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


1

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 4a. Value of Shipments by Selected Industries,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4a Table 4a Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 4a. Value of Shipments1 by Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Billion 2000 Dollars ) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998 2002 2006 311 Food Manufacturing 430 448 472 312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing 121 96 109 313 Textile Mills 56 47 37 314 Textile Product Mills 31 32 30 315 Apparel Manufacturing 65 45 30 316 Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing 10 6 6 321 Wood Product Manufacturing 92 89 100 322 Paper Manufacturing 168 156 153 323 Printing and Related Support Activities 103 93 92 324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 227 242 265 325 Chemical Manufacturing 440 452 509 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 168 171 175

2

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 3a. Value of Shipments by Selected Industries,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

a a Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 3a. Value of Shipments 1 by Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Current Billion Dollars) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998 2002 2006 311 Food Manufacturing 428 457 538 312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing 102 104 125 313 Textile Mills 57 45 39 314 Textile Product Mills 31 32 33 315 Apparel Manufacturing 65 45 30 316 Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing 10 7 6 321 Wood Product Manufacturing 91 88 112 322 Paper Manufacturing 155 153 170 323 Printing and Related Support Activities 100 96 100 324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 138 216 549 325 Chemical Manufacturing 417 454 658 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 164 173 211

3

RH_SRS_Shipment  

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

WIPP Trucks Delivering First Remote-Handled Transuranic Waste WIPP Trucks Delivering First Remote-Handled Transuranic Waste from the Savannah River Site CARLSBAD, N.M., June 11, 2012- Photo caption: On June 7, 2012, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) trucks approach the WIPP facility near Carlsbad, New Mexico, with the first shipment of defense- related remote-handled transuranic (TRU) waste from Savannah River Site (SRS), near Aiken, South Carolina. TRU waste consists of materials contaminated with radioactive elements that have atomic numbers greater than uranium, including tools, rags, protective clothing, sludge and soil. That shipment and two contact- handled TRU waste shipments were released by SRS at the same time The three shipments consisted of (left to right) a TRUPACT-III, a RH-72B and one with

4

SGP Shipment Notification Form  

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

PlainsShipment Notification Form PlainsShipment Notification Form SGP Related Links Facilities and Instruments Central Facility Boundary Facility Extended Facility Intermediate Facility Radiometric Calibration Facility Geographic Information ES&H Guidance Statement Operations Science Field Campaigns Visiting the Site Fact Sheet Images Information for Guest Scientists Contacts Shipment Notification Form Note: Red text indicates a required field. Your Notification Form has been submitted. Section 1 : Initiator Information Date Afilliation Name Phone Number Email Section 2 : Vendor Information Ship From Point of Contact Address Phone Section 3 : Carrier Information Shipping Company Tracking/AWB Number Number of Boxes Approximate Weight for EACH BOX Expected Ship Date Section 4 : Shipment List Description System/Instrument

5

WIPP - Shipment & Disposal Information  

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

February 11, 2014 Site Shipments Loaded Miles Argonne National Laboratory 193 331,333 Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory 5 10,955 GE Vallecitos Nuclear Center 32 44,800 Idaho National...

6

Waste Shipment Tracking Technology Lowers Costs, Increases Efficiency |  

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

Shipment Tracking Technology Lowers Costs, Increases Shipment Tracking Technology Lowers Costs, Increases Efficiency Waste Shipment Tracking Technology Lowers Costs, Increases Efficiency February 27, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis This graphic shows how the radiofrequency identification technology tracks and monitors packages in transport, in-transit stops and storage. This graphic shows how the radiofrequency identification technology tracks and monitors packages in transport, in-transit stops and storage. The technology developed by EM’s Office of Packaging and Transportation Packaging Certification Program technology development team was selected by the RFID Journal as the "Most Innovated Use of RFIDs.” Team members pictured here include Dr. John Lee, Dr. Yung Liu, Dr. Jim Shuler, Dr. Hanchung Tsai and John Anderson. Team members not pictured are Brian Craig and Dr. Kun Chen.

7

WIPP Receives 200th Shipment  

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

of defense- generated transuranic radioactive waste. The shipment came from DOE's Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) in Colorado. "The arrival of the 200 th...

8

WIPP Receives 100th Shipment  

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

of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The shipment came from DOE's Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) in Colorado. "This is a major milestone...

9

LANL reaches waste shipment milestone  

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

LANL reaches waste shipment milestone LANL reaches waste shipment milestone LANL reaches waste shipment milestone The Lab surpassed 100,000 plutonium-equivalent curies of TRU waste shipped to WIPP, about one-third of the Lab's total. May 31, 2011 A shipment of transuranic waste on its way to the WIPP repository A shipment of transuranic waste on its way to the WIPP repository. Contact Fred deSousa Communicatons Office (505) 665-3430 Email LOS ALAMOS, New Mexico, May 31, 2011 - Los Alamos National Laboratory has reached an important milestone in its campaign to ship transuranic (TRU) waste from Cold War-era nuclear operations to the U.S. Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. This month, the Lab surpassed 100,000 plutonium-equivalent curies of TRU waste shipped to WIPP, about one-third of the Lab's total.

10

Stability of Appalachian coal shipments under policy variation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A quadratic programming transportation model and a nonparametric statistical procedure are used to investigate how Appalachian coal-supply flows vary in response to changes in national coal markets and policies, with emphasis on the relative stability of traditional flows. The results show that the relative stability of coal shipments is preserved under small and moderate random shocks, suggesting that coal-shipment patterns remain relatively stable despite changes in the absolute level. The tendency for traditional routes to continue has occurred because of the region's access to transportation networks and its low fixed mining costs. Environmental restriction could change shipment patterns by terminating coal production in some regions. Some areas of instability may require freight subsidies. Increased taxes or changes in mining capital or generating costs could also alter the pattern. Policies to stabilize freight rates and production costs are indicated. 10 references, 8 tables.

Yang, C.W. (Clarion State Coll., PA); Labys, W.C.

1981-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

11

LANL Resumes Shipments to WIPP  

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

19, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) will resume shipments of transuranic waste to DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). In March...

12

Naval Spent Fuel Rail Shipment Accident Exercise Objectives ...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Naval Spent Fuel Rail Shipment Accident Exercise Objectives Naval Spent Fuel Rail Shipment Accident Exercise Objectives Naval Spent Fuel Rail Shipment Accident Exercise Objectives...

13

West Valley Demonstration Project Low-Level Waste Shipment |...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

West Valley Demonstration Project Low-Level Waste Shipment West Valley Demonstration Project Low-Level Waste Shipment West Valley Demonstration Project Low-Level Waste Shipment...

14

Hanford Shipment Arrives Safely At Waste Isolation Pilot Plant  

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

63 shipments of transuranic waste. DOE has disposed of 41 shipments of waste from the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (Boulder, Colorado), 17 shipments from Los...

15

Lab sets new record for waste shipments  

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

New record for waste shipments New record for waste shipments Lab sets new record for waste shipments LANL completing its 132nd transuranic (TRU) waste shipment of fiscal year 2010 to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. August 20, 2010 LANL's shipment of transuranic waste leaves Los Alamos. LANL's shipment of transuranic waste leaves Los Alamos. Contact Fred deSousa Communications Office (505) 500-5672 Email "Removing this waste from Los Alamos is crucial to our plans for overall cleanup." Each shipment moves LANL closer to cleanup LOS ALAMOS, New Mexico, August 20, 2010-Los Alamos National Laboratory set a new LANL record on Friday by completing its 132nd transuranic (TRU) waste shipment of fiscal year 2010 to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The shipment eclipsed last year's

16

WIPP Receives 500th Waste Shipment  

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

transuranic waste. The 500 th shipment arrived at WIPP at 6:38 p.m. Saturday from DOE's Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site in Colorado. It was the 282 nd shipment to WIPP...

17

Rocky Flats resumes shipments to WIPP  

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

Rocky Flats Resumes Shipments to WIPP CARLSBAD, N.M., March 11, 2000 - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has resumed transuranic radioactive waste shipments from DOE's Rocky...

18

Annual Transportation Report for Radioactive Waste Shipments...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

ANNUAL TRANSPORTATION REPORT FY 2008 Radioactive Waste Shipments to and from the Nevada Test Site (NTS) February 2009 United States Department of Energy National Nuclear Security...

19

" Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments...  

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

2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010;" " Level: National and Regional Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" "...

20

" Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments...  

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

6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; " " Level: National and Regional Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" "...

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


21

Moab Resumes Rail Shipments After Rockslide  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

MOAB, Utah EMs Moab Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project recently resumed rail shipments after an almost two-month halt due to a major rockslide.

22

Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time  

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

Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time The Lab's 1,000th shipment of transuranic waste recently left Los Alamos, on its way...

23

Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas...

24

Uraninum-233 Inventory in Oak Ridge Lightened with First Shipment...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Uraninum-233 Inventory in Oak Ridge Lightened with First Shipment of Material from Building 3019 Uraninum-233 Inventory in Oak Ridge Lightened with First Shipment of Material from...

25

Safety and Security Technologies for Radioactive Material Shipments...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Safety and Security Technologies for Radioactive Material Shipments Safety and Security Technologies for Radioactive Material Shipments Safety and Security Technologies for...

26

Microsoft Word - 10000th_shipment.doc  

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

For Immediate Release For Immediate Release The Department of Energy Announces Major Cold War Legacy Waste Cleanup Milestone Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Receives 10,000th Shipment CARLSBAD, N.M., September 28, 2011 - The U.S. Department of Energy today announced that the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) received its 10,000th shipment of transuranic (TRU) waste over the weekend. This marks an important milestone in DOE's mission to clean up the country's Cold War legacy. "This accomplishment reflects the hard work and dedication of our workers and contractors," said Energy Secretary Steven Chu. "It also demonstrates the Department's commitment to future generations as we continue our cleanup mission as safely and quickly as possible." The 10,000th shipment, which consisted of defense-generated contact-handled

27

Overseas shipments of 48Y cylinders  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper describes experiences with two incidents of overseas shipments of uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}) cylinders. The first incident involved nine empty UF{sub 6} cylinders in enclosed sea containers. Three UF{sub 6} cylinders broke free from their tie-downs and damaged and contaminated several sea containers. This paper describes briefly how decontamination was carried out. The second incident involved a shipment of 14 full UF{sub 6} cylinders. Although the incident did not cause an accident, the potential hazard was significant. The investigation of the cause of the near accident is recounted. Recommendations to alleviate future similar incidents for both cases are presented.

Tanaka, R.T.; Furlan, A.S. [Cameco Corp., Port Hope, Ontario (Canada)

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

28

First Oak Ridge Remote-Handled Transuranic Waste Shipment Arrives...  

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

First Oak Ridge Remote-Handled Transuranic Waste Shipment Arrives Safely at WIPP First Oak Ridge Remote-Handled Transuranic Waste Shipment Arrives Safely at WIPP March 2, 2009 -...

29

Table Search (or Ranking Tables)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Halevy, Alon

30

Microsoft Word - ORNL_first_shipment  

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

WIPP Receives First Shipment From Oak Ridge National Laboratory CARLSBAD, N.M., September 25, 2008 - Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Tennessee has become the latest site to ship defense-related transuranic waste directly to the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). A truck with three loaded TRUPACT-II shipping containers departed ORNL yesterday and arrived at WIPP this morning - the 6,894th safe shipment to WIPP since the project opened in 1999. "Safe, responsible cleanup is the bottom line," said DOE Carlsbad Field Office Manager Dr. Dave Moody. "While we make steady progress every day at WIPP, it is milestones like this that highlight the overall success of the DOE clean-up effort. I applaud

31

Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time  

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

Stories » Stories » Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time The Lab's 1,000th shipment of transuranic waste recently left Los Alamos, on its way to a permanent repository near Carlsbad, NM. June 26, 2012 Governor Martinez applauding the 1014th TRU waste shipment New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez and other dignitaries applaud as the 1,014th shipment of transuranic waste leaves Los Alamos National Laboratory. Contact Environmental Communication & Public Involvement P.O. Box 1663 MS M996 Los Alamos, NM 87545 (505) 667-0216 Email "The milestone we're celebrating is one that has been a long-term environmental commitment." Removing nuclear waste, one shipment at a time Elected officials and other dignitaries recently gathered at Los Alamos

32

Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Facility |  

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

Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Facility Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Facility August 18, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Idaho State Patrol Troopers Rick Stouse and Tony Anderson inspected the TRUPACTS, containers which contain TRU waste, and trailer containing the final shipment of Hanford offsite waste. The Idaho State Patrol officers have played an important role in AMWTP's success by inspecting every one of AMWTP's nearly 3,900 shipments. Idaho State Patrol Troopers Rick Stouse and Tony Anderson inspected the TRUPACTS, containers which contain TRU waste, and trailer containing the final shipment of Hanford offsite waste. The Idaho State Patrol officers have played an important role in AMWTP's success by inspecting every one of

33

RSE Table 1.2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 1.2  

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

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

34

"NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic Characteristic(b)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)"  

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

3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.3;" 3 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.3;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",,,"Consumption" " "," ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" " "," ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic Characteristic(b)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES" ,"Value of Shipments and Receipts" ,"(million dollars)" ," Under 20",3,3,3

35

Protecting high value assets in transit  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper reports that one of the most daunting tasks facing a security manager is how to protect classified or high value assets such as nuclear materials in transit, especially when the shipment is to be handled by a commercial carrier. There are many opportunities for an adversary to gain access to cargo shipments en route, including situations in which the cargo must be held in storage for weeks or even months. Standard commercial alarm systems are not suitable for use in containers subject to vibration or high and low temperature extremes, or situations in which national assets might be used to gain surreptitious access to the container and to defeat the alarm system. A new alarm monitoring system has been developed to provide a secure auditing system for use in rail cars, Conex containers, and other transportable containers. The system, referred to as the PEL-100, electronically supervises intrusion detection sensors mounted on or within a container, and records all intrusion attempts in a secure, solid state memory storage device. The security archive can be withdrawn and reviewed after the container has completed its travels, and will provide a complete audit trail of intrusion attempts in transit. The PEL-100 includes one of the most comprehensive security tamper systems ever fielded, and is intended to operate reliably and securely in an environment subject to vibration, EMI/RFI emissions, electronic spoofing, and physical manipulation. The unit provides a clear and unambiguous indication of tampering and includes a comprehensive internal security system to detect insider tampering.

Tennefoss, M. (Stellar Systems, Inc. (US))

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

36

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption...

37

Enhancements to System for Tracking Radioactive Waste Shipments...  

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

now track shipments of radioactive materials and access transportation information on mobile devices. Transportation Tracking and Communication System users can now track...

38

WIPP Receives First Shipment | National Nuclear Security Administratio...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

26, 1999 WIPP Receives First Shipment Carlsbad, NM After more than two decades of political, legal, and bureaucratic delays, the first truckload of radioactive waste from Los...

39

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and...  

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

2 Electricity: Components of Net Demand, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Electricity Components; Unit: Million...

40

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

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

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

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


41

"NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments"  

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

1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.1;" 1 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.1;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,,"Consumption" ,,,"Consumption","per Dollar" ,,"Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Subsector and Industry","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)" ,,"Total United States" 311,"Food",3.8,4.3,4.1 3112," Grain and Oilseed Milling",8.2,5.8,5.6 311221," Wet Corn Milling",0,0,0 31131," Sugar Manufacturing",0,0,0 3114," Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Foods ",7.3,6.7,6.2

42

Enhancements to System for Tracking Radioactive Waste Shipments Benefit  

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

Enhancements to System for Tracking Radioactive Waste Shipments Enhancements to System for Tracking Radioactive Waste Shipments Benefit Multiple Users Enhancements to System for Tracking Radioactive Waste Shipments Benefit Multiple Users January 30, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Transportation Tracking and Communication System users can now track shipments of radioactive materials and access transportation information on mobile devices. Transportation Tracking and Communication System users can now track shipments of radioactive materials and access transportation information on mobile devices. CARLSBAD, N.M. - EM's Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) recently deployed a new version of the Transportation Tracking and Communication System (TRANSCOM) that is compatible with mobile devices, including smartphones. The recent enhancement, TRANSCOM version 3.0, improves the user interface

43

Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal  

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

Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas August 27, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Waste management and transportation personnel worked late to complete the first shipment to WCS. Through a contract with DOE, WCS will treat and accept potentially hazardous waste that has been at the Portsmouth site for decades. Pictured (from left) are Scott Fraser, Joe Hawes, Craig Herrmann, Jim Book, John Lee, John Perry, Josh Knipp, Melissa Dunsieth, Randy Barr, Rick Williams, Janet Harris, Maureen Fischels, Cecil McCoy, Trent Eckert, Anthony Howard and Chris Ashley. Waste management and transportation personnel worked late to complete the first shipment to WCS. Through a contract with DOE, WCS will treat and

44

Ensuring Safe Shipment of Hazardous Materials | Department of Energy  

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

Ensuring Safe Shipment of Hazardous Materials Ensuring Safe Shipment of Hazardous Materials Ensuring Safe Shipment of Hazardous Materials March 28, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis A truck carries a waste shipment from Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York. EM completed legacy cleanup activities at the site last year. A truck carries a waste shipment from Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York. EM completed legacy cleanup activities at the site last year. Emergency responders participate in a training exercise in the Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP), which also recently released its annual report. Administered by EM’s Office of Packaging and Transportation, TEPP ensures federal, state, tribal and local responders have access to the plans, training and technical assistance necessary to safely, efficiently and effectively respond to radiological transportation accidents.

45

WIPP Receives First Shipment | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

WIPP Receives First Shipment | National Nuclear Security Administration WIPP Receives First Shipment | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > About Us > Our History > NNSA Timeline > WIPP Receives First Shipment WIPP Receives First Shipment March 26, 1999 Carlsbad, NM WIPP Receives First Shipment After more than two decades of political, legal, and bureaucratic delays,

46

Portsmouth, Paducah Project Leaps Past Shipment Milestone, Delivering  

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

Portsmouth, Paducah Project Leaps Past Shipment Milestone, Portsmouth, Paducah Project Leaps Past Shipment Milestone, Delivering Economic Benefit to U.S. Portsmouth, Paducah Project Leaps Past Shipment Milestone, Delivering Economic Benefit to U.S. September 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Pictured here are railcars carrying tanks of hydrofluoric acid for shipment from the Portsmouth site to Solvay Fluorides for industrial use. Pictured here are railcars carrying tanks of hydrofluoric acid for shipment from the Portsmouth site to Solvay Fluorides for industrial use. LEXINGTON, Ky. - The company that operates DOE's depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) conversion facilities marked a milestone in September when it shipped the one millionth gallon of hydrofluoric acid. Babcock & Wilcox Conversion Services (BWCS) continues to deliver more of

47

"Economic","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Characteristic(a)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)"  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.2;" 2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Consumption" " ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" " ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "Economic","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Characteristic(a)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",3,3,3 " 20-49",5,5,4 " 50-99",6,5,4 " 100-249",5,5,4 " 250-499",7,9,7 " 500 and Over",3,2,2 "Total",2,2,2

48

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

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

49

Los Alamos National Laboratory Accelerates Transuranic Waste Shipments:  

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

Los Alamos National Laboratory Accelerates Transuranic Waste Los Alamos National Laboratory Accelerates Transuranic Waste Shipments: Spurred by a major wildfire in 2011, Los Alamos National Laboratory's TRU Waste Program accelerates shipments of transuranic waste stored aboveground to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plan Los Alamos National Laboratory Accelerates Transuranic Waste Shipments: Spurred by a major wildfire in 2011, Los Alamos National Laboratory's TRU Waste Program accelerates shipments of transuranic waste stored aboveground to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plan July 2, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez greets Terry Aguilar, governor of San Ildefonso Pueblo, while Frank Marcinowski (lower right), EM deputy assistant secretary of waste management, and Dan Cox, LANL associate deputy director for environmental affairs, look on.

50

Naval Spent Fuel Rail Shipment Accident Exercise Objectives  

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

NAVAL SPENT FUEL RAIL SHIPMENT NAVAL SPENT FUEL RAIL SHIPMENT ACCIDENT EXERCISE OBJECTIVES * Familiarize stakeholders with the Naval spent fuel ACCIDENT EXERCISE OBJECTIVES Familiarize stakeholders with the Naval spent fuel shipping container characteristics and shipping practices * Gain understanding of how the NNPP escorts who accompany the spent fuel shipments will interact with civilian emergency services representatives g y p * Allow civilian emergency services agencies the opportunity to evaluate their response to a pp y p simulated accident * Gain understanding of how the communications links that would be activated in an accident involving a Naval spent fuel shipment would work 1 NTSF May 11 ACCIDENT EXERCISE TYPICAL TIMELINE * Conceptual/Organizational Meeting - April 6 E R T i d it t t d TYPICAL TIMELINE

51

Final Transuranic Waste Shipment Leaves Rocky Flats | Department of Energy  

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

Final Transuranic Waste Shipment Leaves Rocky Flats Final Transuranic Waste Shipment Leaves Rocky Flats Final Transuranic Waste Shipment Leaves Rocky Flats April 19, 2005 - 12:23pm Addthis Cleanup Ahead of Schedule, On Track to Save Taxpayers Billions GOLDEN, CO. - A major environmental victory was achieved at the Rocky Flats Site in Golden, Colo., today when the final remaining shipment of radioactive, transuranic (TRU) waste left the property on a truck bound for an underground waste repository in New Mexico. This major milestone is another step toward the final conversion of the site to a National Wildlife Refuge managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "This is great news for all of Colorado, and would not have been possible without hand-in-glove cooperation between the Department of Energy, the

52

Idaho Site Achieves Successful Nuclear Shipment on Newly Constructed Haul  

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

Achieves Successful Nuclear Shipment on Newly Achieves Successful Nuclear Shipment on Newly Constructed Haul Road Idaho Site Achieves Successful Nuclear Shipment on Newly Constructed Haul Road May 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis The HFEF-6 cask is transported on the haul road. The HFEF-6 cask is transported on the haul road. IDAHO FALLS, Idaho - Close coordination among operations, security and transportation teams at the Idaho site helped ensure the recent success of the first nuclear shipment on a newly constructed haul road. The new road located between the Critical Infrastructure Test Range Complex (CITRC) and the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) is expected to help save significant time and cost over the life of the project by avoiding traffic disruptions on the public highway and increased cost associated with

53

Microsoft Word - INL Waste Stream Cleared for Shipment to WIPP...  

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

2006 - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has authorized the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to restart shipments from the waste stream that was suspended from transport to the...

54

Milestone Shipment Arrives at WIPP | Department of Energy  

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

WIPP Receives First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs DOE Completes TRU Waste Cleanup at Bettis DOE Completes Disposal Operations In Panel 5 of the WIPP Underground...

55

Microsoft Word - First LANL Shipment Arrives at WCS  

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

NWP Media Contacts: Donavan Mager Nuclear Waste Partnership LLC (575) 234-7586 www.wipp.energy.gov For Immediate Release First LANL Shipment Arrives at Waste Control Specialists...

56

Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal  

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

Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas August 27, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Waste management and transportation personnel worked late to complete the first shipment to WCS. Through a contract with DOE, WCS will treat and accept potentially hazardous waste that has been at the Portsmouth site for decades. Pictured (from left) are Scott Fraser, Joe Hawes, Craig Herrmann, Jim Book, John Lee, John Perry, Josh Knipp, Melissa Dunsieth, Randy Barr, Rick Williams, Janet Harris, Maureen Fischels, Cecil McCoy, Trent Eckert, Anthony Howard and Chris Ashley. Waste management and transportation personnel worked late to complete the

57

Estimating carbon emissions from less-than-truckload (LTL) shipments  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Less-than-truckload (LTL) is a $32-billion sector of the trucking industry that focuses on moving smaller shipments, typically with weights between 100 and 10,000 pounds, that do not require a full trailer to be moved. ...

