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


1

Comparative safety analysis of LNG storage tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

LNG storage tank design and response to selected release scenarios were reviewed. The selection of the scenarios was based on an investigation of potential hazards as cited in the literature. A review of the structure of specific LNG storage facilities is given. Scenarios initially addressed included those that most likely emerge from the tank facility itself: conditions of overfill and overflow as related to liquid LNG content levels; over/underpressurization at respective tank vapor pressure boundaries; subsidence of bearing soil below tank foundations; and crack propagation in tank walls due to possible exposure of structural material to cryogenic temperatures. Additional scenarios addressed include those that result from external events: tornado induced winds and pressure drops; exterior tank missile impact with tornado winds and rotating machinery being the investigated mode of generation; thermal response due to adjacent fire conditions; and tank response due to intense seismic activity. Applicability of each scenario depended heavily on the specific tank configurations and material types selected. (PSB)

Fecht, B.A.; Gates, T.E.; Nelson, K.O.; Marr, G.D.

1982-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

2

Improvement in LNG storage tanks  

SciTech Connect

To develop and produce natural gas fuel tanks for medium duty truck and transit bus end-use to overcome the weight and range problems inherent in current fuel systems.

NONE

1999-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

3

Insulating LNG (liquified natural gas) storage tank containment dikes with a lightweight polymer concrete  

SciTech Connect

The natural gas industry has always been concerned ith accidental spills of liquified natural gas (LNG) from storage tanks into surrounding containment dikes. The LNG that is leaked to the dike area boils off and the vapors mix with the atmosphere forming a hazardous explsoive mixture within the dike walls. These hazardous mixtures can travel long distances into industrial or residential areas surroungind LNG storage facilities. Studies by the natural gas industry indicate that the hazards associated with accidental spills of LNG from storage tanks can be makedly reduced by insulating the diked areas surrounding these tanks. In this manner, the heat transfer from the dike surface to the LNG is reduced. The insulating composite is used to construct a thermal barrier between the walls and floor of the dike an the spilled LNG. The thermal conductivity, porosity, and compression strength of a concrete, polymer composite insulating material is discussed. 6 refs., 8 figs., 5 tbs.

Fontana, J.J.

1987-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

4

Simulation of rollover in stratified LNG storage tanks.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??[Truncated abstract] One of the major petroleum exports produced in Australia is Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), which is a highly processed and purified natural gas.… (more)

Arjomandnia, Pooya

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

5

Evaluation of decommissioned LNG storage tanks at Chula Vista, California. Final report, April 1990-June 1992  

SciTech Connect

An inspection and evaluation was made of the design, structural condition, and performance of two San Diego Gas and Electric LNG storage tanks, which were dismantled 25 years and 19 years respectively after construction. Inspection emphasis was placed on identification of factors which could limit the safe operating life of LNG facilities. Inspection showed no design, structural, or operational inherently life limiting factors. Metallurgical and structural evaluation of the LNG tanks indicated a more or less indefinite life, given adequate external maintenance. Protection of the external tank surfaces and stability of the foundation are the more apparent life limiting factors. No in-service corrosion was found on inner tank surfaces, only slight corrosion was found on external tank surfaces. Deterioration of the load bearing insulation under the bearing pad was found due to lack of use of a load transfer material between the concrete bearing pad and the load bearing insulation. Recommendations are made for research in improved understanding of techniques for installation of load bearing insulation and fitness-for-service guidelines.

Lewis, J.P.

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

6

Analysis of crack propagation and arrest in welded LNG (liquefied natural gas) storage tanks. Final report, March 1984-October 1986  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The extensive safe-operating experience that has been accumulated in LNG storage tanks is strongly indicative of a high degree of structural integrity. Nevertheless, concern has arisen with regard to the presence of weld-induced fabrication flaws in these tanks. When such flaws exist, it may not be possible to preclude the initiation of unstable crack growth during operation. However, if it can be shown that the material has the ability to arrest a running crack, an adequate margin of safety can still be demonstrated. A comprehensive program of experimentation was undertaken in companion programs to develop the crack-arrest properties that are needed for such a demonstration. But, because the 9% nickel steel used for LNG tank materials is very ductile and tough, its fracture properties are not well characterized by the quasi-static linear elastic-fracture-mechanics techniques available to these researchers. The research was therefore aimed at assisting the experimental work by providing more-realistic dynamic and nonlinear fracture-mechanics analyses. These analyses were intended to enhance the experimental program and to help insure that the results of the research are appropriate for the assessment of LNG storage-tank integrity. Specifically, the application of these advanced analysis techniques has demonstrated the mildly anticonservative nature of conventional fracture-mechanics treatments for the materials and structural geometry of interest. Nevertheless, provided a defected region in a storage tank is not overly large, the tank materials examined in this research possess high-enough-crack arrest toughness values to preclude complete tank rupture.

Kanninen, M.F.; Dexter, R.J.; Polch, E.Z.; Popelar, C.H.

1986-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

7

Stress analysis and fatigue evaluation of shell-to-footer plate joint in liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage tanks. Final topical report  

SciTech Connect

The life extension efforts were initiated to gather, evaluate, and provide LNG facility operators and storage tank designers with information that will help support assurances for long-term structural integrity. For this specific effort, the evaluation of a critical tank element, i.e. the shell-to-footer plate weld was conducted.

Lewis, J.P.; Outtrim, P.A.; Tong, R.T.

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

8

Storage and regasification of liquefied natural gas (LNG)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A discussion covers the historical background of LNG; a description of Columbia LNG Corp.'s LNG terminal at Cove Point, Maryland, including physical plant layout; LNG unloading facilities; the primary vaporization system, which uses submerged combustion to vaporize approximately 75% of the LNG; waste heat LNG vaporizers; four 375,000 bbl aluminum, double-wall storage tanks; the centrifugal, single-stage, pot-mounted LNG pumps; safety features including the large separation between units, and fire protection and monitoring; the construction, operating, and transportation costs; and the world-wide safety record of the LNG industry.

Litchfield, A.B.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

9

FEM Aided Prestress Design for Large-scale Ultra-low-temperature LNG Tank  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A large-scale low-temperature aboveground LNG storage tank design is described in detail, especially the process of prestressing tendons configuration using finite element method (FEM). Considering the LNG storage tanks working conditions and corresponding ... Keywords: FEM, LNG, optimize design, prestressing design

Fang-yuan Li; Jin-bao Han

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

10

Floating plant for offshore liquefaction, temporary storage and loading of LNG  

SciTech Connect

A floating plant is disclosed for offshore liquefaction, temporary storage and loading of lng, made as a semi-submersible platform with storage tanks for lng arranged in the submerged section of the platform. The storage tanks are independent spherical tanks which are supported inside the submerged section of the platform and completely surrounded thereby.

Kvamsdal, R.

1980-05-13T23:59:59.000Z

11

,"Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","17...

12

,"Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)"  

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

,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","172014"...

13

,"California Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)"  

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

Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2011 ,"Release Date:","1031...

14

,"California Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2011 ,"Release Date:","1031...

15

LNG storage: Safety analysis. Annual report, January-December 1980  

SciTech Connect

Progress is summarized on three projects in the areas of LNG safety: Rollover phenomena; Simultaneous boiling and spreading of cryogenic liquids; Modelling of LNG tank dynamics.

Reid, R.C.; Smith, K.A.; Virk, P.S.

1981-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

16

South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File) South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...

17

Investigation of low-cost LNG vehicle fuel tank concepts. Final report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The objective of this study was to investigate development of a low-cost liquid natural gas (LNG) vehicle fuel storage tank with low fuel boil-off, low tank pressure, and high safety margin. One of the largest contributors to the cost of converting a vehicle to LNG is the cost of the LNG fuel tank. To minimize heat leak from the surroundings into the low-temperature fuel, these tanks are designed as cryogenic dewars with double walls separated by an evacuated insulation space containing multi-layer insulation. The cost of these fuel tanks is driven by this double-walled construction, both in terms of materials and labor. The primary focus of the analysis was to try to devise a fuel tank concept that would allow for the elimination of the double-wall requirement. Results of this study have validated the benefit of vacuum/MLI insulation for LNG fuel tanks and the difficulty in identifying viable alternatives. The thickness of a non-vacuum insulation layer would have to be unreasonably large to achieve an acceptable non-venting hold time. Reasonable hold times could be achieved by using an auxiliary tank to accept boil-off vapor from a non-vacuum insulated primary tank, if the vapor in the auxiliary tank can be stored at high pressure. The primary focus of the analysis was to try to devise a fuel tank concept that allowed for the elimination of the double-wall requirement. Thermodynamic relations were developed for analyzing the fuel tank transient response to heat transfer, venting of vapor, and out-flow of either vapor or liquid. One of the major costs associated with conversion of a vehicle to LNG fuel is the cost of the LNG fuel tank. The cost of these tanks is driven by the cryogenic nature of the fuel and by the fundamental design requirements of long non-venting hold times and low storage pressure.

O`Brien, J.E.; Siahpush, A. [Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies Co., Idaho Falls, ID (United States). Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Lab.

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

18

Semisubmersible LNG plant design uses concrete storage buoy  

SciTech Connect

The ARGE '76 consortium, which includes Bilfinger and Berger, Blohm and Voss A.G., Dyckerhoff and Widmann A.G., Kabelmetal, Linde A.G., and Preussag A.G., has designed a system for exploiting marginal-sized offshore gasfields comprising an LNG liquefaction plant on a steel semisubmersible, a complete transfer system, and a concrete LNG storage buoy with a capacity of 125,000 cu m. The plant can handle 15.36 million cu m/day of natural gas production using a modified mixed refrigerant cycle with precooling from four nearly identical lines of the same capacity. The semisubmersible deck is 124 m square and 12 m deep. Quarters would be built for 160 men. The plant can continue to operate up to an inclination of 5/sup 0/. The storage buoy features a 64 m dia spherical concrete storage tank surrounded by 20 cylindrical ballast tanks. A 10 m dia center column rising from the tank supports a steel deck 20 m above sea level and also houses the transfer and ballast pipes and pumps. A flexible length of Flexwell-LNG transfer pipes 700 m long connects the semisubmersible and the storage tank, which will be 600 m apart.

1978-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

19

Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

20

Release of LNG vapor from large-volume, low-pressure LNG storage. Letter report, September 30, 1981-September 30, 1982  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This project involves development of practical release prevention measures by developing design and operating procedures beyond current practice. The objective of the program is to obtain the quantitative field data necessary to model the physics of the tank vapor space pressure response to boil-off compressor operation and atmospheric pressure changes. This work will lead to the development of guides to LNG storage tank operation and equipment specification that will limit the possibility of vapor venting or rollover of the stored LNG.

Not Available

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


21

,"New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New...

22

,"New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New...

23

,"U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)"  

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

Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2011 ,"Release Date:","7312013" ,"Next Release...

24

,"Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode...

25

,"South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South...

26

,"New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New...

27

,"New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New...

28

,"U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2011 ,"Release Date:","7312013" ,"Next...

29

,"Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska...

30

,"Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)...  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

31

,"U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2011 ,"Release Date:","7312013" ,"Next Release...

32

,"North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","North...

33

,"New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2011 ,"Release Date:","1031...

34

Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

35

Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 110...

36

New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

37

Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

38

Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

39

Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

40

Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

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


41

Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

42

South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

43

Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

44

Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

45

Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

46

Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

47

Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

48

Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

49

Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

50

Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

51

Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

52

Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

53

Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

54

Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

55

New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

56

Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

57

Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

58

Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

59

Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

60

South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

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


61

California Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

62

Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

63

Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

64

Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

65

Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

66

Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

67

Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

68

Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

69

Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

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

70

Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

71

Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

72

Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

73

Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

74

Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

75

Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

76

Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0...

77

Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

78

Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

79

California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

80

North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

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


81

Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

82

Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

83

Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

84

Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

85

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

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

86

Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0...

87

North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

88

Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

89

South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

90

New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

91

Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 251...

92

Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

93

Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

94

California Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

95

South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

96

Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 294...

97

New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

98

New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

99

Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

100

Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's...

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


101

Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

102

Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

103

North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

104

New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

105

Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

106

Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

107

Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

108

Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

109

Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

110

Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

111

Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

112

Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

113

Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic...  

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

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

114

Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet...  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

115

New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

116

New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

117

U.S. Natural Gas Storage and The Global LNG Market  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

U.S. natural gas storage operators are in a good position to take advantage of growing liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade. With the largest storage capacity in the world, the United States has the capability to import LNG in the summer for winter peak use. The normal falloff in global natural gas demand during the summer frees up some LNG supplies, but storage operators in many countries compete for this gas. The ability of U.S. operators to attract LNG supplies depends on the relative prices in the United States and other countries. At the same time, LNG imports compete with domestic supplies.

Information Center

2008-06-24T23:59:59.000Z

118

U.S. Natural Gas Storage and The Global LNG Market  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

U.S. natural gas storage operators are in a good position to take advantage of growing liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade. With the largest storage capacity in the ...

119

Numerical simulation of sloshing in LNG tanks with a compressible two-phase model  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The study of liquid dynamics in LNG tanks is getting more and more important with the actual trend of LNG tankers sailing with partially filled tanks. The effect of sloshing liquid in the tanks on pressure levels at the tank walls and on the overall ship motion indicates the relevance of an accurate simulation of the fluid behaviour. This paper presents the simulation of sloshing LNG by a compressible two-phase model and the validation of the numerical model on model-scale sloshing experiments. The details of the numerical model, an improved Volume Of Fluid (iVOF) method, are presented in the paper. The program has been developed initially to study the sloshing of liquid fuel in spacecraft. The micro-gravity environment requires a very accurate and robust description of the free surface. Later, the numerical model has been used for calculations for different offshore applications, including green water loading. The model has been extended to take two-phase flow effects into account. These effects are particularly important for sloshing in tanks. The complex mixture of the liquid and gas phase around

Rik Wemmenhove; Arthur E. P. Veldman; Tim Bunnik

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

120

,"Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sia_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sia_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:28 PM"

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


121

,"Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)" LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1330_sak_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1330_sak_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:06 PM"

122

,"Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sil_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sil_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:29 PM"

123

,"Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1340_smo_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1340_smo_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:20 PM"

124

,"South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)"  

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

LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)" LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1330_ssd_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1330_ssd_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:13 PM"

125

New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,617 4,658 4,518 4,770 4,781 4,317 5,384 3,236 3,243 1,433 1990's 3,740 2,683 2,422 2,620 4,835 3,055 5,033 3,926 4,922 7,035 2000's 7,688 3,844 6,373 9,189 7,532 8,448 4,574 7,290 5,792 4,919 2010's 3,304 5,018 3,483 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 1/7/2014 Next Release Date: 1/31/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage New Jersey Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into

126

Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 2,865 2,742 1,850 2,222 1,303 2,477 1,695 1,228 2,053 3,757 1990's 2,377 1,923 3,065 2,931 2,879 3,035 3,985 2,416 3,562 3,005 2000's 2,664 2,273 2,234 2,960 1,564 1,487 1,121 3,864 3,509 2,748 2010's 2,738 1,499 2,893 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage Tennessee Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage

127

Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,222 2,508 2,491 977 2,376 2,105 1,766 1,135 2,109 1,879 1990's 3,008 1,522 2,759 2,663 2,985 2,414 2,809 1,875 1,816 2,181 2000's 884 1,606 1,849 1,889 913 1,065 1,391 2,312 2,186 1,867 2010's 1,175 1,688 3,028 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Tennessee Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into

128

Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 20,484 1,508 1,555 1,024 678 1,834 1,942 1,150 1,702 2,930 1990's 2,779 1,969 1,573 1,855 3,788 3,746 6,523 3,221 1,760 607 2000's 3,241 6,772 3,426 5,422 5,570 5,971 7,705 2,817 4,372 3,182 2010's 2,693 3,306 2,097 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Georgia Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into

129

Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 7,885 15,234 14,021 6,599 9,844 9,261 6,184 5,732 5,782 10,004 1990's 6,586 4,399 5,147 5,531 5,550 5,898 6,107 5,049 2,712 3,934 2000's 4,480 6,382 5,683 10,035 9,485 7,643 5,966 10,006 5,863 7,244 2010's 5,507 7,558 3,805 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Massachusetts Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage

130

Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,046 4,051 3,234 1,970 3,714 2,309 2,657 1,381 3,023 2,268 1990's 4,311 2,390 2,869 4,329 5,826 3,523 5,590 4,615 5,092 5,146 2000's 4,918 4,907 862 4,496 2,938 3,416 2,200 2,292 2,683 1,681 2010's 2,353 2,620 2,651 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Pennsylvania Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage

131

Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,107 1,966 4,352 785 2,714 923 777 806 6,321 737 1990's 1,027 1,517 849 2,320 2,638 1,316 4,337 2,520 1,589 2,000 2000's 795 1,477 1,726 2,197 1,602 831 1,447 2,663 982 691 2010's 1,983 609 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Indiana Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into

132

Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 1,626 1,876 1,865 1,223 1,812 2,117 1,989 112 231 2,167 1990's 190 173 173 173 116 1,214 1,631 1,096 632 1,318 2000's 972 691 7,692 1,691 973 1,510 487 1,057 869 1,008 2010's 664 1,977 1,699 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Virginia Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into

133

New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,300 3,541 4,329 4,979 3,313 4,064 3,468 3,422 3,202 2,444 1990's 2,298 2,221 2,471 2,313 3,565 2,982 3,219 3,330 4,305 6,752 2000's 7,501 3,732 4,778 6,554 5,603 5,915 3,680 5,513 5,971 4,425 2010's 3,693 4,404 3,278 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 1/7/2014 Next Release Date: 1/31/2014 Referring Pages: Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage New Jersey Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage

134

Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3,063 2,576 5,243 256 3,089 289 154 670 477 1,008 1990's 1,196 2,012 4,659 5,671 3,867 2,346 5,262 2,134 1,269 1,697 2000's 1,226 702 943 3,153 1,665 2,626 2,438 3,080 3,178 1,652 2010's 1,458 1,858 1,408 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into Storage Iowa Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Additions of Liquefied Natural Gas into

135

U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's...

