

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Watkins, R; Leduc, D; Askew, N

    2009-06-25

    Safety Analysis Reports for Packaging (SARP) document why the transportation of radioactive material is safe in Type A(F) and Type B shipping containers. The content evaluation of certain actinide materials require that the gas generation characteristics be addressed. Most packages used to transport actinides impose extremely restrictive limits on moisture content and oxide stabilization to control or prevent flammable gas generation. These requirements prevent some users from using a shipping container even though the material to be shipped is fully compliant with the remaining content envelope including isotopic distribution. To avoid these restrictions, gas generation issues have to be addressed on a case by case basis rather than a one size fits all approach. In addition, SARP applicants and review groups may not have the knowledge and experience with actinide chemistry and other factors affecting gas generation, which facility experts in actinide material processing have obtained in the last sixty years. This paper will address a proposal to create a Gas Generation Evaluation Committee to evaluate gas generation issues associated with Safety Analysis Reports for Packaging material contents. The committee charter could include reviews of both SARP approved contents and new contents not previously evaluated in a SARP.

  2. Recovery Act: Johnston Rhode Island Combined Cycle Electric Generating Plant Fueled by Waste Landfill Gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Galowitz, Stephen

    2013-06-30

    The primary objective of the Project was to maximize the productive use of the substantial quantities of waste landfill gas generated and collected at the Central Landfill in Johnston, Rhode Island. An extensive analysis was conducted and it was determined that utilization of the waste gas for power generation in a combustion turbine combined cycle facility was the highest and best use. The resulting project reflected a cost effective balance of the following specific sub-objectives. 1) Meet environmental and regulatory requirements, particularly the compliance obligations imposed on the landfill to collect, process and destroy landfill gas. 2) Utilize proven and reliable technology and equipment. 3) Maximize electrical efficiency. 4) Maximize electric generating capacity, consistent with the anticipated quantities of landfill gas generated and collected at the Central Landfill. 5) Maximize equipment uptime. 6) Minimize water consumption. 7) Minimize post-combustion emissions. To achieve the Project Objective the project consisted of several components. 1) The landfill gas collection system was modified and upgraded. 2) A State-of-the Art gas clean up and compression facility was constructed. 3) A high pressure pipeline was constructed to convey cleaned landfill gas from the clean-up and compression facility to the power plant. 4) A combined cycle electric generating facility was constructed consisting of combustion turbine generator sets, heat recovery steam generators and a steam turbine. 5) The voltage of the electricity produced was increased at a newly constructed transformer/substation and the electricity was delivered to the local transmission system. The Project produced a myriad of beneficial impacts. 1) The Project created 453 FTE construction and manufacturing jobs and 25 FTE permanent jobs associated with the operation and maintenance of the plant and equipment. 2) By combining state-of-the-art gas clean up systems with post combustion emissions control systems, the Project established new national standards for best available control technology (BACT). 3) The Project will annually produce 365,292 MWh�s of clean energy. 4) By destroying the methane in the landfill gas, the Project will generate CO{sub 2} equivalent reductions of 164,938 tons annually. The completed facility produces 28.3 MWnet and operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

  3. Recovery Act: Brea California Combined Cycle Electric Generating Plant Fueled by Waste Landfill Gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Galowitz, Stephen

    2012-12-31

    The primary objective of the Project was to maximize the productive use of the substantial quantities of waste landfill gas generated and collected at the Olinda Landfill near Brea, California. An extensive analysis was conducted and it was determined that utilization of the waste gas for power generation in a combustion turbine combined cycle facility was the highest and best use. The resulting Project reflected a cost effective balance of the following specific sub-objectives: Meeting the environmental and regulatory requirements, particularly the compliance obligations imposed on the landfill to collect, process and destroy landfill gas Utilizing proven and reliable technology and equipment Maximizing electrical efficiency Maximizing electric generating capacity, consistent with the anticipated quantities of landfill gas generated and collected at the Olinda Landfill Maximizing equipment uptime Minimizing water consumption Minimizing post-combustion emissions The Project produced and will produce a myriad of beneficial impacts. o The Project created 360 FTE construction and manufacturing jobs and 15 FTE permanent jobs associated with the operation and maintenance of the plant and equipment. o By combining state-of-the-art gas clean up systems with post combustion emissions control systems, the Project established new national standards for best available control technology (BACT). o The Project will annually produce 280,320 MWhs of clean energy o By destroying the methane in the landfill gas, the Project will generate CO2 equivalent reductions of 164,938 tons annually. The completed facility produces 27.4 MWnet and operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

  4. Corn Ethanol: The Surprisingly Effective Route for Natural Gas Consumption in the Transportation Sector

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Szybist, James P.; Curran, Scott

    2015-05-01

    Proven reserves and production of natural gas (NG) in the United States have increased dramatically in the last decade, due largely to the commercialization of hydraulic fracturing. This has led to a plentiful supply of NG, resulting in a significantly lower cost on a gallon of gasoline-equivalent (GGE) basis. Additionally, NG is a domestic, non-petroleum source of energy that is less carbon-intensive than coal or petroleum products, and thus can lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions. Because of these factors, there is a desire to increase the use of NG in the transportation sector in the United States (U.S.). However, using NG directly in the transportation sector requires that several non-trivial challenges be overcome. One of these issues is the fueling infrastructure. There are currently only 1,375 NG fueling stations in the U.S. compared to 152,995 fueling stations for gasoline in 2014. Additionally, there are very few light-duty vehicles that can consume this fuel directly as dedicated or bi-fuel options. For example, in model year 2013Honda was the only OEM to offer a dedicated CNG sedan while a number of others offered CNG options as a preparation package for LD trucks and vans. In total, there were a total of 11 vehicle models in 2013 that could be purchased that could use natural gas directly. There are additional potential issues associated with NG vehicles as well. Compared to commercial refueling stations, the at-home refueling time for NG vehicles is substantial – a result of the small compressors used for home refilling. Additionally, the methane emissions from both refueling (leakage) and from tailpipe emissions (slip) from these vehicles can add to their GHG footprint, and while these emissions are not currently regulated it could be a barrier in the future, especially in scenarios with broad scale adoption of CNG vehicles. However, NG consumption already plays a large role in other sectors of the economy, including some that are important to the transportation sector. Examples include steam reforming of natural gas to provide hydrogen for hydrotreating unit operations within the refinery and production of urea for use as a reductant for diesel after treatment in selective catalytic reduction (SCR). This discussion focuses on the consumption of natural gas in the production pathway of conventional ethanol (non-cellulosic) from corn through fermentation. Though it is clear that NG would also play a significant role in the cellulosic production pathways, those cases are not considered in this analysis.

  5. Table 8.5c Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Electricity Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.5b)

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

    5c Consumption of Combustible Fuels for Electricity Generation: Electric Power Sector by Plant Type, 1989-2011 (Breakout of Table 8.5b) Year Coal 1 Petroleum Natural Gas 6 Other Gases 7 Biomass Other 10 Distillate Fuel Oil 2 Residual Fuel Oil 3 Other Liquids 4 Petroleum Coke 5 Total 5 Wood 8 Waste 9 Short Tons Barrels Short Tons Barrels Thousand Cubic Feet Billion Btu Billion Btu Billion Btu Electricity-Only Plants 11<//td> 1989 767,378,330 25,574,094 241,960,194 3,460 517,385 270,124,673

  6. High order harmonic generation in dual gas multi-jets

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tosa, Valer E-mail: calin.hojbota@itim-cj.ro; Hojbota, Calin E-mail: calin.hojbota@itim-cj.ro

    2013-11-13

    High order harmonic generation (HHG) in gas media suffers from a low conversion efficiency that has its origins in the interaction of the atom/molecule with the laser field. Phase matching is the main way to enhance the harmonic flux and several solutions have been designed to achieve it. Here we present numerical results modeling HHG in a system of multi-jets in which two gases alternate: the first gas jet (for example Ne) generates harmonics and the second one which ionizes easier, recover the phase matching condition. We obtain configurations which are experimentally feasible with respect to pressures and dimensions of the jets.

  7. Gas generation matrix depletion quality assurance project plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-05-01

    The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is to provide the necessary expertise, experience, equipment and instrumentation, and management structure to: Conduct the matrix depletion experiments using simulated waste for quantifying matrix depletion effects; and Conduct experiments on 60 cylinders containing simulated TRU waste to determine the effects of matrix depletion on gas generation for transportation. All work for the Gas Generation Matrix Depletion (GGMD) experiment is performed according to the quality objectives established in the test plan and under this Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP).

  8. U.S. Natural Gas Average Consumption per Industrial Consumer (Thousand

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Industrial Consumer (Thousand Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Average Consumption per Industrial Consumer (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 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's 39,245 37,530 30,909 29,915 24,309 30,956 29,057 30,423 32,071 30,248 1990's 32,144 33,395 35,908 38,067 40,244 40,973 43,050 36,239 36,785 35,384 2000's 36,968 33,840 36,458 34,793 34,645 31,991 33,597 33,561 29,639 29,705 2010's 35,418 36,947 38,159

  9. Fact #844: October 27, 2014 Electricity Generated from Coal has Declined while Generation from Natural Gas has Grown – Dataset

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Excel file with dataset for Fact #844: Electricity Generated from Coal has Declined while Generation from Natural Gas has Grown

  10. Greenhouse Gas Abatement with Distributed Generation in California's Commercial Buildings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marnay, Chris; Stadler, Michael; Lipman, Tim; Lai, Judy; Cardoso, Goncalo; Megel, Olivier

    2009-09-01

    The motivation and objective of this research is to determine the role of distributed generation (DG) in greenhouse gas reductions by: (1) applying the Distributed Energy Resources Customer Adoption Model (DER-CAM); (2) using the California Commercial End-Use Survey (CEUS) database for commercial buildings; (3) selecting buildings with electric peak loads between 100 kW and 5 MW; (4) considering fuel cells, micro-turbines, internal combustion engines, gas turbines with waste heat utilization, solar thermal, and PV; (5) testing of different policy instruments, e.g. feed-in tariff or investment subsidies.

