National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for joaquin basin onshore

  1. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves

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

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

  2. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 2,095 2010's 2,037 1,950 1,893 1,813 1,838 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date:

  3. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After

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

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1,784 1980's 1,721 1,566 1,593 1,556 1,538 1,642 1,398 1,196 1,086 972 1990's 901 885 773 749 744 679 560 518 445 336 2000's 748 836

  4. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas,

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

    Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,253 1980's 2,713 2,664 2,465 2,408 2,270 2,074 2,006 2,033 1,947 1,927 1990's 1,874 1,818 1,738 1,676 1,386

  5. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future

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

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,784 3,960 3,941 1980's 4,344 4,163 3,901 3,819 3,685 3,574 3,277 3,102 2,912 2,784 1990's 2,670 2,614 2,415 2,327 2,044 1,920 1,768 1,912 1,945 1,951 2000's 2,331 2,232 2,102 2,013 2,185 2,694 2,345 2,309 2,128

  6. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 4,037 1980's 4,434 4,230 4,058 3,964 3,808 3,716 3,404 3,229 3,033 2,899 1990's 2,775 2,703 2,511 2,425 2,130 2,018 1,864 2,012 2,016 2,021 2000's 2,413 2,298 2,190 2,116

  7. California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected

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

    Future Production (Million Barrels) San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 74 1980's 74 51 118 111 100 115 104 102 96 91 1990's 82 71 79 81 71 77 77 79 57 59 2000's 63 51 68 78 94 110 100 103 97 113 2010's 98 78 77 85 96

  8. California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 176 1980's 207 163 104 115 163 188 149 155 158 141 1990's 110 120 103 108 108 115 112 146 154 174 2000's 204 195 218 196 184 186 161 154 81 91 2010's 92 102 98 90 84 - = No Data

  9. ,"California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  10. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

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

    Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3 1980's 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 1990's 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 1 1 2000's 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2010's 1 1 1 1 14 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  11. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 740 321 2000's 234 233 111 110 158 238 228 168 117 146 2010's 210 163 226 214 216 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  12. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 6 1980's 4 4 9 9 9 10 10 10 9 8 1990's 8 7 8 8 7 8 8 7 6 7 2000's 7 7 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 2010's 9 9 9 10 9 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  13. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  14. Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing

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

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 740 321 2000's 234 233 111 110 158 238 228 168 117 146 2010's 210 163 226 214 216 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  15. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  16. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  17. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  18. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015"

  20. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014

  1. ,"California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  2. ,"Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids ... PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids ...

  3. Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion...

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

    onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) No Data Available For This Series - No Data Reported; --...

  4. ,"Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in ... PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in ...

  5. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing...

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin ... Proved Nonproducing Reserves of Crude Oil CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Proved ...

  6. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2011 2012 2013 View History Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 855 777 756 2011-2013 Adjustments 1 1 -1 2011-2013 Revision Increases 912 258 68 2011-2013 Revision Decreases 0 248 0...

  7. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas...

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

    Extensions 468 9 70 3 2 0 1979-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 4 0 0 1979-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 1 0 0 1979-2014 Estimated Production 148 164 237 132 ...

  8. ,"CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate...

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

    Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  9. ,"CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves...

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

    Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve Changes, and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Late...

  10. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

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

    2,469 2,321 2,590 1,550 1,460 1,690 1977-2014 Adjustments 2 4 902 -574 -55 10 1977-2014 Revision Increases 180 488 1,444 379 223 579 1977-2014 Revision Decreases 148 427 1,854 491 84 200 1977-2014 Sales 4 2 45 284 35 1,083 2000-2014 Acquisitions 78 0 42 92 25 1,074 2000-2014 Extensions 446 8 69 3 1 0 1977-2014 New Field Discoveries 1 1 0 4 0 0 1977-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 9 0 0 1977-2014 Estimated Production 214 220 289 178 165 150

  11. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve

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

    Changes, and Production 1 1 1 1 14 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 1 0 -1 0 11 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 1 0 4 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 1 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Estimated Production 0 0 0 0 0 1

  12. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas Proved Reserves,

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

    Wet After Lease Separation 607 498 506 269 245 265 1979-2014 Adjustments 1 -3 -12 58 -20 19 1979-2014 Revision Increases 96 47 116 84 115 112 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 59 84 31 120 73 70 1979-2014 Sales 0 2 47 303 0 164 2000-2014 Acquisitions 25 0 44 93 0 164 2000-2014 Extensions 4 0 1 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Field Discoveries 1 1 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 9 0 0 1979-2014 Estimated Production 78 68 63 58 46 4

  13. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Proved Nonproducing Reserves

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

    146 210 163 226 214 216 1996-2014 Lease Condensate (million bbls) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998-2014 Total Gas (billion cu ft) 401 359 319 81 96 55 1996-2014 Nonassociated Gas (billion cu ft) 311 253 265 36 61 37 1996-2014 Associated Gas (billion cu ft) 90 106 54 45 35 18

  14. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    91 92 102 98 90 84 1979-2014 Natural Gas Nonassociated, Wet After Lease Separation 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Natural Gas Associated-Dissolved, Wet After Lease Separation 91 92 102 98 90 84 1979-2014 Dry Natural Gas 84 87 97 93 86 8 Wet After Lease Separation

    0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New

  15. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves ,095 2,037 1,950 1,893 1,813 1,838 2009-2014 Adjustments -30 1 16 14 -39 16 2009-2014 Revision Increases 192 204 229 382 172 328 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 68 125 217 318 79 188 2009-2014 Sales 3 0 0 0 208 419 2009-2014 Acquisitions 18 1 16 5 206 426 2009-2014 Extensions 22 13 18 6 15 11 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 2 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 2 2009-2014 Estimated Production 161 152 149 148 147 151

    2,469 2,321 2,590 1,550 1,460

  16. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

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

    Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles ... Lease Condensate Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Lease ...

  17. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas,

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

    Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 175 1980's 207 162 103 114 162 185 149 155 158 141 1990's 110 120 100 108 108 115 112 143 153 174 2000's 203

  18. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves

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

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

  19. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 235 2010's 257 295 265 255 233 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring

  20. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future

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

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 255 178 163 1980's 193 154 96 107 156 181 142 148 151 137 1990's 106 115 97 102 103 111 109 141 149 168 2000's 193 187 207 187 174 176 153 144 75 84 2010's 87 97 93 86 80 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable;

  1. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 176 1980's 207 163 104 115 163 188 149 155 158 141 1990's 110 120 103 108 108 115 112 146 154 174 2000's 204 195 218 196 184 186 161 154 81 91 2010's 92 102 98 90 84 - =

  2. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After

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

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 2000's 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  3. Peru onshore-deepwater basins should have large potential

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zuniga-Rivero, F.; Keeling, J.A.; Hay-Roe, H.

    1998-10-19

    Perupetro`s recent announcement that 13 offshore exploration blocks of nearly 1 million acres each will be offered for bids in the fourth quarter of 1998 has reawakened interest in this extensive, largely unexplored area. The new government policy, combined with the results of modern, deep-probing seismic surveys, has already led to a stepped-up search for oil and gas that will probably escalate. Most of Peru`s ten coastal basins are entirely offshore, but at both ends of the 1,500-mile coastline the sedimentary basins stretch from onshore across the continental shelf and down the continental slope. Two of these basin areas, both in the north, have commercial production. The third, straddling the country`s southern border, has never been drilled either on land or offshore. The Peruvian sectors of these three basins total roughly 50,000 sq miles in area, 75% offshore. All have major oil and gas potential. They are described individually in this article, an update in the ongoing studies last reported at the 1998 Offshore Technology Conference and in the first article of this series.

  4. Reservoir geology of Landslide field, southern San Joaquin basin, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carr, T.R.; Tucker, R.D.; Singleton, M.T. )

    1991-02-01

    The Landslide field, which is located on the southern margin of the San Joaquin basin, was discovered in 1985 and consists of 13 producers and six injectors. Cumulative production as of mid-1990 was approximately 10 million bbl of oil with an average daily production of 4700 BOPD. Production is from a series of late Miocene turbidite sands (Stevens Sand) that were deposited as a small constructional submarine fan (less than 2 mi in diameter). Based on interpretation of wireline logs and engineering data, deposition of the fan and of individual lobes within the fan was strongly influenced by preexisting paleotopography and small syndepositional slump features. Based on mapping of individual depositional units and stratigraphic dipmeter analysis, transport direction of the sand was to the north-north across these paleotopographic breaks in slope. Dipmeter data and pressure data from individual sands are especially useful for recognition and mapping of individual flow units between well bores. Detailed engineering, geophysical and geological studies have increased our understanding of the dimensions, continuity, geometry, and inherent reservoir properties of the individual flow units within the reservoir. Based on the results of these studies a series of water isolation workovers and extension wells were proposed and successfully undertaken. This work has increased recoverable reserves and arrested the rapid production decline.

  5. Fluvial-deltaic heavy oil reservoir, San Joaquin basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miller, D.D.; McPherson, J.G.; Covington, T.E.

    1989-03-01

    Unconsolidated arkosic sands deposited in a fluvial-deltaic geologic setting comprise the heavy oil (13/degree/ API gravity) reservoir at South Belridge field. The field is located along the western side of the San Joaquin basin in Kern County, California. More than 6000 closely spaced and shallow wells are the key to producing the estimated 1 billion bbl of ultimate recoverable oil production. Thousands of layered and laterally discontinuous reservoir sands produce from the Pleistocene Tulare Formation. The small scale of reservoir geometries is exploited by a high well density, required for optimal heavy oil production. Wells are typically spaced 200-500 ft (66-164 m) apart and drilled to 1000 ft (328 m) deep in the 14-mi/sup 2/ (36-km/sup 2/) producing area. Successful in-situ combustion, cyclic steaming, and steamflood projects have benefited from the shallow-depth, thick, layered sands, which exhibit excellent reservoir quality. The fundamental criterion for finding another South Belridge field is to realize the extraordinary development potential of shallow, heavy oil reservoirs, even when an unspectacular discovery well is drilled. The trap is a combination of structural and stratigraphic mechanisms plus influence from unconventional fluid-level and tar-seal traps. The depositional model is interpreted as a braid delta sequence that prograded from the nearby basin-margin highlands. A detailed fluvial-deltaic sedimentologic model establishes close correlation between depositional lithofacies, reservoir geometries, reservoir quality, and heavy oil producibility. Typical porosity is 35% and permeability is 3000 md.