136

Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -3,383 2,585 -1,618 -700 2,734 45 593 -2,043 -1,644 -6,447 1990's 308 -3,967 -1,844 -2,368 -6,820 -3,134 -5,364 -3,517 -7,243 -2,447 2000's -7,518 350 767 4,359 1,584 3,129 156 -1,560 -1,694 -1,221 2010's -963 -753 -1,384 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage Massachusetts Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals

137

Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 4,915 3,084 3,526 3,090 2,266 2,936 2,398 247 3,186 4,242 1990's 1,679 2,412 2,797 4,534 5,030 3,921 4,722 5,852 4,559 4,477 2000's 5,124 2,844 1,820 3,688 3,627 3,694 1,571 2,685 2,532 2,371 2010's 2,314 2,415 1,763 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage Pennsylvania Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from

138

Storage Tanks (Arkansas) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Storage Tanks (Arkansas) Storage Tanks (Arkansas) Storage Tanks (Arkansas) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Fuel Distributor Industrial Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Program Info State Arkansas Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Quality The Storage Tanks regulations is a set of rules and permit requirements mandated by the Arkansas Pollution and Ecology Commission in order to protect the public health and the lands and the waters of the State of Arkansas. They are promulgated pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated 8-7-801 and the Petroleum Storage Trust Fund Act 8-7-901. It covers all storage tanks, above (AST) and underground (UST). Most importantly these regulations establish that all owners and operators of storage tanks must

139

How Gaz de France optimizes LNG regasification  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A regasification optimization program was implemented at Montoir-de-Bretagne in 1984, and rapidly accepted by the operators. It has been an important tool for decision-making in the optimizing operation of this liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage and regasification terminal. The models used are regularly and easily updated on the basis of equipment behavior: aging or fouling. The Montoir-de-Bretagne LNG terminal is in the port area of Nates-Saint Nazaire on the Atlantic coast. It was commissioned in 1982 by Gaz de France. This terminal is used for receiving, storing, and regasifying the Algerian LNG received under a contract between Gaz de France and Sonatrach, as well as the LNG imported by Belgium and temporarily routed through France. It is designed to receive 25,000 to 200,000 cu m LNG carriers and has three 120,000 cm m LNG storage tanks. The daily sendout ranges between 6.7 million cu m and 36 million cu m. Monitor terminal supplies mainly Brittany and the Paris area. Two identifical berths allow the simultaneous reception of two LNG carriers. LNG is carried to the storage tanks in 32-in. lines at a rate of 12,000 cu m/hr. Each storage tank is equipped with three submerged 450 cu m/hr pumps with which the LNG is sent from the tanks to the secondary pumps at 8 bar. The nine high-pressure (HP) secondary pumps, with a capacity of either 450 cu m/hr or 180 cu m/hr, raise the LNG pressure to a level at least equal to pipeline pressure prior to revaporization.

Colonna, J.L.; Lecomte, B.; Caudron, S.

1986-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

140

,"Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1340_sak_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1340_sak_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:15 PM"

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


141

Underground Storage Tank Regulations | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Underground Storage Tank Regulations Underground Storage Tank Regulations Underground Storage Tank Regulations < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Program Info State Mississippi Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Quality The Underground Storage Tank Regulations is relevant to all energy projects

142

U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet)  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Additions (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,581...

143

Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Onboard Storage Tank Onboard Storage Tank Workshop to someone by E-mail Share Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Facebook Tweet about Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Twitter Bookmark Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Google Bookmark Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Delicious Rank Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Digg Find More places to share Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on AddThis.com... Publications Program Publications Technical Publications Educational Publications Newsletter Program Presentations Multimedia Conferences & Meetings Annual Merit Review Proceedings Workshop & Meeting Proceedings

144

LNG transportation  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In the beginning of 1965, the participants to the starting up of first French LNG transportation system between ARZEW and LE HAVRE were indeed pioneers when they started the cool-down of the three tanks of LE HAVRE, with a LNG freight delivered by old liberty-ship ''BEAUVAIS''. Could they forecast the development of LNG industry in FRANCE and in the world and imagine that modest 'JULES VERNE' and his two english brothers would have, 25 years later, 80 successors - more than five times as big, for the main part of them, that 12 liquefaction plants would be running in the world, supplying about twenty LNG terminals. For the first time, a country - FRANCE - can draw the lessons from the exploitation of the 3 LNG transportation systems during a long period. That is the subject of the present paper.

Picard, J.

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

Storage tanks, particularly for liquefied gases  

SciTech Connect

Marine and Industrial Developments, Ltd., Greece, has developed a new, low-cost LNG-tank lining which is highly resistant to impairment by tensile stresses encountered during cooldown to cryogenic temperatures. The thermal insulation is incorporated in the unitary cellular matrix lining composed of layers of plastics (polyurethane rubbers) including the primary barrier and at least one other fluid-impervious layer between the primary barrier and the tank wall. The plastic layers are thin, less than 0.24 in. (6 mm) in thickness. The layers of plastic for forming the cellular matrix can be formed in situ as the lining is built by applying a polymerizable or curable polymeric composition under, between, and over blocks of the selected thermally insulating material as they are laid. The polymerizable composition thus constitutes a kind of mortar which is then polymerized and/or cured in situ.

Papanicolaou, J.P.; Galatis, T.N.

1976-04-06T23:59:59.000Z

146

Underground storage tank management plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Underground Storage Tank (UST) Management Program at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant was established to locate UST systems in operation at the facility, to ensure that all operating UST systems are free of leaks, and to establish a program for the removal of unnecessary UST systems and upgrade of UST systems that continue to be needed. The program implements an integrated approach to the management of UST systems, with each system evaluated against the same requirements and regulations. A common approach is employed, in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulations and guidance, when corrective action is mandated. This Management Plan outlines the compliance issues that must be addressed by the UST Management Program, reviews the current UST inventory and compliance approach, and presents the status and planned activities associated with each UST system. The UST Management Plan provides guidance for implementing TDEC regulations and guidelines for petroleum UST systems. (There are no underground radioactive waste UST systems located at Y-12.) The plan is divided into four major sections: (1) regulatory requirements, (2) implementation requirements, (3) Y-12 Plant UST Program inventory sites, and (4) UST waste management practices. These sections describe in detail the applicable regulatory drivers, the UST sites addressed under the Management Program, and the procedures and guidance used for compliance with applicable regulations.

NONE

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

147

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank  

Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center (EERE)

Promulgation of Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal

148

LNG importing project in Taiwan, ROC  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

To cope with an ever-increasing demand for natural gas facing a dwindling indigenous supply and to follow the national policy of diversification of energy resources in the Republic of China, Chinese Petroleum Corporation (CPC) has launched its first LNG Receiving Terminal project at Yung-An, Kaohsiung for the importation of LNG to Taiwan. This paper presents selected design essentials and distinguished characteristics of this project. In pursuit of safety, operability and energy efficiency, the design and engineering of this facility features the following: Higher pressure LNG in-ground storage tanks. Application of recondensers for BOG in process. Integrated control system.

Liu, J.C.; Chung, S.T.; Shen, R.H.

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

149

Hydrogen Storage "Think Tank" Report  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

brainstorming on this critical issue. This "Think Tank" meeting was held in Washington, D.C. on March 14, 2003 and was organized and sponsored by the U.S. Department of...

150

Underground Storage Tank Program (Vermont)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

These rules are intended to protect public health and the environment by establishing standards for the design, installation, operation, maintenance, monitoring, and closure of underground storage...

151

Monitoring, safety systems for LNG and LPG operators  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Operators in Korea and Australia have chosen monitoring and control systems in recent contracts for LNG and LPG storage. Korea Gas Corp. (Kogas) has hired Whessoe Varec, Calais, to provide monitoring systems for four LNG storage tanks being built at Kogas` Inchon terminal. For Elgas Ltd., Port Botany, Australia, Whessoe Varec has already shipped a safety valve-shutdown system to a new LPG cavern-storage facility under construction. The paper describes the systems, terminal monitoring, dynamic approach to tank management, and meeting the growing demand for LPG.

True, W.R.

1998-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

152

,"Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sme_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sme_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:31 PM"

153

,"Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_snv_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_snv_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:33 PM"

154

,"Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_swi_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_swi_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:36 PM"

155

,"Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_smo_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_smo_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:31 PM"

156

,"Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sma_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sma_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:30 PM"

157

,"California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sca_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sca_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:27 PM"

158

,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_spa_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_spa_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:34 PM"

159

,"Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_stn_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_stn_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:35 PM"

160

,"South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1998 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_ssd_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_ssd_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:35 PM"

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


161

,"Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sor_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sor_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:34 PM"

162

,"Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sne_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sne_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:32 PM"

163

,"Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_smd_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_smd_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:30 PM"

164

,"South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Withdrawals (MMcf)" Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1340_ssd_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1340_ssd_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:24 PM"

165

,"Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_swa_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_swa_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:36 PM"

166

,"Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_smn_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_smn_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:31 PM"

167

,"Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sla_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sla_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:30 PM"

168

,"Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sga_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sga_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:28 PM"

169

,"Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sar_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sar_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:27 PM"

170

,"Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sin_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sin_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:29 PM"

171

,"Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sal_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sal_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:26 PM"

172

,"Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sde_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sde_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:28 PM"

173

,"South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)"  

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

Additions (MMcf)" Additions (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Additions (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1330_ssc_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1330_ssc_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:13 PM"

174

,"South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Withdrawals (MMcf)" Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1340_ssc_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1340_ssc_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:24 PM"

175

,"Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sid_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sid_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:29 PM"

176

,"Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sco_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sco_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:27 PM"

177

,"Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"  

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

Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2012 ,"Release Date:","12/12/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","1/7/2014" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sva_2a.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://tonto.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/na1350_sva_2a.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.doe.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/12/2013 5:42:35 PM"

178

Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks (Mississippi) Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks (Mississippi) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells

179

Recommended research on LNG safety  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is conducting research on the safety and other environmental aspects of liquefied energy gases including liquefied natural gas (LNG). The effort reported here was conducted as part of the planning for further research into the safety aspects of transporting and storing LNG, with primary emphasis on public safety. Although the modern LNG industry has enjoyed excellent success in providing for safe operations, significant questions remain on the part of many, the expressions of which were intensified with the addition of marine-based LNG import terminals. Public safety with regard to large-scale importation of this fuel has received widespread attention in the US Congress, state legislatures, county and city governments, and from various individuals and public groups, with coverage in all the news media, including books published on the subject. The safety concerns have centered around the consequences to the public of a large spill of the cryogenic liquid from an ocean tanker or a larger storage tank, either of which might hold as much as 125,000 m/sup 3/ of LNG.

Carpenter, H.J.; Gilmore, F.R.

1981-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

180

Computer modeling of ORNL storage tank sludge mobilization and mixing  

SciTech Connect

This report presents and analyzes the results of the computer modeling of mixing and mobilization of sludge in horizontal, cylindrical storage tanks using submerged liquid jets. The computer modeling uses the TEMPEST computational fluid dynamics computer program. The horizontal, cylindrical storage tank configuration is similar to the Melton Valley Storage Tanks (MVST) at Oak Ridge National (ORNL). The MVST tank contents exhibit non-homogeneous, non-Newtonian rheology characteristics. The eventual goals of the simulations are to determine under what conditions sludge mobilization using submerged liquid jets is feasible in tanks of this configuration, and to estimate mixing times required to approach homogeneity of the contents of the tanks.

Terrones, G.; Eyler, L.L.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


181

A NOVEL PROCESS TO USE SALT CAVERNS TO RECEIVE SHIP BORNE LNG  

SciTech Connect

This cooperative research project validates use of man made salt caverns to receive and store the cargoes of LNG ships in lieu of large liquid LNG tanks. Salt caverns will not tolerate direct injection of LNG because it is a cryogenic liquid, too cold for contact with salt. This research confirmed the technical processes and the economic benefits of pressuring the LNG up to dense phase, warming it to salt compatible temperatures and then directly injecting the dense phase gas into salt caverns for storage. The use of salt caverns to store natural gas sourced from LNG imports, particularly when located offshore, provides a highly secure, large scale and lower cost import facility as an alternative to tank based LNG import terminals. This design can unload a ship in the same time as unloading at a tank based terminal. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve uses man made salt caverns to securely store large quantities of crude oil. Similarly, this project describes a novel application of salt cavern gas storage technologies used for the first time in conjunction with LNG receiving. The energy industry uses man made salt caverns to store an array of gases and liquids but has never used man made salt caverns directly in the importation of LNG. This project has adapted and expanded the field of salt cavern storage technology and combined it with novel equipment and processes to accommodate LNG importation. The salt cavern based LNG receiving terminal described in the project can be located onshore or offshore, but the focus of the design and cost estimates has been on an offshore location, away from congested channels and ports. The salt cavern based terminal can provide large volumes of gas storage, high deliverability from storage, and is simplified in operation compared to tank based LNG terminals. Phase I of this project included mathematical modeling that proved a salt cavern based receiving terminal could be built at lower capital cost, and would have significantly higher delivery capacity, shorter construction time, and be much more secure than a conventional liquid tank based terminal. Operating costs of a salt cavern terminal are lower than tank based terminals because ''boil off'' is eliminated and maintenance costs of caverns are lower than LNG tanks. Phase II included the development of offshore mooring designs, wave tank tests, high pressure LNG pump field tests, heat exchanger field tests, and development of a model offshore LNG facility and cavern design. Engineers designed a model facility, prepared equipment lists, and confirmed capital and operating costs. In addition, vendors quoted fabrication and installation costs, confirming that an offshore salt cavern based LNG terminal would have lower capital and operating costs than a similarly sized offshore tank based terminal. Salt cavern storage is infinitely more secure than surface storage tanks, far less susceptible to accidents or purposeful damage, and much more acceptable to the community. More than thirty industry participants provided cost sharing, technical expertise, and guidance in the conduct and evaluation of the field tests, facility design and operating and cost estimates. Their close participation has accelerated the industry's acceptance of the conclusions of this research. The industry participants also developed and submitted several alternative designs for offshore mooring and for high pressure LNG heat exchangers in addition to those that were field tested in this project. HNG Storage, a developer, owner, and operator of natural gas storage facilities, and a participant in the DOE research has announced they will lead the development of the first offshore salt cavern based LNG import facility. Which will be called the Freedom LNG Terminal. It will be located offshore Louisiana, and is expected to be jointly developed with other members of the research group yet to be named. An offshore port license application is scheduled to be filed by fourth quarter 2005 and the terminal could be operational by 2009. This terminal allows the large volume importa

Michael M. McCall; William M. Bishop; Marcus Krekel; James F. Davis; D. Braxton Scherz

2005-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

182

Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Georgia Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Georgia Department of Natural Resources The Georgia Underground Storage Act (GUST) provides a comprehensive program to prevent, detect, and correct releases from underground storage tanks

183

Effect of water storage tanks design in solar combisystems efficiency  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

One of the key components of a solar combisystem is the heat store. In the international literature the matter of storage necessity for solar systems is well justified. We build an experimental system assisted by a stratified storage tank and we estimate ... Keywords: fractional savings, storage tank, stratification

Nikolaos Taoussanidis

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

184

Forklift Storage Tank R&D: Timely, Critical, Exemplary  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Forklift Storage Tank R&D: Timely, Critical, Exemplary August 14, 2012 DOE EERE Fuel Cell Technologies Program Webinar Daniel E. Dedrick and Chris San Marchi Sandia National...

185

Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey) Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey) Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State New Jersey Program Type Safety and Operational Guidelines This chapter constitutes rules for all underground storage tank facilities- including registration, reporting, permitting, certification, financial responsibility and to protect human health and the environment

186

U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)  

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

Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -2,581 1980's -9,651 4,687 2,488 -5,699 8,780 -3,283 6,504 -89 10,559 -13,807 1990's 13,271 169 -4,501 -6,972 -2,211 -6,549 3,770 348 3,522 2,154 2000's -14,644 9,740 707 -4,213 -834 -3,405 -4,958 14 -302 5,797 2010's -4,282 6,424 1,560 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 12/12/2013 Next Release Date: 1/7/2014 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage

187

Research of Heat Storage Tank Operation Modes in Cogeneration Plant.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??The dissertation investigates typical operation modes of the heat storage tank in the small-scale cogeneration (CHP) plant, analyses formation of thermal stratifi-cation in such storage… (more)

Streckien?, Giedr?

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank  

SciTech Connect

This closure package documents the site assessment and permanent closure of the TAN-664 gasoline underground storage tank in accordance with the regulatory requirements established in 40 CFR 280.71, 'Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks: Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure.'

Bradley K. Griffith

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

189

Vapor sampling of the headspace of radioactive waste storage tanks  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This paper recants the history of vapor sampling in the headspaces of radioactive waste storage tanks at Hanford. The first two tanks to receive extensive vapor pressure sampling were Tanks 241-SY-101 and 241-C-103. At various times, a gas chromatography, on-line mass spectrometer, solid state hydrogen monitor, FTIR, and radio acoustic ammonia monitor have been installed. The head space gas sampling activities will continue for the next few years. The current goal is to sample the headspace for all the tanks. Some tank headspaces will be sampled several times to see the data vary with time. Other tanks will have continuous monitors installed to provide additional data.