  11. Modeling acid-gas generation from boiling chloride brines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Guoxiang; Spycher, Nicolas; Sonnenthal, Eric; Steefel, Carl

    2009-11-16

    This study investigates the generation of HCl and other acid gases from boiling calcium chloride dominated waters at atmospheric pressure, primarily using numerical modeling. The main focus of this investigation relates to the long-term geologic disposal of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, where pore waters around waste-emplacement tunnels are expected to undergo boiling and evaporative concentration as a result of the heat released by spent nuclear fuel. Processes that are modeled include boiling of highly concentrated solutions, gas transport, and gas condensation accompanied by the dissociation of acid gases, causing low-pH condensate. Simple calculations are first carried out to evaluate condensate pH as a function of HCl gas fugacity and condensed water fraction for a vapor equilibrated with saturated calcium chloride brine at 50-150 C and 1 bar. The distillation of a calcium-chloride-dominated brine is then simulated with a reactive transport model using a brine composition representative of partially evaporated calcium-rich pore waters at Yucca Mountain. Results show a significant increase in boiling temperature from evaporative concentration, as well as low pH in condensates, particularly for dynamic systems where partial condensation takes place, which result in enrichment of HCl in condensates. These results are in qualitative agreement with experimental data from other studies. The combination of reactive transport with multicomponent brine chemistry to study evaporation, boiling, and the potential for acid gas generation at the proposed Yucca Mountain repository is seen as an improvement relative to previously applied simpler batch evaporation models. This approach allows the evaluation of thermal, hydrological, and chemical (THC) processes in a coupled manner, and modeling of settings much more relevant to actual field conditions than the distillation experiment considered. The actual and modeled distillation experiments do not represent expected conditions in an emplacement drift, but nevertheless illustrate the potential for acid-gas generation at moderate temperatures (<150 C).

  12. Biomass gasification for gas turbine-based power generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paisley, M.A.; Anson, D.

    1998-04-01

    The Biomass Power Program of the US Department of Energy (DOE) has as a major goal the development of cost-competitive technologies for the production of power from renewable biomass crops. The gasification of biomass provides the potential to meet this goal by efficiently and economically producing a renewable source of a clean gaseous fuel suitable for use in high-efficiency gas turbines. This paper discusses the development and first commercial demonstration of the Battelle high-throughput gasification process for power generation systems. Projected process economics are presented along with a description of current experimental operations coupling a gas turbine power generation system to the research scale gasifier and the process scaleup activities in Burlington, Vermont.

  13. Method of generating hydrogen gas from sodium borohydride

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kravitz, Stanley H. (Placitas, NM); Hecht, Andrew M. (Sandia Park, NM); Sylwester, Alan P. (Albuquerque, NM); Bell, Nelson S. (Albuquerque, NM)

    2007-12-11

    A compact solid source of hydrogen gas, where the gas is generated by contacting water with micro-disperse particles of sodium borohydride in the presence of a catalyst, such as cobalt or ruthenium. The micro-disperse particles can have a substantially uniform diameter of 1-10 microns, and preferably about 3-5 microns. Ruthenium or cobalt catalytic nanoparticles can be incorporated in the micro-disperse particles of sodium borohydride, which allows a rapid and complete reaction to occur without the problems associated with caking and scaling of the surface by the reactant product sodium metaborate. A closed loop water management system can be used to recycle wastewater from a PEM fuel cell to supply water for reacting with the micro-disperse particles of sodium borohydride in a compact hydrogen gas generator. Capillary forces can wick water from a water reservoir into a packed bed of micro-disperse fuel particles, eliminating the need for using an active pump.

  14. Relativistic high harmonic generation in gas jet targets

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pirozhkov, A.S.; Kando, M.; Esirkepov, T.Zh.; and others

    2012-07-11

    We experimentally demonstrate a new regime of high-order harmonic generation by relativistic-irradiance lasers in gas jet targets. Bright harmonics with both odd and even orders, generated by linearly as well as circularly polarized pulses, are emitted in the forward direction, while the base harmonic frequency is downshifted. A 9 TW laser generates harmonics up to 360 eV, within the 'water window' spectral region. With a 120 TW laser producing 40 uJ/sr per harmonic at 120 eV, we demonstrate the photon number scalability. The observed harmonics cannot be explained by previously suggested scenarios. A novel high-order harmonics generation mechanism [T. Zh. Esirkepov et al., AIP Proceedings, this volume], which explains our experimental findings, is based on the phenomena inherent in the relativistic laser - underdense plasma interactions (self-focusing, cavity evacuation, and bow wave generation), mathematical catastrophe theory which explains formation of electron density singularities (cusps), and collective radiation due to nonlinear oscillations of a compact charge.

  15. Table 8.4c Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source...

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

    Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy Other 9 Electricity Net Imports Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric ...

  16. Gas cleanup for combined cycle power generation using a hot gas conditioning catalyst

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paisley, M.A.; Gebhard, S.C.

    1995-11-01

    Biomass gasification provides the potential to efficiently and economically produce a renewable source of a clean gaseous fuel suitable for power generation or synthesis gas (syngas) applications. Biomass as the feedstock for the process is uniquely suited to this application because it provides the means to increase the nation`s energy security, and also, to potentially provide a more stable agricultural industry. An important side benefit of the use of biomass is the effective minimization of the primary greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}), by providing a means to close-loop the CO{sub 2} cycle. However, high molecular weight hydrocarbon constituents (tar) in the product gas from gasification can complicate the downstream uses of the gas. This paper discusses both the development of a low cost, disposable catalyst system that can eliminate these heavy hydrocarbons from the gas and the use of the catalyst in conjunction with the Battelle high-throughput gasification process for power generation systems.

  17. Advanced Combustion Systems for Next Generation Gas Turbines

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Joel Haynes; Jonathan Janssen; Craig Russell; Marcus Huffman

    2006-01-01

    Next generation turbine power plants will require high efficiency gas turbines with higher pressure ratios and turbine inlet temperatures than currently available. These increases in gas turbine cycle conditions will tend to increase NOx emissions. As the desire for higher efficiency drives pressure ratios and turbine inlet temperatures ever higher, gas turbines equipped with both lean premixed combustors and selective catalytic reduction after treatment eventually will be unable to meet the new emission goals of sub-3 ppm NOx. New gas turbine combustors are needed with lower emissions than the current state-of-the-art lean premixed combustors. In this program an advanced combustion system for the next generation of gas turbines is being developed with the goal of reducing combustor NOx emissions by 50% below the state-of-the-art. Dry Low NOx (DLN) technology is the current leader in NOx emission technology, guaranteeing 9 ppm NOx emissions for heavy duty F class gas turbines. This development program is directed at exploring advanced concepts which hold promise for meeting the low emissions targets. The trapped vortex combustor is an advanced concept in combustor design. It has been studied widely for aircraft engine applications because it has demonstrated the ability to maintain a stable flame over a wide range of fuel flow rates. Additionally, it has shown significantly lower NOx emission than a typical aircraft engine combustor and with low CO at the same time. The rapid CO burnout and low NOx production of this combustor made it a strong candidate for investigation. Incremental improvements to the DLN technology have not brought the dramatic improvements that are targeted in this program. A revolutionary combustor design is being explored because it captures many of the critical features needed to significantly reduce emissions. Experimental measurements of the combustor performance at atmospheric conditions were completed in the first phase of the program. Emissions measurements were obtained over a variety of operating conditions. A kinetics model is formulated to describe the emissions performance. The model is a tool for determining the conditions for low emission performance. The flow field was also modeled using CFD. A first prototype was developed for low emission performance on natural gas. The design utilized the tools anchored to the atmospheric prototype performance. The 1/6 scale combustor was designed for low emission performance in GE's FA+e gas turbine. A second prototype was developed to evaluate changes in the design approach. The prototype was developed at a 1/10 scale for low emission performance in GE's FA+e gas turbine. The performance of the first two prototypes gave a strong indication of the best design approach. Review of the emission results led to the development of a 3rd prototype to further reduce the combustor emissions. The original plan to produce a scaled-up prototype was pushed out beyond the scope of the current program. The 3rd prototype was designed at 1/10 scale and targeted further reductions in the full-speed full-load emissions.

  18. Fact #844: October 27, 2014 Electricity Generated from Coal has Declined while Generation from Natural Gas has Grown

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    From 2002 to 2012, most states have reduced their reliance on coal for electricity generation. The figure below shows the percent change in electricity generated by coal and natural gas for each...

  19. Review of Operational Water Consumption and Withdrawal Factors for Electricity Generating Technologies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Macknick, J.; Newmark, R.; Heath, G.; Hallett, K. C.

    2011-03-01

    Various studies have attempted to consolidate published estimates of water use impacts of electricity generating technologies, resulting in a wide range of technologies and values based on different primary sources of literature. The goal of this work is to consolidate the various primary literature estimates of water use during the generation of electricity by conventional and renewable electricity generating technologies in the United States to more completely convey the variability and uncertainty associated with water use in electricity generating technologies.

  20. Table 8.4b Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source...

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

    (Subset of Table 8.4a; Billion Btu) Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power 5 Renewable Energy Other 9 Electricity Net Imports 10 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other ...

  1. Table 8.4a Consumption for Electricity Generation by Energy Source...

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

    Year Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power 5 Renewable Energy Other 9 Electricity Net Imports 10 Total Coal 1 Petroleum 2 Natural Gas 3 Other Gases 4 Total Conventional Hydroelectric ...

  2. Reduced Energy Consumption through the Development of Fuel-Flexible Gas Turbines

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Gas turbines—heat engines that use high-temperature and high-pressure gas as the combustible fuel—are used extensively throughout U.S. industry to power industrial processes. The majority of...

  3. Radiolytic gas generation in salt cake technical task plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walker, D.D.; Crawford, C.L.; Bibler, N.E.

    1993-08-29

    High-level radioactive wastes are stored in large, steel tanks in the Savannah River Site Tank Farms. The liquid levels in these tanks are monitored to detect leakage of waste out of tanks or leakage of liquids into the tanks. Recent unexplained level fluctuations in high-level waste (HLW) tanks have caused High Level Waste Engineering (HLWE) to develop a program to better understand tank level behavior. Interim Waste Technology (IWT) has been requested by HLWE to obtain data which will lead to a better understanding of the radiolytic generations of gases in salt cake. The task described below will provide data from laboratory experiments with simulated wastes which can be used in tank level fluctuation modeling. The following experimental programs have been formulated to meet the task requirements of the customer: (A) determine whether radiolytically generated gas bubbles can be trapped in salt cake; (B) determine the composition of gases produced by radiolysis; (C) determine the yield of radiolysis gases as a function of radiation dose; (D) determine bubble distribution.

  4. Next Generation * Natural Gas (NG)2 Information Requirements--Executive Summary

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2000-01-01

    The Energy Information Administration (EIA) has initiated the Next Generation * Natural Gas (NG)2 project to design and implement a new and comprehensive information program for natural gas to meet customer requirements in the post-2000 time frame.

  5. 1,"Chuck Lenzie Generating Station","Natural gas","Nevada Power...