  6. South Belridge fields, Borderland basin, U. S. , San Joaquin Valley

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miller, D.D. ); McPherson, J.G. )

    1991-03-01

    South Belridge is a giant field in the west San Joaquin Valley, Kern County. Cumulative field production is approximately 700 MMBO and 220 BCFG, with remaining recoverable reserves of approximately 500 MMBO. The daily production is nearly 180 MBO from over 6100 active wells. The focus of current field development and production is the shallow Tulare reservoir. Additional probable diatomite reserves have been conservatively estimated at 550 MMBO and 550 BCFG. South Belridge field has two principal reservoir horizons; the Mio-Pliocene Belridge diatomite of the upper Monterey Formation, and the overlying Plio-Pleistocene Tulare Formation. The field lies on the crest of a large southeast-plunging anticline, sub-parallel to the nearby San Andreas fault system. The reservoir trap in both the Tulare and diatomite reservoir horizons is a combination of structure, stratigraphic factors, and tar seals; the presumed source for the oil is the deeper Monterey Formation. The diatomite reservoir produces light oil (20-32{degree} API gravity) form deep-marine diatomite and diatomaceous shales with extremely high porosity (average 60%) and low permeability (average 1 md). In contrast, the shallow ({lt}1000 ft (305 m) deep) overlying Tulare reservoir produces heavy oil (13-14{degree} API gravity) from unconsolidated, arkosic, fluviodeltaic sands of high porosity (average 35%) and permeability (average 3000 md). The depositional model is that of a generally prograding fluviodeltaic system sourced in the nearby basin-margin highlands. More than 6000 closely spaced, shallow wells are the key to steamflood production from hundreds of layered and laterally discontinuous reservoir sands which create laterally and vertically discontinuous reservoir flow units.

  7. California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected

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

    Future Production (Million Barrels) Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 9 1980's 11 6 6 6 5 6 7 7 7 4 1990's 5 4 5 6 5 4 3 4 5 7 2000's 10 8 10 8 8 9 8 9 6 6 2010's 5 4 4 4 4

  8. California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 395 1980's 330 325 384 405 284 277 275 255 232 238 1990's 232 231 215 201 205 163 168 176 118 233 2000's 244 185 197 174 196 277 214 212 151 169 2010's 180 173 305 284 277 - = No Data Reported;

  9. ,"California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  10. ,"Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  11. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved

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

    Reserves ,095 2,037 1,950 1,893 1,813 1,838 2009-2014 Adjustments -30 1 16 14 -39 16 2009-2014 Revision Increases 192 204 229 382 172 328 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 68 125 217 318 79 188 2009-2014 Sales 3 0 0 0 208 419 2009-2014 Acquisitions 18 1 16 5 206 426 2009-2014 Extensions 22 13 18 6 15 11 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 2 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 2 2009-2014 Estimated Production 161 152 149 148 147 151

  12. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas Reserves Summary as of Dec. 31

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

    2,609 2,447 2,685 1,650 1,574 1,823 1979-2014 Natural Gas Nonassociated, Wet After Lease Separation 607 498 506 269 245 265 1979-2014 Natural Gas Associated-Dissolved, Wet After Lease Separation 2,002 1,949 2,179 1,381 1,329 1,558 1979-2014 Dry Natural Gas 2,469 2,321 2,590 1,550 1,460 1,69

  13. CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes,

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

    and Production 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 855 777 756 15 2011-2014 Adjustments 1 1 -1 -740 2011-2014 Revision Increases 912 258 68 1 2011-2014 Revision Decreases 0 248 0 3 2011-2014 Sales 0 0 0 12 2011-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 14 2011-2014 Extensions 43 1 1 0 2011-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 2011-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 2011-2014 Estimated Production 101 90 89 1 2011

  14. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 53 56 2000's 68 97 122 117 63 112 149 98 31 29 2010's 66 69 55 60 45 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  15. Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Calif--Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1990's 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  16. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  17. Reevaluation of Stevens sand potential - Maricopa depocenter, southern San Joaquin basin, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kolb, M.M.; Parks, S.L. )

    1991-02-01

    During the upper Miocene in the Southern San Joaquin basin surrounding highlands contributed coarse material to a deep marine basin dominated by fine grained silicious bioclastic deposition. these coarse deposits became reservoirs isolated within the silicious Antelope Shale Member of the Monterey Formation. In the southern Maricopa depocenter these Stevens sands are productive at Yowlumne, Landslide, Aqueduct, Rio Viejo, San Emidio Nose, Paloma, and Midway-Sunset fields, and are major exploration targets in surrounding areas. In the ARCO Fee lands area of the southern Maricopa depocenter, Stevens sands occur as rapidly thickening lens-shaped bodies that formed as channel, levee, and lobe deposits of deep-marine fan systems. These fans were fed from a southerly source, with apparent transport in a north-northwesterly direction. Sands deflect gently around present-day structural highs indicating that growth of structures influenced depositional patterns. Correlations reveal two major fan depositional intervals bounded by regional N, O, and P chert markers. Each interval contains numerous individual fan deposits, with many lobes and channels recognizable on three-dimensional seismic data. In addition to these basinal sand plays presently being evaluated, ARCO is pursuing a relatively new trend on Fee lands along the southern basin margin, where correlation to mountain data reveals Stevens sands trend into the steeply dipping beds of the mountain front. This area, the upturned Stevens,' has large reserve potential and producing analogies at Metson, Leutholtz, Los Lobos, and Pleito Ranch fields.

  18. 3D Geologic Modeling of the Southern San Joaquin Basin for the Westcarb Kimberlina Demonstration Project- A Status Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wagoner, J

    2009-02-23

    The objective of the Westcarb Kimberlina pilot project is to safely inject 250,000 t CO{sub 2}/yr for four years into the deep subsurface at the Clean Energy Systems (CES) Kimberlina power plant in southern San Joaquin Valley, California. In support of this effort, we have constructed a regional 3D geologic model of the southern San Joaquin basin. The model is centered on the Kimberlina power plant and spans the UTM range E 260000-343829 m and N 3887700-4000309 m; the depth of the model ranges from the topographic surface to >9000 m below sea level. The mapped geologic units are Quaternary basin fill, Tertiary marine and continental deposits, and pre-Tertiary basement rocks. Detailed geologic data, including surface maps, borehole data, and geophysical surveys, were used to define the geologic framework. Fifteen time-stratigraphic formations were mapped, as well as >140 faults. The free surface is based on a 10 m lateral resolution DEM. We use Earthvision (Dynamic Graphics, Inc.) to integrate the geologic and geophysical information into a 3D model of x,y,z,p nodes, where p is a unique integer index value representing the geologic unit. This grid represents a realistic model of the subsurface geology and provides input into subsequent flow simulations.

  19. 3D Geologic Modeling of the Southern San Joaquin Basin for the Westcarb Kimberlina Demonstration Project- A Status Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wagoner, J

    2009-04-24

    The objective of the Westcarb Kimberlina pilot project is to safely inject 250,000 t CO{sub 2}/yr for four years into the deep subsurface at the Clean Energy Systems (CES) Kimberlina power plant in southern San Joaquin Valley, California. In support of this effort, we have constructed a regional 3D geologic model of the southern San Joaquin basin. The model is centered on the Kimberlina power plant and spans the UTM range E 260000-343829 m and N 3887700-4000309 m; the depth of the model ranges from the topographic surface to >9000 m below sea level. The mapped geologic units are Quaternary basin fill, Tertiary marine and continental deposits, and pre-Tertiary basement rocks. Detailed geologic data, including surface maps, borehole data, and geophysical surveys, were used to define the geologic framework. Fifteen time-stratigraphic formations were mapped, as well as >140 faults. The free surface is based on a 10 m lateral resolution DEM. We use Earthvision (Dynamic Graphics, Inc.) to integrate the geologic and geophysical information into a 3D model of x,y,z,p nodes, where p is a unique integer index value representing the geologic unit. This grid represents a realistic model of the subsurface geology and provides input into subsequent flow simulations.

  20. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  1. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  2. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015"

  3. Landslide oil field, San Joaquin Valley, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Collins, B.P.; March, K.A.; Caballero, J.S.; Stolle, J.M.

    1988-03-01

    The Landslide field, located at the southern margin of the San Joaquin basin, was discovered in 1985 by a partnership headed by Channel Exploration Company, on a farm out from Tenneco Oil Company. Initial production from the Tenneco San Emidio 63X-30 was 2064 BOPD, making landslide one of the largest onshore discoveries in California during the past decade. Current production is 7100 BOPD from a sandstone reservoir at 12,500 ft. Fifteen wells have been drilled in the field, six of which are water injectors. Production from the Landslide field occurs from a series of upper Miocene Stevens turbidite sandstones that lie obliquely across an east-plunging structural nose. These turbidite sandstones were deposited as channel-fill sequences within a narrowly bounded levied channel complex. Both the Landslide field and the larger Yowlumne field, located 3 mi to the northwest, comprise a single channel-fan depositional system that developed in the restricted deep-water portion of the San Joaquin basin. Information from the open-hole logs, three-dimensional surveys, vertical seismic profiles, repeat formation tester data, cores, and pressure buildup tests allowed continuous drilling from the initial discovery to the final waterflood injector, without a single dry hole. In addition, the successful application of three-dimensional seismic data in the Landslide development program has helped correctly image channel-fan anomalies in the southern Maricopa basin, where data quality and severe velocity problems have hampered previous efforts. New exploration targets are currently being evaluated on the acreage surrounding the Landslide discovery and should lead to an interesting new round of drilling activity in the Maricopa basin.

  4. A preliminary sub-basin scale evaluation framework of site suitability for onshore aquifer-based CO{sub 2} storage in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wei, Ning; Li, Xiaochun; Wang, Ying; Dahowski, Robert T; Davidson, Casie L; Bromhal, Grant S

    2013-01-01

    Development of a reliable, broadly applicable framework for the identification and suitability evaluation of potential CO{sub 2} storage sites is essential before large-scale deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geological storage (CCS) can commence. In this study, a sub-basin scale evaluation framework was developed to assess the suitability of potential onshore deep saline aquifers for CO{sub 2} storage in China. The methodology, developed in consultation with experts from the academia and the petroleum industry in China, is based on a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) framework that considers four objectives: (1) storage optimization, in terms of storage capacity and injectivity; (2) risk minimization and storage security; (3) environmental restrictions regarding surface and subsurface use; and (4) economic considerations. The framework is designed to provide insights into both the suitability of potential aquifer storage sites as well as the priority for early deployment of CCS with existing CO{sub 2} sources. Preliminary application of the framework, conducted using GIS-based evaluation tools revealed that 18% of onshore aquifer sites with a combined CO{sub 2} storage capacity of 746 gigatons are considered to exhibit very high suitability, and 11% of onshore aquifer sites with a total capacity of 290 gigatons exhibit very high priority opportunities for implementation. These onshore aquifer sites may provide promising opportunities for early large-scale CCS deployment and contribute to CO{sub 2} mitigation in China for many decades.