Reynolds, D.A., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

190

Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act (Alabama) |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act (Alabama) Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act (Alabama) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Industrial Municipal/Public Utility Savings Category Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Program Info State Alabama Program Type Environmental Regulations The department, acting through the commission, is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations governing underground storage tanks and is authorized to seek the approval of the United States Environmental Protection Agency to operate the state underground storage tank program in lieu of the federal program. In addition to specific authorities provided by this chapter, the department is authorized, acting through the commission, to

191

Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Onboard Storage Tank Workshop Onboard Storage Tank Workshop The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Sandia National Laboratories co-hosted the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on April 29th, 2010. Onboard storage tank experts gathered to share lessons learned about research and development (R&D) needs; regulations, codes and standards (RCS); and a path forward to enable the successful deployment of hydrogen storage tanks in early market fuel cell applications. The workshop also included initial follow up to the DOE and Department of Transportation (DOT) International Workshop on Compressed Natural Gas and Hydrogen Fuels held on December 10-11, 2009. Here you will find information about Workshop proceedings including all presentations. Agenda and Notes The following agenda and notes provide summary information about the workshop.

192

Feasibility study for the construction of a new LNG receiving terminal, turkey. Volume 2. Appendix. Export trade information. [LNG (liquified natural gas)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The report was prepared by The M. W. Kellogg Co. for BOTAS Petroleum Pipeline Corporation of Ankara, Turkey. The study was undertaken to evaluate the cost and economics of constructing a second liquified natural gas (LNG) terminal in Turkey to meet future requirements for natural gas. Volume 2 contains the following appendices: LNG Storage Tanks; Vaporizers; Compressors; Pumps; Loading Arms; Marine Installations; Shipping; and Seismic Study.

Not Available

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

193

Hydrogen Peroxide Storage in Small Sealed Tanks  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Unstabilized hydrogen peroxide of 85% concentration has been prepared in laboratory quantities for testing material compatibility and long term storage on a small scale. Vessels made of candidate tank and liner materials ranged in volume from 1 cc to 2540 cc. Numerous metals and plastics were tried at the smallest scales, while promising ones were used to fabricate larger vessels and liners. An aluminum alloy (6061-T6) performed poorly, including increasing homogeneous decay due to alloying elements entering solution. The decay rate in this high strength aluminum was greatly reduced by anodizing. Better results were obtained with polymers, particularly polyvinylidene fluoride. Data reported herein include ullage pressures as a function of time with changing decay rates, and contamination analysis results.

Whitehead, J.

1999-10-20T23:59:59.000Z

194

Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Tanks (West Virginia) Tanks (West Virginia) Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State West Virginia Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection This rule governs the construction, installation, upgrading, use, maintenance, testing, and closure of underground storage tanks, including certification requirements for individuals who install, repair, retrofit,

195

Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Act (West Virginia) Act (West Virginia) Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State West Virginia Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection New underground storage tank construction standards must include at least the following requirements: (1) That an underground storage tank will prevent releases of regulated substances stored therein, which may occur as

196

Use belowground storage tanks to manage stormwater  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

To meet performance and operating requirements under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), BP Oil`s Toledo Refinery installed two 10-million-gallon (MMgal) concrete belowground storage tanks to replace the existing impoundment ponds. Environmental, safety and operating criteria influenced how this older refinery could cost-effectively replace impoundment ponds without interrupting the production schedule. The north stormwater impoundment pond at BP Oil`s Toledo Refinery had received primary sludge, a RCRA-listed hazardous waste and material exceeding the toxic characteristic limit for benzene (0.5 ppm). Because the pond could not be adapted to meet RCRA standards, it had to be replaced by a system that met these standards and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). Under normal operating conditions, stormwater was commingled with process wastewater and processed at the wastewater treatment unit (WWTU) before final disposal. However, when flow in the sewer system exceeded the capacity of the WWTU, excess flow was stored in an impoundment system. The case history shows how BP Oil`s project engineers, working with a consulting engineering group and a general contractor (GC), cost-effectively replaced the impoundment pond to handle stormwater runoff for the refinery.

Nedrow, J. [BP Oil Co., Toledo, OH (United States)

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

197

3 , LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) -165oC  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

C / . Natural Gas Hydrate (NGH) Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Modes of Transport and Storage , , . . . , . , LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) -165oC , . (Piped Natural Gas, PNG) , , . PNG, LNG ( 2-3 ), . (Natural Gas Hydrate, NGH) / . -20o

Hong, Deog Ki

198

Underground Storage Tank Management (District of Columbia)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The  installation, upgrade and operation of any petroleum UST (>110 gallons) or hazardous substance UST System, including heating oil tanks over 1,100 gallons capacity in the District requires a...

199

Stress evaluation of the primary tank of a double-shell underground storage tank facility  

SciTech Connect

A facility called the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) is being designed at the Department of Energy`s Hanford site. The MWTF is expected to be completed in 1998 and will consist of six underground double-shell waste storage tanks and associated systems. These tanks will provide safe and environmentally acceptable storage capacity to handle waste generated during single-shell and double-shell tank safety mitigation and remediation activities. This paper summarizes the analysis and qualification of the primary tank structure of the MWTF, as performed by ICF Kaiser Hanford during the latter phase of Title 1 (Preliminary) design. Both computer finite element analysis (FEA) and hand calculations methods based on the so-called Tank Seismic Experts Panel (TSEP) Guidelines were used to perform the analysis and evaluation. Based on the evaluations summarized in this paper, it is concluded that the primary tank structure of the MWTF satisfies the project design requirements. In addition, the hand calculations performed using the methodologies provided in the TSEP Guidelines demonstrate that, except for slosh height, the capacities exceed the demand. The design accounts for the adverse effect of the excessive slosh height demand, i.e., inadequate freeboard, by increasing the hydrodynamic wall and roof pressures appropriately, and designing the tank for such increased pressures.

Atalay, M.B. [ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc., Oakland, CA (United States); Stine, M.D. [ICF Kaiser Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Farnworth, S.K. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

200

Hanford Tank Farm interim storage phase probabilistic risk assessment outline  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report is the second in a series examining the risks for the high level waste (HLW) storage facilities at the Hanford Site. The first phase of the HTF PSA effort addressed risks from Tank 101-SY, only. Tank 101-SY was selected as the initial focus of the PSA because of its propensity to periodically release (burp) a mixture of flammable and toxic gases. This report expands the evaluation of Tank 101-SY to all 177 storage tanks. The 177 tanks are arranged into 18 farms and contain the HLW accumulated over 50 years of weapons material production work. A centerpiece of the remediation activity is the effort toward developing a permanent method for disposing of the HLW tank`s highly radioactive contents. One approach to risk based prioritization is to perform a PSA for the whole HLW tank farm complex to identify the highest risk tanks so that remediation planners and managers will have a more rational basis for allocating limited funds to the more critical areas. Section 3 presents the qualitative identification of generic initiators that could threaten to produce releases from one or more tanks. In section 4 a detailed accident sequence model is developed for each initiating event group. Section 5 defines the release categories to which the scenarios are assigned in the accident sequence model and presents analyses of the airborne and liquid source terms resulting from different release scenarios. The conditional consequences measured by worker or public exposure to radionuclides or hazardous chemicals and economic costs of cleanup and repair are analyzed in section 6. The results from all the previous sections are integrated to produce unconditional risk curves in frequency of exceedance format.

Not Available

1994-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

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


201

High-expansion foam for LNG vapor mitigation. Topical report, September 1987-December 1989  

SciTech Connect

One of the purposes of these high expansion foam systems is to reduce the extent of the hazardous vapor cloud generated during an accidental LNG release. Should the LNG ignite, these systems serve the additional function of controlling the LNG fire and minimizing its radiation to the surroundings. Foam generators have been installed along the tops of dike walls surrounding some LNG storage tanks, and around other fenced containment areas where LNG may be accidentally released, such as LNG pump pits and pipe rack trenches. To date there are no technically justifiable guidelines for the design and installation of these systems. Furthermore, there are no models that may be used describe the vapor source so as to be able to predict the reduction in the hazardous vapor cloud zone when high expansion foam is applied to an LNG spill. Information is essential not only for the optimal design of high expansion foam systems, but also for comparing the cost effectiveness of alternative LNG vapor mitigation measures.

Atallah, S.; Shah, J.N.; Peterlinz, M.E.

1990-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

202

Floating LNG plant will stress reliability and safety  

SciTech Connect

Mobil has developed a unique floating LNG plant design after extensive studies that set safety as the highest priority. The result is a production, storage and offloading platform designed to produce 6 million tons per year of LNG and up to 55,000 bpd of condensate from 1 Bcfd of feed gas. All production and off-loading equipment is supported by a square donut-shaped concrete hull, which is spread-moored. The hull contains storage tanks for 250,000 m{sup 3} of LNG, 6540,000 bbl of condensate and ballast water. Both LNG and condensate can be directly offloaded to shuttle tankers. Since the plant may be moved to produce from several different gas fields during its life, the plant and barge were designed to be generic. It can be used at any location in the Pacific Rim, with up to 15% CO{sub 2}, 100 ppm H{sub 2}S, 55 bbl/MMcf condensate and 650 ft water depth. It can be modified to handle other water depths, depending upon the environment. In addition, it is much more economical than an onshore grassroots LNG plant, with potential capital savings of 25% or more. The paper describes the machinery, meteorology and oceanography, and safety engineering.

Kinney, C.D.; Schulz, H.R.; Spring, W.

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

203

Computer modeling of forced mixing in waste storage tanks  

SciTech Connect

Numerical simulation results of fluid dynamic and physical processes in radioactive waste storage tanks are presented. Investigations include simulation of jet mixing pump induced flows intended to mix and maintain particulate material uniformly distributed throughout the liquid volume. Physical effects of solids are included in the code. These are particle size through a settling velocity and mixture properties through density and viscosity. Calculations have been accomplished for a centrally located, rotationally-oscillating, horizontally-directed jet mixing pump for two cases. One case is with low jet velocity and high settling velocity. It results in nonuniform distribution. The other case is with high jet velocity and low settling velocity. It results in uniform conditions. Results are being used to aid in experiment design and to understand mixing in the waste tanks. These results are to be used in conjunction with scaled experiments to define limits of pump operation to maintain uniformity of the mixture in the storage tanks during waste retrieval operations.

Eyler, L.L.; Michener, T.E.

1992-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

204

Heat pipe cooling system for underground, radioactive waste storage tanks  

SciTech Connect

An array of 37 heat pipes inserted through the central hole at the top of a radioactive waste storage tank will remove 100,000 Btu/h with a heat sink of 70/sup 0/F atmospheric air. Heat transfer inside the tank to the heat pipe is by natural convection. Heat rejection to outside air utilizes a blower to force air past the heat pipe condenser. The heat pipe evaporator section is axially finned, and is constructed of stainless steel. The working fluid is ammonia. The finned pipes are individually shrouded and extend 35 ft down into the tank air space. The hot tank air enters the shroud at the top of the tank and flows downward as it is cooled, with the resulting increased density furnishing the pressure difference for circulation. The cooled air discharges at the center of the tank above the sludge surface, flows radially outward, and picks up heat from the radioactive sludge. At the tank wall the heated air rises and then flows inward to comple the cycle.

Cooper, K.C.; Prenger, F.C.

1980-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

205

Diagnosis of Solar Water Heaters Using Solar Storage Tank Surface Temperature Data: Preprint  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Study of solar water heaters by using surface temperature data of solar storage tanks to diagnose proper operations.

Burch, J.; Magnuson, L.; Barker, G.; Bullwinkel, M.

2009-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

206

Probabilistic Stress Analysis of Liquid Storage Tank.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Liquefied Natural Gas transport and storage has become very important due to its ability to occupy 1/600th of the volume that compressed natural gas would… (more)

Khan, Khader A.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

207

Estimated uncertainty of calibrations of freestanding prismatic liquefied natural gas cargo tanks  

SciTech Connect

The accuracy of the tank calibrated by the photogrammetric technique was examined during the calibration of fifteen freestanding prismatic LNG transport tanks. This examination indicated that the calibration accuracy of the tanks calibrated in the storage position was better than plus or minus 0.1%. Additional factors influencing the accuracy of the calibration of the tanks, such as the effects of installing the tanks into the ship and loading the ships with LNG, were examined in the course of this work and the results are reported here. The various measurements used by various NBS personnel to analyze the calibration accuracy are detailed in the eight Appendices included in this report.

Siegwarth, J.D.; LaBrecque, J.F.

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

208

LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS WASTE STORAGE TANK VAPOR CONTROL ATTEMPTS ON SINGLE SHELL TANK (SST) & DOUBLE SHELL TANK (DST) FARMS  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report forms the basis for a feasibility study and conceptual design to control vapor emissions from waste storage tanks at the Hanford Site. The Carbtrol, Vapor Mixing, and High Efficiency Gas Absorber (HEGA) vapor controls were evaluated to determine the lessons learned from previous failed vapor control attempts. This document illustrates the resulting findings based on that evaluation.

BAKER, D.M.

2004-08-03T23:59:59.000Z

209

Earthquake Experience Data on Anchored, Ground-Mounted Vertical Storage Tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Earthquake experience data indicate that anchored, vertical storage tanks similar in structure to those used in nuclear power plant safety systems can survive greater ground motion than accounted for in most nuclear plant designs. Comparison of design parameters for nuclear and nonnuclear storage tanks confirmed the applicability of earthquake experience data to demonstrate the seismic adequacy of nuclear plant storage tanks.

1989-03-17T23:59:59.000Z

210

Development of simplified crack arrest measurements and application procedures for gas storage tanks and pipelines. Final report, November 1986-February 1992  

SciTech Connect

There has been concern with regard to the presence of weld-induced fabrication flaws in 9 percent nickel steel LNG storage tanks. Previous studies have shown that structural integrity can be assured if the material has the ability to arrest a running crack with an adequate margin of safety. Current experiment used to demonstrate crack arrest capability requires large specimens and thus is not acceptable for routine industry applications. A simplified test and analysis method to determine crack arrest toughness is of great value to the gas industry.

Kanninen, M.F.; Dexter, R.J.; Tweedy, L.K.

1992-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

Engineering Model of Liquid Storage Utility Tank for Heat Transfer Analysis  

SciTech Connect

The utility or chemical storage tank requires special engineering attention and heat transfer analysis because the tank content is very sensitive to temperature and surrounding environment such as atmospheric or outside air, humidity, and solar radiation heat. A simplified heat transfer model was developed to calculate the liquid content temperature of utility storage tank. The content of the utility storage tanks can be water or any other chemical liquid. An engineering model of liquid storage tank for heat transfer analysis and temperature calculations are presented and discussed in the examples of Tanks No. 1 containing oxalic acid and No. 2 containing sodium tetraphenylborate solution.

Kwon, K.C.

1995-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

212

Ice slurry cooling research: Storage tank ice agglomeration and extraction  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A new facility has been built to conduct research and development on important issues related to implementing ice slurry cooling technology. Ongoing studies are generating important information on the factors that influence ice particle agglomeration in ice slurry storage tanks. The studies are also addressing the development of methods to minimize and monitor agglomeration and improve the efficiency and controllability of tank extraction of slurry for distribution to cooling loads. These engineering issues impede the utilization of the ice slurry cooling concept that has been under development by various groups.

Kasza, K. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Hayashi, Kanetoshi [NKK Corp., Kawasaki (Japan)

1999-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

213

Chemically reactive coatings for passive fire protection in LNG and LPG storage and transporation  

SciTech Connect

According to Van Dyke Associates and TSI Inc., supporting and containing steels used to store and transport LNG and LPG are best protected in case of fire by thermally reactive subliming compounds. When exposed to fire, such compounds undergo an endothermic reaction; thus the substrate material beneath the coating will not heat up beyond the temperature at which this reaction occurs. Gases released by the sublimation reaction pass outward through the pores of the char, breaking down further as they absorb more energy. Numerous tests confirm that in comparison with other types of coatings, subliming compounds require the smallest thickness of coating for any specified level of protection. Routine spraying application techniques further reduce the cost of this passive fire-protection method.

Van Dyke, B.H.; Kawaller, S.T.

1979-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

214

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 134: Aboveground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 134 is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) as “Aboveground Storage Tanks” and consists of the following four Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Areas 3, 15, and 29 of the Nevada Test Site: · CAS 03-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank · CAS 03-01-04, Tank · CAS 15-01-05, Aboveground Storage Tank · CAS 29-01-01, Hydrocarbon Stain

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2009-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

215

GRR/Section 18-TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process 18TXAUndergroundStorageTanks (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies 30 Texas Administrative Code 334 - Underground and Aboveground Storage Tanks 30 Texas Administrative Code 37 - Financial Assurance for Petroleum Underground Storage Tanks Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18TXAUndergroundStorageTanks (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range.

216

GRR/Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank GRR/Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank 18UTAUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Utah Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies Utah Underground Storage Tank Act Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18UTAUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Environmental Response and Remediation oversees the underground storage tank (UST) program in

217

GRR/Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration GRR/Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration 18AKA - StorageTankRegistration (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations & Policies AS 46.03.380 As 46.03.385 18 AAC 78 Underground Storage Tanks Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18AKA - StorageTankRegistration (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Any project that requires installation or operation of a storage tank must

218

Status of the LNG industry  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A status report on the liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry after 22 years of international trade compares developments during 1984-1985 for the major exporting and importing countries. Japan, the leading consumer, imports over 72% of the world production, while Europe imports 27% and the US 1%. There are 10 baseload liquefaction plants with a collective capacity of about 230 million m/sup 3//streamday. Japan has 85% of the world's LNG storage facilities because its geology is not suitable for underground storage. Utilities are looking to LNG for peakshaving, but it will be necessary to time projects so that production and demand will develop a reliable trade climate. 3 tables.

Anderson, P.J.

1986-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

219

Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Site High Level Waste Storage Tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This criticality safety evaluation covers operations for waste in underground storage tanks at the high-level waste tank farms on the Hanford site. This evaluation provides the bases for criticality safety limits and controls to govern receipt, transfer, and long-term storage of tank waste. Justification is provided that a nuclear criticality accident cannot occur for tank farms operations, based on current fissile material and operating conditions.