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

    Co",522 9,"Apex Generating Station","Natural gas","Los Angeles Department of Water & Power",494.4 10,"Desert Star Energy Center","Natural gas","Desert Star Energy Center SDG&E",45

  6. Greenhouse Gas Abatement with Distributed Generation in California's Commercial Buildings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stadler, Michael; Marnay, Chris; Cardoso, Goncalo; Megel, Olivier; Siddiqui, Afzal; Lai, Judy

    2009-08-15

    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBL) is working with the California Energy Commission (CEC) to determine the role of distributed generation (DG) in greenhouse gas reductions. The impact of DG on large industrial sites is well known, and mostly, the potentials are already harvested. In contrast, little is known about the impact of DG on commercial buildings with peak electric loads ranging from 100 kW to 5 MW. We examine how DG with combined heat and power (CHP) may be implemented within the context of a cost minimizing microgrid that is able to adopt and operate various smart energy technologies, such as thermal and photovoltaic (PV) on-site generation, heat exchangers, solar thermal collectors, absorption chillers, and storage systems. We use a mixed-integer linear program (MILP) that has the minimization of a site's annual energy costs as objective. Using 138 representative commercial sites in California (CA) with existing tariff rates and technology data, we find the greenhouse gas reduction potential for California's commercial sector. This paper shows results from the ongoing research project and finished work from a two year U.S. Department of Energy research project. To show the impact of the different technologies on CO2 emissions, several sensitivity runs for different climate zones within CA with different technology performance expectations for 2020 were performed. The considered sites can contribute between 1 Mt/a and 1.8 Mt/a to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) goal of 6.7Mt/a CO2 abatement potential in 2020. Also, with lower PV and storage costs as well as consideration of a CO2 pricing scheme, our results indicate that PV and electric storage adoption can compete rather than supplement each other when the tariff structure and costs of electricity supply have been taken into consideration. To satisfy the site's objective of minimizing energy costs, the batteries will be charged also by CHP systems during off-peak and mid-peak hours and not only by PV during sunny on-peak hours.

  7. Quality Assurance Program Plan for TRUPACT-II Gas Generation Test Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carlsbad Field Office

    2002-03-01

    The Gas Generation Test Program (GGTP), referred to as the Program, is designed to establish the concentration of flammable gases and/or gas generation rates in a test category waste container intended for shipment in the Transuranic Package Transporter-II (TRUPACT-II). The phrase "gas generationtesting" shall refer to any activity that establishes the flammable gas concentration or the flammable gas generation rate. This includes, but is not limited to, measurements performed directly on waste containers or during tests performed on waste containers. This Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) documents the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) requirements that apply to the Program. The TRUPACT-II requirements and technical bases for allowable flammable gas concentration and gas generation rates are described in the TRUPACT-II Authorized Methods for Payload Control (TRAMPAC).

  8. Cover and startup gas supply system for solid oxide fuel cell generator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Singh, P.; George, R.A.

    1999-07-27

    A cover and startup gas supply system for a solid oxide fuel cell power generator is disclosed. Hydrocarbon fuel, such as natural gas or diesel fuel, and oxygen-containing gas are supplied to a burner. Combustion gas exiting the burner is cooled prior to delivery to the solid oxide fuel cell. The system mixes the combusted hydrocarbon fuel constituents with hydrogen which is preferably stored in solid form to obtain a non-explosive gas mixture. The system may be used to provide both non-explosive cover gas and hydrogen-rich startup gas to the fuel cell. 4 figs.

  9. Cover and startup gas supply system for solid oxide fuel cell generator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Singh, Prabhakar (Export, PA); George, Raymond A. (Pittsburgh, PA)

    1999-01-01

    A cover and startup gas supply system for a solid oxide fuel cell power generator is disclosed. Hydrocarbon fuel, such as natural gas or diesel fuel, and oxygen-containing gas are supplied to a burner. Combustion gas exiting the burner is cooled prior to delivery to the solid oxide fuel cell. The system mixes the combusted hydrocarbon fuel constituents with hydrogen which is preferably stored in solid form to obtain a non-explosive gas mixture. The system may be used to provide both non-explosive cover gas and hydrogen-rich startup gas to the fuel cell.

  10. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2A. Natural Gas Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Year Constructed for All Buildings, 2003 Total Natural Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet) Total Floorspace of...

  11. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5A. Natural Gas Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003 Total Natural Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet) Total Floorspace of...

  12. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

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

    0A. Natural Gas Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Climate Zonea for All Buildings, 2003 Total Natural Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet) Total Floorspace of...

  13. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8A. Natural Gas Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 2 Total Natural Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet) Total Floorspace...

  14. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

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

    9A. Natural Gas Consumption and Conditional Energy Intensity by Census Division for All Buildings, 2003: Part 3 Total Natural Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet) Total Floorspace...

  15. Adapting On-Site Electrical Generation Platforms for Producer Gas - Fact

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

    Sheet, April 2014 | Department of Energy Adapting On-Site Electrical Generation Platforms for Producer Gas - Fact Sheet, April 2014 Adapting On-Site Electrical Generation Platforms for Producer Gas - Fact Sheet, April 2014 The University of Minnesota, Morris, in collaboration with the University of Minnesota Center for Diesel Research, Cummins Power Generation Inc., ALL Power Labs, and Hammel, Green & Abrahamson (HGA), integrated a biomass gasifier and a reciprocating engine generator

  16. Natural Gas Weekly Update

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

    this week led to decreases in consumption of natural gas for power generation. Power burn fell almost 4 percent week over week, according to data from Bentek Energy Services,...

  17. 3rd Generation SCR System Using Solid Ammonia Storage and Direct Gas Dosing

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

    | Department of Energy rd Generation SCR System Using Solid Ammonia Storage and Direct Gas Dosing 3rd Generation SCR System Using Solid Ammonia Storage and Direct Gas Dosing SCR system provides direct ammonia gas dosing for optimal SCR performance with simplified and flexible exhaust layout. PDF icon deer12_johannessen.pdf More Documents & Publications Ammonia storage and delivery systems for NOx aftertreatment Safe and compact ammonia storage/delivery systems for SCR-DeNOX in automotive

  18. Fuel Flexibility: Landfill Gas Contaminant Mitigation for Power Generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Storey, John Morse; Theiss, Timothy J; Kass, Michael D; FINNEY, Charles E A; Lewis, Samuel; Kaul, Brian C; Besmann, Theodore M; Thomas, John F; Rogers, Hiram; Sepaniak, Michael

    2014-04-01

    This research project focused on the mitigation of silica damage to engine-based renewable landfill gas energy systems. Characterization of the landfill gas siloxane contamination, combined with characterization of the silica deposits in engines, led to development of two new mitigation strategies. The first involved a novel method for removing the siloxanes and other heavy contaminants from the landfill gas prior to use by the engines. The second strategy sought to interrupt the formation of hard silica deposits in the engine itself, based on inspection of failed landfill gas engine parts. In addition to mitigation, the project had a third task to develop a robust sensor for siloxanes that could be used to control existing and/or future removal processes.

  19. DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND TESTING OF AN ADVANCED, NON-POLLUTING TURBINE DRIVE GAS GENERATOR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Unknown

    2002-01-31

    The objective of this report period was to continue the development of the Gas Generator design, fabrication and test of the non-polluting unique power turbine drive Gas Generator. Focus during this past report period has been to continue completion the Gas Generator design, completing the brazing and bonding experiments to determine the best method and materials necessary to fabricate the Gas Generator hardware, continuing to making preparations for fabricating and testing this Gas Generator and commencing with the fabrication of the Gas Generator hardware and ancillary hardware. Designs have been completed sufficiently such that Long Lead Items [LLI] have been ordered and upon arrival will be readied for the fabrication process. The keys to this design are the platelet construction of the injectors that precisely measures/meters the flow of the propellants and water all throughout the steam generating process and the CES patented gas generating cycle. The Igniter Assembly injector platelets fabrication process has been completed and bonded to the Igniter Assembly and final machined. The Igniter Assembly is in final assembly and is being readied for testing in the October 2001 time frame. Test Plan dated August 2001, was revised and finalized, replacing Test Plan dated May 2001.

  20. Terra nitrogen Company, L.P.: Ammonia Plant Greatly Reduces Natural Gas Consumption After Energy Assessment. Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) Save Energy Now Case Study.

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

    Terra Nitrogen plant in Verdigris, Oklahoma. Terra Nitrogen Company, L.P.: Ammonia Plant Greatly Reduces Natural Gas Consumption After Energy Assessment Industrial Technologies Program Case Study Benefits * Saves approximately $3.5 million annually * Achieves annual natural gas savings of 497,000 MMBtu * Achieves a simple payback of 11 months Key Findings * Accurately quantifying potential energy savings can provide renewed impetus to reduce energy use. * Although Terra Nitrogen actively managed

  1. New generation enrichment monitoring technology for gas centrifuge enrichment plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ianakiev, Kiril D; Alexandrov, Boian S.; Boyer, Brian D.; Hill, Thomas R.; Macarthur, Duncan W.; Marks, Thomas; Moss, Calvin E.; Sheppard, Gregory A.; Swinhoe, Martyn T.

    2008-06-13

    The continuous enrichment monitor, developed and fielded in the 1990s by the International Atomic Energy Agency, provided a go-no-go capability to distinguish between UF{sub 6} containing low enriched (approximately 4% {sup 235}U) and highly enriched (above 20% {sup 235}U) uranium. This instrument used the 22-keV line from a {sup 109}Cd source as a transmission source to achieve a high sensitivity to the UF{sub 6} gas absorption. The 1.27-yr half-life required that the source be periodically replaced and the instrument recalibrated. The instrument's functionality and accuracy were limited by the fact that measured gas density and gas pressure were treated as confidential facility information. The modern safeguarding of a gas centrifuge enrichment plant producing low-enriched UF{sub 6} product aims toward a more quantitative flow and enrichment monitoring concept that sets new standards for accuracy stability, and confidence. An instrument must be accurate enough to detect the diversion of a significant quantity of material, have virtually zero false alarms, and protect the operator's proprietary process information. We discuss a new concept for advanced gas enrichment assay measurement technology. This design concept eliminates the need for the periodic replacement of a radioactive source as well as the need for maintenance by experts. Some initial experimental results will be presented.

  2. Adapting On-site Electrical Generation Platforms for Producer Gas

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Internal combustion reciprocating engine generators (gensets) are regularly deployed at distribution centers, small municipal utilities, and public institutions to provide on-site electricity...