  5. A preliminary sub-basin scale evaluation framework of site suitability for onshore aquifer-based CO2 storage in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wei, Ning; Li, Xiaochun; Wang, Ying; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.; Bromhal, Grant

    2013-01-30

    Development of a reliable, broadly applicable framework for the identification and suitability evaluation of potential CO2 storage sites is essential before large scale deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geological storage (CCS) can commence. In this study, a sub-basin scale evaluation framework was developed to assess the suitability of potential onshore deep saline aquifers for CO2 storage in China. The methodology, developed in consultation with experts from the academia and the petroleum industry in China, is based on a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) framework that considers four objectives: (1) storage optimization, in terms of storage capacity and injectivity; (2) risk minimization and storage security; (3) environmental restrictions regarding surface and subsurface use; and (4) economic considerations. The framework is designed to provide insights into both the suitability of potential aquifer storage sites as well as the priority for early deployment of CCS with existing CO2 sources. Preliminary application of the framework, conducted using GIS-based evaluation tools revealed that 18% of onshore aquifer sites with a combined CO2 storage capacity of 746 gigatons are considered to exhibit very high suitability, and 11% of onshore aquifer sites with a total capacity of 290 gigatons exhibit very high priority opportunities for implementation. These onshore aquifer sites may provide promising opportunities for early large-scale CCS deployment and contribute to CO2 mitigation in China for many decades.

  6. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014

  7. ,"California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  8. Computeer-based decision support tools for evaluation of actions affecting flow and water quality in the San Joaquin Basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, N.W.T.

    1993-01-01

    This document is a preliminary effort to draw together some of the important simulation models that are available to Reclamation or that have been developed by Reclamation since 1987. This document has also attempted to lay out a framework by which these models might be used both for the purposes for which they were originally intended and to support the analysis of other issues that relate to the hydrology and to salt and water quality management within the San Joaquin Valley. To be successful as components of a larger Decision Support System the models should to be linked together using custom designed interfaces that permit data sharing between models and that are easy to use. Several initiatives are currently underway within Reclamation to develop GIS - based and graphics - based decision support systems to improve the general level of understanding of the models currently in use, to standardize the methodology used in making planning and operations studies and to permit improved data analysis, interpretation and display. The decision support systems should allow greater participation in the planning process, allow the analysis of innovative actions that are currently difficult to study with present models and should lead to better integrated and more comprehensive plans and policy decisions in future years.

  9. Core description and analysis using X-radiography and cat-scanning: examples from Sacramento and San Joaquin basins, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fischer, P.J.; Setiawan, J.; Cherven, V.B.

    1986-04-01

    X-radiographs of cores from Forbes deep basin sands, the tar-saturated paralic sands of the Temblor and the Tulare fluvial sands and silts, as well as fractured siliceous units (the Monterey Formation and equivalents) reveal geologic features that are either not visible or barely discernible to the naked eye. These features include changes in grain size, grading, ripple lamination to cross-bedding, cyclic couplets in tidal sequences, bioturbation and burrowing, and fracture patterns and filling. Forbes core x-radiography from the northern Sacramento basin clearly shows a sequence of thinly bedded sand and mudstones that are microripple cross-laminated. Partial Bouma sequences (Ta-b or Tb with Ta-c) are characteristic of the thickly bedded sands below the ripple-laminated units. Cyclic sequences of mud-turbidites and finely laminated, very fine-grained sands to coarse silts characterize a sand-poor sequence that overlies a massive to indistinctly thin-bedded sand. Most of these features described above are barely discernible without x-radiography, yet all provide major input to the interpretation of the depositional environment of the Forbes Formation, as well as information regarding reservoir continuity. Tar or heavy-oil saturation of cores can be a severe problem when cores are examined. In a Tulare Formation core sequence that was x-radiographed, essentially no bedding was visible, even using UV photography. However, extensive fluvial cross-bedding throughout the core was revealed by the x-radiography. A similar, heavy oil masking problem in a Temblor Formation core near East Coalinga was also resolved by the x-ray technique. The reservoir is divided into multiple, thin, tidal couplets (4-6 in.) of oil-saturated sand separated by 1 to 3 in. thick mudstones.

  10. The San Joaquin Valley Westside Perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, Nigel W.T.; Linneman, J. Christopher; Tanji, Kenneth K.

    2006-03-27

    Salt management has been a challenge to westside farmerssince the rapid expansion of irrigated agriculture in the 1900 s. Thesoils in this area are naturally salt-affected having formed from marinesedimentary rocks rich in sea salts rendering the shallow groundwater,and drainage return flows discharging into the lower reaches of the SanJoaquin River, saline. Salinity problems are affected by the importedwater supply from Delta where the Sacramento and San Joaquin Riverscombine. Water quality objectives on salinity and boron have been inplace for decades to protect beneficial uses of the river. However it wasthe selenium-induced avian toxicity that occurred in the evaporationponds of Kesterson Reservoir (the terminal reservoir of a planned but notcompleted San Joaquin Basin Master Drain) that changed public attitudesabout agricultural drainage and initiated a steady stream ofenvironmental legislation directed at reducing non-point source pollutionof the River. Annual and monthly selenium load restrictions and salinityand boron Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) are the most recent of thesepolicy initiatives. Failure by both State and Federal water agencies toconstruct a Master Drain facility serving mostly west-side irrigatedagriculture has constrained these agencies to consider only In-Valleysolutions to ongoing drainage problems. For the Westlands subarea, whichhas no surface irrigation drainage outlet to the San Joaquin River,innovative drainage reuse systems such as the Integrated Farm DrainageManagement (IFDM) offer short- to medium-term solutions while morepermanent remedies to salt disposal are being investigated. Real-timesalinity management, which requires improved coordination of east-sidereservoir releases and west-side drainage, offers some relief toGrasslands Basin farmers and wetland managers - allowing greater salinityloading to the River than under a strict TMDL. However, currentregulation drives a policy that results in a moratorium on all

  11. European Wind Atlas: Onshore | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    URI: cleanenergysolutions.orgcontenteuropean-wind-atlas-onshore,http:cl Language: English Policies: Deployment Programs DeploymentPrograms: Technical Assistance This...

  12. Offshore and onshore engineering practices compared

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-01-01

    The comparison between the practices relevant to onshore and offshore developments is the overall theme of this book. It provides help and guidance to people familiar with onshore practices who are venturing offshore for the first time or vice versa. They draw attention to the lessons of experience which benefit future developments and point to future guidelines and regulations. CONTENTS: Project economic evaluation and conceptual planning - the differences between onshore and offshore projects; A comparison of offshore and onshore plant design; Gas compression equipment - design differences between onshore and offshore applications; Experience in reliable pump design for onshore and offshore applications; Operability, reliability and maintenance - the differences onshore and offshore; Risk analysis in layout and safety engineering for platforms and terminals; The design of electrical supplies for equipment operation; Production measurements for a North Sea oil field; Chemical treatment and process equipment for water injection and oily water treatment systems offshore and onshore; Gas desulphurisation - the consequence of moving the process offshore; A comparison of offshore and onshore pipeline construction and commissioning; Pre-commissioning and commissioning of facilities onshore and offshore; Some aspects of revamp work on onshore and offshore plants.

  13. Bottom-up, decision support system development : a wetlandsalinity management application in California's San Joaquin Valley

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, Nigel W.T.

    2006-05-10

    Seasonally managed wetlands in the Grasslands Basin ofCalifornia's San Joaquin Valley provide food and shelter for migratorywildfowl during winter months and sport for waterfowl hunters during theannual duck season. Surface water supply to these wetland contain saltwhich, when drained to the San Joaquin River during the annual drawdownperiod, negatively impacts downstream agricultural riparian waterdiverters. Recent environmental regulation, limiting discharges salinityto the San Joaquin River and primarily targeting agricultural non-pointsources, now addresses return flows from seasonally managed wetlands.Real-time water quality management has been advocated as a means ofmatching wetland return flows to the assimilative capacity of the SanJoaquin River. Past attempts to build environmental monitoring anddecision support systems to implement this concept have failed forreasons that are discussed in this paper. These reasons are discussed inthe context of more general challenges facing the successfulimplementation of environmental monitoring, modelling and decisionsupport systems. The paper then provides details of a current researchand development project which will ultimately provide wetland managerswith the means of matching salt exports with the available assimilativecapacity of the San Joaquin River, when fully implemented. Manipulationof the traditional wetland drawdown comes at a potential cost to thesustainability of optimal wetland moist soil plant habitat in thesewetlands - hence the project provides appropriate data and a feedback andresponse mechanism for wetland managers to balance improvements to SanJoaquin River quality with internally-generated information on the healthof the wetland resource. The author concludes the paper by arguing thatthe architecture of the current project decision support system, whencoupled with recent advances in environmental data acquisition, dataprocessing and information dissemination technology, holds significantpromise

  14. WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy Workshop WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy Workshop February 8, 2011 - ...

  15. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore ... 7:20:49 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore ...

  16. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated ... 7:20:00 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated ...

  17. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore ... 7:20:49 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore ...

  18. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore ... 7:20:50 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore ...

  19. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated ... 7:19:59 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated ...

  20. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated ... 7:19:59 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated ...

  1. Joaquin Correa JoaquinCorrea@lbl.gov NERSC Data and Analytics Services

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

    Joaquin Correa JoaquinCorrea@lbl.gov NERSC Data and Analytics Services NERSC User Meeting August, 2015 Data Analytics at NERSC Data analytics at NERSC Hardware Resource Management Runtime Framework Tools + Libraries Analytics Capabilities Science Applications Climate, Cosmology, Kbase, Materials, BioImaging, Your science! Statistics, Machine Learning R, python, MLBase Image Processing MATLAB OMERO, Fiji Graph Analytics GraphX Database Operations SQL MPI Spark SciDB Filesystems (Lustre),

  2. San Joaquin, California: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    it. San Joaquin is a city in Fresno County, California. It falls under California's 20th congressional district.12 References US Census Bureau Incorporated place and...

  3. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas ... 7:18:04 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas ...

  4. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas ... 7:18:04 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas ...

  5. ,"Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet ... 7:19:07 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet ...

  6. ,"Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet ... 7:19:07 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet ...

  7. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas ... 7:18:04 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas ...

  8. ,"Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet ... 7:19:07 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet ...

  9. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves...

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

    4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 ...

  10. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves...

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

    3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 ...

  11. San Joaquin-Tulare Conjunctive Use Model: Detailed model description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, N.W.T.

    1992-03-01

    The San Joaquin - Tulare Conjunctive Use Model (SANTUCM) was originally developed for the San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program to evaluate possible scenarios for long-term management of drainage and drainage - related problems in the western San Joaquin Valley of California. A unique aspect of this model is its coupling of a surface water delivery and reservoir operations model with a regional groundwater model. The model also performs salinity balances along the tributaries and along the main stem of the San Joaquin River to allow assessment of compliance with State Water Resources Control Board water quality objectives for the San Joaquin River. This document is a detailed description of the various subroutines, variables and parameters used in the model.

  12. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves...

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

    0 0 0 1 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 1 2009-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0

  13. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Reserves Summary as...

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

    91 92 102 98 90 84 1979-2014 Natural Gas Nonassociated, Wet After Lease Separation 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Natural Gas Associated-Dissolved, Wet After Lease Separation 91 92 102 98 ...

  14. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Proved Nonproducing Reserves

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

    29 66 69 55 60 45 1996-2014 Lease Condensate (million bbls) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998-2014 Total Gas (billion cu ft) 12 21 23 16 16 11 1996-2014 Nonassociated Gas (billion cu ft) 0 0 0 0 0 ...

  15. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas Proved...

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

    0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Increases 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Acquisitions 0 ...