ROGERS, C.A.

2000-02-17T23:59:59.000Z

220

GRR/Section 18-MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks 18MTAUndergroundStorageTanks (2).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Montana Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies Montana Code Annotated 75-11-501 Administrative Rules of Montana 17-56 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18MTAUndergroundStorageTanks (2).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative A developer must obtain an Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit

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


221

GRR/Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems GRR/Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems 18IDAUndergroundStorageTankSystems.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies IDAPA 58.01.07 Rules Regulating Underground Storage Tank Systems Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18IDAUndergroundStorageTankSystems.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requires notification

222

GRR/Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit GRR/Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit 18COAUndergroundStorageTankPermit (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Colorado Department of Labor and Employment Regulations & Policies Solid Waste Disposal Act 7 CCR 1101-14 Article 2 Underground Storage Tanks Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18COAUndergroundStorageTankPermit (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The design, installation, registration, construction, and operation of

223

GRR/Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank GRR/Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank 18ORAStateUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies OAR 340-150: Underground Storage Tank Rules Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18ORAStateUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative _ 18-OR-a.1 - Application for General Permit Registration Certificate, EPA

224

GRR/Section 18-NV-a - Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

a - Underground Storage Tank a - Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-NV-a - Underground Storage Tank 18NVAUndergroundStorageTank.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Regulations & Policies Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18NVAUndergroundStorageTank.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) administers the Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program for the State of Nevada.

225

Tank waste consolidation analysis for transfer of ORNL RH-TRU tank sludges to the Melton Valley Storage Tanks  

SciTech Connect

The objective of this work is to evaluate the schedule and technical issues associated with consolidation of Remote Handled Transuranic (RH-TRU) sludges in the Melton Valley Storage Tanks (MVSTs). This work supports the DOE Transuranic Waste (TRU) Program plans for private sector treatment of all ORNL TRU sludges for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Transfer of these sludges must be completed in FY 2000 to meet the required schedule for beginning shipment of treated sludges to the WIPP by 2002. This study was performed to (1) evaluate the sludge transfer schedule, (2) evaluate the ability of existing tank systems to contain and manage the sludges and liquids generated during the transfers, and (3) evaluate the costs and schedules of different solid/liquid separation and solids-monitoring methods used during sludge transfer for management of sluice waters.

Kent, T.E.; DePaoli, S.M.

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

LNG Reports | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LNG Reports LNG Reports LNG Reports December 9, 2013 LNG Monthly Report - November 2013 LNG Monthly Report - November 2013 March 21, 2013 LNG Annual Report - 2012 LNG Annual Report - 2012 January 28, 2013 LNG Export Study - Related Documents EIA and NERA analysis of LNG exports, and associated documents March 15, 2012 LNG Annual Report - 2011 LNG Annual Report - 2011 March 1, 2011 LNG Annual Report - 2010 LNG Annual Report - 2010 March 1, 2010 LNG Annual Report - 2009 LNG Annual Report - 2009 October 14, 2009 LNG Annual Report - 2008 LNG Annual Report - 2008 October 10, 2008 LNG Annual Report - 2007 LNG Annual Report - 2007 March 1, 2007 LNG Annual Report - 2006 LNG Annual Report - 2006 March 1, 2006 LNG Annual Report - 2005 LNG Annual Report - 2005 March 1, 2005 LNG Annual Report - 2004

227

North American LNG Project Sourcebook  

SciTech Connect

The report provides a status of the development of LNG Import Terminal projects in North America, and includes 1-2 page profiles of 63 LNG projects in North America which are either in operation, under construction, or under development. For each project, the sourcebook provides information on the following elements: project description, project ownership, project status, projected operation date, storage capacity, sendout capacity, and pipeline interconnection.

NONE

2007-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

228

Study of the Effects of Obstacles in Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Vapor Dispersion using CFD Modeling  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The evaluation of the potential hazards related with the operation of an LNG terminal includes possible release scenarios with the consequent flammable vapor dispersion within the facility; therefore, it is important to know the behavior of this phenomenon through the application of advanced simulation tools. Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) tools are often used to estimate the exclusion zones in an event of accidental LNG spill. In practice these releases are more likely to occur in the confines of complex geometries with solid obstacles such as LNG terminals, and LNG processing plants. The objective of this research is to study the effects that different obstacles have over the LNG vapor dispersion and the safety distance reduction caused by enhanced mixing. Through parametric analysis it is demonstrated that height, width and shape of the obstacles play an important role in the vapor concentration reduction. The findings of this research may be applied in the design stage of an LNG terminal, to improve the design of passive barriers, and for designing better layout configurations for storage tanks. Simulations results performed with FLACS (Flame Acceleration Simulator), a CFD solver, confirmed that these applications help to reduce safety distances.

Ruiz Vasquez, Roberto

2012-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

229

Two-tank working gas storage system for heat engine  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A two-tank working gas supply and pump-down system is coupled to a hot gas engine, such as a Stirling engine. The system has a power control valve for admitting the working gas to the engine when increased power is needed, and for releasing the working gas from the engine when engine power is to be decreased. A compressor pumps the working gas that is released from the engine. Two storage vessels or tanks are provided, one for storing the working gas at a modest pressure (i.e., half maximum pressure), and another for storing the working gas at a higher pressure (i.e., about full engine pressure). Solenoid valves are associated with the gas line to each of the storage vessels, and are selectively actuated to couple the vessels one at a time to the compressor during pumpdown to fill the high-pressure vessel with working gas at high pressure and then to fill the low-pressure vessel with the gas at low pressure. When more power is needed, the solenoid valves first supply the low-pressure gas from the low-pressure vessel to the engine and then supply the high-pressure gas from the high-pressure vessel. The solenoid valves each act as a check-valve when unactuated, and as an open valve when actuated.

Hindes, Clyde J. (Troy, NY)

1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

230

Energy Storage In a Restructured Electric Industry: Report on EPRI Think Tank III  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report -- "Energy Storage in a Restructured Electric Industry" -- summarizes the third of a series of Think Tanks sponsored by EPRI on energy storage in a deregulated electric utility industry.

2002-06-10T23:59:59.000Z

231

Cove Point: A step back into the LNG business  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In 1978, ships began unloading LNG from Algeria at Cove Point`s berthing facilities 1.25 miles offshore. An underwater pipeline transported the LNG to land, where it was stored in the terminal`s four 140-foot-high cryogenic storage tanks. When the LNG was needed, the terminals 10 vaporizers converted it back to gas for send out via an 87-mile-long, 36-inch-diameter pipeline linking the terminal with interstate pipelines of CNG Transmission Corp. and Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. in Loudon County, Va. But Cove Point handled only about 80 shiploads of LNG before shutting down in December 1980, after a dispute about gas prices between US customers and Algeria. The plant sat dormant until the natural gas industry`s deregulation under Order 636. Deregulation resulted in major pipelines abandoning their sales service, and gas distributors and large customers found it was now their obligation to ensure that they had adequate gas supplies during winter peak-demand periods. Enter Cove Point`s peaking capabilities. They had to add the liquefaction unit and recommission other parts of the plant, but the timing was right. Cove Point`s new liquefaction unit is liquefying about 15 million cubic feet (MMcf) of LNG per day of domestic gas. It chills the gas to {minus}260 degrees Fahrenheit to turn it into a liquid for injection and storage in one of the facility`s double-walled insulated tanks. During its initial injection season, which ends Dec. 15, Cove Point is expected to produce enough LNG to almost fill one tank, which can store up to 1.25 billion cubic feet (Bcf). Were the gas not intended for peak-shaving purposes, it would be enough to supply 14,000 homes for a year. As it is, most of the gas will be returned as pipeline gas, during next January and February`s expected cold snaps, to the utilities and users who supplied it. Cove Point`s initial daily sendout capacity is about 400 MMcf.

Katz, M.G.

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

232

Polymeric hydrogen diffusion barrier, high-pressure storage tank so equipped, method of fabricating a storage tank and method of preventing hydrogen diffusion  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An electrochemically active hydrogen diffusion barrier which comprises an anode layer, a cathode layer, and an intermediate electrolyte layer, which is conductive to protons and substantially impermeable to hydrogen. A catalytic metal present in or adjacent to the anode layer catalyzes an electrochemical reaction that converts any hydrogen that diffuses through the electrolyte layer to protons and electrons. The protons and electrons are transported to the cathode layer and reacted to form hydrogen. The hydrogen diffusion barrier is applied to a polymeric substrate used in a storage tank to store hydrogen under high pressure. A storage tank equipped with the electrochemically active hydrogen diffusion barrier, a method of fabricating the storage tank, and a method of preventing hydrogen from diffusing out of a storage tank are also disclosed.

Lessing, Paul A. (Idaho Falls, ID)

2008-07-22T23:59:59.000Z

233

Analysis of LNG import terminal release prevention systems  

SciTech Connect

The release prevention systems of liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal were analyzed. A series of potential release scenarios were analyzed to determine the frequency of the release events, the probability these releases are not stopped or isolated by emergency shutdown systems, the estimated release quantities, and the critical components of the system. The two plant areas identified as being most significant with respect to safety are the unloading system and the storage system. Rupture of the main transfer line and gross failure of the storage tanks are the two release scenarios of primary safety interest. Reducing the rate of failure by improved design, better maintenance and testing, or adding redundancy of the critical system components for these plant areas and release scenarios will result in improved safety. Several design alternatives which have the potential to significantly reduce the probability of a large release of LNG occurring at an import terminal are identified. These design alternatives would reduce the probability of a large release of LNG by reducing the expected number of failures which could cause a release or by reducing the magnitude of releases that do occur. All of these alternatives are technically feasible and have been used or considered for use in at least one LNG facility. A more rigorous analysis of the absolute risk of LNG import terminal operation is necessary before the benefits of these design alternatives can be determined. In addition, an economic evaluation of these alternatives must be made so the costs and benefits can be compared. It is concludd that for remotely located facilities many of these alternatives are probably not justified; however, for facilities located in highly populated areas, these alternatives deserve serious consideration.

Baker, E G

1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

234

Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013  

SciTech Connect

This closure package documents the site assessment and permanent closure of the Materials and Fuels Complex biodiesel underground storage tank 99ANL00013 in accordance with the regulatory requirements established in 40 CFR 280.71, “Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks: Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure.”

Kerry L. Nisson

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

235

LIMITATIONS FOR EXISTING STORAGE TANKS FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTES FROM SEPARATIONS PLANTS  

SciTech Connect

The physical limitations of existing storage tanks for radioactive wastes from separations plants are defined as a guide for preparing process and operating criteria for the existing tank forms to assure continued integrity of the tanks. A "safe-load" curve for each of the four groups of tanks based on current technology is presented. Loading conditions, operation procedures, and thermal stresses are discussed. (M.C.G.)

Doud, E.; Stivers, H.W.

1959-10-22T23:59:59.000Z

236

Feasibility report on criticality issues associated with storage of K Basin sludge in tanks farms  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This feasibility study provides the technical justification for conclusions about K Basin sludge storage options. The conclusions, solely based on criticality safety considerations, depend on the treatment of the sludge. The two primary conclusions are, (1) untreated sludge must be stored in a critically safe storage tank, and (2) treated sludge (dissolution, precipitation and added neutron absorbers) can be stored in a standard Double Contained Receiver Tank (DCRT) or 241-AW-105 without future restrictions on tank operations from a criticality safety perspective.

Vail, T.S.

1997-05-29T23:59:59.000Z

237

GRR/Section 18-WA-a - Underground Storage Tank Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-WA-a - Underground Storage Tank Process GRR/Section 18-WA-a - Underground Storage Tank Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-WA-a - Underground Storage Tank Process 18-WA-a - Underground Storage Tank Process.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Washington State Department of Ecology Regulations & Policies Revised Code of Washington Chapter 90.76 Washington Administrative Code Chapter 173-360 Triggers None specified Washington has a federally-approved state Underground Storage Tank (UST) program regulated by the Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDE) under Revised Code of Washington Chapter 90.76 and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 173-360. Washington defines an "Underground

238

“What's going on Inside Today's Fuel Storage Tank?”  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... 14 Page 15. E85 tanks ? Minnesota has a high percentage of underground tanks at gas stations storing 85% ethanol ? Last ...

2013-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

239

Mixed waste removal from a hazardous waste storage tank  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The spent fuel transfer canal at the Oak Ridge Graphite Reactor was found to be leaking 400 gallons of water per day into the surrounding soil. Sampling of the sediment layer on the floor of the canal to determine the environmental impact of the leak identified significant radiological contamination and elevated levels of cadmium and lead which are hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Under RCRA regulations and Rules of Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, the canal was considered a hazardous waste storage tank. This paper describes elements of the radiological control program established in support of a fast-track RCRA closure plan that involved underwater mapping of the radiation fields, vacuuming, and ultra-filtration techniques that were successfully used to remove the mixed waste sediments and close the canal in a method compliant with state and federal regulations.

Geber, K.R.

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

240

Energy Storage in a Restructured Electric Utility Industry: Report on EPRI Think Tanks I and II  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Energy storage will play an increasingly crucial role in the deregulated electric power industry, with future generation probably decreasing in size and becoming more distributed. EPRI sponsored two think tanks to explore the need for energy storage in a deregulated environment and to assess the state of development of energy storage technologies. The think tanks described the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) view of deregulation and how electric utility deregulation compares to the dereg...

1997-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

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


241

LNG – Engine Delivery  

This is a method of improved delivery of liquid natural gas (LNG) within an engine delivery system. The LNG gas is first be pumped into the insulated ...

242

EA-1044: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

44: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak 44: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee EA-1044: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to construct and maintain additional storage capacity at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for liquid low-level radioactive waste. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD May 25, 1995 EA-1044: Finding of No Significant Impact Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee May 25, 1995 EA-1044: Final Environmental Assessment

243

Hydrogen Composite Tank Program Principal Investigator: Dr. Neel Sirosh, Director of Fuel Storage  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Hydrogen Composite Tank Program Principal Investigator: Dr. Neel Sirosh, Director of Fuel Storage-effective and efficient high-pressure hydrogen storage systems. World's premier automotive OEMs developing fuel cell vehicles have demonstrated significant interest in compressed hydrogen storage systems developed

244

LNG Annual Report - 2011 | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LNG Annual Report - 2011 LNG Annual Report - 2011 LNG Annual Report - 2011 (Revised 3152012) LNG Annual Report 2011 More Documents & Publications LNG Monthly Report - June 2013...

245

U.S. LNG Markets and Uses 2003  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

This article examines the different aspects of LNG markets and uses, paying particular attention to marine terminal operations, peak-shaving storage facilities, and developing niche markets.

Information Center

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

246

A STUDY OF CORROSION AND STRESS CORROSION CRACKING OF CARBON STEEL NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE TANKS  

SciTech Connect

The Hanford reservation Tank Farms in Washington State has 177 underground storage tanks that contain approximately 50 million gallons of liquid legacy radioactive waste from cold war plutonium production. These tanks will continue to store waste until it is treated and disposed. These nuclear wastes were converted to highly alkaline pH wastes to protect the carbon steel storage tanks from corrosion. However, the carbon steel is still susceptible to localized corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. The waste chemistry varies from tank to tank, and contains various combinations of hydroxide, nitrate, nitrite, chloride, carbonate, aluminate and other species. The effect of each of these species and any synergistic effects on localized corrosion and stress corrosion cracking of carbon steel have been investigated with electrochemical polarization, slow strain rate, and crack growth rate testing. The effect of solution chemistry, pH, temperature and applied potential are all considered and their role in the corrosion behavior will be discussed.

BOOMER, K.D.

2007-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

247

Lng weathering effects: Theoretical and empirical. Topical report, March-August 1992. [LNG (Liquified Natural Gas)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The report details the composition change of LNG as it weathers in a vehicle size tank. The composition methane number and stoichiometric air-fuel ratios each change with composition. The results show that the factor controlling weathering is the tank heat leak rate. Weathering occurs at a constant rate when plotted against tank volume, that is composition change is primarily a function of tank volume and the percentage of initial fill boiled off. Heat leak defines the rate at which weathering occurs.

Acker, G.H.; Moulton, S.D.

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

248

Heat pump water heater and storage tank assembly  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A water heater and storage tank assembly comprises a housing defining a chamber, an inlet for admitting cold water to the chamber, and an outlet for permitting flow of hot water from the chamber. A compressor is mounted on the housing and is removed from the chamber. A condenser comprises a tube adapted to receive refrigerant from the compressor, and winding around the chamber to impart heat to water in the chamber. An evaporator is mounted on the housing and removed from the chamber, the evaporator being adapted to receive refrigerant from the condenser and to discharge refrigerant to conduits in communication with the compressor. An electric resistance element extends into the chamber, and a thermostat is disposed in the chamber and is operative to sense water temperature and to actuate the resistance element upon the water temperature dropping to a selected level. The assembly includes a first connection at an external end of the inlet, a second connection at an external end of the outlet, and a third connection for connecting the resistance element, compressor and evaporator to an electrical power source.