Veloso de Aguiar, Guilherme

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

58

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

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

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

59

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

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

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

60

Milestone reached: Waste shipment leaves Los Alamos National Laboratory  

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

Waste shipment leaves LANL Waste shipment leaves LANL Milestone reached: Waste shipment leaves Los Alamos National Laboratory The material, known as "remote-handled transuranic waste" (RH-TRU), has been stored at the Laboratory since 1995. June 2, 2009 Los Alamos National Laboratory sits on top of a once-remote mesa in northern New Mexico with the Jemez mountains as a backdrop to research and innovation covering multi-disciplines from bioscience, sustainable energy sources, to plasma physics and new materials. Los Alamos National Laboratory sits on top of a once-remote mesa in northern New Mexico with the Jemez mountains as a backdrop to research and innovation covering multi-disciplines from bioscience, sustainable energy sources, to plasma physics and new materials.

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


61

DOE Seeks Trucking Services for Transuranic Waste Shipments | Department of  

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

Trucking Services for Transuranic Waste Shipments Trucking Services for Transuranic Waste Shipments DOE Seeks Trucking Services for Transuranic Waste Shipments March 30, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Bill Taylor 513-246-0539 william.taylor@emcbc.doe.gov Cincinnati -- The Department of Energy (DOE) today will issue a Request for Proposals for the continuation of carrier services to transport transuranic waste (TRU) between DOE sites and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) site, near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The transportation of TRU waste is accomplished by contracted trucking carriers that ship the waste via public highways on custom designed trailers. The contract will be an Indefinite Delivery/ Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract using firm-fixed- price delivery task orders. The estimated contract cost is $80-$100 million over a five-year contract

62

Pipe overpack container for trasuranic waste storage and shipment  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A Pipe Overpack Container for transuranic waste storage and shipment. The system consists of a vented pipe component which is positioned in a vented, insulated 55 gallon steel drum. Both the vented pipe component and the insulated drum are capable of being secured to prevent the contents from leaving the vessel. The vented pipe component is constructed of 1/4 inch stainless steel to provide radiation shielding. Thus, allowing shipment having high Americium-241 content. Several Pipe Overpack Containers are then positioned in a type B, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved, container. In the current embodiment, a TRUPACT-II container was employed and a maximum of fourteen Pipe Overpack Containers were placed in the TRUPACT-II. The combination received NRC approval for the shipment and storage of transuranic waste.

Geinitz, Richard R. (Arvada, CO); Thorp, Donald T. (Broomfield, CO); Rivera, Michael A. (Boulder, CO)

1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

63

SR-08-03 _LEU Shipments_.doc  

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

DOE Media CONTACTS: For Immediate Release DOE Media CONTACTS: For Immediate Release Jim Giusti, (803) 952-7697 October, 2, 2008 james-r.giusti@srs.gov DOE's Savannah River Site Fulfills Uranium Shipment Contract with TVA Aiken, SC - The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) this week safely sent its final shipment of Cold War era uranium to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), marking a significant step toward achieving the Department's goal of safely cleaning up the Site.

64

Safety and Security Technologies for Radioactive Material Shipments  

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

and Security Technologies for and Security Technologies for Radioactive Material Shipments Safety & Security Technologies Study Started in 2005 with OCRWM Funding. OCRWM funding ended in 2009. EM gave CVSA funding to finish the report. CVSA Ad Hoc RAM/Security/ITS Committee Examined current and emerging technologies for safety and security of radioactive material shipments Site visits Product reviews HMCRP HM-04 report on emerging technologies Safety & Security Technologies Study Completed several site visits to look at current technologies being used. Technologies were broken down into five categories. 1. Inspection Technologies 2. Security Technologies 3. Radioactive Material Dose Rate Measurement and

65

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 5f. Economic Indicators a for the Metalcasting  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

f f Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 5f. Economic Indicators 1 for the Metalcasting Industry (NAICS 3315), 1998, 2002, and 2006 MECS Survey Years Indicators 1998 2002 2006 Nominal Economic Indicator (Current Billion Dollars) Value of Shipments 29 27 33 Value Added 17 15 18 Real Economic Indicator (Billion 2000 Dollars) Value of Shipments 2 29 27 23 Value Added 3 17 16 12 Notes: 1. Physical indicators are not available. 2.Deflated using BEA's price indices for value of shipments for primary metal (NAICS 331). 3 Deflated using BEA's price indices for value added for primary metal (NAICS 331). Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Annual Survey of Manufacturers, Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, 2001, 2004 and 2006; Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), "Value of Shipments by

66

Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010; 3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 405.4 4.0 2.1 20-49 631.3 4.7 2.2 50-99 832.0 4.9 2.3 100-249 1,313.4 6.2 2.8 250-499 1,905.2 7.4 3.6 500 and Over 4,225.4 7.5 3.1 Total 1,449.6 6.4 2.8 311 FOOD Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 576.6 5.9

67

Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;  

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

3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006; 3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 330.6 3.6 2.0 20-49 550.0 4.5 2.2 50-99 830.1 5.9 2.7 100-249 1,130.0 6.7 3.1 250-499 1,961.4 7.6 3.6 500 and Over 3,861.9 9.0 3.6 Total 1,278.4 6.9 3.1 311 FOOD Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 979.3 10.3

68

Preparing the Shipment 1. The material must be characterized.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

' Health and Safety and the Environment Environmental Health & Safety (EHS) 490 10th St., 3rd Floor Atlanta Contact Number (404) 216-5237 Dangerous Goods Shipping Program EHS Role in Chemical/Biological Shipments Association (IATA) and a number of other agencies regulate the transport of dangerous goods. To ensure

Sherrill, David

69

Wildfire Policy in Transition Yellowstone  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Wildfire Policy in Transition 1910 #12;Yellowstone 1988 #12;Colorado South Canyon Fire 1994 #12;#12;Wildfire Policy in Transition 1910 #12;

70

WIPP Receives First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs |  

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

First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs WIPP Receives First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs December 21, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Deb Gill www.wipp.energy.gov 575-234-7270 CARLSBAD, N.M. - The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) has received the first of eight planned defense-related remote-handled transuranic (RH-TRU) waste shipments from Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in Albuquerque. The shipment arrived December 16 for permanent disposal in WIPP's underground repository. DOE National TRU Program Director J.R. Stroble said the shipment is significant to WIPP. "Our goal is to reduce the nation's nuclear waste footprint and we routinely receive shipments from around the country,"

71

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

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

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

72

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

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

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

73

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

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

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

74

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

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

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

75

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

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

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

76

"Economic","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Characteristic(a)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)"  

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

2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.2;" 2 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.2;" " Unit: Percents." ,,,"Consumption" ,,"Consumption","per Dollar" ,"Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "Economic","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Characteristic(a)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)" ,"Total United States" "Value of Shipments and Receipts" "(million dollars)" " Under 20",2.5,2.5,2.4 " 20-49",5,5,4.3 " 50-99",5.8,5.8,5.3 " 100-249",6.2,6.2,5.3 " 250-499",8.2,8,7.1 " 500 and Over",4.3,3,2.7

77

10,000th Waste Shipment Milestone is All in the Family | Department of  

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

10,000th Waste Shipment Milestone is All in the Family 10,000th Waste Shipment Milestone is All in the Family 10,000th Waste Shipment Milestone is All in the Family August 29, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis A Waste Isolation Pilot Plant facility shift manager inspects the shipping manifest of the 10,000th safe shipment to roll through the gates at the Department of Energy’s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on Sept. 24, 2011. A Waste Isolation Pilot Plant facility shift manager inspects the shipping manifest of the 10,000th safe shipment to roll through the gates at the Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on Sept. 24, 2011. Idaho's Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project employees prepare to send the 10,000th shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Idaho's Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project employees prepare to send

78

January 23, 2007: WIPP receives first shipment of waste | Department of  

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

January 23, 2007: WIPP receives first shipment of waste January 23, 2007: WIPP receives first shipment of waste January 23, 2007: WIPP receives first shipment of waste January 23, 2007: WIPP receives first shipment of waste January 23, 2007 The Department's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico, receives (pdf) its first shipment of remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste. The waste, which consisted of three 30-gallon drums of radioactive debris waste and originated at DOE's Idaho National Laboratory, was transported inside a shielded RH-72B shipping cask, providing the same low radiation levels as the contact-handled (CH) TRU wastes that have been shipped to WIPP since 1999. "This first shipment of RH-TRU waste is particularly significant to DOE," notes DOE Assistant

79

WIPP Receives First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs  

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

For immediate release WIPP Receives First Remote-Handled Waste Shipment From Sandia Labs CARLSBAD, N.M., December 21, 2011 - The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) has received the first of eight planned defense-related remote- handled transuranic (RH-TRU) waste shipments from Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in Albuquerque. The shipment arrived December 16 for permanent disposal in WIPP's underground repository. DOE National TRU Program Director J.R. Stroble said the shipment is significant to WIPP. "Our goal is to reduce the nation's nuclear waste footprint and we routinely receive shipments from around the country," said Stroble. "This first shipment of RH-TRU waste from

80

Surveillance Guides - PTS 13.2 Packaging and Preparation for Shipment  

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

PACKAGING AND PREPARATION FOR SHIPMENT PACKAGING AND PREPARATION FOR SHIPMENT 1.0 Objective The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's programs for packaging radioactive and hazardous wastes for shipment. The Facility Representative examines packages ready for shipment, observes preparation of packages, and reviews documents that establish the acceptability of packages. The Facility Representative verifies compliance with DOE requirements including requirements established by the Department of Transportation and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2.0 References 2.1 DOE 5480.3, Safety Requirements for the Packaging and Transportation of Hazardous Materials, Hazardous Substances, and Hazardous Wastes

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


81

E-Print Network 3.0 - atms tracking shipments Sample Search Results  

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

in which the tuna were caught; (3) listing the numbers for the associated Tuna Tracking Forms which contain... to document U.S. domestic landings and shipments of...

82

Conversion Tables  

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

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

83

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 5d. Economic and Physical Indicators for the  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Home > Households, Buildings & Industry > Energy Efficiency > Manufacturing Trend Data, 1998, 2002, and 2006 > Table 5d Home > Households, Buildings & Industry > Energy Efficiency > Manufacturing Trend Data, 1998, 2002, and 2006 > Table 5d Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 5d. Economic and Physical Indicators for Basic Chemicals (NAICS 325), 1998, 2002, and 2006 Indicators MECS Survey Years 1998 2002 2006 Production1 (Million Short Tons) Inorganic Chemicals 179 163 170 Bulk Petrochemical 69 73 80 Organic Intermediate 73 73 64 Plastic Resins 40 48 50 Synthetic Rubber 2 2 NA Synthetic Fibers 5 5 4 Value of Shipments (Current Billion Dollars) Inorganic Chemicals 25 25 34 Bulk Petrochemicals & Intermediates 39 45 90 Plastic Resins 45 47 78 Synthetic Rubber 5 5 7 Synthetic Fibers 13 8 9 Value of Shipments2 (Billion 2000 Dollars) Inorganic Chemicals 27 25 26

84

1991 Tables and Spreadsheets and Answers to Frequently Asked MECS Questions  

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

Tables and Spreadsheets Tables and Spreadsheets 1991 Tables and Spreadsheets Answers to Frequently Asked MECS Questions ( All tables are accessible in PDF and/or Lotus Format) Energy Consumption Q: In 1991, how much energy did manufactures consume for fuel or non-fuel purposes? A: If you would like to review national and regional statistics by SIC in physical units, please click Table A1 (part 1); for common units, please click Table A1 (part 2); and for review by manufacturing economic characteristics, such as employment and value of shipments, please click onTable A9; Table A30 or Table A33. mecs01a.xls (Table A1, Part 1) mecs01b.xls (Table A1, Part 2) mecs09.xls (Table A9) mecs30.xls (Table A30) mecs33.xls (Table A33) Q: In 1991, how much energy did manufactures consume for fuel purposes (i.e., to produce heat, power, and generate electricity)?

85

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

86

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 5a. Economic and Physical Indicators for the  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

a a Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 5a. Economic and Physical Indicators for the Forest Products Industry, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (NAICS 321 and NAICS 322) MECS Survey Years Indicators 1998 2002 2006 Physical Wood Products (Millions of Board Feet) 47,263 47,359 NA Paper Products (Thousand Short Tons) 96,315 91,138 NA Total paper 44,761 41,540 41,810 Total paperboard 49,793 48,126 50,415 Wet Machine Board 90 47 NA Building paper 759 578 NA Insulating Board 912 846 NA Nominal Economic Indicators (Current Billion Dollars) Value of Shipments 246 243 281 Gross Output 244 239 278 Value Added 107 111 124 Real Economic Indicators (Billion 2000 Dollars) Value of Shipments 1 259 245 253 Gross Output 2 257 245 249 Value Added 3 119 112 121 Notes: 1. Deflated using BEA's chain-type price indices for value of shipments.

87

Automating Risk Assessments of Hazardous Material Shipments for Transportation Routes and Mode Selection  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The METEOR project at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) successfully addresses the difficult problem in risk assessment analyses of combining the results from bounding deterministic simulation results with probabilistic (Monte Carlo) risk assessment techniques. This paper describes a software suite designed to perform sensitivity and cost/benefit analyses on selected transportation routes and vehicles to minimize risk associated with the shipment of hazardous materials. METEOR uses Monte Carlo techniques to estimate the probability of an accidental release of a hazardous substance along a proposed transportation route. A METEOR user selects the mode of transportation, origin and destination points, and charts the route using interactive graphics. Inputs to METEOR (many selections built in) include crash rates for the specific aircraft, soil/rock type and population densities over the proposed route, and bounding limits for potential accident types (velocity, temperature, etc.). New vehicle, materials, and location data are added when available. If the risk estimates are unacceptable, the risks associated with alternate transportation modes or routes can be quickly evaluated and compared. Systematic optimizing methods will provide the user with the route and vehicle selection identified with the lowest risk of hazardous material release. The effects of a selected range of potential accidents such as vehicle impact, fire, fuel explosions, excessive containment pressure, flooding, etc. are evaluated primarily using hydrocodes capable of accurately simulating the material response of critical containment components. Bounding conditions that represent credible accidents (i.e; for an impact event, velocity, orientations, and soil conditions) are used as input parameters to the hydrocode models yielding correlation functions relating accident parameters to component damage. The Monte Carlo algorithms use random number generators to make selections at the various decision points such as; crash, location, etc. For each pass through the routines, when a crash is randomly selected, crash parameters are then used to determine if failure has occurred using either external look up tables, correlations functions from deterministic calculations, or built in data libraries. The effectiveness of the software was recently demonstrated in safety analyses of the transportation of radioisotope systems for the US Dept. of Energy. These methods are readily adaptable to estimating risks associated with a variety of hazardous shipments such as spent nuclear fuel, explosives, and chemicals.

Barbara H. Dolphin; William D. RIchins; Stephen R. Novascone

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

88

" Row: Selected SIC Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;"  

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

2. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" 2. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" " Level: National Data; " " Row: Selected SIC Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments","RSE" "SIC"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources","Row"

89

" Row: Selected SIC Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;"  

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

1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" 1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" " Level: National Data; " " Row: Selected SIC Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ","Coke and"," ","Shipments"," " " "," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural Gas(e)","LPG and","Coal","Breeze"," ","of Energy Sources","RSE"

90

PTS 13.2 Packaging and Preparation for Shipment 4/10/95 | Department of  

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

PTS 13.2 Packaging and Preparation for Shipment 4/10/95 PTS 13.2 Packaging and Preparation for Shipment 4/10/95 PTS 13.2 Packaging and Preparation for Shipment 4/10/95 The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's programs for packaging radioactive and hazardous wastes for shipment. The Facility Representative examines packages ready for shipment, observes preparation of packages, and reviews documents that establish the acceptability of packages. The Facility Representative verifies compliance with DOE requirements including requirements established by the Department of Transportation and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. PTS13-02.doc More Documents & Publications PTS 13.1 Radioactive And Hazardous Material Transportation 4/13/00 CMS 3.4 Temporary Changes, 4/10/95

91

First TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation Pilot  

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

TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant First TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant August 29, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Lauren Milone lauren.milone@em.doe.gov 301-903-3731 Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced today that the first shipment of transuranic waste using the newly approved shipping package known as the TRUPACT-III safely arrived at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The shipment, which originated at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, arrived at WIPP on August 25. The new shipping package - the Transuranic Package Transporter Model 3 or TRUPACT-III - allows the Department to package and ship large-sized transuranic waste in a single box that would otherwise

92

First TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation Pilot  

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

First TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation First TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant First TRUPACT-III Shipment Arrives Safely at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant August 29, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Lauren Milone lauren.milone@em.doe.gov 301-903-3731 Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced today that the first shipment of transuranic waste using the newly approved shipping package known as the TRUPACT-III safely arrived at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The shipment, which originated at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, arrived at WIPP on August 25. The new shipping package - the Transuranic Package Transporter Model 3 or TRUPACT-III - allows the Department to package and ship large-sized transuranic waste in a single box that would otherwise

93

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

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

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

94

RSE Table 7.4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.4  

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

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

95

Upcoming Pipeline Capacity Additions Will Facilitate Continued Growth in Crude Oil Shipments from Midwest to Gulf Coast  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

Upcoming Pipeline Capacity Additions Will Facilitate Continued Growth in Crude Oil Shipments from Midwest to Gulf Coast

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

96

Energy Information Administration - Energy Efficiency-table 8b.  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

> Table 8b > Table 8b Table 8b. Expenditures for Purchased Energy per Ton of Steel, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (constant 2000 dollars 1per ton) MECS Survey Years Iron and Steel Mills (NAICS2331111) 19983 20023 20063 Total4 58.8 78.1 71.4 Electricity 16.6 24.7 18.9 Natural Gas 13.5 20.8 25.1 Coal 10.2 12.4 12.4 Residual Fuel 0.6 0.0 0.9 Coke and Breeze 16.6 18.3 12.3 Notes:1. Deflated by the chain-type price indices for iron and steel mills shipments. 2. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. NAICS 331111 includes steel works, blast furnaces (including coke ovens), and rolling mills.

97

Irradiated test fuel shipment plan for the LWR MOX fuel irradiation test project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document outlines the responsibilities of DOE, DOE contractors, the commercial carrier, and other organizations participating in a shipping campaign of irradiated test specimen capsules containing mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel from the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The shipments described here will be conducted according to applicable regulations of the US Department of Transportation (DOT), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and all applicable DOE Orders. This Irradiated Test Fuel Shipment Plan for the LWR MOX Fuel Irradiation Test Project addresses the shipments of a small number of irradiated test specimen capsules and has been reviewed and agreed to by INEEL and ORNL (as participants in the shipment campaign). Minor refinements to data entries in this plan, such as actual shipment dates, exact quantities and characteristics of materials to be shipped, and final approved shipment routing, will be communicated between the shipper, receiver, and carrier, as needed, using faxes, e-mail, official shipping papers, or other backup documents (e.g., shipment safety evaluations). Any major changes in responsibilities or data beyond refinements of dates and quantities of material will be prepared as additional revisions to this document and will undergo a full review and approval cycle.

Shappert, L.B.; Dickerson, L.S.; Ludwig, S.B.

1998-10-16T23:59:59.000Z

98

1992 CBECS Detailed Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

99

Certificate in Transit Management and  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Certificate in Transit Management and Operations UMass Transit, in partnership with the UMass Transportation Center and CTTransit, are pleased to offer "A Certificate in Transit Management and Operations Engineering and the School of Management - Internships with UMass Transit and CTTransit - A summer workshop

Massachusetts at Amherst, University of

100

Certificate in Transit Management and  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Certificate in Transit Management and Operations UMass Transit, in partnership with the UMass Transportation Center and CTTransit, are pleased to offer "A Certificate in Transit Management and Operations contract to provide transit management services in Hartford and other cities in Connecticut. CTTRANSIT

Massachusetts at Amherst, University of

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


101

Table 25  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

102

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

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

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

103

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

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

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

104

chapter 5. Detailed Tables  

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

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

105

Notices TABLE  

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

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

106

Table 4  

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

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

107

50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role | Department  

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

50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role 50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role 50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role August 12, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis A view of the first cask of reactor fuel from Sweden being unloaded from the m.s. Odensholm on July 21, 1963 in Savannah, Ga. A view of the first cask of reactor fuel from Sweden being unloaded from the m.s. Odensholm on July 21, 1963 in Savannah, Ga. Checking a shipment of reactor fuel are, left to right, Samuel Edlow, U.S. Representative for Aktiebolaget Atomenergi of Sweden; S.D. Smiley, offsite fuels coordinator for the Du Pont Company at Savannah River; S.D. Tatalovich, Atomic Energy Commission international affairs representative; and Robert L. Chandler, chemical engineer with the Savannah River Operations Office.

108

"TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than  

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

"TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of "TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than 5,000 Cubic Meters of Nuclear Waste to WIPP "TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than 5,000 Cubic Meters of Nuclear Waste to WIPP With the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding, Savannah River Site (SRS) continues to safely treat and dispose of radioactive waste created while producing materials for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. The DOE site in Aiken, S.C., is safely, steadily, and cost-effectively making progress to analyze, measure, and then carefully cleanup or dispose of legacy transuranic (TRU) waste remaining at SRS after the lengthy nuclear arms race. "TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than

109

10,000th Shipment Celebrated at WIPP | Department of Energy  

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

10,000th Shipment Celebrated at WIPP 10,000th Shipment Celebrated at WIPP 10,000th Shipment Celebrated at WIPP October 24, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Deb Gill www.wipp.energy.gov 575-234-7270 CARLSBAD, N.M. - Approximately 130 people gathered at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) on October 22, to celebrate the 10,000th shipment of transuranic (TRU) waste to WIPP, which arrived safely late last month. The event was attended by elected and appointed officials, state and local leaders, WIPP employees and representatives of the carriers who transport TRU waste to WIPP. People in D.C. absolutely understand the service you provide the nation,‖ said U.S. Congressman Steve Pearce. -We need to solve political problems in this industry because modern economies depend on good fuel and good

110

LANL Reaches Waste Shipment Milestone: Waste from Cold War-era weapons  

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

Reaches Waste Shipment Milestone: Waste from Cold War-era Reaches Waste Shipment Milestone: Waste from Cold War-era weapons production being shipped to WIPP LANL Reaches Waste Shipment Milestone: Waste from Cold War-era weapons production being shipped to WIPP May 31, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Fred deSousa 505-665-3430 fdesousa@lanl.gov LOS ALAMOS, New Mexico - Los Alamos National Laboratory has reached an important milestone in its campaign to ship transuranic (TRU) waste from Cold War-era nuclear operations to the U.S. Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. This month, the Lab surpassed 100,000 plutonium-equivalent curies of TRU waste shipped to WIPP, about one-third of the Lab's total. The waste, sent from LANL to WIPP in more than 750 shipments since 1999,

111

Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections  

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

Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections Tasked for the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections Tasked for the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel Task: Identify Shortline Railroads Serving Nuclear Power Plants Establish Contact Information with Railroads Officials Field Review of each Railroad's Physical and Operational Infrastructure Facilitate Upgrades to Meet Safe Acceptable Standards Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections Tasked for the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel More Documents & Publications TEC Meeting Summaries - February 2008 Presentations TEC Meeting Summaries - July 2007 Presentations TEC Meeting Summaries - September 2006

112

50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role | Department  

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

50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role 50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role 50th Anniversary of First Fuel Shipment Highlights EM's Role August 12, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis A view of the first cask of reactor fuel from Sweden being unloaded from the m.s. Odensholm on July 21, 1963 in Savannah, Ga. A view of the first cask of reactor fuel from Sweden being unloaded from the m.s. Odensholm on July 21, 1963 in Savannah, Ga. Checking a shipment of reactor fuel are, left to right, Samuel Edlow, U.S. Representative for Aktiebolaget Atomenergi of Sweden; S.D. Smiley, offsite fuels coordinator for the Du Pont Company at Savannah River; S.D. Tatalovich, Atomic Energy Commission international affairs representative; and Robert L. Chandler, chemical engineer with the Savannah River Operations Office.