  16. ,"CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate...

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

    Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate Proved Reserves" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  17. ,"CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Lease Condensate Proved Reserves...

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

    Lease Condensate Proved Reserves, Reserve Changes, and Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Late...

  18. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Dry Natural Gas Proved Reserves

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

    Acquisitions 0 0 2 0 35 8 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 2 0 1977-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 1977-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 1977-2014 ...

  19. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Crude Oil plus Lease Condensate...

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

    Acquisitions 0 1 9 1 75 27 2009-2014 Extensions 1 1 6 8 1 1 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 5 4 2009-2014 ...

  20. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas...

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

    Acquisitions 0 0 3 0 37 8 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 2 0 1979-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 1979-2014 ...

  1. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    169 180 173 305 284 277 1979-2014 Natural Gas Nonassociated, Wet After Lease Separation 1 2 1 2 2 8 1979-2014 Natural Gas Associated-Dissolved, Wet After Lease Separation 168 178 172 303 282 269 1979-2014 Dry Natural Gas 163 173 165 290 266 261 After Lease Separation

    1 2 1 2 2 8 1979-2014 Adjustments 1 0 0 0 0 9 1979-2014 Revision Increases 0 1 0 1 0 0 1979-2014 Revision Decreases 1 0 1 0 0 2 1979-2014 Sales 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Acquisitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000-2014 Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 0

  2. CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves 35 257 295 265 255 233 2009-2014 Adjustments 10 15 19 -8 -7 4 2009-2014 Revision Increases 98 22 23 20 15 5 2009-2014 Revision Decreases 47 2 2 36 9 27 2009-2014 Sales 0 0 2 0 75 21 2009-2014 Acquisitions 0 1 9 1 75 27 2009-2014 Extensions 1 1 6 8 1 1 2009-2014 New Field Discoveries 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009-2014 New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields 0 0 0 0 5 4 2009-2014 Estimated Production 15 15 15 15 15 15

    84 87 97 93 86 80 1977-2014 Adjustments 5 5 7 11 -9 9 1977-2014 Revision

  3. WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy

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

    Workshop | Department of Energy Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy Workshop WEDNESDAY: Chu, Salazar, Vilsack to Participate in Onshore Renewable Energy Workshop February 8, 2011 - 12:00am Addthis WASHINGTON, DC --- On Wednesday, February 9th the Department of Interior will host an onshore renewable energy workshop. The two-day conference will bring together stakeholders from across the government, renewable energy industry, and conservation community to discuss

  4. ,"Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation...

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

    Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click ... Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic ...

  5. Louisiana - South Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production...

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

    Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  6. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected...

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

    Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab ... 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production ...

  7. Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion...

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

    South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 ... Release Date: 11192015 Next Release Date: 12312016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane ...

  8. Alaska Onshore Natural Gas Plant Processing

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alaska (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 18,434 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 7/29/2016 Next Release Date: 8/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous

  9. U.S. Total Crude Oil Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production

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

    Area: U.S. Total Lower 48 States Federal Offshore Federal Offshore, Pacific (California) Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico (Louisiana & Alabama) Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico (Texas) Alaska Alabama Arkansas California CA, Coastal Region Onshore CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore CA, State Offshore Colorado Florida Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana North Louisiana LA, South Onshore LA, State Offshore Michigan Mississippi Montana Nebraska New Mexico NM, East

  10. U.S. Natural Gas Proved Reserves, Wet After Lease Separation

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

    Area: U.S. Federal Offshore U.S. Federal Offshore, Pacific (California) Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico, LA & AL Federal Offshore, Gulf of Mexico, TX Alaska Lower 48 States Alabama Arkansas California CA, Coastal Region Onshore CA, Los Angeles Basin Onshore CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore CA, State Offshore Colorado Florida Kansas Kentucky Louisiana North Louisiana LA, South Onshore LA, State Offshore Michigan Mississippi Montana New Mexico NM, East NM, West New York North Dakota Ohio

  11. San Joaquin Solar 1 & 2 Solar Power Plant | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Solar 1 & 2 Solar Power Plant Jump to: navigation, search Name San Joaquin Solar 1 & 2 Solar Power Plant Facility San Joaquin Solar 1 & 2 Sector Solar Facility Type Hybrid...

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

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

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 2,849,980 1,884,566 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals

  13. Alabama--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 125,180 106,903 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Alabama Onshore

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

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

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 6,878,956 7,135,326 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production Texas Onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals and

  15. Aeroelastic Instabilities of Large Offshore and Onshore Wind Turbines: Preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bir, G.; Jonkman, J.

    2007-08-01

    This paper examines the aeroelastic stability of a 5-MW conceptual wind turbine mounted on a floating barge and presents results for onshore and offshore configurations for various conditions.

  16. Property:PotentialOnshoreWindGeneration | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    onshore wind in a place. Use this type to express a quantity of energy. The default unit for energy on OpenEI is the Kilowatt hour (kWh), which is 3,600,000 Joules. http:...

  17. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted...

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

    New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5...

  18. Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet...

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

    Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  19. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves...

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 ...

  20. Information technology and decision support tools for stakeholder-driven river basin salinity management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, N.W.T; Cozad, D.B.; Lee, G.

    2010-01-01

    Innovative strategies for effective basin-scale salinity management have been developed in the Hunter River Basin of Australia and more recently in the San Joaquin River Basin of California. In both instances web-based stakeholder information dissemination has been a key to achieving a high level of stakeholder involvement and the formulation of effective decision support salinity management tools. A common element to implementation of salinity management strategies in both river basins has been the concept of river assimilative capacity for controlling export salt loading and the potential for trading of the right to discharge salt load to the river - the Hunter River in Australia and the San Joaquin River in California. Both rivers provide basin drainage and the means of exporting salt to the ocean. The paper compares and contrasts the use of monitoring, modeling and information dissemination in the two basins to achieve environmental compliance and sustain irrigated agriculture in an equitable and socially and politically acceptable manner.

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

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

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

  2. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Oklahoma

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 8,718 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Texas Onshore-Oklahoma

  3. Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 790,721 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Texas Onshore-Texas

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 938,635 822,216 818,942 724,016 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Louisiana Onshore-Louisiana

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 5,020 4,583 4,920 4,936 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Louisiana Onshore-Texas

  6. California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected

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

    Future Production (Million Barrels) Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 22 1980's 23 14 16 17 14 15 15 13 13 11 1990's 12 11 9 10 9 7 9 9 9 31 2000's 27 16 17 15 19 16 22 14 10 10 2010's 11 12 18 13 12

  7. Calif--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--Onshore Natural Gas Dry Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 201,754 205,320 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Dry Production California Onsho

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Oklahoma (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 96,052 85,735 84,723 84,386 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Texas Onshore-Oklahoma

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 4,763,732 5,274,730 5,854,956 6,636,937 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Texas Onshore-Texas

  10. Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Texas (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 325 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Louisiana Onshore-Texas

  11. Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA) Jump to: navigation, search Statute Name Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA) Year 1987 Url...

  12. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant ... 7:17:17 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant ...

  13. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas ... 7:17:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas ...

  14. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant ... 7:17:17 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant ...

  15. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant ... 7:17:17 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant ...

  16. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas ... 7:17:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas ...

  17. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate...

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

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas ... 7:17:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas ...

  18. Independent focuses Philippines exploration on Visayan basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rillera, F.G.

    1995-08-21

    Cophil Exploration Corp., a Filipino public company, spearheaded 1995 Philippine oil and gas exploration activity with the start of its gas delineation drilling operations in Libertad, northern Cebu. Cophil and its Australian partners, Coplex Resources NL and PacRim Energy NL, have set out to complete a seven well onshore drilling program within this block this year. The companies are testing two modest shallow gas plays, Libertad and Dalingding, and a small oil play, Maya, all in northern Cebu about 500 km southeast of Manila. Following a short discussion on the geology and exploration history of the Visayan basin, this article briefly summarizes Cophil`s ongoing Cebu onshore drilling program. Afterwards, discussion focuses on identified exploration opportunities in the basin`s offshore sector.

  19. Environmental sensor networks and continuous data quality assurance to manage salinity within a highly regulated river basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, N.W.T.; Ortega, R.; Holm, L.

    2010-01-05

    This paper describes a new approach to environmental decision support for salinity management in the San Joaquin Basin of California that focuses on web-based data sharing using YSI Econet technology and continuous data quality management using a novel software tool, Aquarius.

  20. California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Calif--San Joaquin Basin onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) No Data Available For This Series - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 CA, San Joaquin Basin Onshore Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and

    Gross Withdrawals

  1. Louisiana - South Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Louisiana - South Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 343 2010's 342 328 370 396 405 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil plus

  2. Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 143 146 2000's 123 134 139 150 115 148 162 164 122 129 2010's 126 113 125 155 188 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  3. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 263 1980's 267 253 243 238 229 220 208 194 193 196 1990's 182 175 151 133 123 136 127 134 138 142 2000's 159 141 107 82 66 65 65 71 64 74 2010's 68 64 70 68 56 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  4. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

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

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 413 1980's 273 291 258 289 225 222 220 235 228 215 1990's 249 242 229 201 214 359 284 199 187 222 2000's 178 128 119 100 87 103 94 97 78 90 2010's 113 94 134 144 145 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  5. Alabama Onshore-Alabama Natural Gas Plant Processing

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 3,132 3,323 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 7/29/2016 Next Release Date: 8/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production,

  6. California Onshore-California Natural Gas Plant Processing

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

    California (Million Cubic Feet) Plant Liquids Production Extracted in California (Million Cubic Feet) California Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in California (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 12,755 13,192 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 7/29/2016 Next Release Date: 8/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  7. Louisiana Onshore-Louisiana Natural Gas Plant Processing

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

    Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Extracted in Louisiana (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 32,212 33,735 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 7/29/2016 Next Release Date: 8/31/2016 Referring Pages: NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Onshore Natural Gas Processed in Alabama (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 100,491 33,921 35,487 31,116 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Processed in California (Million Cubic Feet) California Onshore Natural Gas Processed in California (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 180,648 169,203 164,401 162,413 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed

  10. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  11. Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 413 1980's 273 291 258 289 225 222 220 235 228 215 1990's 249 242 229 201 214 359 284 199 187 222 2000's 178 128 119 100 87 103 94 97 78 90 2010's 113 94 134 144 145 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  12. California - Coastal Region Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet

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

    After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 307 1980's 265 265 325 344 256 254 261 243 220 233 1990's 228 220 196 135 145 109 120 129 116 233 2000's 244 185 197

  13. California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 341 2010's 478 564 620 599 587 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring

  14. California - Coastal Region Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future

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

    Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 334 350 365 1980's 299 306 362 381 265 256 255 238 215 222 1990's 217 216 203 189 194 153 156 164 106 192 2000's 234 177 190 167 189 268 206 205 146 163 2010's 173 165 290 266 261 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  15. California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation

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

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 395 1980's 330 325 384 405 284 277 275 255 232 238 1990's 232 231 215 201 205 163 168 176 118 233 2000's 244 185 197 174 196 277 214 212 151 169 2010's 180 173 305 284 277 - = No Data

  16. California - Coastal Region Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After

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

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) California - Coastal Region Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 88 1980's 65 60 59 61 28 23 14 12 12 5 1990's 4 11 19 66 60 54 48 47 2 0 2000's 0 0 0 1 8 8 6 1 1 1 2010's 2 1 2 2 8 - = No Data

  17. Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in the Atlantic and their onshore impacts. Atlantic summary report, July 1, 1983-December 31, 1984

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rudolph, R.W.; Havran, K.J.