Dieckmann, John T. (Belmont, MA); Nowicki, Brian J. (Watertown, MA); Teagan, W. Peter (Acton, MA); Zogg, Robert (Belmont, MA)

1999-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

249

U.S. Department of Energy Onboard Storage Tank Workshop Notes  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Energy Onboard Storage Tank Workshop Workshop Notes April 29, 2010 Sandia National Laboratories - Livermore, CA 2 Report from the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop Livermore, CA April 29 th , 2010 The Onboard Storage Tank Workshop was held on April 29 th , 2010, at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in Livermore, CA. The Workshop was co-hosted by SNL and the United States Department of Energy (DOE). The purpose of the Workshop was to identify key issues including research and development (R&D) needs, regulations, codes and standards (RCS), and a path forward to enable the deployment of hydrogen storage tanks in early market fuel cell applications. Background The objectives of the Workshop were to: * Provide initial follow up to the DOE and Department of Transportation (DOT)

250

Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications  

Fuel Cell Technologies Publication and Product Library (EERE)

This technical report describes DOE's assessment of the performance and cost of compressed hydrogen storage tank systems for automotive applications. The on-board performance (by Argonne National Lab)

251

GRR/Section 18-HI-a - Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Page Page Edit with form History Facebook icon Twitter icon » GRR/Section 18-HI-a - Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-HI-a - Underground Storage Tank 18HIAUndergroundStorageTankPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Hawaii Department of Health Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch Regulations & Policies Hawaii Administrative Regulations Title 11, Chapter 281 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18HIAUndergroundStorageTankPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative

252

Safety implications of a large LNG tanker spill over water.  

SciTech Connect

The increasing demand for natural gas in the United States could significantly increase the number and frequency of marine LNG (liquefied natural gas) imports. Although many studies have been conducted to assess the consequences and risks of potential LNG spills, the increasing importance of LNG imports suggests that consistent methods and approaches be identified and implemented to help ensure protection of public safety and property from a potential LNG spill. For that reason the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Fossil Energy, requested that Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) develop guidance on a risk-based analysis approach to assess and quantify potential threats to an LNG ship, the potential hazards and consequences of a large spill from an LNG ship, and review prevention and mitigation strategies that could be implemented to reduce both the potential and the risks of an LNG spill over water. Specifically, DOE requested: (1) An in-depth literature search of the experimental and technical studies associated with evaluating the safety and hazards of an LNG spill from an LNG ship; (2) A detailed review of four recent spill modeling studies related to the safety implications of a large-scale LNG spill over water; (3) Evaluation of the potential for breaching an LNG ship cargo tank, both accidentally and intentionally, identification of the potential for such breaches and the potential size of an LNG spill for each breach scenario, and an assessment of the potential range of hazards involved in an LNG spill; (4) Development of guidance on the use of modern, performance-based, risk management approaches to analyze and manage the threats, hazards, and consequences of an LNG spill over water to reduce the overall risks of an LNG spill to levels that are protective of public safety and property.

Hightower, Marion Michael; Gritzo, Louis Alan; Luketa-Hanlin, Anay Josephine

2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

Gulf LNG, Mississippi LNG Imports (Price) (Dollars per Thousand...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Gulf LNG, Mississippi LNG Imports (Price) (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Gulf LNG, Mississippi LNG Imports (Price) (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

254

Nondestructive examination of DOE high-level waste storage tanks  

SciTech Connect

A number of DOE sites have buried tanks containing high-level waste. Tanks of particular interest am double-shell inside concrete cylinders. A program has been developed for the inservice inspection of the primary tank containing high-level waste (HLW), for testing of transfer lines and for the inspection of the concrete containment where possible. Emphasis is placed on the ultrasonic examination of selected areas of the primary tank, coupled with a leak-detection system capable of detecting small leaks through the wall of the primary tank. The NDE program is modelled after ASME Section XI in many respects, particularly with respects to the sampling protocol. Selected testing of concrete is planned to determine if there has been any significant degradation. The most probable failure mechanisms are corrosion-related so that the examination program gives major emphasis to possible locations for corrosion attack.

Bush, S.; Bandyopadhyay, K.; Kassir, M.; Mather, B.; Shewmon, P.; Streicher, M.; Thompson, B.; van Rooyen, D.; Weeks, J.

1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

255

Status report for inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks at Hanford Site 200 Areas  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The purpose of this status report is to summarize updated data and information from the FY 1994 strategy plan that is associated with inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks (IMUSTs). Assumptions and processes to assess potential risks and operational concerns are documented in this report. Safety issue priorities are ranked based on a number of considerations. Sixty-three IMUSTs have been Identified and placed on the official IMUST list. All the tanks are associated with past Hanford Site operations. Of the 63 tanks., 19 are catch tanks, 20 are vault tanks, 3 are neutralization tanks, 8 are settling tanks, 2 are solvent makeup tanks used to store hexone, 2 are flush tanks, 3 are decontamination tanks, 1 is a diverter station, 1 is a receiver tank, 1 is an experimental tank, and 3 are waste handling tanks. It is important to proactively deal with the risks Imposed by these 63 tanks, and at the same time not jeopardize the existing commitments and schedules for mitigating and resolving identified safety issues related to the 177 SSTs and DSTS. Access controls and signs have been placed on all but the three official IMUSTs added most recently. An accelerated effort to identify authorization documents and perform unreviewed safety question (USQ) screening has been completed. According to a set of criteria consistent with the safety screening data quality objective (DQO) process, 6 IMUSTs are ranked high related to the hydrogen generation potential safety Issue, 1 is ranked high related to the ferrocyanide potential safety issue, 6 are ranked high related to the flammability potential safety issue, and 25 are ranked high related to the vapor emissions potential safety issue.

Powers, T.B.

1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

256

Safe interim storage of Hanford tank wastes, draft environmental impact statement, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Draft EIS is prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). DOE and Ecology have identified the need to resolve near-term tank safety issues associated with Watchlist tanks as identified pursuant to Public Law (P.L.) 101-510, Section 3137, ``Safety Measures for Waste Tanks at Hanford Nuclear Reservation,`` of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991, while continuing to provide safe storage for other Hanford wastes. This would be an interim action pending other actions that could be taken to convert waste to a more stable form based on decisions resulting from the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) EIS. The purpose for this action is to resolve safety issues concerning the generation of unacceptable levels of hydrogen in two Watchlist tanks, 101-SY and 103-SY. Retrieving waste in dilute form from Tanks 101-SY and 103-SY, hydrogen-generating Watchlist double shell tanks (DSTs) in the 200 West Area, and storage in new tanks is the preferred alternative for resolution of the hydrogen safety issues.

Not Available

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

257

Modeling and analysis of ORNL horizontal storage tank mobilization and mixing  

SciTech Connect

The retrieval and treatment of radioactive sludges that are stored in tanks constitute a prevalent problem at several US Department of Energy sites. The tanks typically contain a settled sludge layer with non-Newtonian rheological characteristics covered by a layer of supernatant. The first step in retrieval is the mobilization and mixing of the supernatant and sludge in the storage tanks. Submerged jets have been proposed to achieve sludge mobilization in tanks, including the 189 m{sup 3} (50,000 gallon) Melton Valley Storage tanks (MVST) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the planned 378 m{sup 3} (100,000 gallon) tanks being designed as part of the MVST Capacity Increase Project (MVST-CIP). This report focuses on the modeling of mixing and mobilization in horizontal cylindrical tanks like those of the MVST design using submerged, recirculating liquid jets. The computer modeling of the mobilization and mixing processes uses the TEMPEST computational fluid dynamics program (Trend and Eyler 1992). The goals of the simulations are to determine under what conditions sludge mobilization using submerged liquid jets is feasible in tanks of this configuration, and to estimate mixing times required to approach homogeneity of the contents.

Mahoney, L.A.; Terrones, G.; Eyler, L.L.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

258

Underground storage tank 253-D1U1 Closure Plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report is a closure plan for a diesel fuel tank at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Included are maps of the site, work plans, and personnel information regarding training and qualification.

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

259

ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks FPS 12.1, 1/9/01  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required.  These surveillance activities...

260

ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks FPS 12.1, 1/9/01  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

 The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required.  These surveillance activities...

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


261

U.S. LNG Imports from Oman  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from...

262

U.S. LNG Imports from Brunei  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from...

263

Experimental evaluation of a simulation model for wrap-around heat exchanger, solar storage tanks  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The thermal performance of a commercially available 80 gallon, solar storage tank with an integral wrap-around heat exchanger is characterized experimentally an indoor test stand. The experimental results are used to evaluated the accuracy of a previously developed simulation model. Heat input on the collector side of the heat exchanger is held constant causing the heat transfer to reach a quasi-steady state. Temperatures in the heat exchanger and tank increase with time, however, the temperature differences across the heat exchanger remain nearly constant. Several combinations of heat input and collector loop flow are investigated. The development of the tank temperature profiles over time and the overall heat transfer performance predicted by the model are compared with experimental results. The influence of an electric auxiliary heater located in the top of the solar storage tank on the heat exchanger performance is investigated. Experimental normalization of the model is considered and modifications to the model and experiments are recommended.

Miller, J.A.; Hittle, D.C.

1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

264

Decision and systems analysis for underground storage tank waste retrieval systems and tank waste remediation system  

SciTech Connect

Hanford`s underground tanks (USTs) pose one of the most challenging hazardous and radioactive waste problems for the Department of Energy (DOE). Numerous schemes have been proposed for removing the waste from the USTs, but the technology options for doing this are largely unproven. To help assess the options, an Independent Review Group (IRG) was established to conduct a broad review of retrieval systems and the tank waste remediation system. The IRG consisted of the authors of this report.

Bitz, D.A. [Independent Consultant, Kirkland, WA (United States); Berry, D.L. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Jardine, L.J. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States)

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

265

LNG Annual Report - 2012 | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Annual Report - 2012 LNG Annual Report - 2012 LNG Annual Report - 2012 (Revised 3212013) LNG Annual Report - 2012...

266

Surveillance Guide - ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GROUND DIESEL FUEL STORAGE TANKS UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GROUND DIESEL FUEL STORAGE TANKS 1.0 Objective The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required. These surveillance activities provide a basis for evaluating the effectiveness of the contractor's program for implementation of appropriate controls and compliance with DOE requirements. 2.0 References 1. DOE O 440.1A, Worker Protection Management For DOE Federal And Contractor Employees [http://www.explorer.doe.gov:1776/cgi-bin/w3vdkhgw?qryBGD07_rSj;doe- 1261] 1. 29CFR1910.1200, Subpart Z, Hazard Communication [Access http://www.osha-slc.gov/OshStd_data/1910_1200.html ] 2. 29CFR1910.106, Subpart H, Flammable And Combustible Liquids [Access at

267

Advanced Liquid Natural Gas Onboard Storage System  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Cummins Westport Incorporated (CWI) has designed and developed a liquefied natural gas (LNG) vehicle fuel system that includes a reciprocating pump with the cold end submerged in LNG contained in a vacuum-jacketed tank. This system was tested and analyzed under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced LNG Onboard Storage System (ALOSS) program. The pumped LNG fuel system developed by CWI and tested under the ALOSS program is a high-pressure system designed for application on Class 8 trucks powered by CWI's ISX G engine, which employs high-pressure direct injection (HPDI) technology. A general ALOSS program objective was to demonstrate the feasibility and advantages of a pumped LNG fuel system relative to on-vehicle fuel systems that require the LNG to be ''conditioned'' to saturation pressures that exceeds the engine fuel pressure requirements. These advantages include the capability to store more fuel mass in given-size vehicle and station tanks, and simpler lower-cost LNG refueling stations that do not require conditioning equipment. Pumped LNG vehicle fuel systems are an alternative to conditioned LNG systems for spark-ignition natural gas and port-injection dual-fuel engines (which typically require about 100 psi), and they are required for HPDI engines (which require over 3,000 psi). The ALOSS program demonstrated the feasibility of a pumped LNG vehicle fuel system and the advantages of this design relative to systems that require conditioning the LNG to a saturation pressure exceeding the engine fuel pressure requirement. LNG tanks mounted on test carts and the CWI engineering truck were repeatedly filled with LNG saturated at 20 to 30 psig. More fuel mass was stored in the vehicle tanks as well as the station tank, and no conditioning equipment was required at the fueling station. The ALOSS program also demonstrated the general viability and specific performance of the CWI pumped LNG fuel system design. The system tested as part of this program is designed to be used on Class 8 trucks with CWI ISX G HPDI engines. Extensive test cart and engineering truck tests of the pump demonstrated good durability and the high-pressure performance needed for HPDI application. The LNG tanks manufactured by Taylor-Wharton passed SAE J2343 Recommended Practice drop tests and accelerated road-load vibration tests. NER and hold-time tests produced highly consistent results. Additional tests confirmed the design adequacy of the liquid level sensor, vaporizer, ullage volume, and other fuel system components. While the testing work performed under this program focused on a high-pressure pumped LNG fuel system design, the results also validate the feasibility of a low-pressure pumped fuel system. A low-pressure pumped fuel system could incorporate various design refinements including a simpler and lighter-weight pump, which would decrease costs somewhat relative to a high-pressure system.

Greg Harper; Charles Powars

2003-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

268

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 135: Areas 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, was closed in accordance with the approved Corrective Action Plan (DOE/NV, 2000). CAU 135 consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CAS). Two of these CAS's were identified in the Corrective Action Investigation Data Quality Objective meeting as being improperly identified as underground storage tanks. CAS 25-02-03 identified as the Deluge Valve Pit was actually an underground electrical vault and CAS 25-02-10 identified as an Underground Storage Tank was actually a former above ground storage tank filled with demineralized water. Both of these CAS's are recommended for a no further action closure. CAS 25-02-01 the Underground Storage Tanks commonly referred to as the Engine Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault was closed by decontaminating the vault structure and conducting a radiological verification survey to document compliance with the Nevada Test Site unrestricted use release criteria. The Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, (CAS 25-02-01), referred to as the Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (E-MAD) Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault, were used to receive liquid waste from all of the radioactive and cell service area drains at the E-MAD Facility. Based on the results of the Corrective Action Investigation conducted in June 1999, discussed in ''The Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada'' (DOE/NV, 199a), one sample from the radiological survey of the concrete vault interior exceeded radionuclide preliminary action levels. The analytes from the sediment samples exceeded the preliminary action levels for polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel-range organics, and radionuclides. The CAU 135 closure activities consisted of scabbling radiological ''hot spots'' from the concrete vault, and the drilling removal of the cement-lined vault sump. Field activities began on November 28, 2000, and ended on December 4, 2000. After verification samples were collected, the vault was repaired with cement. The concrete vault sump, soil excavated beneath the sump, and compactable hot line trash were disposed at the Area 23 Sanitary Landfill. The vault interior was field surveyed following the removal of waste to verify that unrestricted release criteria had been achieved. Since the site is closed by unrestricted release decontamination and verification, post-closure care is not required.

D. H. Cox

2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

269

Final Environmental Impact Statement Safe Interim Storage Of Hanford Tank Wastes  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

1995/01eis0212_cl.html[6/27/2011 1:02:59 PM] 1995/01eis0212_cl.html[6/27/2011 1:02:59 PM] Final Environmental Impact Statement Safe Interim Storage Of Hanford Tank Wastes DOE/EIS-0212 VOLUME 1 OF 2 VOLUME 1 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SAFE INTERIM STORAGE OF HANFORD TANK WASTES Hanford Site Richland, Washington October, 1995 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY NUCLEAR WASTE PROGRAM LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RICHLAND OPERATIONS OFFICE

270

Implementation plan for Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 280 and 281; Final rules for underground storage tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report presents the schedules and methods required to comply with the newly promulgated Underground Storage Tank (UST) Regulations Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 280 and 281. These rules were promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on September 23, 1988, and became effective December 22, 1988. These regulations are required by Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Their purpose is to protect the groundwater supplies of the United States in the following ways: Closing old tanks; detecting and remediating tank leaks and spills; establishing stringent standards for new tanks; and upgrade of existing tanks to new-tank standards. 3 refs., 5 tabs.

Stupka, R.C.

1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

271

Underground storage tank integrated demonstration: Evaluation of pretreatment options for Hanford tank wastes  

SciTech Connect

Separation science plays a central role inn the pretreatment and disposal of nuclear wastes. The potential benefits of applying chemical separations in the pretreatment of the radioactive wastes stored at the various US Department of Energy sites cover both economic and environmental incentives. This is especially true at the Hanford Site, where the huge volume (>60 Mgal) of radioactive wastes stored in underground tanks could be partitioned into a very small volume of high-level waste (HLW) and a relatively large volume of low-level waste (LLW). The cost associated with vitrifying and disposing of just the HLW fraction in a geologic repository would be much less than those associated with vitrifying and disposing of all the wastes directly. Futhermore, the quality of the LLW form (e.g., grout) would be improved due to the lower inventory of radionuclides present in the LLW stream. In this report, we present the results of an evaluation of the pretreatment options for sludge taken from two different single-shell tanks at the Hanford Site-Tanks 241-B-110 and 241-U-110 (referred to as B-110 and U-110, respectively). The pretreatment options examined for these wastes included (1) leaching of transuranic (TRU) elements from the sludge, and (2) dissolution of the sludge followed by extraction of TRUs and {sup 90}Sr. In addition, the TRU leaching approach was examined for a third tank waste type, neutralized cladding removal waste.

Lumetta, G.J.; Wagner, M.J.; Colton, N.G.; Jones, E.O.

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

RCRA corrective action for underground storage tanks -- Subtitle C for Subtitle I  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this report is to provide guidance to DOE and DOE contractor personnel responsible for planning and implementation of corrective measures addressing cleanup of releases of hazardous materials or regulated substances from underground storage tanks regulated under RCRA Subtitle C or Subtitle I.

NONE

1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

273

Borehole Miner - Extendible Nozzle Development for Radioactive Waste Dislodging and Retrieval from Underground Storage Tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report summarizes development of borehole-miner extendible-nozzle water-jetting technology for dislodging and retrieving salt cake, sludge} and supernate to remediate underground storage tanks full of radioactive waste. The extendible-nozzle development was based on commercial borehole-miner technology.