113

Under U.S.-Russia Partnership, Final Shipment of Fuel Converted...  

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

U.S.-Russia Partnership, Final Shipment of Fuel Converted From 20,000 Russian Nuclear Warheads Arrives in United States and Will Be Used for U.S. Electricity Under U.S.-Russia...

114

"NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code...  

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

Dollar","of Value" "NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic Characteristic(b)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)" ,,"Total United...

115

Assessing the level of service for shipments originating or terminating on short line railroads  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

This thesis measures railroad freight trip time and trip time reliability for freight rail shipments involving short lines in 2006. It is based on an underlying MIT study commissioned by members of the short line railroading ...

Alpert, Steven M

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

116

"TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than  

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

"TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of "TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than 5,000 Cubic Meters of Nuclear Waste to WIPP "TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than 5,000 Cubic Meters of Nuclear Waste to WIPP With the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding, Savannah River Site (SRS) continues to safely treat and dispose of radioactive waste created while producing materials for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. The DOE site in Aiken, S.C., is safely, steadily, and cost-effectively making progress to analyze, measure, and then carefully cleanup or dispose of legacy transuranic (TRU) waste remaining at SRS after the lengthy nuclear arms race. "TRU" Success: SRS Recovery Act Prepares to Complete Shipment of More Than

117

Packaging and Transportation for Offsite Shipment of Materials of National Security Interest  

Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

The purpose of this Order is to make clear that the packaging and transportation of all offsite shipments of materials of national security interest for DOE must be conducted in accordance with DOT and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations that would be applicable to comparable commercial shipments, except where an alternative course of action is identified in this Order. Cancels DOE O 461.1A.

2010-12-20T23:59:59.000Z

118

" Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;"  

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

.1. Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" .1. Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" " Level: National Data; " " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ","Any",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments","RSE" "NAICS"," ","Energy","Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources","Row"

119

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 5c. Economic and Physical Indicators for the  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Energy Efficiency > Manufacturing Trend Data, 1998, 2002, and 2006 > Table 5c Energy Efficiency > Manufacturing Trend Data, 1998, 2002, and 2006 > Table 5c Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 5c. Economic and Physical Indicators for the Aluminum Industry (NAICS 3313), 1998, 2002, and 2006 Indicators MECS Survey Years 1998 2002 2006 Physical (Thousand Metric Tons) Primary Aluminum Production 3,713 2,707 2,284 Secondary Aluminum Production 3,440 2,930 3,560 Aluminum Imports 3,550 4,060 5,180 Aluminum Exports 1,590 1,590 2,820 Nominal Economic Indicators (Current Billion Dollars) Value of Shipments 57 48 42 Value Added 24 19 12 Real Economic Indicators (Billion 2000 Dollars) Value of Shipments 1 57 49 29 Value Added 2 23 20 8 Notes: 1. Deflated using BEA's chain-type price indices for value of shipments. 2. Deflated using BEA's chain-type price indices for value added.

120

Radiation Exposures Associated with Shipments of Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Experience has shown that the analyses of marine transport of spent fuel in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) were conservative. It is anticipated that for most shipments. The external dose rate for the loaded transportation cask will be more in line with recent shipments. At the radiation levels associated with these shipments, we would not expect any personnel to exceed radiation exposure limits for the public. Package dose rates usually well below the regulatory limits and personnel work practices following ALARA principles are keeping human exposures to minimal levels. However, the potential for Mure shipments with external dose rates closer to the exclusive-use regulatory limit suggests that DOE should continue to provide a means to assure that individual crew members do not receive doses in excess of the public dose limits. As a minimum, the program will monitor cask dose rates and continue to implement administrative procedures that will maintain records of the dose rates associated with each shipment, the vessel used, and the crew list for the vessel. DOE will continue to include a clause in the contract for shipment of the foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel requiring that the Mitigation Action Plan be followed.

MASSEY,CHARLES D.; MESSICK,C.E.; MUSTIN,T.

1999-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


121

1995 Detailed Tables  

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

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

122

PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls  

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

Net Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline, Tanker, and Barge Between PAD Districts, 2005 (Thousand Barrels) Receipts Shipments Net Receipts Receipts Shipments...

123

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

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

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

124

Under U.S.-Russia Partnership, Final Shipment of Fuel Converted From 20,000  

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

Under U.S.-Russia Partnership, Final Shipment of Fuel Converted Under U.S.-Russia Partnership, Final Shipment of Fuel Converted From 20,000 Russian Nuclear Warheads Arrives in United States and Will Be Used for U.S. Electricity Under U.S.-Russia Partnership, Final Shipment of Fuel Converted From 20,000 Russian Nuclear Warheads Arrives in United States and Will Be Used for U.S. Electricity December 10, 2013 - 2:50pm Addthis News Media Contact (202) 586-4940 WASHINGTON, D.C. - The United States and Russia are today commemorating the completion of the 1993 U.S.-Russia HEU Purchase Agreement, commonly known as the Megatons to Megawatts Program, with this week's off-loading of the final shipment of low enriched uranium (LEU) at the Port of Baltimore in Baltimore, Maryland, from Russia. The shipment was the last of the LEU converted from more than 500 metric tons of weapons-origin highly enriched

125

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

126

1999 CBECS Detailed Tables  

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

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

127

"NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic Characteristic(b)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)"  

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

4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.4;" 4 Relative Standard Errors for Table 6.4;" " Unit: Percents." " "," ",,,"Consumption" " "," ",,"Consumption","per Dollar" " "," ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value" "NAICS",,"per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments" "Code(a)","Economic Characteristic(b)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)" ,,"Total United States" " 311 - 339","ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES" ,"Employment Size" ," Under 50",3,4,4 ," 50-99",5,5,5 ," 100-249",4,4,3

128

U.S. Department of Energy to Host Press Call on Radioactive Waste Shipment  

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

U.S. Department of Energy to Host Press Call on Radioactive Waste U.S. Department of Energy to Host Press Call on Radioactive Waste Shipment and Disposal U.S. Department of Energy to Host Press Call on Radioactive Waste Shipment and Disposal November 12, 2013 - 10:26am Addthis NEWS MEDIA CONTACT (202) 586-4940 LAS VEGAS, NV - On Tuesday, November 12, 2013, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will host a press call to discuss Consolidated Edison Uranium Solidification Project (CEUSP) shipment and disposal plans in Nevada. Energy Chief of Staff Kevin Knobloch will host the call and will be joined by issue experts to address any questions. This press call is taking place the day before DOE starts public meetings on this issue in Las Vegas (Nov. 13 at Cashman Center) and Pahrump (Nov. 14 at NV Treasure RV Resort). More details on those meetings can be found

129

U.S. and Bahamian Governments to Cooperate on Detecting Illicit Shipments  

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

Bahamian Governments to Cooperate on Detecting Illicit Bahamian Governments to Cooperate on Detecting Illicit Shipments of Nuclear Material U.S. and Bahamian Governments to Cooperate on Detecting Illicit Shipments of Nuclear Material January 11, 2005 - 9:46am Addthis Bahamas to Become First Caribbean Country to Use Detection Equipment NASSAU, BAHAMAS -- In an effort to work together in the war on terrorism, the United States and the Commonwealth of the Bahamas recently signed an agreement to install special equipment at one of the Bahamas' busiest seaports to detect hidden shipments of nuclear and other radioactive material, Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham announced today. The Bahamas will be the first country in the Caribbean to deploy this type of detection system. "Helping better protect the world's maritime shipping network from

130

Moab Mill Tailings Removal Project Plans to Resume Train Shipments in  

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

Plans to Resume Train Shipments Plans to Resume Train Shipments in March; All of the Laid Off Workers Will Return Moab Mill Tailings Removal Project Plans to Resume Train Shipments in March; All of the Laid Off Workers Will Return February 25, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Donald Metzler, donald.metzler@gjem.doe.gov 970-257-2115 Jeff Biagini, jeff.biagini@gjemrac.doe.gov 970-257-2117 Wendee Ryan, wryan@gjemtac.doe.gov 970-257-2145 Grand Junction, CO - All 27 employees of the Remedial Action Contractor (RAC) to the U.S. Department of Energy will return to work on the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project on March 4, following a 3-month planned furlough. Project shipping and disposal operations have been shut down, as planned, since late November 2012, but are scheduled to resume

131

RUSSIAN-ORIGIN HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL SHIPMENT FROM BULGARIA  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In July 2008, the Global Threat Reduction Initiative and the IRT 2000 research reactor in Sofia, Bulgaria, operated by the Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy (INRNE), safely shipped 6.4 kilograms of Russian origin highly enriched uranium (HEU) spent nuclear fuel (SNF) to the Russian Federation. The shipment, which resulted in the removal of all HEU from Bulgaria, was conducted by truck, barge, and rail modes of transport across two transit countries before reaching the final destination at the Production Association Mayak facility in Chelyabinsk, Russia. This paper describes the work, equipment, organizations, and approvals that were required to complete the spent fuel shipment and provides lessons learned that might assist other research reactor operators with their own spent nuclear fuel shipments.

Kelly Cummins; Igor Bolshinsky; Ken Allen; Tihomir Apostolov; Ivaylo Dimitrov

2009-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

132

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

133

FY 2005 Statistical Table  

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

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

134

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes  

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

1.3 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; 1.3 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Trillion Btu. Shipments Economic Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Characteristic(a) Total(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,166 367 23 48 540 15 41 3 140 12 20-49 1,209 333 20 26 550 8 104 5 182 20 50-99 1,507 349 51 19 575 98 190 9 256 40 100-249 2,651 607 53 20 1,091 23 310 53 566 73 250-499 2,362 413 52 13 754 158 247 9 732 16 500 and Over

135

Savannah River Site offsite hazardous waste shipment data validation report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objective of this data validation is to verify that waste shipments reported in response to the US Department of Energy Headquarters data request are properly categorized according to DOE-HQ definitions. This report documents all findings and actions resulting from the independent review of the Savannah River Site data submittal, and provides a summary of the SRS data submittal and data validation strategy. The overall hazardous waste management and offsite release process from 1987--1991 is documented, along with an identification and description of the hazardous waste generation facilities. SRS did not ship any hazardous waste offsite before 1987. Sampling and analysis and surface surveying procedures and techniques used in determining offsite releasability of the shipments are also described in this report. SRS reported 150 manifested waste shipments from 1984 to 1991 that included 4,755 drums or lab packs and 13 tankers. Of these waste items, this report categorizes 4,251 as clean (including 12 tankers), 326 as likely clean, 138 as likely radioactive, and 55 as radioactive (including one tanker). Although outside the original scope of this report, 14 manifests from 1992 and 1993 are included, covering 393 drums or lab packs and seven tankers. From the 1992--1993 shipments, 58 drums or lab packs are categorized as radioactive and 16 drums are categorized as likely radioactive. The remainder are categorized as clean.

Casey, C.; Kudera, D.E.; Page, L.A.; Rohe, M.J.

1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

136

Routing of radioactive shipments in networks with time-varying costs and curfews  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This research examines routing of radioactive shipments in highway networks with time-dependent travel times and population densities. A time-dependent least-cost path (TDLCP) algorithm that uses a label-correcting approach is adapted to include curfews and waiting at nodes. A method is developed to estimate time-dependent population densities, which are required to estimate risk associated with the use of a particular highway link at a particular time. The TDLCP algorithm is implemented for example networks and used to examine policy questions related to radioactive shipments. It is observed that when only Interstate highway facilities are used to transport these materials, a shipment must go through many cities and has difficulty avoiding all of them during their rush hour periods. Decreases in risk, increased departure time flexibility, and modest increases in travel times are observed when primary and/or secondary roads are included in the network. Based on the results of the example implementation, the suitability of the TDLCP algorithm for strategic nuclear material and general radioactive material shipments is demonstrated.

Bowler, L.A.; Mahmassani, H.S. [Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX (United States). Dept. of Civil Engineering

1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

137

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

138

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

139

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

140

table10.12_02.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy...

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


141

FY 2005 Laboratory Table  

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

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

142

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

143

Energy Information Administration - Energy Efficiency-Table 4.  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 4. Expenditures for Purchased Energy 1998, 2002, and 2006 (million constant 2000 U.S. dollars1) MECS Survey Years Iron and Steel Mills (NAICS 2 331111) 1998 2002 2006 Total3 5,601 6,241 5,806 Electricity 1,580 1,971 1,537 Natural Gas 1,287 1,659 2,037 Coal 971 994 1,010 Residual Fuel 60 3 75 Coke and Breeze 1,584 1,462 999 Notes: 1. Deflated by the chain-type price indices for iron and steel mills shipments. 2. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. NAICS 331111 includes steel works, blast furnaces (including coke ovens), and rolling mills. 3. 'Total' is the sum of all of the listed energy sources, including wood waste, hydrogen, and waste oils and tars.

144

Energy Information Administration - Energy Efficiency-Table 5a. Consumption  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5a 5a Page Last Modified: June 2010 Table 5a. Consumption of Energy for All Purposes (First Use) per Value of Production, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (1000 Btu per constant 2000 dollar 1) MECS Survey Years Iron and Steel Mills (NAICS2 331111) 1998 3 2002 3 2006 3 Total 4 30 27 17 Net Electricity5 3 4 3 Natural Gas 9 9 6 Coal 13 10 6 Notes:1. Value of production is deflated by the chain-type price indices for iron and steel mills shipments. 2. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. NAICS 331111 includes steel works, blast furnaces (including coke ovens), and rolling mills. 3. Denominators represent the value of production for the entire iron and still mills (NAICS 331111), not those based mainly on electric, natural gas or coal.

145

INSTRUCTIONS FOR OPENING RADIONUCLIDE SHIPMENTS All packages containing radioactive material are physically received at the Department of Environmental  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

are monitored and contamination of the package exterior is assessed. The radioactive stock vialINSTRUCTIONS FOR OPENING RADIONUCLIDE SHIPMENTS All packages containing radioactive material radionuclide packages. GENERAL PROCEDURES 1. Radioactive packages must be opened and inspected as soon

Firestone, Jeremy

146

FORM EIA-63B ANNUAL PHOTOVOLTAIC CELL/MODULE SHIPMENTS REPORT  

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

CELL/MODULE SHIPMENTS REPORT For Reporting Year ( ) OMB No. 1905-0129 Approval Expires: 12/31/2016 Burden: 5 hours GENERAL INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS I. Purpose Form EIA-63B is designed to provide the data necessary for the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), a part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), to carry out its responsibilities tracking photovoltaic cell/module shipments in the photovoltaic industry and reporting information concerning the size and status of the industry. The data collected will be published a nnu a lly in the S o la r Phot o vo lt ai c C el l/ Mo du le Sh ip m ent s R epor t a nd be available through EIA's Internet site at http://www.eia.gov/renewable/annual/solar_photo/. II. Who Should Respond to This Survey

147

ELUCIDATING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ONSITE AND OFFSITE SHIPMENT OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Federal regulations stipulate how radioactive materials are transported within the United States. However, the Department of Energy, under Department of Energy Order, has the authority to operate, within the boundaries of their physical site, to other stipulations. In many cases the DOE sites have internal reviews for onsite transfers that rival reviews performed by the regulatory authorities for offsite shipments. Most of the differences are in the level or type of packaging that is required, but in some cases it may be in the amount and type of material that is allowed to be transferred. This paper will describe and discuss those differences and it will discuss ways to effectively align the onsite rules for transferring materials with those for offsite shipment.

Loftin, B.; Watkins, R.

2013-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

148

NR-SRS TRU Waste Shipments Milestone June 4 2013.docx  

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

June 4, 2013 June 4, 2013 Bill Taylor, DOE-SR, (803) 952-8564 bill.taylor@srs.gov DT Townsend, SRNS, (803) 952-7566 Dt-lawrence.townsend@srs.gov Savannah River Site Exceeds Waste Shipment Goals AIKEN, S.C. - During the month of April, the Savannah River Site met two new milestone records towards analyzing, preparing, packaging and shipping radioactive transuranic (TRU) waste bound for a

149

Effects of shipment on diffusive dosimetry recovery efficiency for pentane, hexane and heptane  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Sciences College of Pharmacy Chairman of' Advisory Committee: Mr. Charles L. Gilmore The effects of' shipment on recovery was investigated for three aliphatic hydrocarbons adsorbed on the 3M Company's $3500 Organic Vapor Monitor and the Scientific Kit... of the contaminant compound of interest and the adsorptive properties of the adsorbing (3-6) medium, activated charcoal, for collection. The diffusive dosimeter is easy to use and can be placed on the worker by the first line supervisor each day at the beginning...

Read, Ronald Bruce

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

150

Louisiana Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

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

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

151

Mississippi Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

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

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

152

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;  

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

2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006; 2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value Economic per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Characteristic(a) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 330.6 3.6 2.0 20-49 550.0 4.5 2.2 50-99 830.1 5.9 2.7 100-249 1,130.0 6.7 3.1 250-499 1,961.4 7.6 3.6 500 and Over 3,861.9 9.0 3.6 Total 1,278.4 6.9 3.1 Employment Size Under 50 562.6 4.7 2.4 50-99 673.1 5.1 2.4 100-249 1,072.8 6.5 3.0 250-499 1,564.3 7.7 3.6 500-999 2,328.9

153

In-Transit Natural Gas Form | Department of Energy  

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

In-Transit Natural Gas Form In-Transit Natural Gas Form Excel Version of In-Transit Natural Gas Form.xlsx PDF Version of In-Transit Natural Gas Form More Documents & Publications...

154

2003 CBECS RSE Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

155

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

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

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

156

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

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

157

ARM - Instrument Location Table  

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

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

158

KEYNOTE ADDRESS ECONOMIES IN TRANSITION: SOME ASPECTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

couple of days, with my focus on transition economies and environmental management in this neighborhoodKEYNOTE ADDRESS ECONOMIES IN TRANSITION: SOME ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY Jeffrey Sachs. Tel: (617) 495-5999. Fax: (617) 495-0527. #12;2 Keynote Address Economies in Transition: Some Aspects

159

FY 2009 State Table  

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

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

160

FY 2005 State Table  

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

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

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


161

FY 2010 State Table  

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

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

162

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

163

FY 2006 State Table  

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

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

164

FY 2010 Laboratory Table  

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

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

165

Table of Contents  

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

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

166

FY 2008 State Table  

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

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

167

RH-TRU Waste Shipments from Battelle Columbus Laboratories to the Hanford Nuclear Facility for Interim Storage  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Battelle Columbus Laboratories (BCL), located in Columbus, Ohio, must complete decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) activities for nuclear research buildings and grounds by 2006, as directed by Congress. Most of the resulting waste (approximately 27 cubic meters [m3]) is remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) waste destined for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The BCL, under a contract to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Ohio Field Office, has initiated a plan to ship the TRU waste to the DOE Hanford Nuclear Facility (Hanford) for interim storage pending the authorization of WIPP for the permanent disposal of RH-TRU waste. The first of the BCL RH-TRU waste shipments was successfully completed on December 18, 2002. This BCL shipment of one fully loaded 10-160B Cask was the first shipment of RH-TRU waste in several years. Its successful completion required a complex effort entailing coordination between different contractors and federal agencies to establish necessary supporting agreements. This paper discusses the agreements and funding mechanisms used in support of the BCL shipments of TRU waste to Hanford for interim storage. In addition, this paper presents a summary of the efforts completed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the 10-160B Cask system. Lessons learned during this process are discussed and may be applicable to other TRU waste site shipment plans.

Eide, J.; Baillieul, T. A.; Biedscheid, J.; Forrester, T,; McMillan, B.; Shrader, T.; Richterich, L.

2003-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

168

Evaluation of nuclear facility decommissioning projects: Summary status report: Three Mile Island Unit 2. Radioactive waste and laundry shipments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document summarizes information concerning radioactive waste and laundry shipments from the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2 to radioactive waste disposal sites and to protective clothing decontamination facilities (laundries) since the loss of coolant accident experienced on March 28, 1979. Data were collected from radioactive shipment records, summarized, and placed in a computerized data information retrieval/manipulation system which permits extraction of specific information. This report covers the period of April 9, 1979 through April 19, 1987. Included in this report are: waste disposal site locations, dose rates, curie content, waste description, container type and number, volumes and weights. This information is presented in two major categories: protective clothing (laundry) and radioactive waste. Each of the waste shipment reports is in chronological order.

Doerge, D. H.; Haffner, D. R.