    1984-12-01

    The search for oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf in the Atlantic continues. Hydrocarbon exploration efforts have been and probably will continue to be concentrated on four major sedimentary basins: the Georges Bank Basin, the Baltimore Canyon Trough, the Carolina Trough, and the Blake Plateau Basin. To date, 46 exploratory wells have been drilled in these areas, most of them in the Mid-Atlantic Planning Area where resource estimates indicate the hydrocarbon potential is the greatest of the three Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf planning areas. Currently, no operators are involved in exploration efforts in the Atlantic. No commercial discoveries have been announced. Since the first and most successful sale of Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf blocks in Lease Sale 40 in August 1976, there have been eight other sales bringing total revenues of almost $3 billion to the Federal Treasury. The current tentative milestone chart for the 5-year offshore leasing schedule calls for four additional lease sales to be held in the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf. Although no firm plans have been made for the transportation of potential offshore hydrocarbons to onshore processing facilities, it is believed that oil would be transported by tanker or tug-barge system to existing refineries on the Raritan and Delaware Bays. Gas probably would be transported by pipeline to one of several onshore landfalls identifed by Atlantic Coast States and in Federal environmental impact documents. Recent onshore support for Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf exploration came from Davisville, Rhode Island, the only shore support base for the Atlantic that was active during 1984. Three maps are provided in the back pocket of this report for the North Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic planning areas. 29 refs., 8 figs., 6 tabs.

  18. Elements of an environmental decision support system for seasonal wetland salt management in a river basin subjected to water quality regulation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, N.W.T.

    2009-06-01

    Seasonally managed wetlands in the Grasslands Basin on the west-side of California's San Joaquin Valley provide food and shelter for migratory wildfowl during winter months and sport for waterfowl hunters during the annual duck season. Surface water supply to these wetlands contain salt which, when drained to the San Joaquin River during the annual drawdown period, can negatively impact water quality and cause concern to downstream agricultural riparian water diverters. Recent environmental regulation, limiting discharges salinity to the San Joaquin River and primarily targeting agricultural non-point sources, now also targets return flows from seasonally managed wetlands. Real-time water quality management has been advocated as a means of continuously matching salt loads discharged from agricultural, wetland and municipal operations to the assimilative capacity of the San Joaquin River. Past attempts to build environmental monitoring and decision support systems (EDSS's) to implement this concept have enjoyed limited success for reasons that are discussed in this paper. These reasons are discussed in the context of more general challenges facing the successful implementation of a comprehensive environmental monitoring, modelling and decision support system for the San Joaquin River Basin.

  19. Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved

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

    Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 14,580 1980's 13,407 13,049 12,153 11,553 10,650 10,120 9,416 9,024 8,969 8,934 1990's 8,492 7,846 7,019 6,219 6,558 6,166 6,105 6,137 5,966 5,858 2000's 5,447 5,341 4,395 3,874 3,557 3,478 3,473 3,463

  20. Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 12,276 1980's 11,273 11,178 10,364 9,971 9,162 8,328 7,843 7,644 7,631 7,661 1990's 7,386 6,851 6,166 5,570 5,880 5,446 5,478 5,538 5,336 5,259 2000's

  1. Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,535,033 1,538,511 1,552,603 1,608,633 1,469,698 1,357,155 1,386,478 1,434,389 2000's 1,342,963 1,370,802 1,245,270 1,244,672 1,248,050 1,202,328 1,280,758 1,309,960 1,301,523 1,482,252 2010's 2,148,447 2,969,297 2,882,193 2,289,193 1,925,968 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available;

  2. Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,511,271 1,517,415 1,531,493 1,589,019 1,437,037 1,325,445 1,360,141 1,403,510 2000's 1,314,375 1,350,494 1,226,613 1,219,627 1,226,268 1,189,611 1,264,850 1,293,590 1,292,366 1,472,722 2010's 2,140,525 2,958,249 2,882,193 2,282,452 1,918,626 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

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

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 222,009 228,298 229,483 223,527 221,233 220,674 212,470 207,863 2000's 200,255 191,119 184,500 176,571 173,106 164,304 160,381 155,167 152,051 146,751 2010's 139,215 134,305 128,312 120,666 110,226 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  4. Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 169,220 176,208 174,537 173,399 180,277 185,574 182,641 179,227 2000's 171,917 165,622 162,613 162,524 159,924 153,179 149,415 144,579 140,401 134,757 2010's 128,194 116,932 128,312 120,666 110,226 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  5. Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,409,336 2,545,144 2,861,599 3,256,352 3,247,533 3,257,096 3,245,736 3,236,241 2000's 3,265,436 3,164,843 3,183,857 3,256,295 3,309,960 3,262,379 2,850,934 3,105,086 3,027,696 2,954,896 2010's 2,826,952 2,798,220 2,857,485 2,882,956 2,803,429 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  6. Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 316,456 308,512 335,608 357,629 355,905 346,325 335,426 338,806 2000's 324,577 339,311 358,936 423,366 365,100 376,892 380,221 368,344 337,359 349,457 2010's 316,546 294,728 315,682 280,101 305,061 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  7. Calif--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 386,382 346,733 334,987 322,544 326,919 317,137 315,701 347,667 2000's 334,983 336,629 322,138 303,480 287,205 291,271 301,921 286,584 281,088 258,983 2010's 273,136 237,388 214,509 219,386 218,512 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  8. Calif--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Calif--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 306,829 260,560 251,390 232,005 231,640 236,725 264,610 330,370 2000's 323,864 328,778 309,399 290,212 273,232 274,817 278,933 264,838 259,988 239,037 2010's 251,559 218,638 214,509 219,386 218,512 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

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

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

    Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--onshore Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 5,296,865 5,461,594 5,518,978 5,525,982 5,626,448 5,665,074 5,738,595 5,526,033 2000's 5,681,726 5,698,798 5,603,941 5,737,755 5,688,972 5,969,905 6,301,649 6,931,629 7,753,869 7,615,836 2010's 7,565,123 7,910,898 8,127,004 8,285,436 8,652,111 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  10. Texas--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Texas--onshore Natural Gas Marketed Production (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 4,734,715 4,894,291 4,961,117 4,983,373 5,068,868 5,102,806 5,167,180 5,005,568 2000's 5,240,909 5,229,075 5,084,012 5,189,998 5,022,369 5,239,469 5,523,237 6,093,951 6,913,906 6,781,162 2010's 6,686,719 7,089,072 7,458,989 7,619,582 7,942,121 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available;

  11. Tular Lake Field, Kings County, California - a significant onshore development

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lindblom, R.G.; Waldron, J.M.

    1985-04-01

    The Tulare Lake field is located in Kings County, California, on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and 10 mi east of the Kettleman Hills (North Dome) field and 30 mi souuheast of the city of Coalinga. The field was discovered by Husky Oil Co. (Marathon) in October 1981 with the completion of the Boswell 22-16, Sec. 16, T22S, R20E from sands in the Burbank formation of Oligocene geologic age. Chevron USA offset the Husky discovery well with the completion of the Salyer 678X, Sec. 8, T22S, R20E, in May 1983. Both Chevron and Husky have continued an orderly development of the field, and to date Chevron has 9 producing wells and Husky 10 producing wells. Production is found in the Burbank formation at a vertical depth below 12,800 ft. The entrapment of hydrocarbons is caused by a low amplitude, seismically subtle, anticlinal fold trending northwest/southeast. Isochore maps of the Burbank formation show that stratigraphy is important in the distribution of the four producing sand intervals. Oil gravities form the sands vary 39/sup 0/ API to 51/sup 0/ API and the GOR ranges from 1050 to over 5500. As of January 1, 1984, the field has a cumulative production of 1.7 million bbl of oil and 3.5 billion ft/sup 3/ of gas.

  12. U.S. Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 435 512...

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Onshore Natural Gas Processed in New Mexico (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 29,056 869 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 08/31/2016 Next Release Date: 09/30/2016 Referring Pages: Natural Gas Processed Texas Onshore-New Mexico

  14. Reducing Onshore Natural Gas and Oil Exploration and Production Impacts Using a Broad-Based Stakeholder Approach

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Amy Childers

    2011-03-30

    Never before has the reduction of oil and gas exploration and production impacts been as important as it is today for operators, regulators, non-governmental organizations and individual landowners. Collectively, these stakeholders are keenly interested in the potential benefits from implementing effective environmental impact reducing technologies and practices. This research project strived to gain input and insight from such a broad array of stakeholders in order to identify approaches with the potential to satisfy their diverse objectives. The research team examined three of the most vital issue categories facing onshore domestic production today: (1) surface damages including development in urbanized areas, (2) impacts to wildlife (specifically greater sage grouse), and (3) air pollution, including its potential contribution to global climate change. The result of the research project is a LINGO (Low Impact Natural Gas and Oil) handbook outlining approaches aimed at avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating environmental impacts. The handbook identifies technical solutions and approaches which can be implemented in a practical and feasible manner to simultaneously achieve a legitimate balance between environmental protection and fluid mineral development. It is anticipated that the results of this research will facilitate informed planning and decision making by management agencies as well as producers of oil and natural gas. In 2008, a supplemental task was added for the researchers to undertake a 'Basin Initiative Study' that examines undeveloped and/or underdeveloped oil and natural gas resources on a regional or geologic basin scope to stimulate more widespread awareness and development of domestic resources. Researchers assessed multi-state basins (or plays), exploring state initiatives, state-industry partnerships and developing strategies to increase U.S. oil and gas supplies while accomplishing regional economic and environmental goals.

  15. EA-1697: San Joaquin Valley Right-of-Way Project, California

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    DOE’s Western Area Power Administration is preparing this EA to evaluate the environmental impacts of right-of-way maintenance (including facility inspection and repair, vegetation management, and equipment upgrades for transmission lines and associated rights-or-way, access roads, substations, and a maintenance facility) in the San Joaquin Valley in California.

  16. Evaluation of Global Onshore Wind Energy Potential and Generation Costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhou, Yuyu; Luckow, Patrick; Smith, Steven J.; Clarke, Leon E.