  3. Onboard Plasmatron Generation of Hydrogen rich Gas for Diesel...

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

    Hydrogen generation from plasmatron reformers and use for diesel exhaust aftertreatment A Fast Start-up On-Board Fuel Reformer for NOx Adsorber Regeneration and Desulfation

  4. Relativistic high harmonic generation in gas jet targets (Journal...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    (self-focusing, cavity evacuation, and bow wave generation), mathematical catastrophe theory which explains formation of electron density singularities (cusps), and collective...

  5. Effects of Globally Waste Disturbing Activities on Gas Generation, Retention, and Release in Hanford Waste Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stewart, Charles W.; Fountain, Matthew S.; Huckaby, James L.; Mahoney, Lenna A.; Meyer, Perry A.; Wells, Beric E.

    2005-08-02

    Various operations are authorized in Hanford single- and double-shell tanks that disturb all or a large fraction of the waste. These globally waste-disturbing activities have the potential to release a large fraction of the retained flammable gas and to affect future gas generation, retention, and release behavior. This report presents analyses of the expected flammable gas release mechanisms and the potential release rates and volumes resulting from these activities. The background of the flammable gas safety issue at Hanford is summarized, as is the current understanding of gas generation, retention, and release phenomena. Considerations for gas monitoring and assessment of the potential for changes in tank classification and steady-state flammability are given.

  6. Electric Power Generation from Coproduced Fluids from Oil and Gas Wells

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The primary objective of this project is to demonstrate the technical and economic feasibility of generating electricity from non-conventional low temperature (150 to 300º F) geothermal resources in oil and gas settings.

  7. Comparing Statewide Economic Impacts of New Generation from Wind, Coal, and Natural Gas in Arizona, Colorado, and Michigan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tegen, S.

    2006-05-01

    Report comparing the impacts to states from equivalent new electrical generation from wind, natural gas, and coal.

  8. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Generation (Fact Sheet)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2013-01-01

    Analysts at NREL have developed and applied a systematic approach to review the LCA literature, identify primary sources of variability and, where possible, reduce variability in GHG emissions estimates through a procedure called 'harmonization.' Harmonization of the literature provides increased precision and helps clarify the impacts of specific electricity generation choices, producing more robust results.

  9. FABRICATE AND TEST AN ADVANCED NON-POLLUTING TURBINE DRIVE GAS GENERATOR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eugene Baxter; Roger E. Anderson; Stephen E. Doyle

    2003-06-01

    In September 2000 the Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (DOE/NETL) contracted with Clean Energy Systems, Inc. (CES) of Sacramento, California to design, fabricate, and test a 20 MW{sub t} (10 MW{sub e}) gas generator. Program goals were to demonstrate a non-polluting gas generator at temperatures up to 3000 F at 1500 psi, and to demonstrate resulting drive gas composition, comprising steam and carbon dioxide substantially free of pollutants. Following hardware design and fabrication, testing, originally planned to begin in the summer of 2001, was delayed by unavailability of the contracted test facility. CES designed, fabricated, and tested the proposed gas generator as originally agreed. The CES process for producing near-zero-emissions power from fossil fuels is based on the near-stoichiometric combustion of a clean gaseous fuel with oxygen in the presence of recycled water, to produce a high-temperature, high-pressure turbine drive fluid comprising steam and carbon dioxide. Tests demonstrated igniter operation over the prescribed ranges of pressure and mixture ratios. Ignition was repeatable and reliable through more than 100 ignitions. Injector design ''A'' was operated successfully at both low power ({approx}20% of rated power) and at rated power ({approx}20 MW{sub t}) in more than 95 tests. The uncooled gas generator configuration (no diluent injectors or cooldown chambers installed) produced drive gases at temperatures approaching 3000 F and at pressures greater than 1550 psia. The fully cooled gas generator configuration, with cooldown chambers and injector ''A'', operated consistently at pressures from 1100 to 1540 psia and produced high pressure, steam-rich turbine drive gases at temperatures ranging from {approx}3000 to as low as 600 F. This report includes description of the intended next steps in the gas generator technology demonstration and traces the anticipated pathway to commercialization for the gas generator technology developed in this program.

  10. Accounting for fuel price risk: Using forward natural gas prices instead of gas price forecasts to compare renewable to natural gas-fired generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bolinger, Mark; Wiser, Ryan; Golove, William

    2003-08-13

    Against the backdrop of increasingly volatile natural gas prices, renewable energy resources, which by their nature are immune to natural gas fuel price risk, provide a real economic benefit. Unlike many contracts for natural gas-fired generation, renewable generation is typically sold under fixed-price contracts. Assuming that electricity consumers value long-term price stability, a utility or other retail electricity supplier that is looking to expand its resource portfolio (or a policymaker interested in evaluating different resource options) should therefore compare the cost of fixed-price renewable generation to the hedged or guaranteed cost of new natural gas-fired generation, rather than to projected costs based on uncertain gas price forecasts. To do otherwise would be to compare apples to oranges: by their nature, renewable resources carry no natural gas fuel price risk, and if the market values that attribute, then the most appropriate comparison is to the hedged cost of natural gas-fired generation. Nonetheless, utilities and others often compare the costs of renewable to gas-fired generation using as their fuel price input long-term gas price forecasts that are inherently uncertain, rather than long-term natural gas forward prices that can actually be locked in. This practice raises the critical question of how these two price streams compare. If they are similar, then one might conclude that forecast-based modeling and planning exercises are in fact approximating an apples-to-apples comparison, and no further consideration is necessary. If, however, natural gas forward prices systematically differ from price forecasts, then the use of such forecasts in planning and modeling exercises will yield results that are biased in favor of either renewable (if forwards < forecasts) or natural gas-fired generation (if forwards > forecasts). In this report we compare the cost of hedging natural gas price risk through traditional gas-based hedging instruments (e.g., futures, swaps, and fixed-price physical supply contracts) to contemporaneous forecasts of spot natural gas prices, with the purpose of identifying any systematic differences between the two. Although our data set is quite limited, we find that over the past three years, forward gas prices for durations of 2-10 years have been considerably higher than most natural gas spot price forecasts, including the reference case forecasts developed by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). This difference is striking, and implies that resource planning and modeling exercises based on these forecasts over the past three years have yielded results that are biased in favor of gas-fired generation (again, presuming that long-term stability is desirable). As discussed later, these findings have important ramifications for resource planners, energy modelers, and policy-makers.

  11. SULFUR REMOVAL FROM PIPE LINE NATURAL GAS FUEL: APPLICATION TO FUEL CELL POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    King, David L.; Birnbaum, Jerome C.; Singh, Prabhakar

    2003-11-21

    Pipeline natural gas is being considered as the fuel of choice for utilization in fuel cell-based distributed generation systems because of its abundant supply and the existing supply infrastructure (1). For effective utilization in fuel cells, pipeline gas requires efficient removal of sulfur impurities (naturally occurring sulfur compounds or sulfur bearing odorants) to prevent the electrical performance degradation of the fuel cell system. Sulfur odorants such as thiols and sulfides are added to pipeline natural gas and to LPG to ensure safe handling during transportation and utilization. The odorants allow the detection of minute gas line leaks, thereby minimizing the potential for explosions or fires.

  12. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Generation Fact Sheet

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    As clean energy increasingly becomes part of the national dialogue, lenders, utilities, and lawmakers need the most comprehensive and accurate information on GHG emissions from various sources of energy to inform policy, planning, and investment decisions. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) recently led the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Harmonization Project, a study that gives decision makers and investors more precise estimates of life cycle GHG emissions for renewable and conventional generation, clarifying inconsistent and conflicting estimates in the published literature, and reducing uncertainty.

  13. Natural Gas Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2,089,668 2,073,611 1,919,315 2,003,334 2,257,474 2,597,815

  14. Natural Gas Consumption

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. 24,086,797 24,477,425 25,538,487 26,155,071 26,698,068 27,472,867 1949-2015 Alabama 534,779 598,514 666,712 615,407 634,678 1997-2014 Alaska 333,312 335,458 343,110 332,298 327,428 1997-2014 Arizona 330,914 288,802 332,068 332,073 307,946 1997-2014 Arkansas 271,515 284,076 296,132 282,120

  15. GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION POTENTIAL WITH COMBINED HEAT AND POWER WITH DISTRIBUTED GENERATION PRIME MOVERS - ASME 2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Curran, Scott; Theiss, Timothy J; Bunce, Michael

    2012-01-01

    Pending or recently enacted greenhouse gas regulations and mandates are leading to the need for current and feasible GHG reduction solutions including combined heat and power (CHP). Distributed generation using advanced reciprocating engines, gas turbines, microturbines and fuel cells has been shown to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) compared to the U.S. electrical generation mix due to the use of natural gas and high electrical generation efficiencies of these prime movers. Many of these prime movers are also well suited for use in CHP systems which recover heat generated during combustion or energy conversion. CHP increases the total efficiency of the prime mover by recovering waste heat for generating electricity, replacing process steam, hot water for buildings or even cooling via absorption chilling. The increased efficiency of CHP systems further reduces GHG emissions compared to systems which do not recover waste thermal energy. Current GHG mandates within the U.S Federal sector and looming GHG legislation for states puts an emphasis on understanding the GHG reduction potential of such systems. This study compares the GHG savings from various state-of-the- art prime movers. GHG reductions from commercially available prime movers in the 1-5 MW class including, various industrial fuel cells, large and small gas turbines, micro turbines and reciprocating gas engines with and without CHP are compared to centralized electricity generation including the U.S. mix and the best available technology with natural gas combined cycle power plants. The findings show significant GHG saving potential with the use of CHP. Also provided is an exploration of the accounting methodology for GHG reductions with CHP and the sensitivity of such analyses to electrical generation efficiency, emissions factors and most importantly recoverable heat and thermal recovery efficiency from the CHP system.

  16. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1992...

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

    1992 Consumption and Expenditures 1992 Consumption & Expenditures Overview Full Report Tables National estimates of electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and district heat...

  17. Microbial Gas Generation Under Expected Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Repository Conditions: Final Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gillow, J.B.; Francis, A.

    2011-07-01

    Gas generation from the microbial degradation of the organic constituents of transuranic (TRU) waste under conditions expected in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) was investigated. The biodegradation of mixed cellulosic materials and electron-beam irradiated plastic and rubber materials (polyethylene, polyvinylchloride, hypalon, leaded hypalon, and neoprene) was examined. We evaluated the effects of environmental variables such as initial atmosphere (air or nitrogen), water content (humid ({approx}70% relative humidity, RH) and brine inundated), and nutrient amendments (nitogen phosphate, yeast extract, and excess nitrate) on microbial gas generation. Total gas production was determined by pressure measurement and carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) and methane (CH{sub 4}) were analyzed by gas chromatography; cellulose degradation products in solution were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Microbial populations in the samples were determined by direct microscopy and molecular analysis. The results of this work are summarized.