1988-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

169

FY 2011 State Table  

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

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

170

FY 2007 Laboratory Table  

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

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

171

FY 2011 Laboratory Table  

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

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

172

FY 2008 Laboratory Table  

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

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

173

FY 2006 Laboratory Table  

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

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

174

Fy 2009 Laboratory Table  

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

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

175

Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1.4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2010; 1.4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Shipments NAICS Energy Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States 311 Food 13,269 13,265 151 2,494 10,376 4,061 64 7 1,668 W 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 602 602 9 201 490 286 30 0 165 W 311221 Wet Corn Milling 59 59 W 26 50 36 15 0 29 0 31131 Sugar Manufacturing 73 73 3 36 67 13 11 7 15 0 3114 Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Foods 987 987

176

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;  

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

6 Electricity: Sales to Utility and Nonutility Purchasers, 2006; 6 Electricity: Sales to Utility and Nonutility Purchasers, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Utility and Nonutility Purchasers; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Total of Economic Sales and Utility Nonutility Characteristic(a) Transfers Offsite Purchaser(b) Purchaser(c) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 28 28 0 20-49 307 227 80 50-99 2,218 1,673 545 100-249 2,647 1,437 1,210 250-499 3,736 2,271 1,464 500 and Over 10,814 5,665 5,149 Total 19,750 11,301 8,449 Employment Size Under 50 516 230 287 50-99 1,193 1,180 13 100-249 3,825 3,231 594 250-499 3,796 2,675 1,120 500-999 4,311 1,921 2,390

177

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;  

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

4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2006; 4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Onsite-Generation Components; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Renewable Energy (excluding Wood Economic Total Onsite and Characteristic(a) Generation Cogeneration(b) Other Biomass)(c) Other(d) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,447 450 Q Q 20-49 5,220 5,106 29 Q 50-99 3,784 3,579 29 Q 100-249 17,821 17,115 484 222 250-499 28,464 27,202 334 927 500 and Over 86,249 85,028 106 1,114 Total 142,986 138,480 1,030 3,476 Employment Size Under 50 2,193 1,177 Q Q 50-99 6,617 6,438 13 166 100-249 12,403 12,039 266 98 250-499

178

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes  

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

2.3 Nonfuel (Feedstock) Use of Combustible Energy, 2006; 2.3 Nonfuel (Feedstock) Use of Combustible Energy, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes Column: Energy Sources Unit: Trillion Btu Economic Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coal Breeze Other(e) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 47 0 3 5 Q 20 1 17 20-49 112 7 Q 20 1 12 1 64 50-99 247 29 Q 26 88 33 * 68 100-249 313 28 1 97 12 48 43 85 250-499 297 * * 121 154 3 5 13 500 and Over 2,547 * * 130 2,043 301 6 66 Not Ascertained (f) 3,399 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,399 Total 6,962 64 17 398 2,299 417 56 3,711 Employment Size Under 50 161 4 Q 48 15 19 0 64 50-99 390 41 1 97 145 27 1 77 100-249

179

Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments  

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

1.4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; 1.4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Shipments NAICS Energy Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States 311 Food 14,128 14,113 326 1,475 11,399 2,947 67 15 1,210 W 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 580 580 15 183 449 269 35 0 148 W 311221 Wet Corn Milling 47 47 W 17 44 19 18 0 18 0 31131 Sugar Manufacturing 78 78 11 45 61 35 26 15 45 0 3114 Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food 1,125

180

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;  

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

3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2006; 3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Economic Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,139 367 23 45 535 14 21 3 131 20-49 1,122 333 13 19 530 8 93 5 122 50-99 1,309 349 22 17 549 10 157 8 197 100-249 2,443 607 25 19 994 11 263 10 512 250-499 2,092 413 53 13 633 4 244 3 730 500 and Over 7,551 781 115 17 2,271 31 240 344 3,752 Total 15,657 2,851 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 374 5,445 Employment Size Under 50 1,103 334 10 45 550 10

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


181

Present experience of NRI REZ with preparation of spent nuclear fuel shipment to Russian Federation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Nuclear Research Institute Rez plc (NRI) jointed the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return (RRRFR) programme under the US-Russian Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) initiative and started the preparation of the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) shipment from the LVR-15 research reactor back to the Russian Federation (RF). The transport of 16 SKODA VPVR/M casks with EK-10, IRT-2M 80 %, and IRT-2M 36% fuel types is planned for the autumn of 2007. The paper describes the experience gained so far during the preparatory works for the SNF shipment (facility equipment modification, cask licenses) and the actual preparation of the SNF for transport, in particular its checking, repacking in a hot cell, loading into the VPVR/M casks, drying, manipulation, completion of the transport documentation, etc., including its transport to the SNF storage facility at the NRI before it is shipped to the RF. The paper also briefly describes a regulatory framework for these activities with a focus on legislative and methodological aspects of the return of vitrified waste back to the Czech Republic. (author)

Svitak, F.; Broz, V.; Hrehor, M.; Marek, M.; Novosad, P.; Podlaha, J.; Rychecky, J. [Nuclear Research Institute Rez plc, Husinec 130, CZ-25068 (Czech Republic)

2008-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

182

Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections Tasked for the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel  

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

Transportation Transportation Stakeholders National Transportation Stakeholders National Transportation Stakeholders National Transportation Stakeholders Forum Forum 2011 Annual Meeting 2011 Annual Meeting 2011 Annual Meeting 2011 Annual Meeting May 11, 2011 May 11, 2011 Evaluation of Shortline Railroads Evaluation of Shortline Railroads & & & & SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections SNF/HLW Rail Shipment Inspections Tasked for the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel Tasked for the Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel Evaluation of Shortline Railroads Evaluation of Shortline Railroads Evaluation of Shortline Railroads Evaluation of Shortline Railroads Task: Task: Task: Task: Identify Shortline Railroads Serving Nuclear Power Plants Identify Shortline Railroads Serving Nuclear Power Plants

183

FY 2013 Statistical Table  

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

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

184

FY 2009 Statistical Table  

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

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

185

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

186

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Tables  

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

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

187

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

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

188

Coordinating production and shipment decisions in a two-stage supply chain with time-sensitive demand  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper investigates a supply chain system consisting of one manufacturer who receives an order from a single retailer and then coordinates a production and shipment schedule to fulfill the retailer's order as quickly and cost effectively as possible. ... Keywords: Direct shipping, Inventory control, Supply chain responsiveness

Emmett J. Lodree, Jr.; Christopher D. Geiger; Kandace N. Ballard

2010-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

189

The maritime shipment of LNG to Europe: dynamics in markets, ships and terminal projects  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The aim of this paper is to explore how the maritime shipment of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe has developed over the last decade, given the growing usage of natural gas and increasing seaborne trade volume of LNG over the world. This paper presents the current situation of the LNG trade flows in Europe and also investigates the dynamics of the LNG shipping market, fleet development and import terminal projects in Europe, which are all indispensable to transport LNG to the European market. It is found that Europe increases LNG imports largely in recent years in order to secure its gas supply for seasonal fluctuations. Responding to such rising import volume, many new facilities are being built and planned in the region, including the ordering of new ships and the construction of new regasification terminals.

Siyuan Wang; Theo Notteboom

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

Annual Report - FY 2001, Radioactive Waste Shipments To and From the Nevada Test Site, February 2002  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In February 1997, the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office (NNSA/NV) issued the Mitigation Action Plan which addressed potential impacts described in the ''Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada'' (DOE/EIS 0243). NNSA/NV committed to several actions, including the preparation of an annual report, which summarizes waste shipments to and from the Nevada Test Site (NTS) Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) at Area 3 and Area 5. This document satisfies requirements with regard to low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed low-level radioactive waste (MLLW) transported to or from the NTS during fiscal year (FY 2001).

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Operations Office

2002-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

191

JOINT UNITED STATES/IAEA PROPOSED APPROACH FOR SAFEGUARDS DURING PLUTONIUM STABILIZATION, PACKAGING, AND SHIPMENT  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

For safety reasons, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is preparing to stabilize and package plutonium oxide currently subject to International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) beginning in the year 2001. The Hanford Site will also stabilize and package plutonium materials under IAEA safeguards. The U.S. and the IAEA began consultations in late 1996 to develop an approach to the application of safeguards during stabilization and packaging. With the plans to ship RFETS plutonium to Savannah River for interim storage prior to final disposition, this work has been extended to include safeguards during shipment. This paper will discuss the elements of a joint U.S./IAEA proposal for this task.

L. KWEI; B. SMITH; ET AL

2001-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

192

FY 2006 Statistical Table  

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

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

193

FY 2013 Laboratory Table  

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

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

194

FY 2010 Statistical Table  

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

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

195

FY 2012 State Table  

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

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

196

FY 2012 Statistical Table  

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

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

197

FY 2007 Statistical Table  

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

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

198

FY 2012 Laboratory Table  

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

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

199

FY 2008 Statistical Table  

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

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

200

Table of Contents  

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

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

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


201

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

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

202

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

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

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

203

Table of Contents  

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

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

204

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

205

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

206

Help:Tables | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

207

Table E7.1. Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 1998  

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

1. Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit:...

208

Table 11.4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2010...  

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

4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Onsite-Generation Components; Unit:...

209

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

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

210

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

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

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

211

CARINA Data Table  

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

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

212

Supplement Tables - Contact  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

213

Appendix B: Summary Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

214

Shipment and Disposal of Solidified Organic Waste (Waste Type IV) to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In April of 2005, the last shipment of transuranic (TRU) waste from the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site to the WIPP was completed. With the completion of this shipment, all transuranic waste generated and stored at Rocky Flats was successfully removed from the site and shipped to and disposed of at the WIPP. Some of the last waste to be shipped and disposed of at the WIPP was waste consisting of solidified organic liquids that is identified as Waste Type IV in the Contact-Handled Transuranic Waste Authorized Methods for Payload Control (CH-TRAMPAC) document. Waste Type IV waste typically has a composition, and associated characteristics, that make it significantly more difficult to ship and dispose of than other Waste Types, especially with respect to gas generation. This paper provides an overview of the experience gained at Rocky Flats for management, transportation and disposal of Type IV waste at WIPP, particularly with respect to gas generation testing. (authors)

D'Amico, E. L [Washington TRU Solutions (United States); Edmiston, D. R. [John Hart and Associates (United States); O'Leary, G. A. [CH2M-WG Idaho, LLC (United States); Rivera, M. A. [Aspen Resources Ltd., Inc. (United States); Steward, D. M. [Boulder Research Enterprises, LLC (United States)

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

215

Energy Information Administration - Energy Efficiency-table 8b.  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8a 8a Table 8a. Expenditures for Purchased Energy per Value of Production, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (constant 2000 US cents per dollar) MECS Survey Years Iron and Steel Mills (NAICS1331111) 19982 20022 20062 Total3 10.7 13.0 9.4 Electricity 3.0 4.1 2.5 Natural Gas 2.5 3.4 3.3 Coal 1.9 2.1 1.6 Residual Fuel 0.1 0.0 0.1 Coke and Breeze 3.0 3.0 1.6 Notes: 1. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. NAICS 331111 includes steel works, blast furnaces (including coke ovens), and rolling mills. Deflated by the chain-type price indices for iron and steel mills shipments. 2. Denominators represent the value of production for the entire iron and still mills (NAICS 331111), not those based mainly on electric, natural gas, coal, residual fuel oil or coke.

216

table1.2_02  

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

2 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; 2 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Trillion Btu. Shipments RSE NAICS Net Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Row Code(a) Subsector and Industry Total(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.9 1 1.2 1.8 1 1.6 0.8 0.9 1.2 0.4 311 Food 1,123 230 13 19 582 5 184 1 89 0 6.8 311221 Wet Corn Milling 217 23 * * 61 * 121 0 11 0 1.1 31131 Sugar 112 2 2 1 22 * 37 1 46 0 0.9 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 47 7 1 1 36 Q 0 0 1 0 11 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products 105 26 2 2 46 1 17 0 11

217

table1.4_02  

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

4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002 4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002 Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Shipments NAICS Energy Net Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.7 0.7 1.4 1.2 0.9 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 0.5 311 Food 15,089 15,045 275 2,536 12,106 3,159 91 23 1,911 0 311221 Wet Corn Milling 49 49 3 20 47 14 19 0 15 0 31131 Sugar 77 77 18 41 63 31 24 23 45 0 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 468 468 40 128 416 229 0 0 153 0 312

218

CBECS 1992 - Consumption & Expenditures, Detailed Tables  

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

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

219

Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;  

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

Coke and Shipments Net Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coal Breeze of Energy Sources NAICS Total(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Gas(e) NGL(f) (million (million Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Code(a) Subsector and Industry (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) (billion cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) short tons) (trillion Btu) (trillion Btu) Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.9 1 1.2 1.8 1 1.6 0.8 0.9 1.2 0.4 311 Food 1,123 67,521 2 3 567 1 8 * 89 0 311221 Wet Corn Milling 217 6,851 * * 59 * 5 0 11 0 31131 Sugar 112 725 * * 22 * 2 * 46 0 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 47 1,960 * * 35 * 0 0 1 0 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products 105 7,639 * * 45 * 1 0 11 0 3121 Beverages 85 6,426 * * 41 * * 0 10 0 3122 Tobacco 20 1,213 * * 4 * * 0 1 0 313 Textile Mills 207 25,271 1 * 73 * 1 0 15 0 314

220

Microsoft Word - table_87  

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

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

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


221

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

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

222

Reviews, Tables, and Plots  

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

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

223

Table G3  

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

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

224

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

225

Table of Contents  

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

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

226

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

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

227

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

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

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

228

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

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

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

229

FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

230

ARM - Instrument - s-table  

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

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

231

High energy leptons from muons in transit  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The differential energy distribution for electrons and taus produced from lepton pair production from muons in transit through materials is numerically evaluated. We use the differential cross section to calculate underground lepton fluxes from an incident atmospheric muon flux, considering contributions from both conventional and prompt fluxes. An approximate form for the charged current differential neutrino cross section is provided and used to calculate single lepton production from atmospheric neutrinos. We compare the fluxes of underground leptons produced from incident muons with those produced from incident neutrinos and photons from muon bremsstrahlung. We discuss their relevance for underground detectors.

Alexander Bulmahn; Mary Hall Reno

2009-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

232

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

233

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

234

table14.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

235

Code Tables | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

236

Radioactive waste shipments to Hanford Retrievable Storage from the General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear Center, Pleasanton, California  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

During the next two decades the transuranic (TRU) wastes now stored in the burial trenches and storage facilities at the Hanford Site are to be retrieved, processed at the Waste Receiving and Processing Facility, and shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, New Mexico for final disposal. Approximately 3.8% of the TRU waste to be retrieved for shipment to WIPP was generated at the General Electric (GE) Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC) in Pleasanton, California and shipped to the Hanford Site for storage. The purpose of this report is to characterize these radioactive solid wastes using process knowledge, existing records, and oral history interviews. The waste was generated almost exclusively from the activities, of the Plutonium Fuels Development Laboratory and the Plutonium Analytical Laboratory. Section 2.0 provides further details of the VNC physical plant, facility operations, facility history, and current status. The solid radioactive wastes were associated with two US Atomic Energy Commission/US Department of Energy reactor programs -- the Fast Ceramic Reactor (FCR) program, and the Fast Flux Test Reactor (FFTR) program. These programs involved the fabrication and testing of fuel assemblies that utilized plutonium in an oxide form. The types and estimated quantities of waste resulting from these programs are discussed in detail in Section 3.0. A detailed discussion of the packaging and handling procedures used for the VNC radioactive wastes shipped to the Hanford Site is provided in Section 4.0. Section 5.0 provides an in-depth look at this waste including the following: weight and volume of the waste, container types and numbers, physical description of the waste, radiological components, hazardous constituents, and current storage/disposal locations.

Vejvoda, E.J.; Pottmeyer, J.A.; DeLorenzo, D.S.; Weyns-Rollosson, M.I. [Los Alamos Technical Associates, Inc., NM (United States); Duncan, D.R. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

MECS Fuel Oil Tables  

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

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

238

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

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

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

239

Table 3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2002  

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

3 Fuel Consumption, 2002;" 3 Fuel Consumption, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","RSE" "Economic",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","Row" "Characteristic(a)","Total","Electricity(b)","Fuel Oil","Fuel Oil(c)","Gas(d)","NGL(e)","Coal","Breeze","Other(f)","Factors"

240

University of Hawaii TABLE OF CONTENTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Spills 3-1 C. Injuries to Personnel 3-2 D. Fires Involving Radioactive Materials 3-2 Part IV: Waste Shipments App. A-11 Radioactive Waste Pickup Form Instructions App. A-12 Radioactive Waste Pickup Request Instructions for Cruise Radioactive Waste App. A-16 Radioactive Waste Pick-Up Request form for R/V cruises App

Browder, Tom

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


241

table6.3_02.xls  

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

3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002; 3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002; Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value RSE NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Row Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 1 1 1 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 281.0 3.9 2.2 3 20-49 583.7 6.1 3.0 4.6 50-99 889.2 8.1 3.8 4.9 100-249 1,268.8 8.7 4.1 4.6 250-499 2,146.6 11.2 5.3 7.6 500 and Over 3,807.1 12.5 5.4 2.3 Total 1,172.2 8.9 4.2 2 311 FOOD Value of Shipments and Receipts

242

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - chapter Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

243

Molecular absorption in transition region spectral lines  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Aims: We present observations from the Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph (IRIS) of absorption features from a multitude of cool atomic and molecular lines within the profiles of Si IV transition region lines. Many of these spectral lines have not previously been detected in solar spectra. Methods: We examined spectra taken from deep exposures of plage on 12 October 2013. We observed unique absorption spectra over a magnetic element which is bright in transition region line emission and the ultraviolet continuum. We compared the absorption spectra with emission spectra that is likely related to fluorescence. Results: The absorption features require a population of sub-5000 K plasma to exist above the transition region. This peculiar stratification is an extreme deviation from the canonical structure of the chromosphere-corona boundary . The cool material is not associated with a filament or discernible coronal rain. This suggests that molecules may form in the upper solar atmosphere on small spatial scales...

Schmit, Donald; Ayres, Thomas; Peter, Hardi; Curdt, Werner; Jaeggli, Sarah

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

244

MECS 1991 Publications and Tables  

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

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

245

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

246

Table E1.1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998  

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

.1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" .1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments","RSE" "Economic",,"Net","Residual","Distillate",,"LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources","Row"

247

Table 1.3 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002  

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

3 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002;" 3 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments","RSE" "Economic",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources","Row"

248

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

249

Evaluation of nuclear facility decommissioning projects. Three Mile Island Unit 2. Radioactive waste and laundry shipments. Volume 9. Summary status report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document summarizes information concerning radioactive waste and laundry shipments from the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2 to radioactive waste disposal sites and to protective clothing decontamination facilities (laundries) since the loss of coolant accident experienced on March 28, 1979. Data were collected from radioactive shipment records, summarized, and placed in a computerized data information retrieval/manipulation system which permits extraction of specific information. This report covers the period of April 9, 1979 to May 5, 1985. Included in this report are: waste disposal site locations, dose rates, curie content, waste description, container type and number, volumes and weights. This information is presented in two major categories: protective clothing (laundry) and radioactive waste. Each of the waste shipment reports is in chronological order.

Doerge, D. H.; Miller, R. L.; Scotti, K. S.

1986-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

250

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

251

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

252

Environmental assessment for the manufacture and shipment of nuclear reactor fuel from the United States to Canada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) has declared 41.9 tons (38 metric tons) of weapons-usable plutonium surplus to the United States` defense needs. A DOE Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement analyzed strategies for plutonium storage and dispositioning. In one alternative, plutonium as a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel would be irradiated (burned) in a reengineered heavy-water-moderated reactor, such as the Canadian CANDU design. In an Environmental Assessment (EA), DOE proposes to fabricate and transport to Canada a limited amount of MOX fuel as part of the Parallex (parallel experiment) Project. MOX fuel from the US and Russia would be used by Canada to conduct performance tests at Chalk River Laboratories. MOX fuel would be fabricated at Los Alamos National Laboratory and transported in approved container(s) to a Canadian port(s) of entry on one to three approved routes. The EA analyzes the environmental and human health effects from MOX fuel fabrication and transportation. Under the Proposed Action, MOX fuel fabrication would not result in adverse effects to the involved workers or public. Analysis showed that the shipment(s) of MOX fuel would not adversely affect the public, truck crew, and environment along the transportation routes.

Rangel, R.C.

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

Nature Bulletin Table of Contents  

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

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

254

COST AND QUALITY TABLES 95  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

255

MTS Table Top Load frame  

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

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

256

CBECS 1992 - Building Characteristics, Detailed Tables  

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

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

257

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

258

table1.5_02.xls  

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

5 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; 5 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National Data; Row: Energy Sources and Shipments, including Further Classification of 'Other' Energy Sources; Column: First Use per Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Trillion Btu. RSE Total Row Energy Source First Use Factors Total United States RSE Column Factor: 1.0 Coal 1,959 10.0 Natural Gas 6,468 1.3 Net Electricity 2,840 1.4 Purchases 2,882 1.4 Transfers In 35 2.6 Onsite Generation from Noncombustible Renewable Energy 8 1.5 Sales and Transfers Offsite 86 0.7 Coke and Breeze 385 1.7 Residual Fuel Oil 255 2.3 Distillate Fuel Oil 151 5.6 Liquefied Petroleum Gases and Natural Gas Liquids 3,070 0.6

259

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Shihadeh, Alan

260

CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Braun, Paul

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


261

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

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

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

262

PARENT HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Adali, Tulay

263

Automatic Construction of Diagnostic Tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

W. R. Willcox; S. P. Lapage

1972-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

264

Table 6.2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002  

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

2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002;" 2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;" " Unit: Varies." ,,,"Consumption" " ",,"Consumption","per Dollar"," " " ","Consumption","per Dollar","of Value","RSE" "Economic","per Employee","of Value Added","of Shipments","Row" "Characteristic(a)","(million Btu)","(thousand Btu)","(thousand Btu)","Factors"

265

Table 11.4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2002  

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

4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2002;" 4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Onsite-Generation Components;" " Unit: Million Kilowatthours." " ",,,"Renewable Energy" ,,,"(excluding Wood",,"RSE" "Economic","Total Onsite",,"and",,"Row" "Characteristic(a)","Generation","Cogeneration(b)","Other Biomass)(c)","Other(d)","Factors" ,"Total United States" "RSE Column Factors:",0.8,0.8,1.1,1.4 "Value of Shipments and Receipts"

266

An optimal filtering algorithm for table constraints  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

Jean-Baptiste Mairy; Pascal Van Hentenryck; Yves Deville

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

267

Table Name query? | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

268

Lessons Learned from a Regional Approach to Route Selection for Spent Nuclear Fuel Shipments to Yucca Mountain  

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

Midwestern Route Identification Project Midwestern Route Identification Project Sarah K. Wochos Policy Analyst Council of State Governments - Midwest Approach Why Regional? * States need to know the routes as soon as possible * Regions develop and use the criteria that is important to them * States have a better feel for routes that run through their jurisdictions * States felt that EIS routes were a poor starting point for discussions * Regional framework has worked well on other issues Why a Suite of Routes? * Better variety and thus perhaps better security? * Flexibility during construction, bad weather or special events * Inevitable further winnowing through national discussion Methodology Primary Factors - from U.S. DOT's Guidelines for Selecting Preferred Highway Routes for Highway Route Controlled Shipments of Radioactive Materials

269

Stakeholder Transportation Scorecard: Reviewing Nevada's Recommendations for Enhancing the Safety and Security of Nuclear Waste Shipments - 13518  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As a primary stakeholder in the Yucca Mountain program, the state of Nevada has spent three decades examining and considering national policy regarding spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste transportation. During this time, Nevada has identified 10 issues it believes are critical to ensuring the safety and security of any spent nuclear fuel transportation program, and achieving public acceptance. These recommendations are: 1) Ship the oldest fuel first; 2) Ship mostly by rail; 3) Use dual-purpose (transportable storage) casks; 4) Use dedicated trains for rail shipments; 5) Implement a full-scale cask testing program; 6) Utilize a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for the selection of a new rail spur to the proposed repository site; 7) Implement the Western Interstate Energy Board (WIEB) 'straw man' process for route selection; 8) Implement Section 180C assistance to affected States, Tribes and localities through rulemaking; 9) Adopt safety and security regulatory enhancements proposed states; and 10) Address stakeholder concerns about terrorism and sabotage. This paper describes Nevada's proposals in detail and examines their current status. The paper describes the various forums and methods by which Nevada has presented its arguments and sought to influence national policy. As of 2012, most of Nevada's recommendations have been adopted in one form or another, although not yet implemented. If implemented in a future nuclear waste program, the State of Nevada believes these recommendations would form the basis for a successful national transportation plan for shipments to a geologic repository and/or centralized interim storage facility. (authors)

Dilger, Fred C. [Black Mountain Research, Henderson, NV 81012 (United States)] [Black Mountain Research, Henderson, NV 81012 (United States); Ballard, James D. [Department of Sociology, California State University, Northridge, CA 91330 (United States)] [Department of Sociology, California State University, Northridge, CA 91330 (United States); Halstead, Robert J. [State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, Carson City, NV 80906 (United States)] [State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, Carson City, NV 80906 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

270

Chemistry Department Assessment Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Bogaerts, Steven

271

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

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

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

272

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

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

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

273

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

274

Description of Energy Intensity Tables (12)  

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

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

275

Sandia National Labs: PCNSC: IBA Table  

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

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

276

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

277

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

278

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

279

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Economic Growth Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

280

Table  

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

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

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


281

Table  

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

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

282

Table  

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

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

283

Table  

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

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

284

Table  

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

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

285

Table  

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

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

286

Table  

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

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

287

Table  

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

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

288

Table  

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

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

289

Table  

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

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

290

Table  

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

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

291

Table  

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

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

292

Table  

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

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

293

Table  

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

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

294

Table  

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

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

295

Table  

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

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

296

Table  

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

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

297

Table  

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

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

298

Table  

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

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

299

Table  

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

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

300

Table  

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

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

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


301

Table  

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

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

302

Table  

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

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

303

Table  

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

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

304

Table  

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

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

305

Table  

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

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

306

Table  

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

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

307

Table  

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

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

308

Table  

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

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

309

Table  

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

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

310

Table  

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

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

311

Table  

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

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

312

Table  

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

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

313

Table  

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

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

314

Table  

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

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

315

Table  

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

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

316

Table  

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

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

317

Table  

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

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

318

Analysis of International Commodity Shipping Data and the Shipment of NORM to the United States  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As part of the Spreader Bar Radiation Detector project, PNNL analyzed US import data shipped through US ports collected over the 12 months of 2006 (over 4.5 million containers). Using these data, we extracted a variety of distributions that are of interest to modelers and developers of active and passive detection systems used to 'scan' IMCCs for potential contraband. This report expands on some of the analysis presented in an earlier report from LLNL, by investigation the foreign port distribution of commodities shipped to the US. The majority of containers shipped to the United States are 40 ft containers ({approx}70%); about 25% are 20 ft; and about 3.6% are 45 ft containers. A small fraction (<1%) of containers are of other more specialized sizes, and very few ports actually ship these unique size containers (a full distribution for all foreign ports is shown in Appendix A below). The primary foreign ports that ship the largest fraction of each container are shown in the table below. Given that 45 ft containers comprise 1 of out every 27 containers shipped to the US, and given the foreign ports from which they are shipped, they should not be ignored in screening; further testing and analysis of radiation measurements for national security with this size container is warranted. While a large amount of NORM is shipped in IMCCs, only a few specific commodities are shipped with enough frequency to present potential issues in screening IMCCs at ports. The majority of containers with NORM will contain fertilizers (5,700 containers), granite (59,000 containers), or ceramic (225,000 containers) materials. Fertilizers were generally shipping in either 20- or 40 ft containers with equal frequency. While granite is mostly shipped in 20 ft containers, ceramic materials can be shipped in either 20- or 40 ft containers. The size of container depended on the specific use of the ceramic or porcelain material. General construction ceramics (such as floor and roofing tiles) tend to be shipped in 20 ft containers. Consumer products made from ceramic materials (e.g., tableware, sinks, and toilets) are generally shipped in 40 ft containers. This distinct discrepancy is due in large part to the packaging of the commodity. Consumer products are generally shipped packed in a box loaded with Styrofoam or other packing material to protect the product from breakage. Construction ceramic materials are generally shipped in less packing material, many times consisting of only a cardboard or wooden box. Granite is almost always shipped in a 20 ft container, given its very high density.