    2012-06-20

    In this study, we develop an updated global estimate of onshore wind energy potential using reanalysis wind speed data, along with updated wind turbine technology performance and cost assumptions as well as explicit consideration of transmission distance in the calculation of transmission costs. We find that wind has the potential to supply a significant portion of world energy needs, although this potential varies substantially by region as well as with assumptions such as on what types of land can be used to site wind farms. Total global wind potential under central assumptions is estimated to be approximately 89 petawatt hours per year at less than 9 cents/kWh with substantial regional variations. One limitation of global wind analyses is that the resolution of current global wind speed reanalysis data can result in an underestimate of high wind areas. A sensitivity analysis of eight key parameters is presented. Wind potential is sensitive to a number of input parameters, particularly those related to land suitability and turbine density as well as cost and financing assumptions which have important policy implications. Transmission cost has a relatively small impact on total wind costs, changing the potential at a given cost by 20-30%. As a result of sensitivities studied here we suggest that further research intended to inform wind supply curve development focus not purely on physical science, such as better resolved wind maps, but also on these less well-defined factors, such as land-suitability, that will also have an impact on the long-term role of wind power.

  17. Tidal Energy System for On-Shore Power Generation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bruce, Allan J

    2012-06-26

    Addressing the urgent need to develop LCOE competitive renewable energy solutions for US energy security and to replace fossil-fuel generation with the associated benefits to environment impacts including a reduction in CO2 emissions, this Project focused on the advantages of using hydraulic energy transfer (HET) in large-scale Marine Hydrokinetic (MHK) systems for harvesting off-shore tidal energy in US waters. A recent DOE resource assessment, identifies water power resources have a potential to meet 15% of the US electric supply by 2030, with MHK technologies being a major component. The work covered a TRL-4 laboratory proof-in-concept demonstration plus modeling of a 15MW full scale system based on an approach patented by NASA-JPL, in which submerged high-ratio gearboxes and electrical generators in conventional MHK turbine systems are replaced by a submerged hydraulic radial pump coupled to on-shore hydraulic motors driving a generator. The advantages are; first, the mean-time-between-failure (MTBF), or maintenance, can be extended from approximately 1 to 5 years and second, the range of tidal flow speeds which can be efficiently harvested can be extended beyond that of a conventional submerged generator. The approach uses scalable, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components, facilitating scale-up and commercialization. All the objectives of the Project have been successfully met (1) A TRL4 system was designed, constructed and tested. It simulates a tidal energy turbine, with a 2-m diameter blade in up to a 2.9 m/sec flow. The system consists of a drive motor assembly providing appropriate torque and RPM, attached to a radial piston pump. The pump circulates pressurized, environmentally-friendly, HEES hydraulic fluid in a closed loop to an axial piston motor which drives an electrical generator, with a resistive load. The performance of the components, subsystems and system were evaluated during simulated tidal cycles. The pump is contained in a tank for

  18. Louisiana - South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Louisiana - South Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,304 1980's 2,134 1,871 1,789 1,582 1,488 1,792 1,573 1,380 1,338 1,273 1990's 1,106 995 853 649 678 720 627 599 630 599

  19. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After

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

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 955 1980's 921 806 780 747 661 570 517 512 428 430 1990's 407 352 308 288 299 245 252 235 204 202 2000's 115 65 70 81

  20. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After

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

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1,416 1980's 1,292 1,005 890 765 702 684 596 451 393 371 1990's 301 243 228 215 191 209 246 368 394 182 2000's 176 140

  1. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  2. Concept Paper for Real-Time Temperature and Water QualityManagement for San Joaquin River Riparian Habitat Restoration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, Nigel W.T.

    2004-12-20

    The San Joaquin River Riparian Habitat Restoration Program (SJRRP) has recognized the potential importance of real-time monitoring and management to the success of the San Joaquin River (SJR) restoration endeavor. The first step to realizing making real-time management a reality on the middle San Joaquin River between Friant Dam and the Merced River will be the installation and operation of a network of permanent telemetered gauging stations that will allow optimization of reservoir releases made specifically for fish water temperature management. Given the limited reservoir storage volume available to the SJJRP, this functionality will allow the development of an adaptive management program, similar in concept to the VAMP though with different objectives. The virtue of this approach is that as management of the middle SJR becomes more routine, additional sensors can be added to the sensor network, initially deployed, to continue to improve conditions for anadromous fish.

  3. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,079 1980's 1,645 1,920 1,785 1,890 1,965 1,895 1,760 1,861 1,703 1,419 1990's 1,418 1,127 1,176 1,137 1,169 1,126 1,178 1,497 1,516

  4. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After

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

    Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 2,513 1980's 2,429 2,080 1,881 1,784 1,756 1,537 1,405 1,296 1,226 1,148 1990's 1,056 1,123 1,206 1,159 1,063 960

  5. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 4,052 1980's 3,333 3,466 3,167 3,220 3,264 2,940 2,605 2,563 2,400 2,278 1990's 2,024 1,987 1,723 2,092 2,590 3,196 3,612 3,539 3,275

  6. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease

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

    Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 7,143 1980's 7,074 7,251 7,802 7,847 8,094 7,825 7,964 7,317 6,891 7,009 1990's 7,473 7,096 6,813 7,136 7,679 7,812 7,877 8,115 8,430

  7. U.S. Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S. Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 41 41 38 43 44 45 43 46 46 48 2001 44 45 45 47 45 42 42 41 39 39 42 41 2002 38 40 35 32 32 32 34 33 37 38 35 31 2003 28 29 28 27 24 25 28 30 30 31 31 32 2004 33 35 35 36 35 39 38 39 40 42 42 41

  8. ,"California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)"

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

    Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  9. Economic evaluation on CO₂-EOR of onshore oil fields in China

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Wei, Ning; Li, Xiaochun; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.; Liu, Shengnan; Zha, Yongjin

    2015-06-01

    Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO₂-EOR) and sequestration in depleted oil reservoirs is a plausible option for utilizing anthropogenic CO₂ to increase oil production while storing CO₂ underground. Evaluation of the storage resources and cost of potential CO₂-EOR projects is an essential step before the commencement of large-scale deployment of such activities. In this paper, a hybrid techno-economic evaluation method, including a performance model and cost model for onshore CO₂-EOR projects, has been developed based on previous studies. Total 296 onshore oil fields, accounting for about 70% of total mature onshore oil fields in China, were evaluated by the techno-economicmore » method. The key findings of this study are summarized as follows: (1) deterministic analysis shows there are approximately 1.1 billion tons (7.7 billion barrels) of incremental crude oil and 2.2 billion tons CO₂ storage resource for onshore CO₂-EOR at net positive revenue within the Chinese oil fields reviewed under the given operating strategy and economic assumptions. (2) Sensitivity study highlights that the cumulative oil production and cumulative CO₂ storage resource are very sensitive to crude oil price, CO₂ cost, project lifetime, discount rate and tax policy. High oil price, short project lifetime, low discount rate, low CO₂ cost, and low tax policy can greatly increase the net income of the oil enterprise, incremental oil recovery and CO₂ storage resource. (3) From this techno-economic evaluation, the major barriers to large-scale deployment of CO₂-EOR include complex geological conditions, low API of crude oil, high tax policy, and lack of incentives for the CO₂-EOR project.« less

  10. Economic evaluation on CO₂-EOR of onshore oil fields in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wei, Ning; Li, Xiaochun; Dahowski, Robert T.; Davidson, Casie L.; Liu, Shengnan; Zha, Yongjin

    2015-06-01

    Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO₂-EOR) and sequestration in depleted oil reservoirs is a plausible option for utilizing anthropogenic CO₂ to increase oil production while storing CO₂ underground. Evaluation of the storage resources and cost of potential CO₂-EOR projects is an essential step before the commencement of large-scale deployment of such activities. In this paper, a hybrid techno-economic evaluation method, including a performance model and cost model for onshore CO₂-EOR projects, has been developed based on previous studies. Total 296 onshore oil fields, accounting for about 70% of total mature onshore oil fields in China, were evaluated by the techno-economic method. The key findings of this study are summarized as follows: (1) deterministic analysis shows there are approximately 1.1 billion tons (7.7 billion barrels) of incremental crude oil and 2.2 billion tons CO₂ storage resource for onshore CO₂-EOR at net positive revenue within the Chinese oil fields reviewed under the given operating strategy and economic assumptions. (2) Sensitivity study highlights that the cumulative oil production and cumulative CO₂ storage resource are very sensitive to crude oil price, CO₂ cost, project lifetime, discount rate and tax policy. High oil price, short project lifetime, low discount rate, low CO₂ cost, and low tax policy can greatly increase the net income of the oil enterprise, incremental oil recovery and CO₂ storage resource. (3) From this techno-economic evaluation, the major barriers to large-scale deployment of CO₂-EOR include complex geological conditions, low API of crude oil, high tax policy, and lack of incentives for the CO₂-EOR project.

  11. Parana basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zalan, P.V.; Wolff, S.; Conceicao, J.C.J.; Vieira, I.S.; Astolfi, M.A.; Appi, V.T.; Zanotto, O.; Neto, E.V.S.; Cerqueira, J.R.

    1987-05-01

    The Parana basin is a large intracratonic basin in South America, developed entirely on continental crust and filled with sedimentary and volcanic rocks ranging in age from Silurian to Cretaceous. It occupies the southern portion of Brazil (1,100,000 km/sup 2/ or 425,000 mi/sup 2/) and the eastern half of Paraguay (100,000 km/sup 2/ or 39,000 mi/sup 2/); its extension into Argentina and Uruguay is known as the Chaco-Parana basin. Five major depositional sequences (Silurian, Devonian, Permo-Carboniferous, Triassic, Juro-Cretaceous) constitute the stratigraphic framework of the basin. The first four are predominantly siliciclastic in nature, and the fifth contains the most voluminous basaltic lava flows of the planet. Maximum thicknesses are in the order of 6000 m (19,646 ft). The sequences are separated by basin wide unconformities related in the Paleozoic to Andean orogenic events and in the Mesozoic to the continental breakup and sea floor spreading between South America and Africa. The structural framework of the Parana basin consists of a remarkable pattern of criss-crossing linear features (faults, fault zones, arches) clustered into three major groups (N45/sup 0/-65/sup 0/W, N50/sup 0/-70/sup 0/E, E-W). The northwest- and northeast-trending faults are long-lived tectonic elements inherited from the Precambrian basement whose recurrent activity throughout the Phanerozoic strongly influenced sedimentation, facies distribution, and development of structures in the basin. Thermomechanical analyses indicate three main phases of subsidence (Silurian-Devonian, late Carboniferous-Permian, Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous) and low geothermal gradients until the beginning of the Late Jurassic Permian oil-prone source rocks attained maturation due to extra heat originated from Juro-Cretaceous igneous intrusions. The third phase of subsidence also coincided with strong tectonic reactivation and creation of a third structural trend (east-west).

  12. Visayan Basin - the birthplace of Philippine petroleum exploration revisited

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rillera, F.G. ); Durkee, E.F. )

    1994-07-01

    Petroleum exploration in the Philippines has its roots in the Visayan Basin in the central Philippines. This is a Tertiary basin with up to 30,000 ft of sedimentary fill. With numerous surface oil and gas manifestations known as early as 1888, the area was the site of the first attempts to establish commercial petroleum production in the country. Over the past 100 years, more than 200 wells have been drilled in the basin. Several of these have yielded significant oil and gas shows. Production, albeit noncommercial in scale, has been demonstrated to be present in some places. A review of past exploration data reveals that many of the earlier efforts failed due to poorly located tests from both structural and stratigraphic standpoints. Poor drilling and completion technology and lack of funding compounded the problems of early explorationists. Because of this, the basin remains relatively underexplored. A recent assessment by COPLEX and E.F. Durkee and Associates demonstrates the presence of many untested prospects in the basin. These prospects may contain recoverable oil and gas potential on the order of 5 to 10 MMBO onshore and 25 to 100 MMBO offshore. With new exploration ideas, innovative development concepts, and the benefit of modern technology, commercial oil and gas production from the basin may yet be realized.