  18. CALCULATION OF DEMONSTRATION BULK VITRIFICATION SYSTEM MELTER INLEAKAGE AND OFF-GAS GENERATION RATE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MAY TH

    2008-04-16

    The River Protection Project (RPP) mission is to safely store, retrieve, treat, immobilize, and dispose of the Hanford Site tank waste. The Demonstration Bulk Vitrification System (DBVS) is a research and development project whose objective is to demonstrate the suitability of Bulk Vitrification treatment technology waste form for disposing of low-activity waste from the Tank Farms. The objective of this calculation is to determine the DBVS melter inleakage and off-gas generation rate based on full scale testing data from 38D. This calculation estimates the DBVS melter in leakage and gas generation rate based on test data. Inleakage is estimated before the melt was initiated, at one point during the melt, and at the end of the melt. Maximum gas generation rate is also estimated.

  19. Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Gas Generation Testing Program at the INEL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-10-01

    The data quality objectives (DQOs) for the Program are to evaluate compliance with the limits on total gas generation rates, establish the concentrations of hydrogen and methane in the total gas flow, determine the headspace concentration of VOCs in each drum prior to the start of the test, and obtain estimates of the concentrations of several compounds for mass balance purposes. Criteria for the selection of waste containers at the INEL and the parameters that must be characterized prior to and during the tests are described. Collection of gaseous samples from 55-gallon drums of contact-handled transuranic waste for the gas generation testing is discussed. Analytical methods and calibrations are summarized. Administrative quality control measures described in this QAPjP include the generation, review, and approval of project documentation; control and retention of records; measures to ensure that personnel, subcontractors or vendors, and equipment meet the specifications necessary to achieve the required data quality for the project.

  20. Gas generation from low-level radioactive waste: Concerns for disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Siskind, B.

    1992-01-01

    The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) has urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reexamine the topic of hydrogen gas generation from low-level radioactive waste (LLW) in closed spaces to ensure that the slow buildup of hydrogen from water-bearing wastes in sealed containers does not become a problem for long-term safe disposal. Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) has prepared a report, summarized in this paper, for the NRC to respond to these concerns. The paper discusses the range of values for G(H{sub 2}) reported for materials of relevance to LLW disposal; most of these values are in the range of 0.1 to 0.6. Most studies of radiolytic hydrogen generation indicate a leveling off of pressurization, probably because of chemical kinetics involving, in many cases, the radiolysis of water within the waste. Even if no leveling off occurs, realistic gas leakage rates (indicating poor closure by gaskets on drums and liners) will result in adequate relief of pressure for radiolytic gas generation from the majority of commercial sector LLW packages. Biodegradative gas generation, however, could pose a pressurization hazard even at realistic gas leakage rates. Recommendations include passive vents on LLW containers (as already specified for high integrity containers) and upper limits to the G values and/or the specific activity of the LLW.

  1. Gas generation from low-level radioactive waste: Concerns for disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Siskind, B.

    1992-04-01

    The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) has urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reexamine the topic of hydrogen gas generation from low-level radioactive waste (LLW) in closed spaces to ensure that the slow buildup of hydrogen from water-bearing wastes in sealed containers does not become a problem for long-term safe disposal. Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) has prepared a report, summarized in this paper, for the NRC to respond to these concerns. The paper discusses the range of values for G(H{sub 2}) reported for materials of relevance to LLW disposal; most of these values are in the range of 0.1 to 0.6. Most studies of radiolytic hydrogen generation indicate a leveling off of pressurization, probably because of chemical kinetics involving, in many cases, the radiolysis of water within the waste. Even if no leveling off occurs, realistic gas leakage rates (indicating poor closure by gaskets on drums and liners) will result in adequate relief of pressure for radiolytic gas generation from the majority of commercial sector LLW packages. Biodegradative gas generation, however, could pose a pressurization hazard even at realistic gas leakage rates. Recommendations include passive vents on LLW containers (as already specified for high integrity containers) and upper limits to the G values and/or the specific activity of the LLW.

  2. Life Cycle GHG Emissions from Conventional Natural Gas Power Generation: Systematic Review and Harmonization (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heath, G.; O'Donoughue, P.; Whitaker, M.

    2012-12-01

    This research provides a systematic review and harmonization of the life cycle assessment (LCA) literature of electricity generated from conventionally produced natural gas. We focus on estimates of greenhouse gases (GHGs) emitted in the life cycle of electricity generation from conventionally produced natural gas in combustion turbines (NGCT) and combined-cycle (NGCC) systems. A process we term "harmonization" was employed to align several common system performance parameters and assumptions to better allow for cross-study comparisons, with the goal of clarifying central tendency and reducing variability in estimates of life cycle GHG emissions. This presentation summarizes preliminary results.

  3. Limited Electricity Generation Supply and Limited Natural Gas Supply Cases (released in AEO2008)

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2008-01-01

    Development of U.S. energy resources and the permitting and construction of large energy facilities have become increasingly difficult over the past 20 years, and they could become even more difficult in the future. Growing public concern about global warming and CO2 emissions also casts doubt on future consumption of fossil fuels -- particularly coal, which releases the largest amount of CO2 per unit of energy produced. Even without regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, the investment community may already be limiting the future use of some energy options. In addition, there is considerable uncertainty about the future availability of, and access to, both domestic and foreign natural gas resources.

  4. Method for generating a highly reactive plasma for exhaust gas aftertreatment and enhanced catalyst reactivity

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Whealton, John H. (Oak Ridge, TN); Hanson, Gregory R. (Clinton, TN); Storey, John M. (Oak Ridge, TN); Raridon, Richard J. (Oak Ridge, TN); Armfield, Jeffrey S. (Upsilanti, MI); Bigelow, Timothy S. (Knoxville, TN); Graves, Ronald L. (Knoxville, TN)

    2001-01-01

    A method for non-thermal plasma aftertreatment of exhaust gases the method comprising the steps of providing short risetime (about 40 ps), high frequency (about 5G hz), high power bursts of low-duty factor microwaves sufficient to generate a dielectric barrier discharge and passing a gas to treated through the discharge so as to cause dissociative reduction of the exhaust gases. The invention also includes a reactor for generating the non-thermal plasma.

  5. Technology on In-Situ Gas Generation to Recover Residual Oil Reserves

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sayavur Bakhtiyarov

    2008-02-29

    This final technical report covers the period October 1, 1995 to February 29, 2008. This chapter begins with an overview of the history of Enhanced Oil Recovery techniques and specifically, CO2 flood. Subsequent chapters conform to the manner consistent with the Activities, Tasks, and Sub-tasks of the project as originally provided in Exhibit C1 in the Project Management Plan dated September 20, 1995. These chapters summarize the objectives, status and conclusions of the major project activities performed during the project period. The report concludes by describing technology transfer activities stemming from the project and providing a reference list of all publications of original research work generated by the project team or by others regarding this project. The overall objective of this project was a final research and development in the United States a technology that was developed at the Institute for Geology and Development of Fossil Fuels in Moscow, Russia. Before the technology can be convincingly adopted by United States oil and gas producers, the laboratory research was conducted at Mew Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. The experimental studies were conducted to measure the volume and the pressure of the CO{sub 2} gas generated according to the new Russian technology. Two experimental devices were designed, built and used at New Mexico Tech facilities for these purposes. The designed setup allowed initiating and controlling the reaction between the 'gas-yielding' (GY) and 'gas-forming' (GF) agents proposed by Russian technology. The temperature was controlled, and the generated gas pressure and volume were recorded during the reaction process. Additionally, the effect of surfactant addition on the effectiveness of the process was studied. An alternative GY reactant was tested in order to increase the efficiency of the CO2 gas generation process. The slim tube and the core flood experimental studies were conducted to define the sweep efficiency of the in-situ generated CO{sub 2} gas. A set of core flood experiments were conducted to define effect of surfactant on recovery efficiency. The results demonstrated obvious advantages of the foamy system over the brine solution in order to achieve higher sweep efficiency and recovery coefficient. It is shown that a slug injection is not an efficient method for mixing GY and GF solutions and it can't generate considerable gas inside the slim-tube.

  6. Implications of Lower Natural Gas Prices for Electric Generators in the Southeast, The

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2009-01-01

    This supplement to the Energy Information Administration's (EIA) May 2009 Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) focuses on changes in the utilization of coal- and natural-gas-fired generation capacity in the electric utility sector as the differential between delivered fuel prices narrows.

  7. Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1994

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

    Natural Gas to Residual Fuel Oil, by Industry Group and Selected Industries, 1994 369 Energy Information AdministrationManufacturing Consumption of Energy 1994 SIC Residual...

  8. Second-Generation Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion: Small gas turbine induustrial plant study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shenker, J.; Garland, R.; Horazak, D.; Seifert, F.; Wenglarz, R.

    1992-07-01

    Second-Generation Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion (PFBC) plants provide a coal-fired, high-efficiency, combined-cycle system for the generation of electricity and steam. The plants use lime-based sorbents in PFB combustors to meet environmental air standards without back-end gas desulfurization equipment. The second-generation system is an improvement over earlier PFBC concepts because it can achieve gas temperatures of 2100[degrees]F and higher for improved cycle efficiency while maintaining the fluidized beds at 1600[degrees]F for enhanced sulfur capture and minimum alkali release. Second-generation PFBC systems are capable of supplying the electric and steam process needs of industrial plants. The basic second-generation system can be applied in different ways to meet a variety of process steam and electrical requirements. To evaluate the potential of these systems in the industrial market, conceptual designs have been developed for six second-generation PFBC plants. These plants cover a range of electrical outputs from 6.3 to 41.5 MWe and steam flows from 46,067 to 442,337 lb/h. Capital and operating costs have been estimated for these six plants and for equivalent (in size) conventional, coal-fired atmospheric fluidized bed combustion cogeneration plants. Economic analyses were conducted to compare the cost of steam for both the second-generation plants and the conventional plants.

  9. Second-Generation Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion: Small gas turbine industrial plant study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shenker, J.; Garland, R.; Horazak, D.; Seifert, F.; Wenglarz, R.