Baciak, James E.; Ely, James H.; Schweppe, John E.; Sandness, Gerald A.; Robinson, Sean M.

2011-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

319

Variable White Dwarf Data Tables  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Below, I give a brief explanation of the information in these tables. In all cases, I list the WD {number_sign}, either from the catalog of McCook {ampersand} Sion (1987) or determined by me from the epoch 1950 coordinates. Next, I list the most commonly used name (or alias), then I list the variable star designation if it is available. If not, I list the constellation name and a V** or?? depending on what the last designated variable star for that constellation is. I present epoch 2000 coordinates for all of the stars, which I precessed from the 1950 ones in most cases. I do not include proper motion effects; this is negligible for all except the largest proper motion DAV stars, such as L 19-2, BPM 37093, B 808, and G 29-38. Even in these cases, the error is no more than 30` in declination and 2 s in right ascension. I culled effective temperatures from the latest work (listed under each table); they are now much more homogeneous than before. I pulled the magnitude estimates from the appropriate paper, and they are mean values integrated over several cycles. The amplitude given is for the height of a typical pulse in the light curve. The periods correspond the dominant ones found in the light curve. In some cases, there is a band of power in a given period range, or the light curve is very complex, and I indicate this in the table. In the references, I generally list the paper with the most comprehensive pulsation analysis for the star in question. In some cases, there is more than one good reference, and I list them as well.

Bradley, P. A.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

320

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2008 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 2 0 6,256 6,258 Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 * 0 0 * Hawaii............................. 2,554 5 0 0 2,559 Illinois.............................. 0 15 0 0 15 Indiana............................ 0 30 0 0 30 Iowa ................................ 0 24 3 0 27 Kentucky......................... 0 15 0 0 15 Maryland ......................... 0 181 0 0 181 Massachusetts................ 0 13 0 0 13 Minnesota ....................... 0 46 0 0 46 Missouri .......................... * 6 0 0 6 Nebraska ........................ 0 28 0 0 28 New Hampshire .............. 0 44 0 0 44 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 489 489 New York ........................

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


321

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2009 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 7,525 7,527 Connecticut..................... 0 * 0 0 * Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 0 52 * 52 Hawaii............................. 2,438 9 0 0 2,447 Illinois.............................. 0 20 0 0 20 Indiana............................ 0 * 0 0 * Iowa ................................ 0 3 0 0 3 Kentucky......................... 0 18 0 0 18 Maryland ......................... 0 170 0 0 170 Massachusetts................ 0 10 0 0 10 Minnesota ....................... 0 47 0 0 47 Missouri .......................... * 10 0 0 10 Nebraska ........................ 0 18 0 0 18 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 454 454 New York ........................

322

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 4 0 5,144 5,148 Delaware ........................ 0 1 0 0 1 Georgia........................... 0 0 732 0 732 Hawaii............................. 2,465 6 0 0 2,472 Illinois.............................. 0 17 0 0 17 Indiana............................ 0 1 0 0 1 Iowa ................................ 0 2 0 0 2 Kentucky......................... 0 5 0 0 5 Louisiana ........................ 0 0 249 0 249 Maryland ......................... 0 115 0 0 115 Massachusetts................ 0 * 0 0 * Minnesota ....................... 0 12 0 0 12 Missouri .......................... * 18 0 0 18 Nebraska ........................ 0 12 0 0 12 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 457 457 New York ........................

323

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2007 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 6,866 6,869 Delaware ........................ 0 5 0 0 5 Georgia........................... 0 2 0 0 2 Hawaii............................. 2,679 4 0 0 2,683 Illinois.............................. 0 11 0 0 11 Indiana............................ 0 81 0 554 635 Iowa ................................ 0 2 38 0 40 Kentucky......................... 0 124 0 0 124 Maryland ......................... 0 245 0 0 245 Massachusetts................ 0 15 0 0 15 Minnesota ....................... 0 54 0 0 54 Missouri .......................... 7 60 0 0 66 Nebraska ........................ 0 33 0 0 33 New Hampshire .............. 0 9 0 0 9 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 379 379 New York ........................

324

Table-top job analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this Handbook is to establish general training program guidelines for training personnel in developing training for operation, maintenance, and technical support personnel at Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. TTJA is not the only method of job analysis; however, when conducted properly TTJA can be cost effective, efficient, and self-validating, and represents an effective method of defining job requirements. The table-top job analysis is suggested in the DOE Training Accreditation Program manuals as an acceptable alternative to traditional methods of analyzing job requirements. DOE 5480-20A strongly endorses and recommends it as the preferred method for analyzing jobs for positions addressed by the Order.

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

325

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - Low Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main Low Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year Low Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions

326

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - High Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main High Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary High Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year High Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Excel Gif

327

Table E13.2. Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 1998  

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

2. Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Onsite-Generation...

328

Proposed risk evaluation guidelines for use by the DOE-AL Nuclear Explosive Safety Division in evaluating proposed shipments of nuclear components  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The licensing requirements of 10 CFR 71 (US Code of Federal Regulations) are the primary criteria used to license proposed US Department of Energy (DOE) shipments of nuclear components. However, if a shipment cannot meet 10 CFR 71 requirements, a Transportation System Risk Assessment (TSRA) is prepared to document: (1) the degree of compliance of proposed DOE shipments of nuclear components with applicable federal regulations, and (2) the risk associated with the proposed shipments. The Nuclear Explosive Safety Division (NESD) of the Department of Energy, Albuquerque Area Office (DOE-AL) is responsible for evaluating TSRAs and for preparing Safety Evaluation Reports (SERs) to authorize the off-site transport. Hazards associated with the transport may include the presence of fissile material, chemically and radiologically toxic uranium, and ionizing radiation. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has historically considered only radiological hazards in licensing the transport of radiological material because the US Department of Transportation considers licensing requirements of nonradiological (i.e., chemically toxic) hazards. The requirements of 10 CFR 71 are based primarily on consideration of radiological hazards. For completeness, this report provides information for assessing the effects of chemical toxicity. Evaluating the degree of compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 71 is relatively straightforward. However, there are few precedents associated with developing TSRA risk assessments for packages that do not comply with all of the requirements of 10 CFR 71. The objective of the task is to develop Risk Evaluation Guidelines for DOE-AL to use when evaluating a TSRA. If the TSRA shows that the Risk Evaluation Guidelines are not exceeded, then from a risk perspective the TSRA should be approved if there is evidence that the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle has been applied.

Just, R.A.; Love, A.F.

1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

329

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, October 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

330

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, August 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (August 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M., Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

331

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, September 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

332

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

333

Environmental regulatory update table, July 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (July 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

334

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1990  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Hawkins, G.T.; Houlberg, L.M.; Noghrei-Nikbakht, P.A.; Salk, M.S.

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

335

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

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

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

336

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1) 1) June 2013 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2011 2011 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table E1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price Estimates, 2011 (Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector g,h Retail Electricity Total Energy g,i Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total g,h,i Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Other e Total Wood and Waste f Alabama 3.09 5.66 26.37 22.77 25.54 27.12 13.18 19.42 25.90 0.61 3.01 8.75 2.56 27.08 19.85 Alaska 3.64 6.70 29.33 23.12 29.76 31.60 20.07 34.62 26.61 - 14.42 20.85 6.36 47.13 25.17 Arizona 1.99 7.07 27.73 22.84 31.95 26.97 17.00 17.23 26.71 0.75 6.31 10.79 2.16 28.46 25.23 Arkansas 1.93 6.94 26.37 22.45 26.66 27.35 17.35 33.22

337

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

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

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

338

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2004 2004 Consumption Summary Tables Table S1. Energy Consumption Estimates by Source and End-Use Sector, 2004 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Power d Biomass e Other f Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/Losses g Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Alabama 2,159.7 853.9 404.0 638.5 329.9 106.5 185.0 0.1 -358.2 393.7 270.2 1,001.1 494.7 Alaska 779.1 14.1 411.8 334.8 0.0 15.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 56.4 63.4 393.4 266.0 Arizona 1,436.6 425.4 354.9 562.8 293.1 69.9 8.7 3.6 -281.7 368.5 326.0 231.2 511.0 Arkansas 1,135.9 270.2 228.9 388.3 161.1 36.5 76.0 0.6 -25.7 218.3 154.7 473.9 288.9 California 8,364.6 68.9 2,474.2 3,787.8 315.6 342.2

339

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9) 9) June 2011 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2009 2009 Consumption Summary Tables Table C1. Energy Consumption Overview: Estimates by Energy Source and End-Use Sector, 2009 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy e Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/ Losses f Net Electricity Imports Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum d Total Alabama 1,906.8 631.0 473.9 583.9 1,688.8 415.4 272.9 -470.3 0.0 383.2 266.0 788.5 469.2 Alaska 630.4 14.5 344.0 255.7 614.1 0.0 16.3 0.0 (s) 53.4 61.0 325.4 190.6 Arizona 1,454.3 413.3 376.7 520.8 1,310.8 320.7 103.5 -279.9 -0.8 400.8 352.1 207.8 493.6 Arkansas 1,054.8 264.1 248.1 343.1 855.3 158.7 126.5 -85.7 0.0 226.3 167.0 372.5

340

Microsoft Word - table_01.doc  

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

3 3 Table 1 Table 1. Summary of natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Year and Month Gross Withdrawals Marketed Production NGPL Production a Dry Gas Production b Supplemental Gaseous Fuels c Net Imports Net Storage Withdrawals d Balancing Item e Consumption f 2008 Total 25,636 21,112 953 20,159 61 3,021 34 2 23,277 2009 Total 26,057 21,648 1,024 20,624 65 2,679 -355 -103 22,910 2010 Total 26,816 22,382 1,066 21,316 65 2,604 -13 115 24,087 2011 January 2,299 1,953 92 1,861 5 236 811 R -24 R 2,889 February 2,104 1,729 82 1,647 4 186 594 R 20 R 2,452 March 2,411 2,002 95 1,908 5 171 151 R -4 R 2,230 April 2,350 1,961 93 1,868 5 R 152 -216 R 17 R 1,825 May 2,411 2,031

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


341

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Annual 4 Table 2 Alabama 215,710 7,110 -162,223 617,883 0 -2,478 0 666,738 Alaska 351,259 21,470 22,663 0 -9,342 0 0 343,110 Arizona 117 0 -13,236 389,036 -43,838 0 0 332,079 Arkansas 1,146,168 424 -18,281 -831,755 0 -103 0 295,811 California 246,822 12,755 104,820 2,222,355 -109,787 48,071 0 2,403,385 Colorado 1,709,376 81,943 -107,940 -1,077,968 0 2,570 4,412 443,367 Connecticut 0 0 4,191 225,228 0 260 0 229,159 Delaware 0 0 21,035 80,692 0 51 * 101,676 District of Columbia 0 0 497 28,075 0 0 0 28,572 Florida 18,681 0 15,168 1,294,620 0 0 0 1,328,469

342

TableHC2.12.xls  

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

Detached Attached 2 to 4 Units Energy Information Administration: 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing...

343

TableHC10.13.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

or More... 0.3 Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators U.S. Census Region Northeast Midwest Table HC10.13 Lighting Usage...

344

TABLE54.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

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

Administration (EIA) Forms EIA-812, "Monthly Product Pipeline Report," and EIA-813, Monthly Crude Oil Report." Table 54. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline...

345

TABLE19.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

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

Table 19. PAD District IV-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

346

TABLE15.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

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

Table 15. PAD District III-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

347

TABLE53.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

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

Table 53. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline, Tanker, and Barge Between July 2004 Crude Oil ... 0 383 0...

348

TABLE11.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

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

(Thousand Barrels) Table 11. PAD District II-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

349

2011 Annual Report Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

) ...................12 Smart Grid Cyber Security.....................................................13 ICT Supply ChainComputer Security Division 2011 Annual Report #12;Table of Contents Welcome ................................................................. 1 Division Organization .................................................2 The Computer Security

350

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

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

Cost Report." Figure Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996 3 Table 2. U.S. Refiner Prices of Petroleum Products to End Users (Cents per Gallon...

351

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Volume II Table of Contents SURVEY OF AVAILABLE DATA Introduction ...................................................................................13 EVALUATING GIS HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE Introduction ...................................................................................14 Sources of Information About GIS......................................................14 GIS

Ghelli, Giorgio

352

Energy Information Administration - Energy Efficiency-Table 6a- End uses of  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6a 6a Page Last Modified: June 2010 Table 6a. End Uses of Fuel Consumption per Value of Production, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (thousand Btu per constant 2000 dollar 1) MECS Survey Years Iron and Steel Mills (NAICS2 331111) 1998 3 2002 3 2006 3 Total 4 32.0 30.2 18.7 Net Electricity 5 3.0 3.8 2.8 Natural Gas 8.7 8.1 5.3 Coal 0.9 0.7 0.2 Boiler Fuel -- -- -- Coal 0.2 W 0.02 Residual Fuel Oil 0.2 * 0.1 Natural Gas 1.0 0.8 0.4 Process Heating -- -- -- Net Electricity 1.4 1.6 1.2 Residual Fuel Oil 0.4 * 0.2 Natural Gas 7.1 6.8 4.4 Machine Drive -- -- -- Net Electricity 1.3 1.8 1.3 Notes:1. Value of production is deflated by the chain-type price indices for iron and steel mills shipments. 2. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. NAICS 331111 includes steel works, blast furnaces (including coke ovens), and rolling mills.

353

Energy Information Administration - Energy Efficiency-Table 6a- End uses of  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

a a Table 7a. Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption per Value Of Production 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Btu per constant 2000 dollar 1) MECS Survey Years Iron and Steel Mills (NAICS2 331111) 19983 20024 20064 Total NA 19,716 12,179 Electricity NA 3,839 2,846 Natural Gas NA 8,052 5,301 Coal NA 747 228 Residual Fuel NA 21 309 Coke and Breeze NA 6,496 3,025 Notes: 1. Value of production is deflated by the chain-type price indices for iron and steel mills shipments. 2. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. NAICS 331111 includes steel works, blast furnaces (including coke ovens), and rolling mills. 3. 1998 data unavailable due to disclosure avoidance procedures in place at the time. 4. Denominators represent the value of production for the entire iron and still mills (NAICS 331111), not those based mainly on electric, natural gas, coal, residual fuel oil or coke.

354

table11.4_02.xls  

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

4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2002; 4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Onsite-Generation Components; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Renewable Energy (excluding Wood RSE Economic Total Onsite and Row Characteristic(a) Generation Cogeneration(b) Other Biomass)(c) Other(d) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.4 Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 609 379 W W 25.2 20-49 4,155 4,071 27 58 13.3 50-99 6,356 6,296 * 61 6.5 100-249 19,027 16,033 1,185 1,809 2.2 250-499 36,752 32,991 W W 2.2 500 and Over 69,334 66,458 W W 1.2 Total 136,233 126,228 2,381 7,625 2 Employment Size Under 50 3,927 3,713

355

table4.3_02.xls  

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

Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2002; Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. RSE Economic Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coke and Row Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.6 0.6 1.3 2.2 0.7 1.4 1.5 0.6 1 Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,276 437 15 50 598 W 47 W 97 14.5 20-49 1,258 417 28 22 590 W 112 W 72 6.1 50-99 1,463 401 17 W 731 7 185 W 97 4.9 100-249 2,041 571 43 17 968 8 253 7 175 4.6 250-499 1,962 475 54 W 826 W 326 W 255 5.6 500 and Over 3,971 618 38 W 2,077 37 259 W 607 1.5 Total 11,970

356

table3.3_02.xls  

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

Fuel Consumption, 2002; Fuel Consumption, 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. RSE Economic Net Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coke and Row Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.6 0.7 1.3 2.1 0.7 1.4 1.5 0.7 0.9 Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,312 436 15 50 598 W 47 W 132 13.9 20-49 1,465 407 28 22 590 W 112 W 289 6.9 50-99 1,598 394 17 W 731 7 185 W 237 4.5 100-249 2,385 561 43 17 972 8 253 7 525 4.2 250-499 2,598 458 57 W 826 W 326 W 906 5.4 500 and Over 6,914 584 47 21 2,077 55 259 530 3,342 1.5 Total 16,273 2,840

357

table7.4_02.xls  

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

4 Average Prices of Selected Purchased Energy Sources, 2002; 4 Average Prices of Selected Purchased Energy Sources, 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: U.S. Dollars per Physical Units. Residual Distillate Natural LPG and RSE Economic Electricity Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(b) Gas(c) NGL(d) Coal Row Characteristic(a) (kWh) (gallons) (gallons) (1000 cu ft) (gallons) (short tons) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.7 1.2 2.2 0.7 0.5 1.6 Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 0.067 0.6 1.01 5.05 0.9 60.2 11.2 20-49 0.056 0.55 0.89 4.69 0.88 40.36 6.5 50-99 0.05 0.61 0.91 4.21 0.62 47.85 4.7 100-249 0.043 0.59 0.92 3.84 0.45 41.33 5.5 250-499 0.038 0.52 0.79 3.94

358

Table 3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2010;  

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

3 Fuel Consumption, 2010; 3 Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Economic Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,148 314 6 53 446 14 25 Q 291 20-49 1,018 297 13 22 381 18 97 5 185 50-99 1,095 305 7 13 440 6 130 9 186 100-249 1,728 411 16 11 793 7 131 7 353 250-499 1,916 391 16 11 583 3 185 5 722 500 and Over 7,323 720 21 21 2,569 21 300 348 3,323 Total 14,228 2,437 79 130 5,211 69 868 376 5,059 Employment Size Under 50 1,149 305 12 45 565 21 31

359

table7.5_02.xls  

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

5 Average Prices of Selected Purchased Energy Sources, 2002; 5 Average Prices of Selected Purchased Energy Sources, 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: U.S. Dollars per Million Btu. RSE Economic Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Row Characteristic(a) Electricity Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(b) Gas(c) NGL(d) Coal Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 0.7 1.2 2.2 0.7 0.5 1.6 Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 19.67 3.98 7.29 4.91 9.79 2.57 11.3 20-49 16.48 3.64 6.42 4.57 9.97 1.77 6.5 50-99 14.79 4.07 6.53 4.1 7.14 2.11 4.7 100-249 12.72 3.94 6.6 3.74 5.2 1.87 5.5 250-499 11.2 3.46 5.69 3.84 5.97 1.74 4.6 500 and Over 11.64 3.88 5.23 3.48 5.83 1.84 1.7 Total 14.13

360

Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - High Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6-2030) 6-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 XLS GIF Spreadsheets are provided in Excel High Price Case Tables (2006-2030) Table Title Formats Summary High Price Case Tables PDF GIF High Price Case Tables XLS GIF Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary XLS GIF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption XLS GIF Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions XLS GIF Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

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


361

Exhibit C Table of Contents  

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

Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" SCHEDULES AND LISTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Form Title A Schedule of Quantities and Prices B Milestone and Payment Schedule C Lower-Tier Subcontractor and Vendor List Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 2 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" FORM A SCHEDULE OF QUANTITIES AND PRICES NOTE: This Exhibit "C" Form A is part of the model subcontract for Trinity and is provided to Offerors for informational purposes only. It is not intended that this form be returned with the Offeror's proposal. 1.0 WORK TO BE PERFORMED Work shall be performed strictly in accordance with requirements of the Subcontract

362

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2005 Alabama .................................. 255,157 9,748 13,759 37,048 Alaska...................................... 3,089,229 23,700 27,956 105,449 Arkansas.................................. 16,756 177 231 786 California ................................. 226,230 11,101 13,748 45,926 Colorado .................................. 730,948 25,603 34,782 95,881 Florida...................................... 3,584 359 495 1,400 Illinois....................................... 280 37 46 129 Kansas..................................... 476,656 22,165 31,521 85,737 Kentucky.................................. 38,792 1,411 1,716 5,725 Louisiana ................................. 2,527,636 73,035 103,381

363

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Producing Gas Wells by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2006-2010 Alabama .......................................................... 6,227 6,591 6,860 6,913 7,026 Alaska.............................................................. 231 239 261 261 269 Arizona ............................................................ 7 7 6 6 5 Arkansas.......................................................... 3,814 4,773 5,592 6,314 7,397 California ......................................................... 1,451 1,540 1,645 1,643 1,580 Colorado .......................................................... 20,568 22,949 25,716 27,021 28,813 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 2,419 2,552 1,527 1,984 1,852 Illinois...............................................................