  13. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  14. ,"Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  15. ,"California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California - Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  16. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel

  17. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)"

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

    Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  18. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)"

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

    Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release

  19. ,"Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana--South Onshore Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016" ,"Excel File

  20. ,"Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  1. ,"Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  2. ,"Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","11/19/2015" ,"Next Release Date:","12/31/2016"

  3. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 137 134 2000's 130 148 61 61 16 70 85 42 26 51 2010's 199 248 293 280 281 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next

  4. Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 0 0 3 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  5. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 66 2010's 154 691 1,508 1,857 2,110 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude

  6. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 257 2010's 272 261 428 500 613 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil

  7. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 92 2010's 207 222 203 256 257 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Crude Oil

  8. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 5 7 2000's 9 12 14 12 13 16 16 16 8 14 2010's 53 242 711 615 825 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  9. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 19 1980's 16 20 23 26 22 24 20 32 25 16 1990's 17 14 14 14 12 11 8 12 10 12 2000's 13 14 11 13 15 19 16 17 17 15 2010's 47 229 506 594 706 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  10. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

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

    Production (Million Barrels) Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 45 1980's 48 68 52 73 81 76 69 70 67 56 1990's 63 61 66 72 74 82 85 75 75 64 2000's 59 53 60 56 64 72 74 94 88 77 2010's 113 203 374 698 1,037 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  11. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 24 26 2000's 34 29 41 37 21 19 18 22 18 26 2010's 37 19 118 163 189 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release

  12. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 54 1980's 52 51 53 57 53 49 53 75 58 73 1990's 49 48 39 57 54 68 79 116 77 74 2000's 69 82 71 72 72 78 75 128 65 74 2010's 75 76 81 63 67 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid

  13. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

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

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 7 9 2000's 8 8 5 7 4 17 4 2 2 1 2010's 80 3 1 7 6 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016

  14. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

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

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 76 1980's 75 77 85 80 87 86 84 80 74 72 1990's 71 69 65 65 70 70 82 86 96 122 2000's 90 97 91 85 73 71 87 77 79 74 2010's 96 202 181 228 223 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to

  15. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  16. Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 19 1980's 16 20 23 26 22 24 20 32 25 16 1990's 17 14 14 14 12 11 8 12 10 12 2000's 13 14 11 13 15 19 16 17 17 15 2010's 47 229 506 594 706 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  17. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 2 onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 395 1,692 4,743 5,595 6,648 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 2 Onshore Shale Gas

  18. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate,

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 71 47 49 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Coalbed Methane Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC

  19. Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 54 1980's 52 51 53 57 53 49 53 75 58 73 1990's 49 48 39 57 54 68 79 116 77 74 2000's 69 82 71 72 72 78 75 128 65 74 2010's 75 76 81 63 67 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  20. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Coalbed Methane Production (Billion Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas--RRC District 3 onsh Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 0 0 0 2010's 0 1 6 24 106 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015 Next Release Date: 12/31/2016 Referring Pages: Shale Natural Gas Proved Reserves as of Dec. 31 TX, RRC District 3 Onshore

  1. Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Texas--RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 76 1980's 75 77 85 80 87 86 84 80 74 72 1990's 71 69 65 65 70 70 82 86 96 122 2000's 90 97 91 85 73 71 87 77 79 74 2010's 96 202 181 228 223 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  2. Agriculture, irrigation, and drainage on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, California: Unified perspective on hydrogeology, geochemistry and management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Narasimhan, T.N.; Quinn, N.W.T.

    1996-03-01

    The purpose of this report is to provide a broad understanding of water-related issues of agriculture and drainage on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. To this end, an attempt is made to review available literature on land and water resources of the San Joaquin Valley and to generate a process-oriented framework within which the various physical-, chemical-, biological- and economic components of the system and their interactions are placed in mutual perspective.

  3. Joaquin Correa

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

    ... Knierim, Marcin Zemla, Michael Joo, David Larson, Roseann Csencsits, Bahram Parvin, ... Amita Gorur, Mitalee Desai, Manfred Auer, W.J. Costerton, J. Berleman, Trent Northen, D. ...

  4. Joaquin Correa

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

    at the center. His interests are Burst processingData streaming, Automated data logistics, Image ProcessingComputer vision and effective technology transfer for science and...

  5. MASK basin

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

    MASK basin - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Energy Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced Nuclear Energy

  6. San Joaquin River Up-Stream DO TMDL Project Task 4: MonitoringStudy Interim Task Report #3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stringfellow, William; Borglin, Sharon; Dahlgren, Randy; Hanlon,Jeremy; Graham, Justin; Burks, Remie; Hutchinson, Kathleen

    2007-03-30

    The purpose of the Dissolved Oxygen Total Maximum Daily LoadProject (DO TMDLProject) is to provide a comprehensive understanding ofthe sources and fate of oxygen consuming materials in the San JoaquinRiver (SJR) watershed between Channel Point and Lander Avenue (upstreamSJR). When completed, this study will provide the stakeholders anunderstanding of the baseline conditions of the basin, provide input foran allocation decision, and provide the stakeholders with a tool formeasuring the impact of any waterquality management program that may beimplemented as part of the DO TMDL process. Previous studies haveidentified algal biomass as the most significant oxygen-demandingsubstance in the DO TMDL Project study-area between of Channel Point andLander Ave onthe SJR. Other oxygen-demanding substances found in theupstream SJR include ammonia and organic carbon from sources other thanalgae. The DO TMDL Project study-area contains municipalities, dairies,wetlands, cattle ranching, irrigated agriculture, and industries thatcould potentially contribute biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) to the SJR.This study is designed to discriminate between algal BOD and othersources of BOD throughout the entire upstream SJR watershed. Algalbiomass is not a conserved substance, but grows and decays in the SJR;hence, characterization of oxygen-demanding substances in the SJR isinherently complicated and requires an integrated effort of extensivemonitoring, scientific study, and modeling. In order to achieve projectobjectives, project activities were divided into a number of Tasks withspecific goals and objectives. In this report, we present the results ofmonitoring and research conducted under Task 4 of the DO TMDL Project.The major objective of Task 4 is to collect sufficient hydrologic (flow)and water quality (WQ) data to characterize the loading of algae, otheroxygen-demanding materials, and nutrients fromindividual tributaries andsub-watersheds of the upstream SJR between Mossdale and

  7. NATURAL GAS RESOURCES IN DEEP SEDIMENTARY BASINS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thaddeus S. Dyman; Troy Cook; Robert A. Crovelli; Allison A. Henry; Timothy C. Hester; Ronald C. Johnson; Michael D. Lewan; Vito F. Nuccio; James W. Schmoker; Dennis B. Riggin; Christopher J. Schenk

    2002-02-05

    From a geological perspective, deep natural gas resources are generally defined as resources occurring in reservoirs at or below 15,000 feet, whereas ultra-deep gas occurs below 25,000 feet. From an operational point of view, ''deep'' is often thought of in a relative sense based on the geologic and engineering knowledge of gas (and oil) resources in a particular area. Deep gas can be found in either conventionally-trapped or unconventional basin-center accumulations that are essentially large single fields having spatial dimensions often exceeding those of conventional fields. Exploration for deep conventional and unconventional basin-center natural gas resources deserves special attention because these resources are widespread and occur in diverse geologic environments. In 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that 939 TCF of technically recoverable natural gas remained to be discovered or was part of reserve appreciation from known fields in the onshore areas and State waters of the United. Of this USGS resource, nearly 114 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of technically-recoverable gas remains to be discovered from deep sedimentary basins. Worldwide estimates of deep gas are also high. The U.S. Geological Survey World Petroleum Assessment 2000 Project recently estimated a world mean undiscovered conventional gas resource outside the U.S. of 844 Tcf below 4.5 km (about 15,000 feet). Less is known about the origins of deep gas than about the origins of gas at shallower depths because fewer wells have been drilled into the deeper portions of many basins. Some of the many factors contributing to the origin of deep gas include the thermal stability of methane, the role of water and non-hydrocarbon gases in natural gas generation, porosity loss with increasing thermal maturity, the kinetics of deep gas generation, thermal cracking of oil to gas, and source rock potential based on thermal maturity and kerogen type. Recent experimental simulations using laboratory

  8. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,034 1980's 2,566 2,726 2,565 2,637 2,626 2,465 2,277 2,373 2,131 1,849 1990's 1,825 1,479 1,484 1,425 1,468 1,371 1,430 1,732 1,720 1,974 2000's 2,045 1,863 1,867 1,849 1,934 2,175 2,166 2,386

  9. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Proved Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 6,565 1980's 5,762 5,546 5,048 5,004 5,020 4,477 4,010 3,859 3,626 3,426 1990's 3,080 3,110 2,929 3,251 3,653 4,156 4,652 4,418 4,205 4,132 2000's 4,042 3,943 3,826 3,548 3,400 3,406 3,278 3,102

  10. Recoverable Resource Estimate of Identified Onshore Geopressured Geothermal Energy in Texas and Louisiana (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Esposito, A.; Augustine, C.

    2012-04-01

    Geopressured geothermal reservoirs are characterized by high temperatures and high pressures with correspondingly large quantities of dissolved methane. Due to these characteristics, the reservoirs provide two sources of energy: chemical energy from the recovered methane, and thermal energy from the recovered fluid at temperatures high enough to operate a binary power plant for electricity production. Formations with the greatest potential for recoverable energy are located in the gulf coastal region of Texas and Louisiana where significantly overpressured and hot formations are abundant. This study estimates the total recoverable onshore geopressured geothermal resource for identified sites in Texas and Louisiana. In this study a geopressured geothermal resource is defined as a brine reservoir with fluid temperature greater than 212 degrees F and a pressure gradient greater than 0.7 psi/ft.