CW Enderlin; DG Alberts; JA Bamberger; M White

1998-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

274

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 130: Storage Tanks Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 130: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. The corrective action sites (CASs) within CAU 130 are located within Areas 1, 7, 10, 20, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site. Corrective Action Unit 130 is comprised of the following CASs: • 01-02-01, Underground Storage Tank • 07-02-01, Underground Storage Tanks • 10-02-01, Underground Storage Tank • 20-02-03, Underground Storage Tank • 20-99-05, Tar Residue • 22-02-02, Buried UST Piping • 23-02-07, Underground Storage Tank This CR provides documentation supporting the completed corrective action investigations and provides data confirming that the closure objectives for CASs within CAU 130 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: • Reviewed the current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. • Implemented any corrective actions necessary to protect human health and the environment. • Properly disposed of corrective action and investigation-derived wastes. From August 4 through September 30, 2008, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 130, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The purposes of the activities as defined during the data quality objectives process were: • Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. • If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent, implement appropriate corrective actions, confirm that no residual contamination is present, and properly dispose of wastes. Constituents detected during the closure activities were evaluated against final action levels to identify COCs for CAU 130. Assessment of the data generated from closure activities indicates that no further action is necessary because no COCs were identified at any CAU 130 CAS. Debris removal from these CASs was considered a best management practice because no contamination was detected. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office provides the following recommendations: • No further corrective action is required at all CAU 130 CASs. • A Notice of Completion to DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 130. • Corrective Action Unit 130 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order.

Alfred Wickline

2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

CSER 94-004: Criticality safety of double-shell waste storage tanks  

SciTech Connect

This criticality safety evaluation covers double-shell waste storage tanks (DSTs), double-contained receiver tanks (DCRTs), vault tanks, and the 242-A Evaporator located in the High Level Waste (HLW) Tank Farms on the Hanford Site. Limits and controls are specified and the basis for ensuring criticality safety is discussed. A minimum limit of 1,000 is placed upon the solids/plutonium mass ratio in incoming waste. The average solids/Pu mass ratio over all waste in tank farms is estimated to be about 74,500, about 150 times larger than required to assure subcriticality in homogeneous waste. PFP waste in Tank-102-SY has an estimated solids/Pu mass ratio of 10,000. Subcriticality is assured whenever the plutonium concentration is less than 2.6 g. The median reported plutonium concentration for 200 samples of waste solids is about 0.01 g (0.038 g/gal). A surveillance program is proposed to increase the knowledge of the waste and provide added assurance of the high degree of subcriticality.

Rogers, C.A.

1994-09-22T23:59:59.000Z

276

Vehicular hydrogen storage using lightweight tanks (regenerative fuel cell systems)  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Energy storage systems with extremely high specific energy (>400 Wh/kg) have been designed that use lightweight tankage to contain the gases generated by reversible (unitized) regenerative fuel cells (URFCs). Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) will leverage work for aerospace applications supported by other sponsors (including BMDO, NASA, and USAF) to develop URFC systems for transportation and utility applications. Lightweight tankage is important for primary fuel cell powered vehicles that use on-board storage of hydrogen. Lightweight pressure vessels with state-of-the-art performance factors were designed, and prototypes are being fabricated to meet the DOE 2000 goals (4000 Wh/kg, 12% hydrogen by weight, 700 Wh/liter, and $20/kWh in high volume production). These pressure vessels use technologies that are easily adopted by industrial partners. Advanced liners provide permeation barriers for gas storage and are mandrels for composite overwrap. URFCs are important to the efficient use of hydrogen as a transportation fuel and enabler of renewable energy. H{sub 2}/halogen URFCs may be advantageous for stationary applications whereas H{sub 2}/O{sub 2} or H{sub 2}/air URFCs are advantageous for vehicular applications. URFC research and development is required to improve performance (efficiency), reduce catalyst loading, understand engineering operation, and integrate systems. LLNL has the experimental equipment and advanced URFC membrane electrode assemblies (some with reduced catalyst loading) for evaluating commercial hardware (not funded by DOE in FY1999).

Mitlitsky, F; Myers, B; Weisberg, A H

1999-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

277

Lightweight concrete materials and structural systems for water tanks for thermal storage. Final report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Thermally efficient hot water storage tanks were designed, fabricated and evaluated. The tanks were made using cellular concrete at a nominal density of 100 lb/ft/sup 3/ for the structural elements and at a 30 lb/ft/sup 3/ density for the insulating elements. Thermal performance testing of the tanks was done using a static decay test since the test procedure specified in ASHRAE 94-77 was not experimentally practical. A series of composition modifications to the cellular concrete mix were investigated and the addition of alkaline resistant glass fibers was found to enhance the mechanical properties at no sacrifice in thermal behavior. Economic analysis indicated that cellular concrete provides a cost-effective insulating material. The total portability of the plant for producing cellular concrete makes cellular concrete amenable to on-site fabrication and uniquely adaptable to retrofit applications.

Buckman, R.W. Jr.; Elia, G.G.; Ichikawa, Y.

1980-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

278

C-tank transfers: Transuranic sludge removal from the C-1, C-2, and W-23 waste storage tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect

Two fluidic pulse jet mixing systems were used to successfully mobilize remote-handled transuranic sludge for retrieval from three 50,000-gal horizontal waste storage tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The results of this operation indicate that the pulse jet system should be considered for mixing and bulk retrieval of sludges in other vertical and horizontal waste tanks at ORNL and at other U.S. Department of Energy sites.

Dahl, T.L.; Lay, A.C.; Taylor, S.A.; Moore, J.W.

1999-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

279

Effects of plumbing attachments on heat losses from solar domestic hot water storage tanks. Final report, Part 2  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The Solar Rating and Certification Corporation (SRCC) has established a standardized methodology for determining the performance rating of the Solar Domestic Hot Water (SDHW) systems it certifies under OG-300. Measured performance data for the solar collector component(s) of the system are used along with numerical models for the balance of the system to calculate the system`s thermal performance under a standard set of rating conditions. SRCC uses TRNSYS to model each of the components that comprise the system. The majority of the SRCC certified systems include a thermal storage tank with an auxiliary electrical heater. The most common being a conventional fifty gallon electric tank water heater. Presently, the thermal losses from these tanks are calculated using Q = U {center_dot} A {center_dot} {Delta}T. Unfortunately, this generalized formula does not adequately address temperature stratification both within the tank as well as in the ambient air surrounding the tank, non-uniform insulation jacket, thermal siphoning in the fluid lines attached to the tank, and plumbing fittings attached to the tank. This study is intended to address only that part of the problem that deals with the plumbing fittings attached to the tank. Heat losses from a storage tank and its plumbing fittings involve three different operating modes: charging, discharging and standby. In the charging mode, the tank receives energy from the solar collector. In the discharge mode, water flows from the storage tank through the distribution pipes to the faucets and cold city water enters the tank. In the standby mode, there is no forced water flow into or out of the tank. In this experimental study, only the standby mode was considered.

Song, J.; Wood, B.D. [Univ. of Nevada, Reno, NV (United States); Ji, L.J. [Arizona State Univ., Tempe, AZ (United States)

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

280

Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

09-33 09-33 Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Nuclear Engineering Division About Argonne National Laboratory Argonne is a U.S. Department of Energy laboratory managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC under contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. The Laboratory's main facility is outside Chicago, at 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, Illinois 60439. For information about Argonne

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


281

Tank Farm Contractor Phase 1 Feed Delivery and Storage and Disposal Mission Summary for 2006 Hot Start Extended Order  

SciTech Connect

This is the level one logic diagram for the River Protection Project (RPP), Tank Farm Contractor, Phase 1, Feed Delivery Storage and Disposal Mission Summary for 2006 Hot Start.

DAVIS, T.J.

2000-04-24T23:59:59.000Z

282

METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 5 is the annual update of the methodology and calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

BARKER, S.A.

2006-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

283

METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771, Flammable Gas Safety Isme Resolution. Appendices A through I provide supporting information. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste and characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 6 is the annual update of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

TU, T.A.

2007-01-04T23:59:59.000Z

284

METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT HANFORD SITE [SEC 1 & 2  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generate ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as diluents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semivolatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in tank headspace as described in RPP-7771, Flammable Gas Safety Issue Resolution. Appendices A through L provide supporting information. This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste and characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event.

BARKER, S.A.; HEDENGREN, D.C.

2003-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

285

Technical assessment of compressed hydrogen storage tank systems for automotive applications.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The performance and cost of compressed hydrogen storage tank systems has been assessed and compared to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 2010, 2015, and ultimate targets for automotive applications. The on-board performance and high-volume manufacturing cost were determined for compressed hydrogen tanks with design pressures of 350 bar ({approx}5000 psi) and 700 bar ({approx}10,000 psi) capable of storing 5.6 kg of usable hydrogen. The off-board performance and cost of delivering compressed hydrogen was determined for hydrogen produced by central steam methane reforming (SMR). The main conclusions of the assessment are that the 350-bar compressed storage system has the potential to meet the 2010 and 2015 targets for system gravimetric capacity but will not likely meet any of the system targets for volumetric capacity or cost, given our base case assumptions. The 700-bar compressed storage system has the potential to meet only the 2010 target for system gravimetric capacity and is not likely to meet any of the system targets for volumetric capacity or cost, despite the fact that its volumetric capacity is much higher than that of the 350-bar system. Both the 350-bar and 700-bar systems come close to meeting the Well-to-Tank (WTT) efficiency target, but fall short by about 5%. These results are summarized.

Hua, T. Q.; Ahluwalia, R. K.; Peng, J. K.; Kromer, M.; Lasher, S.; McKenney, K.; Law, K.; Sinha, J. (Nuclear Engineering Division); (TIAX, LLC)

2011-02-09T23:59:59.000Z

286

Technical assessment of compressed hydrogen storage tank systems for automotive applications.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The performance and cost of compressed hydrogen storage tank systems has been assessed and compared to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 2010, 2015, and ultimate targets for automotive applications. The on-board performance and high-volume manufacturing cost were determined for compressed hydrogen tanks with design pressures of 350 bar ({approx}5000 psi) and 700 bar ({approx}10,000 psi) capable of storing 5.6 kg of usable hydrogen. The off-board performance and cost of delivering compressed hydrogen was determined for hydrogen produced by central steam methane reforming (SMR). The main conclusions of the assessment are that the 350-bar compressed storage system has the potential to meet the 2010 and 2015 targets for system gravimetric capacity but will not likely meet any of the system targets for volumetric capacity or cost, given our base case assumptions. The 700-bar compressed storage system has the potential to meet only the 2010 target for system gravimetric capacity and is not likely to meet any of the system targets for volumetric capacity or cost, despite the fact that its volumetric capacity is much higher than that of the 350-bar system. Both the 350-bar and 700-bar systems come close to meeting the Well-to-Tank (WTT) efficiency target, but fall short by about 5%.

Hua, T.; Ahluwalia, R.; Peng, J. K.; Kromer, M.; Lasher, S.; McKenney, K.; Law, K.; Sinha, J. (Nuclear Engineering Division); (TIAX LLC)

2011-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

287

Custody transfer measurements for LNG/LPG  

SciTech Connect

The buying, selling, and transportation of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) requires the use of sophisticated measurement systems for accurate determination of the total quantity and energy content for custody transfer reporting and safe cargo handling of these cryogenic products. These systems must meet strict safety standards for operation in a hazardous environment and, at the same time, provide accurate, reliable information for the storage, transfer, and data reporting required for both operational and financial accounting purposes. A brief discussion of LNG and LPG characteristics and detailed description of these special measurement techniques are given in this presentation.

Williams, R.A.

1984-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

288

Natural Gas - CNG & LNG  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Natural Gas Natural Gas Natural gas pump Natural gas, a fossil fuel comprised mostly of methane, is one of the cleanest burning alternative fuels. It can be used in the form of compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquefied natural gas (LNG) to fuel cars and trucks. Dedicated natural gas vehicles are designed to run on natural gas only, while dual-fuel or bi-fuel vehicles can also run on gasoline or diesel. Dual-fuel vehicles allow users to take advantage of the wide-spread availability of gasoline or diesel but use a cleaner, more economical alternative when natural gas is available. Since natural gas is stored in high-pressure fuel tanks, dual-fuel vehicles require two separate fueling systems, which take up passenger/cargo space. Natural gas vehicles are not available on a large scale in the U.S.-only

289

Sampling and Analysis Plan for Flammable Gases in Inactive Miscellaneous Underground Storage Tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This sampling and analysis plan (SAP) identifies the field measurements for a screening of flammable gases in the vapor space of the inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks (IMUSTs) currently assigned to the River Protection Project (RPP). If a measurement exceeds 25% of the lower flammability limit (LFL), vapor grab samples will be collected for laboratory analysis. This SAP also specifies the sample collection, laboratory analysis, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), and reporting objectives for grab sampling. Technical bases for the sampling objectives are provided in the Tank Safety Screening Data Quality Objectives (Dukelow et al 1995). The screening data will be used to determine if additional data are needed to support closure of a flammable gas unreviewed safety question for these facilities.

NGUYEN, D.M.

2000-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

290

U.S. LNG Imports from Peru  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

291

U.S. LNG Imports from Indonesia  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

292

U.S. LNG Imports from Oman  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

293

U.S. LNG Imports from Qatar  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

294

U.S. LNG Imports from Nigeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

295

U.S. LNG Imports from Norway  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

296

U.S. LNG Imports from Malaysia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

297

U.S. LNG Imports from Australia  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

298

U.S. LNG Imports from Brunei  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

299

U.S. LNG Imports from Algeria  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

300

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage Latest update: August 2004 Natural gas-a colorless, odorless, gaseous hydrocarbon-may be stored in a number of different ways. It is most commonly held in inventory underground under pressure in three types of facilities. These are: (1) depleted reservoirs in oil and/or gas fields, (2) aquifers, and (3) salt cavern formations. (Natural gas is also stored in liquid form in above-ground tanks. A discussion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is beyond the scope of this report. For more information about LNG, please see the EIA report, The Global Liquefied Natural Gas Market: Status & Outlook.) Each storage type has its own physical characteristics (porosity, permeability, retention capability) and economics (site preparation and

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


301

Seismic design and evaluation guidelines for the Department of Energy high-level waste storage tanks and appurtenances  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document provides guidelines for the design and evaluation of underground high-level waste storage tanks due to seismic loads. Attempts were made to reflect the knowledge acquired in the last two decades in the areas of defining the ground motion and calculating hydrodynamic loads and dynamic soil pressures for underground tank structures. The application of the analysis approach is illustrated with an example. The guidelines are developed for specific design of underground storage tanks, namely double-shell structures. However, the methodology discussed is applicable for other types of tank structures as well. The application of these and of suitably adjusted versions of these concepts to other structural types will be addressed in a future version of this document.

Bandyopadhyay, K.; Cornell, A.; Costantino, C.; Kennedy, R.; Miller, C.; Veletsos, A.

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

302

Qualitative Risk Assessment for an LNG Refueling Station and Review of Relevant Safety Issues  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report is a qualitative assessment of the public and worker risk involved with the operation of a liquefied natural gas (LNG) vehicle refueling facility. This study includes facility maintenance and operations, tank truck deliveries, and end-use vehicle fueling; it does not treat the risks of LNG vehicles on roadways. Accident initiating events are identified by using a Master Logic Diagram, a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, and historical operating experiences. The event trees were drawn to depict possible sequences of mitigating events following the initiating events. The phenomenology of LNG and other vehicle fuels is discussed to characterize the hazard posed by LNG usage. Based on the risk modeling and analysis, recommendations are given to improve the safety of LNG refueling stations in the areas of procedures and training, station design, and the dissemination of ``best practice`` information throughout the LNG community.

Siu, N.; Herring, J.S.; Cadwallader, L.; Reece, W.; Byers, J.

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

303

LNG Monthly Report - August 2013 | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Monthly Report - August 2013 LNG Monthly Report - August 2013 LNG Monthly Report - August 2013 LNG Monthly Report - August 2013...

304

Separation projects within the US Department of Energy`s Underground Storage Tank: Integrated Demonstration  

SciTech Connect

The greatest challenge facing the US Department of Energy is the remediation of the 1 {times} 10{sup 8} gal of high-level and low-level radioactive waste in the underground storage tanks (USTs) at its Hanford, Savannah River, Oak Ridge, Idaho, and Fernald sites. With current technologies, this remediation will cost at least 100 billion dollars. In an effort to reduce costs, improve safety, and minimize delays, the Underground Storage Tank--Integrated Demonstration was created for demonstration, testing, and evaluation (DT&E) of promising new technologies that can be used for UST remediation. These demonstrations, which are typically at the pilot-plant scale, will determine which processes will be used in the full-scale remediation of the USTs. These DT&E studies are performed by the Characterization and Waste Retrieval Program or by the Waste Processing and Disposal Program (WPDP). This paper presents the technical progress and future plans of the WPDP projects. The 11 WPDP programs in FY 1993 focused on three problem areas, which involve the treatment of supernate, the treatment of sludge, and nitrate destruction and subsequent waste forms. In addition, a planned Request for Expression of Interest on organic destruction techniques from private industries and universities and the WPDP`s future direction and programmatic issues are discussed.

McGinnis, C.P.; Hunt, R.D. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Gibson, S.M. [USDOE, Germantown, MD (United States); Gilchrist, R.L. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

305

Technical assessment of cryo-compressed hydrogen storage tank systems for automotive applications.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

On-board and off-board performance and cost of cryo-compressed hydrogen storage are assessed and compared to the targets for automotive applications. The on-board performance of the system and high-volume manufacturing cost were determined for liquid hydrogen refueling with a single-flow nozzle and a pump that delivers liquid H{sub 2} to the insulated cryogenic tank capable of being pressurized to 272 atm. The off-board performance and cost of delivering liquid hydrogen were determined for two scenarios in which hydrogen is produced by central steam methane reforming (SMR) or by central electrolysis. The main conclusions are that the cryo-compressed storage system has the potential of meeting the ultimate target for system gravimetric capacity, mid-term target for system volumetric capacity, and the target for hydrogen loss during dormancy under certain conditions of minimum daily driving. However, the high-volume manufacturing cost and the fuel cost for the SMR hydrogen production scenario are, respectively, 2-4 and 1.6-2.4 times the current targets, and the well-to-tank efficiency is well short of the 60% target specified for off-board regenerable materials.