364

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2004-2008, and by State, 2008 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ R 16,335,710 -- R 6.25 R 20,196,346 R 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,424,440 -- 7.96 21,239,516 169,038,089 Alabama ............................... 246,747 2,382,188 9.65 257,884 2,489,704 Alaska................................... 337,359 2,493,128 7.39 398,442 2,944,546 Arizona ................................. 503 3,568 7.09 523 3,710 Arkansas...............................

365

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... 2,476 281 2,757 2,789 271 3,060 Alaska.......................... 2 4 6 2 1 3 Arizona ........................ 285 98 383 274 116 390 Arkansas...................... 648 456 1,104 582 443 1,025 California ..................... 36,124 R 3,467 R 39,591 35,126 3,762 38,888 Colorado ...................... 341 4,475 4,816 297 4,787 5,084 Connecticut.................. 2,386 810 3,196 2,228 910 3,138 Delaware ..................... 96 69 165 39 73 112 Florida.......................... 161 288 449 123 484 607 Georgia........................ 1,003 1,887 2,890 956 1,298 2,254 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 25 0 25 Idaho............................ 108 91 199 109 78 187 Illinois...........................

366

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... 2,495 R 304 R 2,799 2,487 299 2,786 Alaska.......................... 6 4 10 7 5 12 Arizona ........................ 328 86 414 319 106 425 Arkansas...................... 782 R 441 R 1,223 671 449 1,120 California ..................... 39,426 2,061 41,487 38,150 2,076 40,226 Colorado ...................... 393 3,782 4,175 364 3,954 4,318 Connecticut.................. 2,625 845 3,470 2,618 819 3,437 Delaware ..................... 134 52 186 124 55 179 Florida.......................... R 174 224 R 398 159 273 432 Georgia........................ R 993 2,168 R 3,161 854 2,599 3,453 Hawaii.......................... 29 0 29 28 0 28 Idaho............................ 117 79 196 116 79 195

367

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2001-2005 Alabama .......................................................... 4,597 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 Alaska.............................................................. 170 165 195 224 227 Arizona ............................................................ 8 7 9 6 6 Arkansas.......................................................... 4,825 6,755 7,606 3,460 2,878 California ......................................................... 1,244 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 Colorado .......................................................... 22,117 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,271 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 Illinois...............................................................

368

EM International Program Action Table  

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

EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 E M I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r o g r a m s Page 1 ACTION TABLE Subject Lead Office Engaging Country Meeting Location Purpose Status Date of Event 3 rd US/German Workshop on Salt Repository Research, Design and Operations N. Buschman, EM-22 Germany Albuquerque & Carlsbad, NM Continue collaboration with Germans on salt repository research, design and operations. Draft agenda prepared. October 8-12, 2012 International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) Ministerial R. Elmetti, EM- 2.1 Multilateral Marrakech, Morocco To support the development of nuclear energy infrastructure globally through workforce training, information sharing, and approaches related to the safe, secure and responsible use of

369

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2009 Alabama .................................. 248,232 11,667 17,232 42,984 Alaska...................................... 2,830,034 19,542 22,925 86,767 Arkansas.................................. 2,352 125 168 541 California ................................. 198,213 11,042 13,722 45,669 Colorado .................................. 1,233,260 47,705 67,607 174,337 Illinois....................................... 164 24 31 84 Kansas..................................... 370,670 18,863 26,948 72,922 Kentucky.................................. 60,167 2,469 3,270 9,982 Louisiana ................................. 2,175,026 67,067 95,359 250,586 Michigan .................................. 23,819 2,409

370

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 11 0 0 6,138 6,149 Connecticut.................. 0 91 0 0 0 91 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 3 0 0 0 3 Hawaii.......................... 2,610 3 0 0 0 2,613 Illinois........................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Indiana......................... 0 2 0 0 1,640 1,642 Iowa ............................. 0 * 0 0 46 46 Kentucky...................... 0 3 0 0 0 3 Maryland ...................... 0 41 0 0 0 41 Massachusetts............. 0 51 0 0 0 51 Minnesota .................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Missouri ....................... 0 78 0 0 0 78 Nebraska ..................... 0 19 0 0 0 19 New Hampshire ........... 0 92 0 0 0 92 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 175 175 New York .....................

371

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

20 20 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2004-2008 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 3,589,221 Mexico ...................................................... 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 43,314 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 3,632,535 LNG Algeria....................................................... 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 0 Australia.................................................... 14,990 0 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 54,839 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

372

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2007 Alabama .................................. 257,443 13,381 19,831 48,922 Alaska...................................... 2,965,956 22,419 26,332 99,472 Arkansas.................................. 11,532 126 162 552 California ................................. 206,239 11,388 13,521 47,045 Colorado .................................. 888,705 27,447 38,180 102,563 Florida...................................... 2,422 103 132 423 Illinois....................................... 235 38 48 131 Kansas..................................... 391,022 19,600 28,063 74,941 Kentucky.................................. 38,158 1,455 1,957 5,917 Louisiana ................................. 2,857,443 77,905 110,745

373

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C11. Energy Consumption by Source, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum b Retail Electricity Sales State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu 1 Texas 1,695.2 Texas 3,756.9 Texas 5,934.3 Texas 1,283.1 2 Indiana 1,333.4 California 2,196.6 California 3,511.4 California 893.7 3 Ohio 1,222.6 Louisiana 1,502.9 Louisiana 1,925.7 Florida 768.0 4 Pennsylvania 1,213.0 New York 1,246.9 Florida 1,680.3 Ohio 528.0 5 Illinois 1,052.2 Florida 1,236.6 New York 1,304.0 Pennsylvania 507.6 6 Kentucky 1,010.6 Pennsylvania 998.6 Pennsylvania 1,255.6 New York 491.5

374

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2008 Alabama .................................. 253,028 11,753 17,222 43,191 Alaska...................................... 2,901,760 20,779 24,337 92,305 Arkansas.................................. 6,531 103 139 446 California ................................. 195,272 11,179 13,972 46,176 Colorado .................................. 1,029,641 37,804 53,590 139,332 Florida...................................... 300 16 22 65 Illinois....................................... 233 33 42 115 Kansas..................................... 397,587 19,856 28,302 76,021 Kentucky.................................. 58,899 1,783 2,401 7,233 Louisiana ................................. 2,208,920 66,369 94,785 245,631

375

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2002-2006 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 Mexico ...................................................... 1,755 0 0 9,320 12,749 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 LNG Algeria....................................................... 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 Australia.................................................... 0 0 14,990 0 0 Brunei ....................................................... 2,401 0 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

376

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2001-2005 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,728,537 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 Mexico ...................................................... 10,276 1,755 0 0 9,320 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,738,814 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 LNG Algeria....................................................... 64,945 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 Australia.................................................... 2,394 0 0 14,990 0 Brunei ....................................................... 0 2,401 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

377

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2002-2006 Alabama .......................................................... 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 Alaska.............................................................. 165 195 224 227 231 Arizona ............................................................ 7 9 6 6 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 6,755 7,606 3,460 R 3,462 3,811 California ......................................................... 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 Colorado .......................................................... 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 1,946 Illinois...............................................................

378

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

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

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 67,561 135 R 67,696 67,099 135 67,234 Alaska R 12,724 303 R 13,027 13,073 61 13,134 Arizona 56,349 198 56,547 56,252 280 56,532 Arkansas 67,454 361 67,815 68,151 614 68,765

379

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2003-2007 Alabama .......................................................... 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 6,591 Alaska.............................................................. 195 224 227 231 239 Arizona ............................................................ 9 6 6 7 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 7,606 3,460 3,462 R 3,814 4,773 California ......................................................... 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 1,540 Colorado .......................................................... 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 22,949 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,039 2,781 2,123 R 2,419 2,552 Illinois...............................................................

380

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2003-2007 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 Mexico ...................................................... 0 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 LNG Algeria....................................................... 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 Australia.................................................... 0 14,990 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

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


381

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2007-2008 Alabama ...................... 2,409 295 2,704 2,476 281 2,757 Alaska.......................... 7 4 11 2 4 6 Arizona ........................ 296 99 395 285 98 383 Arkansas...................... 637 418 1,055 648 456 1,104 California ..................... 35,814 3,320 39,134 36,124 3,533 39,657 Colorado ...................... 298 4,294 4,592 341 4,475 4,816 Connecticut.................. 2,472 845 3,317 2,386 810 3,196 Delaware ..................... 125 60 185 96 69 165 Florida.......................... 156 311 467 161 288 449 Georgia........................ R 1,013 1,900 R 2,913 1,003 1,887 2,890 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 27 0 27 Idaho............................ 109 79 188 108 91 199 Illinois...........................

382

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2006 Alabama .................................. 287,278 14,736 21,065 54,529 Alaska...................................... 2,665,742 20,993 24,638 93,346 Arkansas.................................. 13,702 166 212 734 California ................................. 223,580 11,267 14,056 46,641 Colorado .................................. 751,036 26,111 36,317 97,697 Florida...................................... 3,972 357 485 1,416 Illinois....................................... 242 37 47 128 Kansas..................................... 453,111 21,509 30,726 83,137 Kentucky.................................. 39,559 1,666 2,252 6,763 Louisiana ................................. 2,511,802 73,551 105,236

383

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2005-2009 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ R 18,305,411 -- R 7.97 R 21,112,053 R 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 21,604,158 79,188,096 Alabama ............................... 225,666 975,789 4.32 236,029 1,020,599 Alaska................................... 397,077 1,163,555 2.93 397,077 1,163,554 Arizona ................................. 695 2,214 3.19 712 2,269 Arkansas............................... 680,613 2,332,956 3.43

384

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2010-2011 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 68,017 146 R 68,163 67,522 135 67,657 Alaska 12,673 325 12,998 12,721 303 13,024 Arizona 56,510 166 56,676 56,349 198 56,547 Arkansas 67,676 311 67,987 67,454 361 67,815 California 399,290 40,282

385

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2006-2010 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,305,411 -- 7.97 21,112,053 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 R 21,647,936 R 79,348,561 2010 Total ............................ 19,262,198 -- 4.48 22,402,141 100,272,654 Alabama ............................... 212,769 949,340 4.46 222,932 994,688 Alaska................................... 316,546 1,002,566 3.17 374,226 1,185,249 Arizona ................................. 165 676 4.11 183 753 Arkansas............................... 936,600 3,594,843 3.84

386

Microsoft Word - table_10.doc  

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

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

387

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 2 0 0 5,283 5,285 Connecticut.................. 0 273 0 0 0 273 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 * 0 0 0 * Hawaii.......................... 2,593 14 0 0 0 2,606 Illinois........................... 0 11 0 4 0 15 Indiana......................... 0 30 0 0 1,958 1,988 Iowa ............................. 0 2 0 30 0 31 Kentucky...................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Maryland ...................... 0 382 0 0 0 382 Massachusetts............. 0 46 0 0 0 46 Minnesota .................... 0 154 0 0 0 154 Missouri ....................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Nebraska ..................... 0 16 0 * 0 16 New Hampshire ........... 0 84 0 0 0 84 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 435 435 New York

388

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

17 17 Table C12. Total Energy Consumption, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Total Energy Consumption Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP State Trillion Btu State Billion Chained (2005) Dollars State Thousand Btu per Chained (2005) Dollar 1 Texas 12,206.6 California 1,735.4 Louisiana 19.7 2 California 7,858.4 Texas 1,149.9 Wyoming 17.5 3 Florida 4,217.1 New York 1,016.4 North Dakota 15.4 4 Louisiana 4,055.3 Florida 661.1 Alaska 14.3 5 Illinois 3,977.8 Illinois 582.1 Mississippi 13.8 6 Ohio 3,827.6 Pennsylvania 500.4 Kentucky 13.5

389

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2003-2007, and by State, 2007 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ R 15,981,421 -- R 6.39 R 19,409,674 R 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,031,199 -- 6.37 20,019,321 127,530,680 Alabama ............................... 259,062 1,926,374 7.44 270,407 2,010,736 Alaska................................... 368,344 2,072,647 5.63 433,485 2,439,193 Arizona ................................. 634 3,791 5.98 655 3,913 Arkansas...............................

390

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2010 Alabama .................................. 242,444 13,065 19,059 47,741 Alaska...................................... 2,731,803 17,798 20,835 79,355 Arkansas.................................. 9,599 160 213 692 California ................................. 204,327 10,400 13,244 42,509 Colorado .................................. 1,434,003 57,924 82,637 209,191 Kansas..................................... 341,778 18,424 26,251 70,425 Kentucky.................................. 66,579 3,317 4,576 13,311 Louisiana ................................. 2,207,760 71,231 102,448 262,178 Michigan .................................. 23,449 2,207 2,943 8,272 Mississippi ...............................

391

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

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

7 7 Table 7. Supplemental gas supplies by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) Colorado 0 99 0 4,313 4,412 Georgia 0 0 660 0 660 Hawaii 2,491 20 0 0 2,510 Illinois 0 1 0 0 1 Indiana 0 1 0 0 1 Kentucky 0 1 0 0 1 Louisiana 0 0 553 0 553 Maryland 0 116 0 0 116 Minnesota 0 9 0 0 9 Missouri * 0 0 0 * Nebraska 0 4 0 0 4 New Jersey 0 0 0 139 139 North Dakota 52,541 0 0 0 52,541 Ohio 0 6 360 0 366 Pennsylvania 0 2 0 0 2 Vermont 0 3 0 0 3 Virginia 0 48 0 0 48 Total 55,032 309 1,573 4,452 61,366 State Synthetic Natural Gas Propane-Air Biomass Gas Other Total * Volume is less than 500,000 cubic feet.

392

Intra-Household Inequality in Transitional Russia Ekaterina Kalugina  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1 Intra-Household Inequality in Transitional Russia Ekaterina Kalugina Natalia Radtchenko Catherine and satisfaction. Using two different subjective questions of the Russian data RLMS (Russia Longitudinal Monitoring and social changes in Russia, we investigate the dynamics of household behavior. Keywords: subjective data

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

393

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2004 2004 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2004 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector d,e Retail Electricity Total Energy d,f Coal Natural Gas Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass c Total d,e,f Distillate Fuel Jet Fuel LPG a Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Other b Total Alabama 1.57 7.72 11.91 8.82 15.78 13.68 4.78 8.25 12.28 0.43 1.81 5.32 1.68 18.01 11.29 Alaska 1.91 3.59 12.43 9.61 19.64 15.55 3.63 12.09 11.05 - 6.68 9.07 3.18 32.29 11.09 Arizona 1.31 6.84 13.59 9.53 18.40 15.33 5.29 7.23 13.92 0.45 5.90 6.68 2.18 21.83 15.24 Arkansas 1.25 8.09 12.01 8.30 14.80 13.97 4.67 11.02 12.77 0.49 1.79 6.59 1.43 16.76 11.89 California 1.82 7.63 13.58

394

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7) 7) August 2009 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2007 2007 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector e,f Retail Electricity Total Energy e,g Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total e,f,g Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel LPG b Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Oil Other c Total Wood and Waste d Alabama 2.17 9.06 19.43 16.20 21.84 21.26 8.46 14.19 19.62 0.42 2.71 7.47 2.29 22.46 16.01 Alaska 2.34 5.76 19.43 16.35 28.63 22.14 11.51 23.69 17.97 - 10.51 14.88 4.94 38.96 17.87 Arizona 1.61 8.44 19.84 16.24 27.16 21.95 10.04 11.27 20.50 0.57 10.86 9.61 2.78 25.02 20.72 Arkansas 1.65 9.33 19.63 15.73 21.10 21.54 8.65 18.76 20.42 0.57 2.66 9.45 1.98 20.57

395

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION  

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SECTION B: HOUSING TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SECTION C: HOME HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SECTION D: AIR CONDITIONING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 SECTION E: WATER HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 SECTION F: LIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 SECTION G: APPLIANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cooking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Refrigerators and Freezers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

396

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

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

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

397

Tables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

design challenges for tabletop interfaces: integrating access to public and private information, managing a cooperative gesture to organize digital documents on an interactive table. Our tabletop interface designTables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with Ubicomp Environments Abstract Our work

Klemmer, Scott

398

Tafel Musik: Formatting algorithm of tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper provides a description on the formatting algorithm of tables that the authors have developed. This algorithm is an important component of the so called TafeMusik (Tafel Musik) environment. TafeMusikprovides the user with an environment to ... Keywords: First-fit algorithm, Linear programming, Optimization, Tables, Tabular formatting, Tabular layout

K. -H. Shin; K. Kobayashi; A. Suzuki

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

399

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 5. South Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

400

Table 1.1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002  

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

1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002;" 1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ","Coke and"," ","Shipments"," " " "," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and","Coal","Breeze"," ","of Energy Sources","RSE"

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


401

Table 1.2 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002  

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

2 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002;" 2 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Trillion Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ",," ","Shipments","RSE" "NAICS"," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural ","LPG and",,"Coke and"," ","of Energy Sources","Row"

402

Table N1.1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998  

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

1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" 1. First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998;" " Level: National and Regional Data; " " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." " "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," "," ",," "," ",," "," ","Coke and"," ","Shipments"," " " "," ",,"Net","Residual","Distillate","Natural Gas(e)","LPG and","Coal","Breeze"," ","of Energy Sources","RSE"

403

1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Detailed Tables  

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

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

404

T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets...  

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

3: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information...

405

Table 4-3 Site Wide Environmental Management Matrix  

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

Table 4-3. Site-Wide Environmental Management Matrix National Renewable Energy Laboratory's South Table Mountain Complex FINAL POTENTIAL ISSUES PROGRAM OF IMPROVEMENTS Off- Site...

406

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

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

7 7 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:04:58 PM Table 3. Selected national average natural gas prices, 2008-2013 (dollars per thousand cubic feet, except where noted) Year and Month NGL Composite Spot Price a Natural Gas Spot Price b Citygate Price Delivered to Consumers Electric Power Price d Residential Commercial Industrial Price % of Total c Price % of Total c Price % of Total c 2008 Annual Average 15.20 8.86 9.18 13.89 97.5 12.23 79.7 9.65 20.4 9.26 2009 Annual Average 8.99 5.24 6.48 12.14 97.4 10.06 77.8 5.33 18.8 4.93 2010 Annual Average 11.83 4.37 6.18 11.39 97.4 9.47 77.5 5.49 18.0 5.27 2011 January 13.03 4.49 5.69 9.90 96.5 R 8.74 72.8 R 5.66 R 16.8 5.66 February 13.64 4.09 5.75 10.14 96.5 8.88 72.0 R 5.77 R 16.6

407

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and estimated extraction loss by state, 2011 Alabama 230,546 12,265 17,271 43,636 Alaska 2,721,396 18,314 21,554 82,255 Arkansas 5,611 212 268 883 California 180,648 9,831 12,095 39,909 Colorado 1,507,467 63,075 90,801 223,858 Illinois 15,727 705 1,043 2,409 Kansas 322,944 18,098 25,804 67,845 Kentucky 60,941 3,398 4,684 13,377 Louisiana 2,048,175 66,426 95,630 239,349 Michigan 21,518 2,132 2,465 7,875 Mississippi 126,859 7,732 11,221 28,404 Montana 11,185 927 1,252 3,744 New Mexico 795,069 61,857 90,291 223,829 North Dakota 112,206 10,199 14,182 41,156 Oklahoma 1,218,855 91,963 134,032 328,694 Pennsylvania 131,959 6,721 8,931 26,896 Tennessee 6,200

408

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 120,717 77.85 125,467 78.45 124,857 78.77 R 129,337 R 79.22 115,449 76.41 Alaska................................... 2,539 3.78 6,411 9.76 11,433 27.77 15,472 R 33.10 16,582 31.35 Arizona ................................. 11,380 53.61 10,089 58.81 9,174 60.05 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 Arkansas............................... 114,976 94.00 112,544 95.03 105,215 94.65 R 94,613 R 94.06 84,177 94.77 California .............................. 606,097 90.94 682,886 92.26 740,589 95.06 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 Colorado ............................... 136,704 99.27 128,709 98.75 111,291 99.07 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41

409

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 5. Number of producing gas wells by state and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2008-2012 Alabama 6,860 6,913 7,026 7,063 6,327 Alaska 261 261 269 277 185 Arizona 6 6 5 5 5 Arkansas 5,592 6,314 7,397 8,388 8,538 California 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 1,423 Colorado 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 32,000 Gulf of Mexico 1,527 1,984 1,852 1,559 1,474 Illinois 45 51 50 40 40 Indiana 525 563 620 914 819 Kansas 17,862 21,243 22,145 25,758 24,697 Kentucky 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 17,936 Louisiana 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 19,792 Maryland 7 7 7 8 9 Michigan 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 10,900 Mississippi 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 1,669 Missouri 0 0 0 53 100 Montana 7,095 7,031 6,059 6,477 6,240 Nebraska 322 285 276 322 270 Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 New Mexico 44,241 44,784

410

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2011 (million cubic feet) Alabama 195,581 17,271 -53,277 480,317 0 7,282 0 598,068 Alaska 356,225 21,554 14,450 0 -16,398 0 0 332,723 Arizona 168 0 -17,607 348,820 -42,026 0 0 289,357 Arkansas 1,072,212 268 3,943 -791,878 0 212 0 283,797 California 250,177 12,095 72,353 1,954,947 -91,287 20,598 0 2,153,498 Colorado 1,637,576 90,801 -76,093 -1,005,837 0 3,128 4,268 465,985 Connecticut 0 0 1,253 228,585 0 129 0 229,710 Delaware 0 0 11,756 67,928 0 -31 0 79,716 District of Columbia 0 0 1,961 31,016 0 0 0 32,976 Florida 15,125 0 -5,102 1,208,317 0 0 0 1,218,340 Georgia 0 0 -10,315 459,390 75,641 2,542 701 522,874 Gulf of Mexico 1,812,328 0 -82 -1,711,029 0

411

Microsoft Word - table_26.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

412

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.30 100.00 15.58 80.17 10.57 27.20 17.32 10.03 Alaska................................... 8.72 100.00 8.66 74.90 5.49 78.23 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.60 100.00 13.01 93.06 10.47 29.65 11.00 8.60 Arkansas............................... 14.09 100.00 11.32 64.49 10.56 3.87 -- 9.23 California .............................. 12.75 99.31 11.75 56.69 10.80 4.85 11.32 8.23 Colorado ............................... 9.77 100.00 9.01 95.24 8.76 0.56 13.57 7.02 Connecticut........................... 17.85 97.75 13.81 70.71 12.63 47.28 24.04 10.48 Delaware .............................. 16.07 100.00 14.24

413

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 129,337 79.22 115,449 76.41 114,699 76.48 R 114,325 R 75.97 103,662 72.80 Alaska................................... 15,472 33.10 16,582 31.35 11,619 36.94 5,934 30.04 1,304 21.77 Arizona ................................. 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 11,457 62.11 13,292 68.67 14,200 70.35 Arkansas............................... 94,613 94.06 84,177 94.77 83,347 95.22 82,213 95.85 81,841 96.13 California .............................. 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 690,491 94.32 699,283 94.69 726,927 95.15 Colorado ............................... 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41 110,565 99.38 116,699 99.55 119,032 99.44 Connecticut...........................

414

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Calais, ME .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 2,131 5.62 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 43,980 4.01 Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 113 4.49 Marysville, MI...................... 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 14,925 4.85 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 2,044 5.04 St. Clair, MI ......................... 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 R 492,235 R 8.96 612,369 4.62 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................