    1992-07-01

    Second-Generation Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion (PFBC) plants provide a coal-fired, high-efficiency, combined-cycle system for the generation of electricity and steam. The plants use lime-based sorbents in PFB combustors to meet environmental air standards without back-end gas desulfurization equipment. The second-generation system is an improvement over earlier PFBC concepts because it can achieve gas temperatures of 2100{degrees}F and higher for improved cycle efficiency while maintaining the fluidized beds at 1600{degrees}F for enhanced sulfur capture and minimum alkali release. Second-generation PFBC systems are capable of supplying the electric and steam process needs of industrial plants. The basic second-generation system can be applied in different ways to meet a variety of process steam and electrical requirements. To evaluate the potential of these systems in the industrial market, conceptual designs have been developed for six second-generation PFBC plants. These plants cover a range of electrical outputs from 6.3 to 41.5 MWe and steam flows from 46,067 to 442,337 lb/h. Capital and operating costs have been estimated for these six plants and for equivalent (in size) conventional, coal-fired atmospheric fluidized bed combustion cogeneration plants. Economic analyses were conducted to compare the cost of steam for both the second-generation plants and the conventional plants.

  10. State energy data report 1996: Consumption estimates

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1999-02-01

    The State Energy Data Report (SEDR) provides annual time series estimates of State-level energy consumption by major economic sectors. The estimates are developed in the Combined State Energy Data System (CSEDS), which is maintained and operated by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). The goal in maintaining CSEDS is to create historical time series of energy consumption by State that are defined as consistently as possible over time and across sectors. CSEDS exists for two principal reasons: (1) to provide State energy consumption estimates to Members of Congress, Federal and State agencies, and the general public and (2) to provide the historical series necessary for EIA`s energy models. To the degree possible, energy consumption has been assigned to five sectors: residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, and electric utility sectors. Fuels covered are coal, natural gas, petroleum, nuclear electric power, hydroelectric power, biomass, and other, defined as electric power generated from geothermal, wind, photovoltaic, and solar thermal energy. 322 tabs.

  11. Integrating Gasifiers and Reciprocating Engine Generators to Utilize Biomass-Based Fuel

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

    Adapting On-site Electrical Generation Platforms for Producer Gas ADVANCED MANUFACTURING OFFICE Integrating Gasifiers and Reciprocating Engine Generators to Utilize Biomass- Based Fuel This project integrated a biomass gasifer and a reciprocating engine generator set into a combined platform, enabling electricity generation from waste biomass while reducing diesel fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Introduction Internal combustion reciprocating engine generators (gensets) are

  12. Survey Consumption

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

    purchase diaries from a subset of respondents composing a Household Transportation Panel and is reported separately. Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Consumption and...

  13. Gas Generation and Release in Near-Surface Repository at Armenian NPP - 13372

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grigoryan, G.; Amirjanyan, A.; Hovhannisyan, A.; Gondakyan, Y.

    2013-07-01

    The potential nuclear waste repository at Armenian Nuclear Power Plant (ANPP) can store Low and Intermediate Level Radioactive waste (LL/ILW). In this kind of near-surface repository for radioactive waste, significant quantities of gases may be generated as a result of microbial degradation and corrosion. A discussion is presented of the microbial and chemical degradation of cellulose. For the release of gas, it is assumed that the complete conversion of cellulosic wastes to gases by the action of microbes, is, in principle, permitted. Released radioactive gases such as {sup 14}CO{sub 2} and {sup 14}CH{sub 4} could have a direct pathway to the atmosphere. The potential impact of gas generation, accumulation and migration on the long-term of repository, should therefore be assessed properly. We present here safety assessment result of gas producing radioactive waste disposal by the inhalation dose to a maximally exposed individual above ground, based on some conservative assumptions about release from waste as well as gas generation calculations. (authors)

  14. Radiolytic gas generation from cement-based waste hosts for DOE low-level radioactive wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dole, L.R.; Friedman, H.A.

    1986-01-01

    Using cement-based immobilization binders with simulated radioactive waste containing sulfate, nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, and fluoride anions, the gamma- and alpha-radiolytic gas generation factors (G/sub t/, molecules/100 eV) and gas compositions were measured on specimens of cured grouts. These tests studied the effects of; (1) waste composition; (2) the sample surface-to-volume ratio; (3) the waste slurry particle size; and (4) the water content of the waste host formula. The radiolysis test vessels were designed to minimize the ''dead'' volume and to simulate the configuration of waste packages.

  15. Variance Analysis of Wind and Natural Gas Generation under Different Market Structures: Some Observations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bush, B.; Jenkin, T.; Lipowicz, D.; Arent, D. J.; Cooke, R.

    2012-01-01

    Does large scale penetration of renewable generation such as wind and solar power pose economic and operational burdens on the electricity system? A number of studies have pointed to the potential benefits of renewable generation as a hedge against the volatility and potential escalation of fossil fuel prices. Research also suggests that the lack of correlation of renewable energy costs with fossil fuel prices means that adding large amounts of wind or solar generation may also reduce the volatility of system-wide electricity costs. Such variance reduction of system costs may be of significant value to consumers due to risk aversion. The analysis in this report recognizes that the potential value of risk mitigation associated with wind generation and natural gas generation may depend on whether one considers the consumer's perspective or the investor's perspective and whether the market is regulated or deregulated. We analyze the risk and return trade-offs for wind and natural gas generation for deregulated markets based on hourly prices and load over a 10-year period using historical data in the PJM Interconnection (PJM) from 1999 to 2008. Similar analysis is then simulated and evaluated for regulated markets under certain assumptions.

  16. Energy Information Administration - Commercial Energy Consumption...

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

    Gas Consumption Natural Gas Expenditures per Building (thousand cubic feet) per Square Foot (cubic feet) Distribution of Building-Level Intensities (cubic feetsquare foot) 25th...

  17. GAS-GENERATION EXPERIMENTS FOR LONG-TERM STORAGE OF TRU WASTES AT WIPP

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Felicione, F.S.; Carney, K.P.; Dwight, C.C.; Cummings, D.G.; Foulkrod, L.E.

    2003-02-27

    An experimental investigation was conducted for gas generation in contact-handled transuranic (CH-TRU) wastes subjected for several years to conditions similar to those expected to occur at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) should the repository eventually become inundated with brine. Various types of actual CH-TRU wastes were placed into 12 corrosion-resistant vessels. The vessels were loosely filled with the wastes, which were submerged in synthetic brine having the same chemical composition as that in the WIPP vicinity. The vessels were also inoculated with microbes found in the Salado Formation at WIPP. The vessels were sealed, purged, and the approximately 750-ml headspace was pressurized with nitrogen gas to approximately 146 atmospheres to create anoxic conditions at the lithostatic pressure expected in the repository were it inundated. The temperature was maintained at the expected 30 C. The test program objective was to measure the quantities and species of gases generate d by metal corrosion, radiolysis, and microbial activity. These data will assist in the specification of the rates at which gases are produced under inundated repository conditions for use in the WIPP Performance Assessment computer models. These experiments were very carefully designed, constructed, instrumented, and performed. Approximately 6-1/2 years of continuous, undisturbed testing were accumulated. Several of the vessels showed significantly elevated levels of generated gases, virtually all of which was hydrogen. One vessel measured over 4.2% hydrogen, by volume. Two other vessels generated well over 1% hydrogen, and another was at nearly 1%. Only small quantities of other gases, principally carbon dioxide, were detected. Gas generation was found to depend strongly on the waste composition. The maximum hydrogen generation occurred in tests containing carbon steel. Average corrosion penetration rates in carbon-steel of up to 2.3 microns per year were deduced. Conversion of carbon to carbon dioxide was calculated to be up to 4.7 {micro}g-mol/yr/g-carbon.

  18. Accounting for fuel price risk when comparing renewable togas-fired generation: the role of forward natural gas prices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bolinger, Mark; Wiser, Ryan; Golove, William

    2004-07-17

    Unlike natural gas-fired generation, renewable generation (e.g., from wind, solar, and geothermal power) is largely immune to fuel price risk. If ratepayers are rational and value long-term price stability, then--contrary to common practice--any comparison of the levelized cost of renewable to gas-fired generation should be based on a hedged gas price input, rather than an uncertain gas price forecast. This paper compares natural gas prices that can be locked in through futures, swaps, and physical supply contracts to contemporaneous long-term forecasts of spot gas prices. We find that from 2000-2003, forward gas prices for terms of 2-10 years have been considerably higher than most contemporaneous long-term gas price forecasts. This difference is striking, and implies that comparisons between renewable and gas-fired generation based on these forecasts over this period have arguably yielded results that are biased in favor of gas-fired generation.

  19. Rapid hydrogen gas generation using reactive thermal decomposition of uranium hydride.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kanouff, Michael P.; Van Blarigan, Peter; Robinson, David B.; Shugard, Andrew D.; Gharagozloo, Patricia E.; Buffleben, George M.; James, Scott Carlton; Mills, Bernice E.

    2011-09-01

    Oxygen gas injection has been studied as one method for rapidly generating hydrogen gas from a uranium hydride storage system. Small scale reactors, 2.9 g UH{sub 3}, were used to study the process experimentally. Complimentary numerical simulations were used to better characterize and understand the strongly coupled chemical and thermal transport processes controlling hydrogen gas liberation. The results indicate that UH{sub 3} and O{sub 2} are sufficiently reactive to enable a well designed system to release gram quantities of hydrogen in {approx} 2 seconds over a broad temperature range. The major system-design challenge appears to be heat management. In addition to the oxidation tests, H/D isotope exchange experiments were performed. The rate limiting step in the overall gas-to-particle exchange process was found to be hydrogen diffusion in the {approx}0.5 {mu}m hydride particles. The experiments generated a set of high quality experimental data; from which effective intra-particle diffusion coefficients can be inferred.

  20. Hydrogen Gas Generation Model for Fuel Based Remote Handled TRU Waste Stored at INEEL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Soli T. Khericha; Rajiv N. Bhatt; Kevin Liekhus

    2003-02-01

    The Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory (INEEL) initiated efforts to calculate the hydrogen gas generation in remote-handled transuranic (RH-TRU) containers in order to evaluate continued storage of unvented RH-TRU containers in vaults and to identify any potential problems during retrieval and aboveground storage. A computer code is developed to calculate the hydrogen concentration in the stored RH-TRU waste drums for known configuration, waste matrix, and radionuclide inventories as a function of time.

  1. Electric Power Generation from Coproduced Fluids from Oil and Gas Wells

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

    Electric Power Generation from Coproduced Fluids from Oil and Gas Wells Principal Investigator Will Gosnold University of North Dakota Low Temperature Demonstration Projects May 19, 2010 This presentation does not contain any proprietary confidential, or otherwise restricted information. Insert photo of your choice 2 | US DOE Geothermal Program eere.energy.gov - Timeline * Start date: 1/29/2010 * End date: 1/31/2013 * Percent complete: ~ 5% - Budget * Total project funding: $3,467, 057 * DOE

  2. Steam generator materials performance in high temperature gas-cooled reactors

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chafey, J.E.; Roberts, D.I.