Ahluwalia, R.; Hua, T.; Peng, J.-K.; Lasher, S.; McKenney, K.; Sinha, J.; Gardiner, M.; Nuclear Engineering Division; TIAX LLC; U.S. DOE

2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

306

LNG Monthly Report - June 2013 | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Monthly Report - June 2013 LNG Monthly Report - June 2013 LNG Monthly Report - June 2013 LNG Monthly Report - June 2013 Rev1 More Documents & Publications LNG Annual Report - 2011...

307

Combined cooling and purification system for nuclear reactor spent fuel pit, refueling cavity, and refueling water storage tank  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

The spent fuel pit of a pressured water reactor (PWR) nuclear power plant has sufficient coolant capacity that a safety rated cooling system is not required. A non-safety rated combined cooling and purification system with redundant branches selectively provides simultaneously cooling and purification for the spent fuel pit, the refueling cavity, and the refueling water storage tank, and transfers coolant from the refueling water storage tank to the refueling cavity without it passing through the reactor core. Skimmers on the suction piping of the combined cooling and purification system eliminate the need for separate skimmer circuits with dedicated pumps.

Corletti, Michael M. (New Kensington, PA); Lau, Louis K. (Monroeville, PA); Schulz, Terry L. (Murrysville Boro, PA)

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

308

Combined cooling and purification system for nuclear reactor spent fuel pit, refueling cavity, and refueling water storage tank  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

The spent fuel pit of a pressured water reactor (PWR) nuclear power plant has sufficient coolant capacity that a safety rated cooling system is not required. A non-safety rated combined cooling and purification system with redundant branches selectively provides simultaneously cooling and purification for the spent fuel pit, the refueling cavity, and the refueling water storage tank, and transfers coolant from the refueling water storage tank to the refueling cavity without it passing through the reactor core. Skimmers on the suction piping of the combined cooling and purification system eliminate the need for separate skimmer circuits with dedicated pumps. 1 figures.

Corletti, M.M.; Lau, L.K.; Schulz, T.L.

1993-12-14T23:59:59.000Z

309

Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-Gallon Radioactive Liquid Waste Storage Tanks at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center  

SciTech Connect

This report provides a record of the Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-gal liquid waste storage tanks and associated equipment at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, as required by U.S. Department of Energy M 435.1-1, ''Radioactive Waste Management Manual.'' This equipment is known collectively as the Tank Farm Facility. The conclusion of this report is that the Tank Farm Facility tanks, vaults, and transfer systems that remain in service for storage are structurally adequate, and are expected to remain structurally adequate over the remainder of their planned service life through 2012. Recommendations are provided for continued monitoring of the Tank Farm Facility.

Bryant, J.W.; Nenni, J.A.; Yoder, T.S.

2003-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

310

Technical assessment of cryo-compressed hydrogen storage tank systems for automotive applications.  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

On-board and off-board performance and cost of cryo-compressed hydrogen storage has been assessed and compared to the DOE 2010, 2015 and ultimate targets for automotive applications. The Gen-3 prototype system of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory was modeled to project the performance of a scaled-down 5.6-kg usable hydrogen storage system. The on-board performance of the system and high-volume manufacturing cost were determined for liquid hydrogen refueling with a single-flow nozzle and a pump that delivers 1.5 kg/min of liquid H{sub 2} to the insulated cryogenic tank capable of being pressurized to 272 atm (4000 psi). The off-board performance and cost of delivering liquid hydrogen were determined for two scenarios in which hydrogen is produced by central steam methane reforming (SMR) and by central electrolysis using electricity from renewable sources. The main conclusions from the assessment are that the cryo-compressed storage system has the potential of meeting the ultimate target for system gravimetric capacity and the 2015 target for system volumetric capacity (see Table I). The system compares favorably with targets for durability and operability although additional work is needed to understand failure modes for combined pressure and temperature cycling. The system may meet the targets for hydrogen loss during dormancy under certain conditions of minimum daily driving. The high-volume manufacturing cost is projected to be 2-4 times the current 2010 target of $4/kWh. For the reference conditions considered most applicable, the fuel cost for the SMR hydrogen production and liquid H{sub 2} delivery scenario is 60%-140% higher than the current target of $2-$3/gge while the well-to-tank efficiency is well short of the 60% target specified for off-board regenerable materials.

Ahluwalia, R. K.; Hua, T. Q.; Peng, J.-K.; Lasher, S.; McKenney, K.; Sinha, J.; Nuclear Engineering Division; TIAX LLC

2010-03-03T23:59:59.000Z

311

SAVANNAH RIVER SITE INCIPIENT SLUDGE MIXING IN RADIOACTIVE LIQUID WASTE STORAGE TANKS DURING SALT SOLUTION BLENDING  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This paper is the second in a series of four publications to document ongoing pilot scale testing and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling of mixing processes in 85 foot diameter, 1.3 million gallon, radioactive liquid waste, storage tanks at Savannah River Site (SRS). Homogeneous blending of salt solutions is required in waste tanks. Settled solids (i.e., sludge) are required to remain undisturbed on the bottom of waste tanks during blending. Suspension of sludge during blending may potentially release radiolytically generated hydrogen trapped in the sludge, which is a safety concern. The first paper (Leishear, et. al. [1]) presented pilot scale blending experiments of miscible fluids to provide initial design requirements for a full scale blending pump. Scaling techniques for an 8 foot diameter pilot scale tank were also justified in that work. This second paper describes the overall reasons to perform tests, and documents pilot scale experiments performed to investigate disturbance of sludge, using non-radioactive sludge simulants. A third paper will document pilot scale CFD modeling for comparison to experimental pilot scale test results for both blending tests and sludge disturbance tests. That paper will also describe full scale CFD results. The final paper will document additional blending test results for stratified layers in salt solutions, scale up techniques, final full scale pump design recommendations, and operational recommendations. Specifically, this paper documents a series of pilot scale tests, where sludge simulant disturbance due to a blending pump or transfer pump are investigated. A principle design requirement for a blending pump is UoD, where Uo is the pump discharge nozzle velocity, and D is the nozzle diameter. Pilot scale test results showed that sludge was undisturbed below UoD = 0.47 ft{sup 2}/s, and that below UoD = 0.58 ft{sup 2}/s minimal sludge disturbance was observed. If sludge is minimally disturbed, hydrogen will not be released. Installation requirements were also determined for a transfer pump which will remove tank contents, and which is also required to not disturb sludge. Testing techniques and test results for both types of pumps are presented.

Leishear, R.; Poirier, M.; Lee, S.; Steeper, T.; Fowley, M.; Parkinson, K.

2011-01-12T23:59:59.000Z

312

Implementation of seismic design and evaluation guidelines for the Department of Energy high-level waste storage tanks and appurtenances  

SciTech Connect

In the fall of 1992, a draft of the Seismic Design and Evaluation Guidelines for the Department of Energy (DOE) High-level Waste Storage Tanks and Appurtenances was issued. The guidelines were prepared by the Tanks Seismic Experts Panel (TSEP) and this task was sponsored by DOE, Environmental Management. The TSEP is comprised of a number of consultants known for their knowledge of seismic ground motion and expertise in the analysis of structures, systems and components subjected to seismic loads. The development of these guidelines was managed by staff from Brookhaven National Laboratory, Engineering Research and Applications Division, Department of Nuclear Energy. This paper describes the process used to incorporate the Seismic Design and Evaluation Guidelines for the DOE High-Level Waste Storage Tanks and Appurtenances into the design criteria for the Multi-Function Waste Tank Project at the Hanford Site. This project will design and construct six new high-level waste tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. This paper also discusses the vehicles used to ensure compliance to these guidelines throughout Title 1 and Title 2 design phases of the project as well as the strategy used to ensure consistent and cost-effective application of the guidelines by the structural analysts. The paper includes lessons learned and provides recommendations for other tank design projects which might employ the TSEP guidelines.

Conrads, T.J.

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

313

Design method to determine the optimal distribution and amount of insulation for in-ground heat storage tanks  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The seasonal sensible heat storage model developed by F.C. Hooper and C.R. Attwater is modified to describe the thermal behaviour of the soil regime surrounding cylindrical, in-ground, heat storage tanks with optimally distributed insulation. The model assumes steady-state heat transfer, and the surrounding soil is considered to be homogeneous and isotropic. Changes in soil thermal properties due to moisture migration, whether driven by thermal or hydrostatic gradients, are assumed negligible. The optimal distribution is determined using the method of Lagrange multipliers. It is shown that the marginal cost per unit of energy lost and per unit of tank surface area must be the same at all points on the surface of the tank as the condition for minimum total heat loss with a given total investment in insulation. This condition appears to apply for all axi-symmetric in-ground tank geometries. For a given volume of insulation, the incremental increase in storage efficiency with an optimal redistribution of the insulation is a function of tank geometry. The problem of determining the optimal total investment in insulation for a given marginal cost of fuel is described and a method of solution is outlined.

Williams, G.T.; Attwater, C.R.; Hooper, F.C.

1979-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

314

EIS-0494: Excelerate Liquefaction Solutions Lavaca Bay LNG Project, Calhoun  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4: Excelerate Liquefaction Solutions Lavaca Bay LNG Project, 4: Excelerate Liquefaction Solutions Lavaca Bay LNG Project, Calhoun and Jackson Counties, Texas EIS-0494: Excelerate Liquefaction Solutions Lavaca Bay LNG Project, Calhoun and Jackson Counties, Texas SUMMARY The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is preparing, with DOE as a cooperating agency, an EIS to analyze the potential environmental impacts of a proposal to construct and operate a liquefied natural gas terminal consisting of two floating liquefaction, storage and offloading units and a 29-mile pipeline header system to transport natural gas from existing pipeline systems to the LNG terminal facilities. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD March 12, 2013 EIS-0494: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

315

LNG annotated bibliography  

SciTech Connect

This document updates the bibliography published in Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Safety and Environmental Control Assessment Program: third status report (PNL-4172) and is a complete listing of literature reviewed and reported under the LNG Technical Surveillance Task. The bibliography is organized alphabetically by author.

Bomelburg, H.J.; Counts, C.A.; Cowan, C.E.; Davis, W.E.; DeSteese, J.G.; Pelto, P.J.

1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

316

Steam reforming as a method to treat Hanford underground storage tank (UST) wastes  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report summarizes a Sandia program that included partnerships with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Synthetica Technologies, Inc. to design and test a steam reforming system for treating Hanford underground storage tank (UST) wastes. The benefits of steam reforming the wastes include the resolution of tank safety issues and improved radionuclide separations. Steam reforming destroys organic materials by first gasifying, then reacting them with high temperature steam. Tests indicate that up to 99% of the organics could be removed from the UST wastes by steam exposure. In addition, it was shown that nitrates in the wastes could be destroyed by steam exposure if they were first distributed as a thin layer on a surface. High purity alumina and nickel alloys were shown to be good candidates for materials to be used in the severe environment associated with steam reforming the highly alkaline, high nitrate content wastes. Work was performed on designing, building, and demonstrating components of a 0.5 gallon per minute (gpm) system suitable for radioactive waste treatment. Scale-up of the unit to 20 gpm was also considered and is feasible. Finally, process demonstrations conducted on non-radioactive waste surrogates were carried out, including a successful demonstration of the technology at the 0.1 gpm scale.

Miller, J.E.; Kuehne, P.B. [eds.] [and others

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

317

Revised cost savings estimate with uncertainty for enhanced sludge washing of underground storage tank waste  

SciTech Connect

Enhanced Sludge Washing (ESW) has been selected to reduce the amount of sludge-based underground storage tank (UST) high-level waste at the Hanford site. During the past several years, studies have been conducted to determine the cost savings derived from the implementation of ESW. The tank waste inventory and ESW performance continues to be revised as characterization and development efforts advance. This study provides a new cost savings estimate based upon the most recent inventory and ESW performance revisions, and includes an estimate of the associated cost uncertainty. Whereas the author`s previous cost savings estimates for ESW were compared against no sludge washing, this study assumes the baseline to be simple water washing which more accurately reflects the retrieval activity along. The revised ESW cost savings estimate for all UST waste at Hanford is $6.1 B {+-} $1.3 B within 95% confidence. This is based upon capital and operating cost savings, but does not include development costs. The development costs are assumed negligible since they should be at least an order of magnitude less than the savings. The overall cost savings uncertainty was derived from process performance uncertainties and baseline remediation cost uncertainties, as determined by the author`s engineering judgment.

DeMuth, S.

1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

ANL-10/24 ANL-10/24 Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Nuclear Engineering Division About Argonne National Laboratory Argonne is a U.S. Department of Energy laboratory managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC under contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. The Laboratory's main facility is outside Chicago, at 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, Illinois 60439. For information about Argonne and its pioneering science and technology programs, see www.anl.gov. Availability of This Report This report is available, at no cost, at http://www.osti.gov/bridge. It is also available on paper to the U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, for a processing fee, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information

319

Concentration of Melton Valley Storage Tank surrogates with a wiped film evaporator  

SciTech Connect

This report describes experiments to determine whether a wiped film evaporator (WFE) might be used to concentrate low-level liquid radioactive waste (LLLW). Solutions used in these studies were surrogates that contain no radionuclides. The compositions of the surrogates were based on one of Oak Ridge National Laboratory`s (ORNL`s) Melton Valley Storage Tanks (MVSTs). It was found that a WFE could be used to concentrate LLLW to varying degrees by manipulating various parameters. The parameters studied were rotor speed, process fluid feed temperature and feed rate, and evaporator temperature. Product consistency varied from an unsaturated liquid to a dry powder. Volume reductions up to 68% were achieved. System decontamination factors were consistently in the range of 10{sup 4}.

Boring, M.D.; Farr, L.L.; Fowler, V.L.; Hewitt, J.D.

1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

320

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID)  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 3) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Safeguards and Security, Engineering Design, and Maintenance.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


321

High level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 6  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 6) outlines the standards and requirements for the sections on: Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Research and Development and Experimental Activities, and Nuclear Safety.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

322

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 2) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Quality Assurance, Training and Qualification, Emergency Planning and Preparedness, and Construction.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

323

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 4  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 4) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Radiation Protection and Operations.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

324

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 5  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 5) outlines the standards and requirements for the Fire Protection and Packaging and Transportation sections.

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

325

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the CPP-648 Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System (VES-SFE-106)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan for the Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System located in the adjacent to the Sludge Tank Control House (CPP-648), Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, Idaho National Laboratory, was developed to meet the interim status closure requirements for a tank system. The system to be closed includes a tank and associated ancillary equipment that were determined to have managed hazardous waste. The CPP-648 Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System will be "cleaned closed" in accordance with the requirements of the Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as implemented by the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 265. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods of acheiving those standards for the CPP-648 Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System.

S. K. Evans

2006-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

326

A review of large-scale LNG spills : experiment and modeling.  

SciTech Connect

The prediction of the possible hazards associated with the storage and transportation of liquefied natural gas (LNG) by ship has motivated a substantial number of experimental and analytical studies. This paper reviews the experimental and analytical work performed to date on large-scale spills of LNG. Specifically, experiments on the dispersion of LNG, as well as experiments of LNG fires from spills on water and land are reviewed. Explosion, pool boiling, and rapid phase transition (RPT) explosion studies are described and discussed, as well as models used to predict dispersion and thermal hazard distances. Although there have been significant advances in understanding the behavior of LNG spills, technical knowledge gaps to improve hazard prediction are identified. Some of these gaps can be addressed with current modeling and testing capabilities. A discussion of the state of knowledge and recommendations to further improve the understanding of the behavior of LNG spills on water is provided.

Luketa-Hanlin, Anay Josephine

2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

327

U.S. LNG Imports from Canada  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

328

U.S. LNG Imports from Norway  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

329

U.S. LNG Imports from Australia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

330

U.S. LNG Imports from Egypt  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

331

U.S. LNG Imports from Malaysia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

332

U.S. LNG Imports from Peru  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

333

U.S. LNG Imports from Algeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

334

U.S. LNG Imports from Nigeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

335

U.S. LNG Imports from Qatar  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

336

U.S. LNG Imports from Yemen  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

337

U.S. LNG Imports from Indonesia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

338

U.S. LNG Imports from Indonesia  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

339

U.S. LNG Imports from Australia  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

340

U.S. LNG Imports from Yemen  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

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


341

U.S. LNG Imports from Peru  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

342

U.S. LNG Imports from Nigeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

343

U.S. LNG Imports from Malaysia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

344

U.S. LNG Imports from Oman  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

345

U.S. LNG Imports from Egypt  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

346

U.S. LNG Imports from Norway  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

347

U.S. LNG Imports from Algeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

348

U.S. LNG Imports from Brunei  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

349

Revised corrective action plan for underground storage tank 2331-U at the Building 9201-1 Site  

SciTech Connect

This document represents the Corrective Action Plan for underground storage tank (UST) 2331-U, previously located at Building 9201-1, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Tank 2331-U, a 560-gallon UST, was removed on December 14, 1988. This document presents a comprehensive summary of all environmental assessment investigations conducted at the Building 9201-1 Site and the corrective action measures proposed for remediation of subsurface petroleum product contamination identified at the site. This document is written in accordance with the regulatory requirements of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) Rule 1200-1-15-.06(7).