415

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2003-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 Alaska................................... 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 Arizona ................................. 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 Arkansas............................... 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 California .............................. 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 Colorado ............................... 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 Connecticut........................... 5.59 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 Delaware .............................. 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 Florida................................... 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 Georgia................................. 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15

416

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

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

4 4 Table 14. Underground natural gas storage capacity by state, December 31, 2012 (million cubic feet) Alabama 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 11,200 13,500 2 27,350 35,400 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12,178 21,853 2 12,178 21,853 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 349,296 592,411 14 349,296 592,411 Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 60,582 124,253 10 60,582 124,253 Illinois 0 0 0 17 215,594 779,862 11 87,368 220,070 28 302,962 999,931 Indiana 0 0 0 12 19,215 80,746 10 13,809 30,003 22 33,024 110,749 Iowa 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 Kansas 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,968 283,974 19 123,343 284,905 Kentucky 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana 11 200,702 297,020 0 0 0 7 211,780 402,626 18 412,482

417

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 115,449 76.4 114,699 76.5 114,325 76.0 103,662 72.8 94,597 72.1 Alaska................................... 16,582 31.4 11,619 36.9 5,934 30.0 1,304 21.8 1,827 27.5 Arizona ................................. 9,569 56.4 11,457 62.1 13,292 68.7 14,200 70.4 12,730 70.9 Arkansas............................... 84,177 94.8 83,347 95.2 82,213 95.8 81,841 96.1 74,752 96.4 California .............................. 738,704 94.5 690,491 94.3 699,283 94.7 R 683,512 R 94.9 673,034 95.3 Colorado ............................... 125,618 99.4 110,565 99.4 116,699 99.5 119,032 99.4 112,995 99.5 Connecticut...........................

418

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2006 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 484,711 12 484,711 5.82 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.18 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 881,037 11 103,731 29 984,768 11.82 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.37 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 275,200 0 0 4 275,200 3.30 Kansas.................................. 1 1,088 0 0 18 287,295 19 288,383 3.46 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 208,827 23 218,394

419

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2002-2006 (Million Cubic Feet) 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580 0 0 0 293,580 California................. 0 7,068 7,068 3,080 64,735 67,816 74,884 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,719,169 828,458 4,547,627 4,547,627 Louisiana ................ 125,481 11,711 137,192 NA NA NA 137,192 Texas...................... 54,672 2,391 57,063 NA NA NA 57,063 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010

420

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 Marysville, MI...................... 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 St. Clair, MI ......................... 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 524,065 8.98 Noyes, MN .......................... 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

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


421

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2004-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 9.84 Alaska................................... 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 6.74 Arizona ................................. 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 8.49 Arkansas............................... 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 8.88 California .............................. 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 8.11 Colorado ............................... 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 6.98 Connecticut........................... 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 10.24 Delaware .............................. 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 8.32 Florida................................... 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 9.73 Georgia................................. 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15 9.35

422

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2007-2011 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,782,708 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 Mexico 54,062 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 Total Pipeline Imports 3,836,770 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 LNG Algeria 77,299 0 0 0 0 Egypt 114,580 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 Equatorial Guinea 17,795 0 0 0 0 Nigeria 95,028 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 Norway 0 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 Peru 0 0 0 16,045 16,620 Qatar 18,352 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 Trinidad/Tobago 447,758 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 Yemen 0 0 0 38,897 60,071 Total LNG Imports 770,812 351,698

423

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.13 100.00 15.07 79.82 8.70 24.02 -- 7.19 Alaska................................... 8.68 100.00 7.57 76.01 4.67 69.96 -- 3.58 Arizona ................................. 17.21 100.00 12.84 93.36 10.49 31.33 9.40 6.84 Arkansas............................... 13.08 100.00 10.07 70.38 9.51 4.15 8.39 7.04 California .............................. 11.57 99.50 10.20 60.63 9.07 5.31 7.71 6.72 Colorado ............................... 8.84 100.00 8.10 95.70 7.21 0.45 8.72 4.35 Connecticut........................... 16.39 98.20 12.61 71.49 10.54 50.04 20.57 7.81 Delaware .............................. 16.21 100.00 14.48

424

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 15,572 15,356 216 493 606 -114 103 Alaska....................... 0 0 0 738 738 0 0 Arkansas................... 4,394 4,707 -313 72 51 20 -293 California .................. 190,055 179,359 10,696 82 50 31 10,727 Colorado ................... 38,588 39,442 -854 0 0 0 -854 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 1,383 682 701 701 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 138 145 -7 -7 Georgia..................... 0 0 0 4,179 2,660 1,520 1,520 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 46 189 -143 -143 Illinois........................ 260,515 259,288 1,226 3 405 -402 824 Indiana...................... 21,405 22,827 -1,422 831 1,066 -236 -1,658 Iowa .......................... 66,827 70,206 -3,379 2,626 2,845 -219

425

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2005-2009 (Million Cubic Feet) 2005 Total ................ 363,652 321,019 684,671 2,474,076 730,830 3,204,906 3,889,577 Alabama.................. 152,902 0 152,902 NA NA NA 152,902 Alaska..................... 74,928 305,641 380,568 0 0 0 380,568 California................. 0 6,685 6,685 684 53,404 54,088 60,773 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 2,473,392 677,426 3,150,818 3,150,818 Louisiana ................ 99,290 8,294 107,584 NA NA NA 107,584 Texas...................... 36,532 400 36,932 NA NA NA 36,932 2006 Total ................ 321,261 308,391 629,652 2,272,669 681,869 2,954,538 3,584,190 Alabama.................. 145,762 0 145,762 NA NA NA 145,762 Alaska..................... 62,156 292,660 354,816

426

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 20. Number of natural gas residential consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 Alabama R 772,892 0 R 772,892 767,412 0 767,412 Alaska 121,736 0 121,736 122,983 0 122,983 Arizona 1,146,280 6 1,146,286 1,157,682 6 1,157,688 Arkansas 551,795 0 551,795 549,959 0 549,959 California R 10,545,585 R 79,605 10,625,190 10,547,706 134,210 10,681,916 Colorado 1,645,711 5 1,645,716 1,659,803 5 1,659,808 Connecticut 494,065 905 494,970 503,241 897 504,138 Delaware 152,005 0 152,005 153,307 0 153,307 District of Columbia 130,888 14,636 145,524 129,674 16,264 145,938 Florida 664,564 R 14,635 R 679,199 672,160 14,861 687,021 Georgia 321,515 1,418,491 1,740,006 319,179 1,420,364 1,739,543 Hawaii 25,305 0 25,305

427

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2003-2007 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 15 4.34 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Detroit, MI ........................... 19,737 5.47 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 Marysville, MI...................... 811 5.06 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 605 4.94 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 St. Clair, MI ......................... 238,444 6.13 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 Noyes, MN .......................... 172 5.43 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 38 6.48 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

428

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2006-2010 (Million Cubic Feet) 2006 Total ................ 321,261 308,391 629,652 2,272,669 681,869 2,954,538 3,584,190 Alabama.................. 145,762 0 145,762 NA NA NA 145,762 Alaska..................... 62,156 292,660 354,816 0 0 0 354,816 California................. 156 6,654 6,809 2,094 38,313 40,407 47,217 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 2,270,575 643,556 2,914,131 2,914,131 Louisiana ................ 88,657 8,822 97,479 NA NA NA 97,479 Texas...................... 24,529 255 24,785 NA NA NA 24,785 2007 Total ................ 276,117 341,925 618,042 2,204,379 654,334 2,858,713 3,476,755 Alabama.................. 134,451 0 134,451 NA NA NA 134,451 Alaska..................... 48,876 325,328 374,204

429

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 3. Gross withdrawals and marketed production of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2008-2012 (million cubic feet) 2008 Total 15,134,644 5,609,425 2,022,228 2,869,960 25,636,257 3,638,622 166,909 718,674 21,112,053 953,451 20,158,602 2009 Total 14,414,287 5,674,120 2,010,171 3,958,315 26,056,893 3,522,090 165,360 721,507 21,647,936 1,024,082 20,623,854 2010 Total 13,247,498 5,834,703 1,916,762 5,817,122 26,816,085 3,431,587 165,928 836,698 22,381,873 1,066,366 21,315,507 2011 Total 12,291,070 5,907,919 1,779,055 8,500,983 28,479,026 3,365,313 209,439 867,922 24,036,352 1,134,473 22,901,879 2012 Total 12,736,678 4,969,668 1,539,395 10,296,572 29,542,313 3,259,680 212,848 761,836 25,307,949 1,250,340 24,057,609

430

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Created on: 1/7/2014 9:25:31 AM Table 7. Marketed production of natural gas in selected states and the Federal Gulf of Mexico, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Year and Month Alaska Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Wyoming Other a States Federal Gulf of Mexico U.S. Total 2008 Total 398,442 1,377,969 1,446,204 1,886,710 6,960,693 2,274,850 4,452,843 2,314,342 21,112,053 2009 Total 397,077 1,548,607 1,383,004 1,901,556 6,818,973 2,335,328 4,834,474 2,428,916 21,647,936 2010 Total 374,226 2,210,099 1,292,185 1,827,328 6,715,294 2,305,525 5,412,154 2,245,062 22,381,873 2011 January 31,027 224,410 100,352 154,940 588,714 178,331 496,362 178,597 1,952,732 February 31,076 208,495 88,553

431

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2007 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 487,711 12 487,711 5.80 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.17 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 876,960 11 103,731 29 980,691 11.67 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.36 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 278,238 0 0 4 278,238 3.31 Kansas.................................. 1 931 0 0 18 287,996 19 288,926 3.44 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 210,792 23 220,359

432

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 3. Gross Withdrawals and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2004-2008 (Million Cubic Feet) 2004 Total ............. 17,885,247 6,084,431 NA 23,969,678 3,701,656 96,408 654,124 19,517,491 926,600 18,590,891 2005 Total ............. 17,471,847 5,984,975 NA 23,456,822 3,699,535 119,097 711,095 18,927,095 876,497 18,050,598 2006 Total ............. 17,995,554 5,539,464 NA 23,535,018 3,264,929 129,469 730,946 19,409,674 906,069 18,503,605 2007 Total ............. 17,065,375 R 5,818,405 1,779,875 R 24,663,656 R 3,662,685 R 143,457 R 661,168 R 20,196,346 930,320 R 19,266,026 2008 Total ............. 18,011,151 5,844,798 1,898,399 25,754,348 3,638,563 166,588 709,681 21,239,516 953,451 20,286,065 Alabama Total ...... 159,912 6,368 111,273 277,553 475 1,801 17,394

433

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2004-2008 (Million Cubic Feet) 2004 Total ................ 401,662 279,249 680,911 3,214,488 840,852 4,055,340 4,736,252 Alabama.................. 165,630 0 165,630 NA NA NA 165,630 Alaska..................... 73,457 260,667 334,125 0 0 0 334,125 California................. 0 6,966 6,966 850 53,805 54,655 61,622 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,213,638 787,047 4,000,685 4,000,685 Louisiana ................ 117,946 11,299 129,245 NA NA NA 129,245 Texas...................... 44,630 316 44,946 NA NA NA 44,946 2005 Total ................ 363,652 321,019 684,671 2,474,076 730,830 3,204,906 3,889,577 Alabama.................. 152,902 0 152,902 NA NA NA 152,902 Alaska..................... 74,928 305,641 380,568

434

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

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

5 5 Created on: 12/12/2013 1:57:32 PM Table 2. Natural gas consumption in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Delivered to Consumers Year and Month Lease and Plant Fuel a Pipeline and Distribution Use b Residential Commercial Industrial Electric Power Vehicle Fuel Total Total Consumption 2008 Total 1,220 648 4,892 3,153 6,670 6,668 26 21,409 23,277 2009 Total 1,275 670 4,779 3,119 6,167 6,873 27 20,965 22,910 2010 Total 1,286 674 4,782 3,103 6,826 7,387 29 22,127 24,087 2011 January 107 R 83 970 528 R 659 540 3 R 2,699 R 2,889 February 97 70 R 768 432 R 600 484 2 R 2,285 R 2,452 March 111 63 R 595 R 361 R 616 482 3 R 2,056 R 2,230 April 109 51 R 341 R 232 R 569 521 R 2 R 1,665 R 1,825 May 112 46 R 205 R 166 R

435

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2008 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 11,900 15,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 20,900 26,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14,500 22,000 2 14,500 22,000 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 283,796 498,705 12 283,796 498,705 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 42,579 95,068 8 42,579 95,068 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 18 244,900 874,384 10 51,418 103,606 28 296,318 977,989 Indiana................ 0 0 0 12 19,978 81,991 10 12,791 32,946 22 32,769 114,937 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 87,350 284,747 0 0 0 4 87,350 284,747 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 118,885 281,291 19 119,260 282,221 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 94,598 210,792 23 101,227 220,359 Louisiana ............

436

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 20,604 12,127 8,477 704 698 7 8,484 Arkansas................... 4,789 4,081 707 45 57 -12 695 California .................. 168,957 182,247 -13,290 92 76 16 -13,274 Colorado ................... 35,836 38,506 -2,670 0 0 0 -2,670 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 532 246 286 286 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 68 68 * * Georgia..................... 0 0 0 7,705 1,963 5,742 5,742 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 415 275 140 140 Illinois........................ 242,754 235,590 7,163 238 358 -119 7,044 Indiana...................... 23,598 20,707 2,891 1,447 1,172 275 3,165 Iowa .......................... 68,750 65,187 3,563 2,438 1,540 899 4,462 Kansas...................... 103,105 99,698 3,407

437

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2001-2005 (Million Cubic Feet) 2001 Total ................ 508,374 170,206 678,580 4,146,993 989,969 5,136,962 5,815,542 Alabama.................. 200,862 0 200,862 NA NA NA 200,862 Alaska..................... 113,870 149,067 262,937 0 0 0 262,937 California................. 0 7,262 7,262 3,913 67,034 70,947 78,209 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 4,143,080 922,935 5,066,015 5,066,015 Louisiana ................ 140,358 13,513 153,871 NA NA NA 153,871 Texas...................... 53,285 364 53,649 NA NA NA 53,649 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580

438

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 25. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2009-2010 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 20.22 R 18.41 20.18 97.7 17.85 19.44 17.89 97.9 Georgia................................. 13.20 16.81 16.30 14.1 12.18 15.67 15.17 14.3 Maryland ............................... 13.09 R 16.80 13.73 82.8 12.20 13.51 12.44 81.7 New Jersey ........................... 14.49 R 16.52 14.54 97.7 12.77 14.87 12.84 96.6 New York .............................. 14.96 R 15.38 15.05 77.1 13.87 14.55 14.04 74.6 Ohio ...................................... 11.64 13.64 12.68 47.8 10.28 11.80 11.13 43.7 Pennsylvania ........................ 14.56 R 16.46 14.74 90.9

439

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2002-2006 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 4.74 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 Alaska................................... 2.36 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 Arizona ................................. 3.77 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 Arkansas............................... 5.17 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 California .............................. 3.20 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 Colorado ............................... 2.72 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 Connecticut........................... 6.42 5.59 7.56 R 9.74 9.11 Delaware .............................. 5.37 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 Florida................................... 3.90 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 Georgia................................. 4.55 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 Hawaii...................................

440

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Residential Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2009-2010 Alabama ...................... R 785,005 0 R 785,005 768,921 0 768,921 Alaska.......................... 120,124 0 120,124 121,166 0 121,166 Arizona ........................ 1,130,047 0 1,130,047 1,138,448 0 1,138,448 Arkansas...................... 557,355 0 557,355 549,970 0 549,970 California ..................... R 10,454,747 R 56,203 R 10,510,950 10,469,734 72,850 10,542,584 Colorado ...................... 1,622,429 5 1,622,434 1,634,582 5 1,634,587 Connecticut.................. 488,614 735 489,349 489,380 805 490,185 Delaware ..................... 149,006 0 149,006 150,458 0 150,458 District of Columbia...... 129,738 13,698 143,436 130,048 14,103 144,151 Florida.......................... 659,725 14,365

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


441

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Commercial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... R 65,193 120 R 65,313 67,468 128 67,596 Alaska.......................... 12,267 497 12,764 12,854 363 13,217 Arizona ........................ 57,481 105 57,586 57,022 169 57,191 Arkansas...................... 68,943 201 69,144 68,794 249 69,043 California ..................... 417,531 29,629 447,160 406,270 35,225 441,495 Colorado ...................... 144,543 176 144,719 145,455 169 145,624 Connecticut.................. 50,023 3,880 53,903 50,106 4,404 54,510 Delaware ..................... 12,619 84 12,703 12,726 113 12,839 District of Columbia...... 6,838 3,186 10,024 6,706 3,582 10,288 Florida.......................... 41,164 16,961 58,125 41,748 17,801 59,549

442

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2009 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.12 100.0 14.93 78.7 6.48 27.9 19.17 4.30 Alaska................................... 10.23 100.0 9.51 85.3 4.02 72.5 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.65 100.0 12.15 88.0 8.19 29.1 14.96 4.16 Arkansas............................... 13.39 100.0 10.71 59.4 8.47 3.6 -- 4.14 California .............................. 9.43 98.9 7.75 54.9 6.57 4.7 7.61 4.44 Colorado ............................... 8.80 100.0 7.56 94.8 6.57 0.5 9.12 4.27 Connecticut........................... 14.81 97.5 9.92 69.0 8.44 37.5 15.26 4.89 Delaware .............................. 17.79 100.0 15.87 53.5 13.99 2.1 14.12 W District of Columbia...............

443

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 23,026 16,740 6,286 946 968 -21 6,264 Arkansas................... 4,672 4,368 304 42 40 2 306 California .................. 226,810 203,653 23,157 56 54 2 23,159 Colorado ................... 43,250 45,010 -1,760 0 0 0 -1,760 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 651 473 178 178 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 73 76 -2 -2 Georgia..................... 0 0 0 2,693 2,314 379 379 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 142 72 70 70 Illinois........................ 247,458 245,135 2,323 398 325 74 2,397 Indiana...................... 21,943 22,454 -511 1,983 1,148 835 324 Iowa .......................... 76,407 78,444 -2,037 1,458 1,312 146 -1,891 Kansas...................... 113,253 121,737 -8,484

444

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2006-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 21.48 24.62 21.54 97.95 20.55 23.23 20.61 97.79 Georgia................................. 15.84 18.81 R 18.37 14.70 14.64 18.02 17.53 14.35 Maryland ............................... 16.14 17.41 16.36 82.27 14.95 16.26 15.17 83.26 New Jersey ........................... 14.87 17.69 R 14.91 98.66 14.45 16.50 14.48 98.35 New York .............................. 15.09 16.99 15.35 86.06 15.50 15.46 15.49 84.07 Ohio ...................................... 14.41 14.36 14.39 58.77 13.05 13.95 13.47 53.01 Pennsylvania ........................ 16.48 16.06 16.45

445

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2001-2005, and by State, 2005 2001 Total ............................ 19,577,660 -- 4.00 20,570,295 82,202,805 2002 Total ............................ 14,467,289 -- 2.95 19,884,780 58,596,868 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 R 19,517,491 R 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,525,771 -- 7.33 18,950,734 138,987,902 Alabama ............................... 285,237 2,645,780 9.28 296,528 2,750,513 Alaska................................... 502,887 2,387,581 4.75 487,282 2,313,492 Arizona ................................. 211 1,445 6.86 233 1,599 Arkansas............................... 190,533 1,383,193 7.26

446

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2010 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 25,150 32,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13,898 21,760 2 13,898 21,760 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 311,096 542,511 13 311,096 542,511 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 49,119 105,768 9 49,119 105,768 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 17 216,132 772,381 11 87,368 218,106 28 303,500 990,487 Indiana................ 0 0 0 13 19,437 81,268 9 13,545 30,003 22 32,982 111,271 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 90,613 288,010 0 0 0 4 90,613 288,010 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,814 283,891 19 123,190 284,821 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana ............

447

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2007-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 20.55 23.23 20.61 97.79 21.11 25.00 21.19 97.78 Georgia................................. 14.64 18.02 17.53 14.35 15.46 18.73 18.26 14.43 Maryland ............................... 14.95 16.26 15.17 83.26 15.98 16.54 16.08 83.15 New Jersey ........................... 14.45 16.50 14.48 98.35 15.15 18.07 15.21 97.98 New York .............................. R 15.79 15.46 R 15.73 R 82.34 16.79 16.57 16.75 80.64 Ohio ...................................... 13.05 13.95 13.47 53.01 14.60 14.45 14.52 52.47 Pennsylvania ........................

448

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2009 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 11,900 15,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 20,900 26,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13,898 21,760 2 13,898 21,760 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 296,096 513,005 13 296,096 513,005 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 48,129 105,768 9 48,129 105,768 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 18 252,344 885,848 10 51,418 103,606 28 303,761 989,454 Indiana................ 0 0 0 12 19,367 81,328 10 12,791 32,946 22 32,157 114,274 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 87,414 284,811 0 0 0 4 87,414 284,811 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 118,964 281,370 19 119,339 282,300 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 96,855 210,801 23 103,484 220,368 Louisiana ............