    1980-11-01

    This paper reviews the materials technology aspects of steam generators for HTGRs which feature a graphite-moderated, uranium-thorium, all-ceramic core and utilizes high-pressure helium as the primary coolant. The steam generators are exposed to gas-side temperatures approaching 760/sup 0/C and produce superheated steam at 538/sup 0/C and 16.5 MPa (2400 psi). The prototype Peach Bottom I 40-MW(e) HTGR was operated for 1349 EFPD over 7 years. Examination after decommissioning of the U-tube steam generators and other components showed the steam generators to be in very satisfactory condition. The 330-MW(e) Fort St. Vrain HTGR, now in the final stages of startup, has achieved 70% power and generated more than 1.5 x 10/sup 6/ MWh of electricity. The steam generators in this reactor are once-through units of helical configuration, requiring a number of new materials factors including creep-fatigue and water chemistry control. Current designs of larger HTGRs also feature steam generators of helical once-through design. Materials issues that are important in these designs include detailed consideration of time-dependent behavior of both base metals and welds, as required by current American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code rules, evaluation of bimetallic weld behavior, evaluation of the properties of large forgings, etc.

  3. Conversion of Mixed Oxygenates Generated from Synthesis Gas to Fuel Range Hydrocarbon

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ramasamy, Karthikeyan K.; Gerber, Mark A.; Lilga, Michael A.; Flake, Matthew D.

    2012-08-19

    The growing dependence in the U.S. on foreign crude oil supplies and increased concerns regarding greenhouse gas emission has generated considerable interest in research to develop renewable and environmentally friendly liquid hydrocarbon transportation fuels. One of the strategies for achieving this is to produce intermediate compounds such as alcohols and other simple oxygenates from biomass generated synthesis gas (mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen) and further convert them into liquid hydrocarbons. The focus of this research is to investigate the effects of mixed oxygenates intermediate product compositions on the conversion step to produce hydrocarbon liquids. A typical mixed oxygenate stream is expected to contain water (around 50%), alcohols, such as methanol and ethanol (around 35%), and smaller quantities of oxygenates such as acetaldehyde, acetic acid and ethyl acetate. However the ratio and the composition of the mixed oxygenate stream generated from synthesis gas vary significantly depending on the catalyst used and the process conditions. Zeolite catalyzed deoxygenation of methanol accompanied by chain growth is well understood under Methanol-to-Gasoline (MTG) like reaction conditions using an H-ZSM-5 zeolite as the catalyst6-8. Research has also been conducted to a limited extent in the past with higher alcohols, but not with other oxygenates present9-11. Also there has been little experimental investigation into mixtures containing substantial amounts of water. The latter is of particular interest because water separation from the hydrocarbon product would be less energy intensive than first removing it from the oxygenate intermediate stream prior to hydrocarbon synthesis, potentially reducing overall processing costs.

  4. Gas Generation Rates as an Indicator for the Long Term Stability of Radioactive Waste Products

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Steyer, S.; Brennecke, P.; Bandt, G.; Kroger, H.

    2007-07-01

    Pursuant to the 'Act on the Peaceful Utilization of Atomic Energy and the Protection against its Hazards' (Atomic Energy Act) the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (Bundesamt fuer Strahlenschutz, BfS) is legally responsible for the construction and operation of federal facilities for the disposal of radioactive waste. Within the scope of this responsibility, particular due to par. 74(1) Ordinance on Radiation Protection, BfS defines all safety-related requirements on waste packages envisaged for disposal, establishes guidelines for the conditioning of radioactive waste and approves the fulfillment of the waste acceptance requirements within the radioactive waste quality control system. BfS also provides criteria to enable the assessment of methods for the treatment and packaging of radioactive waste to produce waste packages suitable for disposal according to par. 74(2) Ordinance on Radiation Protection. Due to the present non-availability of a repository in Germany, quality control measures for all types of radioactive waste products are carried out prior to interim storage with respect to the future disposal. As a result BfS approves the demonstrated properties of the radioactive waste packages and confirms the fulfillment of the respective requirements. After several years of storage the properties of waste packages might have changed. By proving, that such changes have no significant impact on the quality of the waste product, the effort of requalification could be minimized. Therefore, data on the long-term behavior of radioactive waste products need to be acquired and indicators to prove the long-term stability have to be quantified. Preferably, such indicators can be determined easily with non-destructive methods, even for legacy waste packages. A promising parameter is the gas generation rate. The relationship between gas generation rate and long term stability is presented as first result of an ongoing study on behalf of BfS. Permissible gas generation rates that ensure adequate product stability with respect to future disposal are to be identified. (authors)

  5. Method for generating a highly reactive plasma for exhaust gas aftertreatment and enhanced catalyst reactivity

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Whealton, John H. (Oak Ridge, TN); Hanson, Gregory R. (Clinton, TN); Storey, John M. (Oak Ridge, TN); Raridon, Richard J. (Oak Ridge, TN); Armfield, Jeffrey S. (Ypsilanti, MI); Bigelow, Timothy S. (Knoxville, TN); Graves, Ronald L. (Knoxville, TN)

    2002-01-01

    A method for non-thermal plasma aftertreatment of exhaust gases the method comprising the steps of providing short risetime, high frequency, high power bursts of low-duty factor microwaves sufficient to generate a plasma discharge and passing a gas to be treated through the discharge so as to cause dissociative reduction of the exhaust gases and enhanced catalyst reactivity through application of the pulsed microwave fields directly to the catalyst material sufficient to cause a polarizability catastrophe and enhanced heating of the metal crystallite particles of the catalyst, and in the presence or absence of the plasma. The invention also includes a reactor for aftertreatment of exhaust gases.

  6. Reduction of Heavy-Duty Fuel Consumption and CO2 Generation-- What the Industry Does and What the Government Can Do

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Smart regulations, funding for advanced technologies, and improvements to operations and infrastructure play important roles in reducing fuel consumption

  7. PV output smoothing using a battery and natural gas engine-generator.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, Jay; Ellis, Abraham; Denda, Atsushi; Morino, Kimio; Shinji, Takao; Ogata, Takao; Tadokoro, Masayuki

    2013-02-01

    In some situations involving weak grids or high penetration scenarios, the variability of photovoltaic systems can affect the local electrical grid. In order to mitigate destabilizing effects of power fluctuations, an energy storage device or other controllable generation or load can be used. This paper describes the development of a controller for coordinated operation of a small gas engine-generator set (genset) and a battery for smoothing PV plant output. There are a number of benefits derived from using a traditional generation resource in combination with the battery; the variability of the photovoltaic system can be reduced to a specific level with a smaller battery and Power Conditioning System (PCS) and the lifetime of the battery can be extended. The controller was designed specifically for a PV/energy storage project (Prosperity) and a gas engine-generator (Mesa Del Sol) currently operating on the same feeder in Albuquerque, New Mexico. A number of smoothing simulations of the Prosperity PV were conducted using power data collected from the site. By adjusting the control parameters, tradeoffs between battery use and ramp rates could be tuned. A cost function was created to optimize the control in order to balance, in this example, the need to have low ramp rates with reducing battery size and operation. Simulations were performed for cases with only a genset or battery, and with and without coordinated control between the genset and battery, e.g., without the communication link between sites or during a communication failure. The degree of smoothing without coordinated control did not change significantly because the battery dominated the smoothing response. It is anticipated that this work will be followed by a field demonstration in the near future.

  8. Waste drum gas generation sampling program at Rocky Flats during FY 1988

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roggenthen, D.K.; McFeeters, T.L.; Nieweg, R.G.

    1991-02-11

    Rocky Flats Plant Transuranic Waste Drums were sampled for gas composition. Combustibles, plastics, Raschig rings, solidified organic sludge, and solidified inorganic sludge transuranic waste forms were sampled. Plastic bag material and waste samples were also taken from some solidified sludge waste drums. A vacuum system was used to sample each layer of containment inside a waste drum, including individual waste bags. G values (gas generation) were calculated for the waste drums. Analytical results indicate that very low concentrations of potentially flammable or corrosive gas mixtures will be found in vented drums. G(H{sub 2}) was usually below 1.6, while G(Total) was below 4.0. Hydrogen permeability tests on different types of plastic waste bags used at Rocky Flats were also conducted. Polyvinylchloride was slightly more permeable to hydrogen than polyethylene for new or creased material. Permeability of aged material to hydrogen was slightly higher than for new material. Solidified organic and inorganic sludges were sampled for volatile organics. The analytical results from two drums of solidified organic sludges showed concentrations were above detection limits for four of the 36 volatile organics analyzed. The analytical results for four of the five solidified inorganic sludges show that concentrations were below detection limits for all volatile organics analyzed. 3 refs., 5 figs., 2 tabs.

  9. Apples with apples: accounting for fuel price risk in comparisons of gas-fired and renewable generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bolinger, Mark; Wiser, Ryan

    2003-12-18

    For better or worse, natural gas has become the fuel of choice for new power plants being built across the United States. According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), natural gas combined-cycle and combustion turbine power plants accounted for 96% of the total generating capacity added in the US between 1999 and 2002--138 GW out of a total of 144 GW. Looking ahead, the EIA expects that gas-fired technology will account for 61% of the 355 GW new generating capacity projected to come on-line in the US up to 2025, increasing the nationwide market share of gas-fired generation from 18% in 2002 to 22% in 2025. While the data are specific to the US, natural gas-fired generation is making similar advances in other countries as well. Regardless of the explanation for (or interpretation of) the empirical findings, however, the basic implications remain the same: one should not blindly rely on gas price forecasts when comparing fixed-price renewable with variable-price gas-fired generation contracts. If there is a cost to hedging, gas price forecasts do not capture and account for it. Alternatively, if the forecasts are at risk of being biased or out of tune with the market, then one certainly would not want to use them as the basis for resource comparisons or investment decisions if a more certain source of data (forwards) existed. Accordingly, assuming that long-term price stability is valued, the most appropriate way to compare the levelized cost of these resources in both cases would be to use forward natural gas price data--i.e. prices that can be locked in to create price certainty--as opposed to uncertain natural gas price forecasts. This article suggests that had utilities and analysts in the US done so over the sample period from November 2000 to November 2003, they would have found gas-fired generation to be at least 0.3-0.6 cents/kWh more expensive (on a levelized cost basis) than otherwise thought. With some renewable resources, in particular wind power, now largely competitive with gas-fired generation in the US (including the impact of the federal production tax credit and current high gas prices), a margin of 0.3-0.6 cents/kWh may in some cases be enough to sway resource decisions in favor of renewables.