  11. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

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

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,162 2,976 2,974 1980's 2,502 2,629 2,493 2,534 2,512 2,358 2,180 2,273 2,037 1,770 1990's 1,737 1,393 1,389 1,321 1,360 1,251 1,322 1,634 1,614 1,881 2000's 1,980 1,801 1,782 1,770 1,844 2,073 2,060 2,255 2,238 1,800 2010's 2,090

  12. Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation

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

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 2 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,034 1980's 2,566 2,726 2,565 2,637 2,626 2,465 2,277 2,373 2,131 1,849 1990's 1,825 1,479 1,484 1,425 1,468 1,371 1,430 1,732 1,720 1,974 2000's 2,045 1,863 1,867 1,849 1,934 2,175 2,166

  13. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

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

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 7,518 7,186 6,315 1980's 5,531 5,292 4,756 4,680 4,708 4,180 3,753 3,632 3,422 3,233 1990's 2,894 2,885 2,684 2,972 3,366 3,866 4,349 4,172 3,961 3,913 2000's 3,873 3,770 3,584 3,349 3,185 3,192 3,050 2,904 2,752 2,616 2010's 2,588

  14. Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation

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

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 3 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 6,565 1980's 5,762 5,546 5,048 5,004 5,020 4,477 4,010 3,859 3,626 3,426 1990's 3,080 3,110 2,929 3,251 3,653 4,156 4,652 4,418 4,205 4,132 2000's 4,042 3,943 3,826 3,548 3,400 3,406 3,278

  15. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production

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

    (Billion Cubic Feet) Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Dry Natural Gas Expected Future Production (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 9,621 9,031 8,326 1980's 8,130 8,004 8,410 8,316 8,525 8,250 8,274 7,490 7,029 7,111 1990's 7,475 7,048 6,739 7,038 7,547 7,709 7,769 8,099 8,429 8,915 2000's 9,645 9,956 9,469 8,763 8,699 8,761 8,116 7,963 7,604 6,728 2010's 7,014

  16. Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation

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

    Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas - RRC District 4 Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 8,559 1980's 8,366 8,256 8,692 8,612 8,796 8,509 8,560 7,768 7,284 7,380 1990's 7,774 7,339 7,041 7,351 7,870 8,021 8,123 8,483 8,824 9,351 2000's 10,118 10,345 9,861 9,055 9,067 9,104 8,474

  17. U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Four-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Four-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Four-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

  18. U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Three-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Three-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Three-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 36 36 34 37 39 40 39 41 40 41 2001 38 38 38 39 37 35 35 32 30 33 34 33 2002 32 31 26 25 24 23 26 26 28 30 27 22 2003 19 20 20 20 17 18 21 22 22 24 24 25 2004 25 27 27 27 26 30 30 31 32 34 33 32

  19. U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Two-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Two-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) U.S.Lower 48 States Onshore Maximum Number of Active Crews Engaged in Two-Dimensional Seismic Surveying (Number of Elements) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2000 0 0 4 4 3 5 4 4 3 4 4 5 2001 5 6 6 7 7 6 6 8 8 5 7 7 2002 6 9 9 7 8 9 8 7 9 8 8 8 2003 8 9 8 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 7 7 2004 8 8 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 9 9 2005 8 8 6 8 8 9 8 8 7 6 5 6 2006 5 5 4 4 4 9 5 4 4 5 5 5 2007

  20. Basin Destination State

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, EIA data Basin Destination State 2008 2009 2010 2008-2010 2009-2010 Northern Appalachian Basin Delaware 26.24 - W...

  1. Basin Destination State

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

    3. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, basin to state, EIA data Basin Destination State 2008 2009 2010 2008-2010 2009-2010 Northern Appalachian Basin Delaware 28.49 - W...

  2. Basin Destination State

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

    43 0.0294 W - W W - - - Northern Appalachian Basin Florida 0.0161 W W W W 0.0216 W W W W W Northern Appalachian Basin Illinois W W - - - - - - - - - Northern Appalachian Basin...

  3. Late Cenozoic fault kinematics and basin development, Calabrian arc, Italy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Knott, S.D.; Turco, E.

    1988-08-01

    Current views for explaining the present structure of the Calabrian arc emphasize bending or buckling of an initially straight zone by rigid indentation. Although bending has played an important role, bending itself cannot explain all structural features now seen in the arc for the following reasons: (1) across-arc extension is inconsistent with buckling, (2) north-south compression predicted by a bending mechanism to occur in the internal part of a curved mountain belt is not present in the Calabrian arc, and (3) lateral shear occurs throughout the arc, not just along the northern and southern boundaries. The model presented here is based on lateral bending of mantle and lower crust (demonstrated by variation in extension in the Tyrrhenian basin) and semibrittle faulting and block rotation in the upper crust. These two styles of deformation are confined to the upper plate of the Calabrian subduction system. This deformation is considered to have been active from the beginning of extension in the Tyrrhenian basin (late Tortonian) and is still active today (based on Holocene seismicity). Block rotations are a consequence of lateral heterogeneous shear during extension. Therefore, some of the observed rotation of paleo-magnetic declinations may have occurred in areas undergoing extension and not just during thrusting. Inversion of sedimentary basins by block rotation is predicted by the model. The model will be a useful aid in interpreting reflection seismic data and exploring and developing offshore and onshore sedimentary basins in southern Italy.

  4. Outer continental shelf oil and gas activities in the South Atlantic (US) and their onshore impacts. South Atlantic summary report update

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Havran, K.J.

    1983-01-01

    An update of the South Atlantic Summary Report 2, this report provides current information about Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil- and gas-related activities and their onshore impacts for the period June 1982 to February, 1983. The geographical area covered by the report extends from north of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina to Cape Canaveral, Florida. The information is designed to assist in planning for the onshore effects associated with offshore oil and gas development. It covers lease and transportation strategies and the nature and location of onshore facilities. An appendix summarizes related state and federal studies. 11 references, 2 tables.

  5. ,"Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)"

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

    Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana - South Onshore Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release

  6. Coastal energy transportation study, phase ii, volume 1: a study of OCS onshore support bases and coal export terminals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cribbins, P.D.

    1981-08-01

    This study concentrates on siting alternatives for on-shore support bases for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas exploration and coal export terminals. Sixteen alternative OCS sites are described, and a parametric analysis is utilized to select the most promising sites. Site-specific recommendations regarding infrastructure requirements and transportation impacts are provided. Eleven alternative coal terminal sites are identified and assessed for their potential impacts.

  7. Identification of geopressured occurrences outside of the Gulf Coast. Final report, Phase I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Strongin, O.

    1980-09-30

    As an extension of its efforts in the development of the geopressured resources of the Gulf Coast, the Division of Geothermal Energy of the US Department of Energy is interested in determining the extent and characteristics of geopressured occurrences in areas outside the Gulf Coast. The work undertaken involved a literature search of available information documenting such occurrences. Geopressured reservoirs have been reported from various types of sedimentary lithologies representing virtually all geologic ages and in a host of geologic environments, many of which are unlike those of the Gulf Coast. These include many Rocky Mountain basins (Green River, Big Horn, Powder River, Wind River, Uinta, Piceance, Denver, San Juan), Mid-Continent basins (Delaware, Anadorko, Interior Salt, Williston, Appalachian), California basins (Sacramento, San Joaquin, Los Angeles, Ventura, Coast Ranges), Alaskan onshore and offshore basins, Pacific Coast offshore basins, and other isolated occurrences, both onshore and offshore.

  8. Crossing Active Faults on the Sakhalin II Onshore Pipeline Route: Analysis Methodology and Basic Design

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vitali, Luigino; Mattiozzi, Pierpaolo

    2008-07-08

    Twin oil (20 and 24 inch) and gas (20 and 48 inch) pipeline systems stretching 800 km are being constructed to connect offshore hydrocarbon deposits from the Sakhalin II concession in the North to an LNG plant and oil export terminal in the South of Sakhalin island. The onshore pipeline route follows a regional fault zone and crosses individual active faults at 19 locations. Sakhalin Energy, Design and Construction companies took significant care to ensure the integrity of the pipelines, should large seismic induced ground movements occur during the Operational life of the facilities. Complex investigations including the identification of the active faults, their precise location, their particular displacement values and assessment of the fault kinematics were carried out to provide input data for unique design solutions. Lateral and reverse offset displacements of 5.5 and 4.5 m respectively were determined as the single-event values for the design level earthquake (DLE)--the 1000-year return period event. Within the constraints of a pipeline route largely fixed, the underground pipeline fault crossing design was developed to define the optimum routing which would minimize stresses and strain using linepipe materials which had been ordered prior to the completion of detailed design, and to specify requirements for pipe trenching shape, materials, drainage system, etc. This Paper describes the steps followed to formulate the concept of the special trenches and the analytical characteristics of the Model.

  9. Crossing Active Faults on the Sakhalin II Onshore Pipeline Route: Pipeline Design and Risk Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mattiozzi, Pierpaolo; Strom, Alexander

    2008-07-08

    Twin oil (20 and 24 inch) and gas (20 and 48 inch) pipeline systems stretching 800 km are being constructed to connect offshore hydrocarbon deposits from the Sakhalin II concession in the North to an LNG plant and oil export terminal in the South of Sakhalin island. The onshore pipeline route follows a regional fault zone and crosses individual active faults at 19 locations. Sakhalin Energy, Design and Construction companies took significant care to ensure the integrity of the pipelines, should large seismic induced ground movements occur during the Operational life of the facilities. Complex investigations including the identification of the active faults, their precise location, their particular displacement values and assessment of the fault kinematics were carried out to provide input data for unique design solutions. Lateral and reverse offset displacements of 5.5 and 4.5 m respectively were determined as the single-event values for the design level earthquake (DLE) - the 1000-year return period event. Within the constraints of a pipeline route largely fixed, the underground pipeline fault crossing design was developed to define the optimum routing which would minimize stresses and strain using linepipe materials which had been ordered prior to the completion of detailed design, and to specify requirements for pipe trenching shape, materials, drainage system, etc. Detailed Design was performed with due regard to actual topography and to avoid the possibility of the trenches freezing in winter, the implementation of specific drainage solutions and thermal protection measures.

  10. Dispersion mechanisms of a tidal river junction in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, California

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Gleichauf, Karla T.; Wolfram, Philip J.; Monsen, Nancy E.; Fringer, Oliver B.; Monismith, Stephen G.

    2014-12-17

    In branching channel networks, such as in the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, junction flow dynamics contribute to dispersion of ecologically important entities such as fish, pollutants, nutrients, salt, sediment, and phytoplankton. Flow transport through a junction largely arises from velocity phasing in the form of divergent flow between junction channels for a portion of the tidal cycle. Field observations in the Georgiana Slough junction, which is composed of the North and South Mokelumne rivers, Georgiana Slough, and the Mokelumne River, show that flow phasing differences between these rivers arise from operational, riverine, and tidal forcing. A combination of Acoustic Dopplermore » Current Profile (ADCP) boat transecting and moored ADCPs over a spring–neap tidal cycle (May to June 2012) monitored the variability of spatial and temporal velocity, respectively. Two complementary drifter studies enabled assessment of local transport through the junction to identify small-scale intrajunction dynamics. We supplemented field results with numerical simulations using the SUNTANS model to demonstrate the importance of phasing offsets for junction transport and dispersion. Different phasing of inflows to the junction resulted in scalar patchiness that is characteristic of MacVean and Stacey’s (2011) advective tidal trapping. Furthermore, we observed small-scale junction flow features including a recirculation zone and shear layer, which play an important role in intra-junction mixing over time scales shorter than the tidal cycle (i.e., super-tidal time scales). Thus, the study period spanned open- and closed-gate operations at the Delta Cross Channel. Synthesis of field observations and modeling efforts suggest that management operations related to the Delta Cross Channel can strongly affect transport in the Delta by modifying the relative contributions of tidal and riverine flows, thereby changing the junction flow phasing.« less