449

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

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

5 5 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2008-2012 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 2,962,827 Mexico 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 314 Total Pipeline Imports 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 2,963,140 LNG by Vessel Egypt 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 2,811 Nigeria 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 0 Norway 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 6,212 Peru 0 0 16,045 16,620 0 Qatar 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 33,823 Trinidad/Tobago 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 112,207 Yemen 0 0 38,897 60,071 19,595 Total LNG Imports 351,698 451,957 431,010 348,939 174,649 Total Imports 3,984,101 3,751,360

450

Microsoft Word - table_19.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 19. Number of Natural Gas Residential Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... R 806,660 R 0 R 806,660 799,256 0 799,256 Alaska.......................... 104,360 0 104,360 108,401 0 108,401 Arizona ........................ 993,885 0 993,885 1,042,662 0 1,042,662 Arkansas...................... R 554,844 0 R 554,844 555,861 0 555,861 California ..................... 9,921,331 R 36,081 R 9,957,412 10,092,466 31,967 10,124,433 Colorado ...................... R 1,496,873 3 R 1,496,876 1,524,810 3 1,524,813 Connecticut.................. 468,918 414 469,332 474,807 414 475,221 District of Columbia...... 120,709 17,425 138,134 127,139 13,873 141,012 Delaware ..................... 133,197 0 133,197 137,115 0 137,115 Florida.......................... R 628,104 10,910

451

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Commercial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2006-2007 Alabama ...................... R 66,222 115 R 66,337 65,738 118 65,856 Alaska.......................... 12,858 1,526 14,384 12,491 917 13,408 Arizona ........................ 56,955 136 57,091 57,047 122 57,169 Arkansas...................... 69,318 157 69,475 69,319 176 69,495 California ..................... 426,379 15,673 442,052 421,449 24,671 446,120 Colorado ...................... 139,566 180 139,746 141,201 219 141,420 Connecticut.................. 49,056 3,926 52,982 48,522 3,867 52,389 Delaware ..................... 12,288 57 12,345 12,507 69 12,576 District of Columbia...... 7,004 3,406 10,410 6,867 3,048 9,915 Florida.......................... 41,190 14,069 55,259 41,325 15,995 57,320

452

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 176 4.40 15 4.34 48 5.36 0 -- Detroit, MI ........................... 35,644 4.57 7,431 3.03 19,737 5.47 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 Marysville, MI...................... 3,651 3.92 0 -- 811 5.06 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 0 -- 0 -- 605 4.94 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 St. Clair, MI ......................... 122,293 3.82 164,084 3.42 238,444 6.13 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 71 1.99 172 5.43 2,193 5.77 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 549 3.55 143 2.28 38 6.48 1,429 4.98 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

453

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2005 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 15.82 100.00 13.13 81.65 9.51 23.59 -- 9.67 Alaska................................... 5.73 100.00 4.93 51.19 2.59 68.65 -- 3.42 Arizona ................................. 13.54 100.00 9.85 93.29 8.53 43.63 7.91 8.24 Arkansas............................... 13.65 100.00 10.20 74.07 9.44 5.23 10.16 8.59 California .............................. 11.86 99.66 10.69 68.67 9.84 5.46 8.80 8.09 Colorado ............................... 10.29 99.99 9.39 95.15 8.68 0.59 8.17 7.41 Connecticut........................... 16.24 98.75 13.00 70.34 11.68 46.41 14.60 9.31 District of Columbia............... 16.87 79.76 13.17 100.00 --

454

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2007-2011 (million cubic feet) 2007 Total 276,117 341,925 618,042 2,204,379 654,334 2,858,713 3,476,755 Alabama 134,451 0 134,451 NA NA NA 134,451 Alaska 48,876 325,328 374,204 0 0 0 374,204 California 312 6,977 7,289 2,137 43,379 45,516 52,805 Gulf of Mexico 0 0 0 2,202,242 610,955 2,813,197 2,813,197 Louisiana 63,357 9,512 72,868 NA NA NA 72,868 Texas 29,121 108 29,229 NA NA NA 29,229 2008 Total 297,565 356,139 653,704 1,849,891 524,965 2,374,857 3,028,561 Alabama 125,502 0 125,502 NA NA NA 125,502 Alaska 43,079 345,109 388,188 0 0 0 388,188 California 266 6,764 7,029 1,601 43,300 44,902

455

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2003-2007 (Million Cubic Feet) 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010 0 0 0 322,010 California................. 0 6,866 6,866 1,731 56,363 58,095 64,961 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,563,883 883,465 4,447,348 4,447,348 Louisiana ................ 123,939 9,517 133,456 NA NA NA 133,456 Texas...................... 52,206 1,363 53,569 NA NA NA 53,569 2004 Total ................ 401,662 279,249 680,911 3,214,488 840,852 4,055,340 4,736,252 Alabama.................. 165,630 0 165,630 NA NA NA 165,630 Alaska..................... 73,457 260,667 334,125

456

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

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

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

457

EIA - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (1990-2030) Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region, Reference Case Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel, Reference Case Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

458

FY 2005 Control Table by Organization  

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

Organization Organization (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 2 National Nuclear Security Administration..................................................... 3 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.................................................... 4 Electric Transmission and Distribution......................................................... 4 Fossil Energy................................................................................................ 5 Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology...................................................

459

Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey -- Publication and Tables  

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

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

460

Precision Flow Table | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Table Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Flow Table Overseeing Organization United States Army Corp of Engineers (ERDC) Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type Flow Table Length(m) 2.4 Beam(m) 1.2 Water Type Freshwater Cost(per day) Contact POC Towing Capabilities Towing Capabilities None Wavemaking Capabilities Wavemaking Capabilities None Channel/Tunnel/Flume Channel/Tunnel/Flume Yes Wind Capabilities Wind Capabilities None Control and Data Acquisition Description Automated data acquisition and control system Cameras None Available Sensors Flow, Pressure Range(psi), Turbulence, Velocity, Wave Probe Data Generation Capability Real-Time No Test Services Test Services Yes Past Pertinent Test Experience Users are District Engineers, Planners, and Engineering Consultants

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


461

FY 2005 Control Table by Appropriation  

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

Appropriation Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 5 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 5 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 5 Science.........................................................................................................

462

Commercial Buildings Characteristics 1992 - Publication and Tables  

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

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

463

ii Colorado Climate Table of Contents  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

#12;ii Colorado Climate Table of Contents Web: http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu Colorado Climate Spring 2002 Vol. 3, No. 2 Lightning in Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Colorado Climate in Review

464

TableHC11.12.xls  

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

... 2.8 0.3 Q 0.2 Million U.S. Housing Units Home Electronics Usage Indicators Table HC11.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Northeast Census Region,...

465

TableHC6.13.xls  

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

Q 5 or More... 0.3 N Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators 4 Members 5 or More Members Table HC6.13 Lighting Usage Indicators by...

466

TABLES3.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

S3. Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Imports, 1988 - Present (Thousand Barrels per Day) See footnotes at end of table. 1988 Average ... 300 58 345 343 92 80 0 0 1989...

467

Table of Contents Resilient Sustainable Communities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

..................................... 5 Onondaga County: Sustainable Development Plan....................... 9 Comparison of the Hazard Mitigation Plan and Onondaga County Sustainable Development Plan DraftTable of Contents Resilient Sustainable Communities: Integrating Hazard Mitigation & Sustainability

468

Table of Contents Chapter and Content Pages  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

#12;Page 2 Table of Contents Chapter and Content Pages 1. Field Trip Itinerary ................................................................................. 7 4. Geologic Framework of the Netherlands Antilles 5. Coral Reefs of the Netherlands Antilles

Fouke, Bruce W.

469

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C9. Electric Power Sector Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydroelectric Power b Biomass Geothermal Solar/PV d Wind Net Electricity Imports e Total f Distillate Fuel Oil Petroleum Coke Residual Fuel Oil Total Wood and Waste c Alabama ............. 586.1 349.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 411.8 86.3 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,439.3 Alaska ................. 6.0 42.3 3.3 0.0 1.5 4.8 0.0 13.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 (s) 66.3 Arizona ............... 449.9 183.9 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 327.3 89.1 2.4 0.0 0.8 2.5 1.5 1,057.9 Arkansas ............. 300.5 109.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.6 148.5 28.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 588.9 California ............ 19.7 630.1 0.4 11.1 (s) 11.5 383.6 413.4 69.0 122.0 8.4 75.3 20.1 1,753.1 Colorado ............. 362.4 88.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 20.2 0.9

470

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 3. Gross withdrawals and marketed production of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2007-2011 (million cubic feet) 2007 Total R 14,991,891 R 5,681,871 R 1,999,748 1,990,145 24,663,656 3,662,685 143,457 661,168 20,196,346 930,320 19,266,026 2008 Total R 15,134,644 R 5,609,425 R 2,022,228 R 2,869,960 25,636,257 3,638,622 166,909 718,674 21,112,053 953,451 20,158,602 2009 Total R 14,414,287 R 5,674,120 R 2,010,171 R 3,958,315 26,056,893 3,522,090 165,360 721,507 21,647,936 1,024,082 20,623,854 2010 Total R 13,247,498 R 5,834,703 1,916,762 5,817,122 R 26,816,085 3,431,587 165,928 836,698 R 22,381,873 R 1,066,366 R 21,315,507 2011 Total 12,291,070 5,907,919 1,779,055 8,500,983 28,479,026 3,365,313 209,439 867,922 24,036,352 1,134,473 22,901,879

471

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural gas delivered to commercial consumers for the account of others by state, 2008-2012 (volumes in million cubic feet) Alabama 4,999 19.8 5,160 21.2 5,494 20.3 5,313 21.1 5,126 23.8 Alaska 4,274 25.1 2,448 14.7 1,951 12.3 2,208 R 11.4 1,005 5.1 Arizona 2,258 6.9 3,866 12.0 3,605 11.3 3,988 12.2 4,213 13.4 Arkansas 13,112 35.5 14,776 40.6 17,862 44.4 19,402 48.5 24,772 59.8 California 108,738 43.3 111,702 45.1 113,903 45.9 R 112,448 45.7 126,571 50.0 Colorado 3,132 4.8 3,240 5.2 3,118 5.4 3,457 6.2 4,061 7.8 Connecticut 11,032 29.3 12,324 31.0 14,068 34.6 15,519 34.6 14,774 34.9 Delaware 2,611 29.4 5,438 46.5 6,117 50.2 4,879 46.6 5,647 56.3 District of Columbia 15,110 82.1 15,550 83.1 15,507 83.6 14,029

472

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural gas delivered to commercial consumers for the account of others by state, 2007-2011 (volumes in million cubic feet) Alabama 4,722 20.2 4,999 19.8 5,160 21.2 5,494 R 20.3 5,313 21.1 Alaska 4,499 24.0 4,274 25.1 2,448 14.7 1,951 12.3 2,208 13.3 Arizona 2,172 6.6 2,258 6.9 3,866 12.0 3,605 11.3 3,988 12.2 Arkansas 9,534 29.6 13,112 35.5 14,776 40.6 17,862 44.4 19,402 48.5 California 98,776 39.3 108,738 43.3 111,702 45.1 113,903 45.9 112,561 45.7 Colorado 2,721 4.3 3,132 4.8 3,240 5.2 R 3,118 5.4 3,457 6.2 Connecticut 10,252 28.5 11,032 29.3 12,324 31.0 14,068 34.6 15,519 34.6 Delaware 2,178 25.2 2,611 29.4 5,438 46.5 6,117 50.2 4,879 46.6 District of Columbia 15,703 81.4 15,110 82.1 15,550 83.1 15,507 83.6 14,029

473

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

State State Energy Data 2011: Consumption 11 Table C8. Transportation Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy Electrical System Energy Losses e Total Aviation Gasoline Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Lubricants Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Total Alabama ............. 0.0 23.5 0.4 124.4 13.4 0.3 2.3 316.3 6.7 463.7 0.0 487.2 0.0 487.2 Alaska ................. 0.0 3.5 0.8 44.4 118.2 (s) 0.4 32.9 0.4 197.2 0.0 200.7 0.0 200.7 Arizona ............... 0.0 15.6 1.0 111.3 21.5 0.8 1.6 318.2 0.0 454.5 0.0 470.1 0.0 470.1 Arkansas ............. 0.0 11.5 0.4 99.7 5.9 0.4 2.0 171.3 0.0 279.8 (s) 291.2 (s) 291.2 California ............ 0.0 25.7 1.9 440.9 549.7 3.8 13.3 1,770.1 186.9 2,966.5 2.8 2,995.1 5.5 3,000.5 Colorado ............. 0.0 14.7 0.6 83.2 58.3 0.3

474

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table C6. Commercial Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Hydro- electric Power e Biomass Geothermal Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy g Electrical System Energy Losses h Total g Distillate Fuel Oil Kerosene LPG b Motor Gasoline c Residual Fuel Oil Total d Wood and Waste f Alabama ............. 0.0 25.5 7.0 (s) 2.7 0.2 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 75.9 112.4 144.8 257.2 Alaska ................. 9.4 16.9 10.1 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 11.5 0.0 0.3 0.1 9.7 48.0 20.2 68.2 Arizona ............... 0.0 33.1 6.8 (s) 1.5 0.7 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.5 (s) 100.7 143.2 202.3 345.5 Arkansas ............. 0.0 40.6 3.6 (s) 1.2 0.4 0.0 5.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 41.4 88.6 86.1 174.7 California ............ 0.0 250.9 47.9 0.1 8.7 1.4 0.0 58.1 (s) 17.4 0.7 418.9 746.2 809.9 1,556.1 Colorado ............. 3.2 57.6 5.9 (s) 2.9 0.2 0.0 9.1 0.0 1.2 0.2

475

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average price of natural gas delivered to consumers by state and sector, 2011 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Alabama 15.09 100.0 12.37 78.9 5.56 23.4 11.45 4.36 Alaska 8.77 100.0 8.77 86.7 3.84 60.8 -- 5.04 Arizona 15.04 100.0 9.99 87.8 6.86 24.2 7.73 5.02 Arkansas 11.46 100.0 8.90 51.5 7.44 2.1 -- 4.73 California 9.93 98.3 8.28 54.3 7.04 4.5 7.32 4.71 Colorado 8.25 100.0 7.84 93.8 6.42 7.6 9.56 4.97 Connecticut 13.83 96.8 8.48 65.4 9.16 31.4 18.59 5.09 Delaware 15.38 100.0 13.58 53.4 11.69 1.6 28.76 W District of Columbia 13.06 75.0 12.24 16.9 -- -- 4.17 -- Florida 18.16 98.1 11.11 39.8 8.07 3.0 4.93 5.86 Georgia 15.72 100.0 10.51 100.0 5.90 18.2 5.57 4.72 Hawaii 55.28 100.0 45.58

476

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C7. Industrial Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Hydro- electric power e Biomass Geo- thermal Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy h,i Electrical System Energy Losses j Total h,i Distillate Fuel Oil LPG b Motor Gasoline c Residual Fuel Oil Other d Total Wood and Waste f Losses and Co- products g Alabama ............. 65.0 179.1 23.9 3.7 3.3 6.7 46.3 83.9 0.0 147.2 0.0 (s) 115.1 590.4 219.5 810.0 Alaska ................. 0.1 253.8 19.2 0.1 1.0 0.0 27.1 47.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 4.5 306.0 9.4 315.4 Arizona ............... 10.0 22.0 33.2 1.4 4.6 (s) 18.4 57.6 0.0 1.4 3.1 0.2 42.1 136.5 84.7 221.2 Arkansas ............. 5.6 93.1 31.1 2.6 4.0 0.1 17.4 55.1 0.0 72.7 0.0 (s) 58.0 284.5 120.5 405.0 California ............ 35.6 767.4 77.2 23.9 29.6 (s) 312.5

477

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C5. Residential Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal a Natural Gas b Petroleum Biomass Geothermal Solar/PV e Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy f Electrical System Energy Losses g Total f Distillate Fuel Oil Kerosene LPG c Total Wood d Alabama ............. 0.0 37.2 0.1 0.1 6.0 6.2 6.0 0.1 0.2 112.6 162.2 214.7 376.9 Alaska ................. 0.0 20.5 8.1 0.1 0.5 8.8 1.9 0.1 (s) 7.3 38.6 15.1 53.7 Arizona ............... 0.0 39.1 (s) (s) 5.5 5.5 2.6 (s) 7.9 112.9 168.0 226.8 394.7 Arkansas ............. 0.0 34.2 0.1 (s) 5.2 5.3 8.6 0.7 0.2 64.1 113.1 133.2 246.3 California ............ 0.0 522.4 0.6 0.6 30.9 32.2 33.3 0.2 43.2 301.6 932.9 583.1 1,516.1 Colorado ............. 0.0 134.2 0.1 (s) 12.3 12.4 8.3 0.2 0.7 62.4 216.5 136.5 353.0 Connecticut ......... 0.0 46.0 59.6

478

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

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

7 7 Table 24. Average price of natural gas delivered to consumers by state and sector, 2012 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Alabama 16.20 100.0 12.55 76.2 4.35 22.1 17.99 3.09 Alaska 8.47 100.0 8.09 94.9 5.11 100.0 -- 4.32 Arizona 15.75 100.0 9.35 86.6 5.78 21.4 13.19 3.51 Arkansas 11.82 100.0 7.99 40.2 6.38 1.9 9.04 3.19 California 9.14 97.5 7.05 50.0 5.77 4.2 7.01 3.68 Colorado 8.31 100.0 7.58 92.2 5.79 6.8 11.65 W Connecticut 14.17 96.7 8.40 65.1 8.83 32.3 13.70 3.99 Delaware 15.24 100.0 13.31 43.7 11.61 0.3 30.97 -- District of Columbia 12.10 73.9 11.19 17.9 -- -- 9.38 -- Florida 18.31 97.7 10.41 37.0 6.96 2.7 9.83 4.80 Georgia 16.23 100.0 9.74 100.0 4.60 20.0 14.51 3.40 Hawaii 52.86 100.0 47.03

479

RSE Table 7.5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 7.5  

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

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

480

RSE Table 10.12 Relative Standard Errors for Table 10.12  

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

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

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


481

Qualified Energy Conservation Bond State-by-State Summary Tables  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Provides a list of qualified energy conservation bond state summary tables. Author: Energy Programs Consortium

482

Shipments in Idaho  

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

Radiological Training for Radiological Training for Emergency Responders in Idaho Doug Walker Senior Health Physicist Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Radiation Control Program 2 Initial Assessment * Evaluation of state-wide resources * Consideration for instrumentation * Implementation of state-based training 3 State - Wide Resources State - Wide Resources * Regional Haz-Mat Response Teams * Idaho State Police CVSA/Haz-Mat Radiation Control Program 4 Response Instrumentation * Standardized instrumentation * Annual calibration schedule 5 State Emergency Response Commission * Approval for standardizing instrumentation within the regional response structure * Adopted the DOE-MERRTT as the core training for radioactive materials * Assigned Radiation Control Program to manage the training program

483

Residential Transportation Historical Data Tables for 1983-2001  

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

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

484

EIA - Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 13 complete) Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table C1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region, Low Economic Growth Case Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Low Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table C2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel, Low Economic Growth Case

485

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (1990-2030) Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2009 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

486

EIA - Appendix D - High Price Case Projections Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

High Price Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) High Price Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 High Oil Price Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 12 complete) High Oil Price Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix D. High Oil Price Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table D1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table D1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table D2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table D2. World total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

487

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2008 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

488

EIA - International Energy Outlook 2007-Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2007 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

489

Preparation of the First Shipment of Transuranic Waste by the Los Alamos National Laboratory: A Rest Stop on the Road to WIPP  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) achieved a national milestone on the road to shipping transuranic (TRU) waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) when it received certification authority on September 12, 1997. Since that time, LANL has been characterizing a non-mixed TRU waste stream and preparing shipments of this TRU waste for disposal in the WIPP. The paper describes the TRU waste identified as waste stream TA-55-43 Lot No. 01 from LANL Technical Area-55 and the process used to determine that it does not contain hazardous waste regulated by the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) or the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act (HWA). The non-mixed determination is based on the acceptable knowledge (AK) characterization process, which clearly shows that the waste does not exhibit any RCRA characteristics nor meet any RCRA listing descriptions. LANL has certified TRU waste from waste stream TA-55-43 Lot No. 01 and is prepared to certify additional quantities of TRU waste horn other non-mixed TRU waste streams. Assembly and preparation of AK on the processes that generated TRU waste is recognized as a necessary part of the process for having waste ready for shipment to the WIPP.

Allen, G.; Barr, A.; Betts, S.E.; Farr, J.; Foxx, J.; Gavett, M.A.; Janecky, D.R.; Kosiewicz, S.T.; Liebman, C.P.; Montoya, A.; Poths, H.; Rogers, P.S.Z.; Taggart, D.P.; Triay, I.R.; Vigil, G.I.; Vigil, J.J.; Wander, S.G.; Yeamans, D.

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

490

Giant Monopole Resonance in Transitional and Deformed-Nuclei  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

=129 MeV on ' ' Sm and ' ' ' Nd to investigate the giant monopole resonance in transitional and deformed nuclei. The experimental data reveal a mixing of I.=0 and I.=2 modes in '" Sm resulting in almost identi- cal angular distributions for the two... components of the giant resonance peaks in the angular range 2'?6. A "splitting" of the giant monopole resonance is observed in ' Nd; the extent of this split- ting is sma11er than that reported for ' "Sm. Comparison is made with the predictions of various...

Garg, U.; Bogucki, P.; Bronson, J. D.; Lui, YW; Youngblood, David H.

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

491

RSE Table 3.5 Relative Standard Errors for Table 3.5  

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

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

492

Shake Table for Calibration of Velocity Pickups  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

A Shake Table was developed and built by the Engineering Research Institute to calibrate low?frequency (0 to 200 cps) velocity pickups. The platform that supports the pickup to be tested is 6 in. in diameter and will support a load of approximately 30 lb. This makes the use of a table limited by force it can deliver except at very low frequencies. The table will operate with a 10 lb load to a frequency of 150 cps. The platform displacement is 0.125 in. peak?to?peak. The platform and its load are supported by air bellows. This is an improvement over a spring support due to the fact that it has greater damping and it is more easily adjusted to different loads. The adjustment consists of just putting more air in the bellows. The table is driven by a dc push?pull power amplifier. This delivers a current to a tapped coil on the Shake Table that is located in a magnetic field. The field is set up by a coil energized by 24 volts. The power amplifier can be driven by any convenient source delivering about 1 volt. (Parts of this research were supported by Tri?service Contract No. DA?36?039?sc?52654.)

J. W. Wescott; J. H. Prout; W. H. Follett

1957-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

493

EIA - Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2008  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

494

EIA - High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 13 complete) High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table B1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region, High Economic Growth Case High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. High Economic Growth Case Projection Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

495

FY 2013 Control Table by Appropriation  

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

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

496

Particle Data Group - 2012 Reviews, Tables, Plots  

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

Downloadable figures are available for these reviews. Complete list of Reviews in the Particle Listings.. Categories: Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties Physical Constants (rev.) Astrophysical Constants International System of units (SI) Periodic table of the elements (rev.) Electronic structure of the elements (rev.) Atomic and nuclear properties of materials PDF / Interactive Electromagnetic relations Naming scheme for hadrons Collapse table Standard Model and Related Topics Quantum Chromodynamics (rev.) Electroweak model and constraints on new physics (rev.) Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa quark-mixing matrix (rev.) CP violation (rev.) Neutrino mass, mixing, and oscillations (rev.) Quark model (rev.) Grand Unified Theories (rev.) Heavy-Quark and Soft-Collinear Effective Theory (new)

497

FY 2009 Control Table by Appropriation  

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

Control Table by Appropriation Control Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Current Current Congressional Op. Plan Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy.......................... -- 1,722,407 1,255,393 -467,014 -27.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................... -- 138,556 134,000 -4,556 -3.3% Nuclear energy.................................................................. -- 961,665 853,644 -108,021 -11.2% Legacy management........................................................ -- 33,872 -- -33,872 -100.0% Energy supply and Conservation...................................... 2,145,149 -- -- -- -- Fossil energy programs

498

table10.10_02.xls  

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

0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; 0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Short Tons. RSE NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual Row Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil LPG Other(e) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 1.4 1.1 1.5 0.7 1.1 0.8 1.2 1.5 0.5 311 Food 8,290 1,689 7,112 0 1,410 Q 212 313 7 8.5 311221 Wet Corn Milling 5,462 771 5,201 0 766 0 0 249 6 0.9 31131 Sugar 1,648 388 1,260 0 243 0 W 0 2 0.9 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products

499

table10.4_02.xls  

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

4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; 4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Barrels. Coal Coke RSE NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate and Row Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 1.9 1.4 1.9 0.6 1.5 0.6 0.6 0.9 0 0.7 311 Food 2,125 1,411 508 0 819 W W Q 0 Q 11.1 311221 Wet Corn Milling 61 W 45 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 0.8 31131 Sugar 346 193 98 0 169 0 W 0 0 0 0.7 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 153 29 Q 0 29 * 0 0 0 0 24.6 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products

500

table6.1_02.xls  

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

1 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002; 1 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value RSE NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Row Code(a) Subsector and Industry (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Factors Total United States RSE Column Factors: 1.1 0.9 1 311 Food 867.8 6.0 2.6 5.9 311221 Wet Corn Milling 24,113.7 65.7 26.2 1.8 31131 Sugar 8,414.5 54.2 17.9 1 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 824.1 5.4 2.5 10.6 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products 670.4 1.6 1.0 2.7 3121 Beverages 658.6 2.8 1.3 3.9 3122 Tobacco 729.4 0.6 0.5 1 313 Textile Mills 798.7 11.2 4.3