  10. Natural Gas Weekly Update, Printer-Friendly Version

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    this week led to decreases in consumption of natural gas for power generation. Power burn fell almost 4 percent week over week, according to data from Bentek Energy Services,...

  11. Effects of current on droplet generation and arc plasma in gas metal arc welding

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hu, J.; Tsai, H. L.

    2006-09-01

    In gas metal arc welding (GMAW), a technology using pulsed currents has been employed to achieve the one-droplet-per-pulse (ODPP) metal transfer mode with the advantages of low average currents, a stable and controllable droplet generation, and reduced spatter. In this paper, a comprehensive model was developed to study the effects of different current profiles on the droplet formation, plasma generation, metal transfer, and weld pool dynamics in GMAW. Five types of welding currents were studied, including two constant currents and three wave form currents. In each type, the transient temperature and velocity distributions of the arc plasma and the molten metal, and the shapes of the droplet and the weld pool were calculated. The results showed that a higher current generates smaller droplets, higher droplet frequency, and higher electromagnetic force that becomes the dominant factor detaching the droplet from the electrode tip. The model has demonstrated that a stable ODPP metal transfer mode can be achieved by choosing a current with proper wave form for given welding conditions.

  12. Influence of gas pressure on high-order-harmonic generation of Ar and Ne

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang Guoli; Jin Cheng; Le, Anh-Thu; Lin, C. D.

    2011-11-15

    We study the effect of gas pressure on the generation of high-order harmonics where harmonics due to individual atoms are calculated using the recently developed quantitative rescattering theory, and the propagation of the laser and harmonics in the medium is calculated by solving the Maxwell's wave equation. We illustrate that the simulated spectra are very sensitive to the laser focusing conditions at high laser intensity and high pressure since the fundamental laser field is severely reshaped during the propagation. By comparing the simulated results with several experiments we show that the pressure dependence can be qualitatively explained. The lack of quantitative agreement is tentatively attributed to the failure of the complete knowledge of the experimental conditions.

  13. Slowing of Femtosecond Laser-Generated Nanoparticles in a Background Gas

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Rouleau, Christopher M; Puretzky, Alexander A; Geohegan, David B

    2014-01-01

    The slowing of Pt nanoparticles in argon background gas was characterized by Rayleigh scattering imaging using a plume of nanoparticles generated by femtosecond laser through thin film ablation (fs-TTFA) of 20 nanometers-thick Pt films. The ablation was performed at threshold laser energy fluences for complete film removal to provide a well-defined plume consisting almost entirely of nanoparticles traveling with a narrow velocity distribution, providing a unique system to unambiguously characterize the slowing of nanoparticles during interaction with background gases. Nanoparticles of ~200 nm diameter were found to decelerate in background Ar gas with pressures less than 50 Torr in goodmore » agreement with a linear drag model in the Epstein regime. Based on this model, the stopping distance of small nanoparticles in the plume was predicted and tested by particle collection in an off-axis geometry, and size distribution analysis by transmission electron microscopy. These results permit a basis to interpret nanoparticle propagation through background gases in laser ablation plumes that contain mixed components.« less

  14. The Case for Natural Gas Fueled Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Power Systems for Distributed Generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chick, Lawrence A.; Weimar, Mark R.; Whyatt, Greg A.; Powell, Michael R.

    2015-02-01

    Natural-gas-fueled solid oxide fuel cell (NGSOFC) power systems yield electrical conversion efficiencies exceeding 60% and may become a viable alternative for distributed generation (DG) if stack life and manufacturing economies of scale can be realized. Currently, stacks last approximately 2 years and few systems are produced each year because of the relatively high cost of electricity from the systems. If mass manufacturing (10,000 units per year) and a stack life of 15 years can be reached, the cost of electricity from an NGSOFC system is estimated to be about 7.7 /kWh, well within the price of commercial and residential retail prices at the national level (9.9-10/kWh and 11-12 /kWh, respectively). With an additional 5 /kWh in estimated additional benefits from DG, NGSOFC could be well positioned to replace the forecasted 59-77 gigawatts of capacity loss resulting from coal plant closures due to stricter emissions regulations and low natural gas prices.

  15. Low NO{sub x} turbine power generation utilizing low Btu GOB gas. Final report, June--August 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.V.; Gabrielson, J.; Glickert, R.

    1995-08-01

    Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, is second only to carbon dioxide as a contributor to potential global warming. Methane liberated by coal mines represents one of the most promising under exploited areas for profitably reducing these methane emissions. Furthermore, there is a need for apparatus and processes that reduce the nitrogen oxide (NO{sub x}) emissions from gas turbines in power generation. Consequently, this project aims to demonstrate a technology which utilizes low grade fuel (CMM) in a combustion air stream to reduce NO{sub x} emissions in the operation of a gas turbine. This technology is superior to other existing technologies because it can directly use the varying methane content gases from various streams of the mining operation. The simplicity of the process makes it useful for both new gas turbines and retrofitting existing gas turbines. This report evaluates the feasibility of using gob gas from the 11,000 acre abandoned Gateway Mine near Waynesburg, Pennsylvania as a fuel source for power generation applying low NO{sub x} gas turbine technology at a site which is currently capable of producing low grade GOB gas ({approx_equal} 600 BTU) from abandoned GOB areas.

  16. MOX and MOX with 237Np/241Am Inert Fission Gas Generation Comparison in ATR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G. S. Chang; M. Robel; W. J. Carmack; D. J. Utterbeck

    2006-06-01

    The treatment of spent fuel produced in nuclear power generation is one of the most important issues to both the nuclear community and the general public. One of the viable options to long-term geological disposal of spent fuel is to extract plutonium, minor actinides (MA), and potentially long-lived fission products from the spent fuel and transmute them into short-lived or stable radionuclides in currently operating light-water reactors (LWR), thus reducing the radiological toxicity of the nuclear waste stream. One of the challenges is to demonstrate that the burnup-dependent characteristic differences between Reactor-Grade Mixed Oxide (RG-MOX) fuel and RG-MOX fuel with MA Np-237 and Am 241 are minimal, particularly, the inert gas generation rate, such that the commercial MOX fuel experience base is applicable. Under the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI), developmental fuel specimens in experimental assembly LWR-2 are being tested in the northwest (NW) I-24 irradiation position of the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR). The experiment uses MOX fuel test hardware, and contains capsules with MOX fuel consisting of mixed oxide manufactured fuel using reactor grade plutonium (RG-Pu) and mixed oxide manufactured fuel using RG-Pu with added Np/Am. This study will compare the fuel neutronics depletion characteristics of Case-1 RG-MOX and Case-2 RG-MOX with Np/Am.

  17. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation: Systematic Review and Harmonization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Whitaker, M.; Heath, G. A.; O'Donoughue, P.; Vorum, M.

    2012-04-01

    This systematic review and harmonization of life cycle assessments (LCAs) of utility-scale coal-fired electricity generation systems focuses on reducing variability and clarifying central tendencies in estimates of life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Screening 270 references for quality LCA methods, transparency, and completeness yielded 53 that reported 164 estimates of life cycle GHG emissions. These estimates for subcritical pulverized, integrated gasification combined cycle, fluidized bed, and supercritical pulverized coal combustion technologies vary from 675 to 1,689 grams CO{sub 2}-equivalent per kilowatt-hour (g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh) (interquartile range [IQR]= 890-1,130 g CO{sub 2}-eq/kWh; median = 1,001) leading to confusion over reasonable estimates of life cycle GHG emissions from coal-fired electricity generation. By adjusting published estimates to common gross system boundaries and consistent values for key operational input parameters (most importantly, combustion carbon dioxide emission factor [CEF]), the meta-analytical process called harmonization clarifies the existing literature in ways useful for decision makers and analysts by significantly reducing the variability of estimates ({approx}53% in IQR magnitude) while maintaining a nearly constant central tendency ({approx}2.2% in median). Life cycle GHG emissions of a specific power plant depend on many factors and can differ from the generic estimates generated by the harmonization approach, but the tightness of distribution of harmonized estimates across several key coal combustion technologies implies, for some purposes, first-order estimates of life cycle GHG emissions could be based on knowledge of the technology type, coal mine emissions, thermal efficiency, and CEF alone without requiring full LCAs. Areas where new research is necessary to ensure accuracy are also discussed.

  18. An expanded review and comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel and geothermal electrical generating facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Booth, R.B.; Neil, P.E.

    1998-12-31

    This paper provides a review of the greenhouse gas emissions due to fossil fuel and geothermal electrical generation and to the emissions of their respective support activities. These support activities consist of, exploration, development, and transportation aspects of the fuel source, including waste management. These support activities could amount to an additional 6% for coal, 22% for oil, 13% for natural gas and 1% for geothermal. The presented methodologies and underlying principles can be used to better define the resultant emissions, rankings and global impacts of these electrical generating industries.

  19. Assessment of the impact of the next generation solvent on DWPF melter off-gas flammability

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daniel, W. E.

    2013-02-13

    An assessment has been made to evaluate the impact on the DWPF melter off-gas flammability of replacing the current solvent used in the Modular Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction Process Unit (MCU) process with the Next Generation Solvent (NGS-MCU) and blended solvent. The results of this study showed that the concentrations of nonvolatile carbon and hydrogen of the current solvent in the Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) product would both be about 29% higher than their counterparts of the NGS-MCU and blended solvent in the absence of guanidine partitioning. When 6 ppm of guanidine (TiDG) was added to the effluent transfer to DWPF to simulate partitioning for the NGS-MCU and blended solvent cases and the concentration of Isopar{reg_sign} L in the effluent transfer was controlled below 87 ppm, the concentrations of nonvolatile carbon and hydrogen of the NGS-MCU and blended solvent were still about 12% and 4% lower, respectively, than those of the current solvent. It is, therefore, concluded that as long as the volume of MCU effluent transfer to DWPF is limited to 15,000 gallons per Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT)/SME cycle and the concentration of Isopar{reg_sign} L in the effluent transfer is controlled below 87 ppm, using the current solvent assumption of 105 ppm Isopar{reg_sign} L or 150 ppm solvent in lieu of NGS-MCU or blended solvent in the DWPF melter off-gas flammability assessment is conservative for up to an additional 6 ppm of TiDG in the effluent due to guanidine partitioning. This report documents the calculations performed to reach this conclusion.

  20. STEO December 2012 - natural gas production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2012 natural gas production seen at record 69 billion cubic feet per day U.S. natural gas production is expected to increase 4.5 percent this year to a record 69 billion cubic feet per day, according to the new monthly energy forecast from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. A big portion of that natural gas is going to the U.S. electric power sector, which is generating more electricity from gas in place of coal. Consumption of natural gas for power generation this year is forecast to