Bohrman, D.E.; Ingram, E.M. [Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, TN (United States)

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

350

Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System - 1997 Notice of Violation Consent Order  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System is one of two documents that comprise the Sampling and Analysis Plan for the HWMA/RCRA closure certification of the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. This plan, which provides information about sampling design, required analyses, and sample collection and handling procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System.

Evans, S.K.

2002-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

351

Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System - 1997 Notice of Violation Consent Order  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System is one of two documents that comprise the Sampling and Analysis Plan for the HWMA/RCRA closure certification of the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. This plan, which provides information about sampling design, required analyses, and sample collection and handling procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System.

Evans, Susan Kay; Orchard, B. J.

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

U.S. LNG Imports from Oman  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

353

U.S. LNG Imports from Australia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

354

U.S. LNG Imports from Nigeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

355

U.S. LNG Imports from Yemen  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

356

U.S. LNG Imports from Algeria  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

357

EIA-176 Instructions w-LNG  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

LNG MARINE TERMINALS REPORTING Liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals should report the origin of natural gas imported, along with its ultimate destination, whether it

358

U.S. LNG Imports from Indonesia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

359

U.S. LNG Imports from Brunei  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

360

U.S. LNG Imports from Egypt  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

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


361

U.S. LNG Imports from Canada  

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

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

362

U.S. LNG Imports from Peru  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

363

U.S. LNG Imports from Malaysia  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

364

U.S. LNG Markets and Uses  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas January 2003 1 U.S. LNG Markets and Uses Introduction Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is expected to play an

365

LNG Export Study | Department of Energy  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Power Marketing Administration Other Agencies You are here Home Services Natural Gas Regulation LNG Export Study LNG Export Study Petroleum Reserves International...

366

Materials at Low Temperatures  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... tank. In a commercial storage tank for liquefied natural gas (LNG), the tank itself cools as the LNG is added. The volume ...

2001-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

367

294-296  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... tank. In a commercial storage tank for liquefied natural gas (LNG), the tank itself cools as the LNG is added. The volume ...

2001-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

368

Seismic design and evaluation guidelines for the Department of Energy High-Level Waste Storage Tanks and Appurtenances  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document provides seismic design and evaluation guidelines for underground high-level waste storage tanks. The guidelines reflect the knowledge acquired in the last two decades in defining seismic ground motion and calculating hydrodynamic loads, dynamic soil pressures and other loads for underground tank structures, piping and equipment. The application of the guidelines is illustrated with examples. The guidelines are developed for a specific design of underground storage tanks, namely double-shell structures. However, the methodology discussed is applicable for other types of tank structures as well. The application of these and of suitably adjusted versions of these concepts to other structural types will be addressed in a future version of this document. The original version of this document was published in January 1993. Since then, additional studies have been performed in several areas and the results are included in this revision. Comments received from the users are also addressed. Fundamental concepts supporting the basic seismic criteria contained in the original version have since then been incorporated and published in DOE-STD-1020-94 and its technical basis documents. This information has been deleted in the current revision.

Bandyopadhyay, K.; Cornell, A.; Costantino, C.; Kennedy, R.; Miller, C.; Veletsos, A.

1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

369

Pending LT LNG Export Apps (12-6-13).xlsx  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Current Current Processing Position Company DOE/FE Docket No. 1 Cameron LNG, LLC 11-162-LNG 2 Jordan Cove Energy Project, L.P. 12-32-LNG 3 LNG Development Company, LLC (d/b/a Oregon LNG) 12-77-LNG 4 Cheniere Marketing, LLC 12-97-LNG 5 Excelerate Liquefaction Solutions I, LLC 12-146-LNG 6 Carib Energy (USA) LLC 11-141-LNG 7 Gulf Coast LNG Export, LLC 12-05-LNG 8 Southern LNG Company, L.L.C. 12-100-LNG 9 Gulf LNG Liquefaction Company, LLC 12-101-LNG 10 CE FLNG, LLC 12-123-LNG 11 Golden Pass Products LLC 12-156-LNG 12 Pangea LNG (North America) Holdings, LLC 12-184-LNG 13 Trunkline LNG Export, LLC 13-04-LNG 14 Freeport-McMoRan Energy LLC 13-26-LNG 15 Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC 13-30-LNG 16 Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC 13-42-LNG 17 Venture Global LNG, LLC 13-69-LNG 18 Eos LNG LLC 13-116-LNG 19 Barca LNG LLC

370

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 124, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada with Errata Sheet, Revision 0  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 124, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nevada. This report complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management (FFACO, 1996; as amended January 2007). This CR provides documentation and justification for the closure of CAU 124 without further corrective action. This justification is based on process knowledge and the results of the investigative activities conducted in accordance with the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 124: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (NNSA/NSO, 2007). The SAFER Plan provides information relating to site history as well as the scope and planning of the investigation. Therefore, this information will not be repeated in this CR.

Alfred Wickline

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

371

Investigation of methods to transfer heat from solar liquid-heating collectors to heat storage tanks. Final report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A study was made of the methods available to transfer heat from the collector to the water storage tank in water heating systems. In counterflow heat exchangers used in double loop water heating systems, it was found to be more important to use a high water flowrate than a high heat transfer fluid flowrate. It was earlier thought to be best to have matched WC/sub p/ (mass flowrate-specific heat) products in the loops. It was shown in this study that the water WC/sub p/ product should be about twice as large as that of the heat transfer fluid. It was found that neither the heat exchanger type nor the size was very critical, so that very simple criteria were adequate in determining optimum heat exchanger size. It was found that there is a definite system size below which one should use a traced tank or a coil in a tank. Equations and optimization criteria were developed for traced tanks or tanks with coils. At present, there is no quantitative understanding of liquid to liquid (direct contact) heat exchangers, though they are clearly quite effective. Draindown systems are discussed, and several appendices are included on heat transfer and other characteristics of fluid and of equipment.

Horel, J. D.; de Winter, F.

1978-04-20T23:59:59.000Z

372

Underground storage tank management plan, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant was established to locate UST systems at the facility and to ensure that all operating UST systems are free of leaks. UST systems have been removed or upgraded in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulations and guidance. With the closure of a significant portion of the USTs, the continuing mission of the UST Management Program is to manage the remaining active UST systems and continue corrective actions in a safe regulatory compliant manner. This Program outlines the compliance issues that must be addressed, reviews the current UST inventory and compliance approach, and presents the status and planned activities associated with each UST system. The UST Program provides guidance for implementing TDEC regulations and guidelines for petroleum UST systems. The plan is divided into three major sections: (1) regulatory requirements, (2) active UST sites, and (3) out-of-service UST sites. These sections describe in detail the applicable regulatory drivers, the UST sites addressed under the Program, and the procedures and guidance for compliance.

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

373

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 134: Aboveground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan identifies the activities required for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 134, Aboveground Storage Tanks. CAU 134 is currently listed in Appendix III of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (FFACO, 1996; as amended February 2008) and consists of four Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 3, 15, and 29 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) (Figure 1): (1) CAS 03-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank; (2) CAS 03-01-04, Tank; (3) CAS 15-01-05, Aboveground Storage Tank; and (4) CAS 29-01-01, Hydrocarbon Stain. CAS 03-01-03 consists of a mud tank that is located at the intersection of the 3-07 and the 3-12 Roads in Area 3 of the NTS. The tank and its contents are uncontaminated and will be dispositioned in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. This CAS will be closed by taking no further action. CAS 03-01-04 consists of a potable water tank that is located at the Core Complex in Area 3 of the NTS. The tank will be closed by taking no further action. CAS 15-01-05 consists of an aboveground storage tank (AST) and associated impacted soil, if any. This CAS is located on a steep slope near the Climax Mine in Area 15 of the NTS. The AST is empty and will be dispositioned in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Soil below the AST will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted by chemicals at concentrations exceeding the action levels. It appears that the tank is not at its original location. Soil will also be sampled at the original tank location, if it can be found. If soil at either location has been impacted at concentrations that exceed the action levels, then the extent of contamination will be identified and a use restriction (UR) will be implemented. The site may be clean closed if contamination is less than one cubic yard in extent and can be readily excavated. If action levels are not exceeded, then no further action is required. CAS 29-01-01 consists of soil that has been impacted by a release or operations from an active diesel AST that fuels the generator at the Shoshone Receiver Site in Area 29 of the NTS. Soil below the AST will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted at concentrations exceeding the action levels. If it is, then the extent of contamination will be identified and a UR will be implemented. The site may be clean closed if contamination is less than one cubic yard in extent, can be readily excavated, and it is determined that clean closure is feasible based upon site conditions. If action levels are not exceeded, then no further action is required. Based on review of the preliminary assessment information for CAU 134 and recent site inspections, there is sufficient process knowledge to close CAU 134 using the SAFER process.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

374

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 127: Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

CAU 127, Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, consists of twelve CASs located in Areas 25 and 26 of the NTS. The closure alternatives included no further action, clean closure, and closure in place with administrative controls. The purpose of this Closure Report is to provide a summary of the completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and analytical data to confirm that the remediation goals were met.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

375

Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System - 1997 Notice of Violation Consent Order  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System is one of two documents that comprise the Sampling and Analysis Plan for the HWMA/RCRA closure certification of the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. This plan, which provides information about the project description, project organization, and quality assurance and quality control procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System. This Quality Assurance Project Plan specifies the procedures for obtaining the data of known quality required by the closure activities for the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system.

Evans, Susan Kay; Orchard, B. J.

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

376

Thermal Storage Commercial Plant Design Study for a 2-Tank Indirect Molten Salt System: Final Report, 13 May 2002 - 31 December 2004  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Subcontract report by Nexant, Inc., and Kearney and Associates regarding a study of a solar parabolic trough commercial plant design with 2-tank indirect molten salt thermal storage system.

Kelly, B.; Kearney, D.

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

377

Action plan for response to abnormal conditions in Hanford high level radioactive liquid waste storage tanks containing flammable gases. Revision 1  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Radioactive liquid waste tends to produce hydrogen as a result of the interaction of gamma radiation and water. In tanks containing organic chelating agents, additional hydrogen gas as well as nitrous oxide and ammonia can be produced by thermal and radiolytic decomposition of these organics. Several high-level radioactive liquid waste storage tanks, located underground at the Hanford Site, contain waste that retains the gases produced in them until large quantities are released rapidly to the tank vapor space. Tanks filled to near capacity have relatively little vapor space; therefore, if the waste suddenly releases a large amount of hydrogen and nitrous oxide, a flammable gas mixture may result. The most notable waste tank with a flammable gas problem is tank 241-SY-101. Waste in this tank has occasionally released enough flammable gas to burn if an ignition source had been present inside of the tank. Several other waste tanks exhibit similar behavior to a lesser magnitude. Administrative controls have been developed to assure that these Flammable Gas Watch List tanks are safely maintained. Responses have also been developed for off-normal conditions which might develop in these tanks. In addition, scientific and engineering studies are underway to further understand and mitigate the behavior of the Flammable Gas Watch List tanks.

Sherwood, D.J.

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

378

Risks of LNG and LPG. [Review  

SciTech Connect

Since the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and liquefied petroleum gases (LPG) as fuels is likely to increase and will certainly persist for some time to come, assessment of the safety of LNG/LPG systems will continue to draw attention and is quite likely to force continuing review of operating and design standards for LNG/LPG facilities. Scientific investigations to date appear to have identified the major hazards. Except for the dispersive behavior of vapor clouds - a not-insignificant factor in risk evaluation - the consequences of spills are well circumscribed by current analyses. The physically significant effects accompanying nonexplosive combustion of spilled material are fairly well documented; yet, potentially substantial uncertainties remain. Catastrophic spills of 10/sup 4/-10/sup 5/ m/sup 3/ on land or water are possible, given the current size of storage vessels. Almost all experimental spills have used less than 10 m/sup 3/ of liquid. There is thus some uncertainty regarding the accuracy and validity of extrapolation of current empirical information and physical models to spills of catastrophic size. The less-likely but still-possible explosive or fireball combustion modes are not well understood in respect to their inception. The troubling experience with such violent combustion of similar combustible vapors suggests that this possibility will need further definition. Extant LNG and LPG risk analyses illustrate the difficulties of substantiating the numerous event probabilities and the determination of all event sequences that can lead to hazardous consequences. Their disparate results show that significant improvements are needed. Most importantly, a detailed critique of past efforts and a determination of an exhaustive set of criteria for evaluating the adequacy of a risk analysis should precede any further attempts to improve on existing studies. 44 references, 1 table.

Fay, J.A.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 130: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the actions needed to achieve closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 130, Storage Tanks, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended February 2008). Corrective Action Unit 130 consists of the seven following corrective action sites (CASs) located in Areas 1, 7, 10, 20, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site: • 01-02-01, Underground Storage Tank • 07-02-01, Underground Storage Tanks • 10-02-01, Underground Storage Tank • 20-02-03, Underground Storage Tank • 20-99-05, Tar Residue • 22-02-02, Buried UST Piping • 23-02-07, Underground Storage Tank This plan provides the methodology for field activities needed to gather the necessary information for closing each CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 130 using the SAFER process. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a field investigation before selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible recommendation that no further corrective action is necessary. This will be presented in a Closure Report that will be prepared and submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) for review and approval. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) finalized on April 3, 2008, by representatives of NDEP; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture; and National Security Technologies, LLC. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to determine and implement appropriate corrective actions for each CAS in CAU 130. The DQO process developed for this CAU identified the following expected closure options: (1) investigation and confirmation that no contamination exists above the final action levels, leading to a no further action declaration; (2) characterization of the nature and extent of contamination, leading to closure in place with use restrictions; or (3) clean closure by remediation and verification. The following text summarizes the SAFER activities that will support the closure of CAU 130: • Perform site preparation activities (e.g., utilities clearances, geophysical surveys). • Move or remove and dispose of debris at various CASs, as required. • Collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., stained soil) to confirm or disprove the presence of contaminants of concern (COCs) as necessary to supplement existing information. • If no COCs are present at a CAS, establish no further action as the corrective action. • If COCs exist, collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., clean soil adjacent to contaminated soil) and submit for laboratory analyses to define the extent of COC contamination. • If a COC is present at a CAS, either: - Establish clean closure as the corrective action. The material to be remediated will be removed, disposed of as waste, and verification samples will be collected from remaining soil, or - Establish closure in place as the corrective action and implement the appropriate use restrictions. • Obtain consensus from NDEP that the preferred closure option is sufficient to protect human health and the environment. • Close the underground storage tank(s) and their contents, if any, in accordance with Nevada Administrative Code regulations. • Remove the lead brick(s) found at any CAS in accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

Alfred Wickline

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

380

Large neighborhood search for LNG inventory routing  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is steadily becoming a common mode for commercializing natural gas. Due to the capital intensive nature of LNG projects, the optimal design of LNG supply chains is extremely important from a profitability perspective. Motivated ... Keywords: LNG, Liquefied natural gas, Maritime inventory routing, Ship schedule optimization

Vikas Goel; Kevin C. Furman; Jin-Hwa Song; Amr S. El-Bakry

2012-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


381

Structural acceptance criteria for the evaulation of existing double-shell waste storage tanks located at the Hanford site, Richland, Washington  

SciTech Connect

The structural acceptance criteria contained herein for the evaluation of existing underground double-shell waste storage tanks located at the Hanford Site is part of the Life Management/Aging Management Program of the Tank Waste Remediation System. The purpose of the overall life management program is to ensure that confinement of the waste is maintained over the required service life of the tanks. Characterization of the present condition of the tanks, understanding and characterization of potential degradation mechanisms, and development of tank structural acceptance criteria based on previous service and projected use are prerequisites to assessing tank integrity, to projecting the length of tank service, and to developing and applying prudent fixes or repairs. The criteria provided herein summarize the requirements for the analysis and structural qualification of the existing double-shell tanks for continued operation. Code reconciliation issues and material degradation under aging conditions are addressed. Although the criteria were developed for double-shell tanks, many of the provisions are equally applicable to single-shell tanks. However, the criteria do not apply to the evaluation of tank appurtenances and buried piping.

Julyk, L.J.; Day, A.D.; Dyrness, A.D.; Moore, C.J.; Peterson, W.S.; Scott, M.A.; Shrivastava, H.P.; Sholman, J.S.; Watts, T.N.

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

382

Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect

The Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks site Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 135 will be closed by unrestricted release decontamination and verification survey, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consert Order (FFACO, 1996). The CAU includes one Corrective Action Site (CAS). The Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, (CAS 25-02-01), referred to as the Engine-Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly (E-MAD) Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault, were used to receive liquid waste from all of the radioactive drains at the E-MAD Facility. Based on the results of the Corrective Action Investigation conducted in June 1999 discussed in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (DOE/NV,1999a), one sample from the radiological survey of the concrete vault interior exceeded radionuclide preliminary action levels. The analytes from the sediment samples that exceeded the preliminary action levels are polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel-range organics, and radionuclides. Unrestricted release decontamination and verification involves removal of concrete and the cement-lined pump sump from the vault. After verification that the contamination has been removed, the vault will be repaired with concrete, as necessary. The radiological- and chemical-contaminated pump sump and concrete removed from the vault would be disposed of at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site. The vault interior will be field surveyed following removal of contaminated material to verify that unrestricted release criteria have been achieved.

D. H. Cox

2000-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

383

Complete LNG Terminal Status Maps | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LNG Terminal Status Maps Complete LNG Terminal Status Maps A series of slides showing the status of various LNG terminals (existing, under construction, proposed, etc.) in North...

384

LNG Export Study - Related Documents | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LNG Export Study - Related Documents LNG Export Study - Related Documents Federal Register Notice of Availability of the LNG Export Study EIA Analysis (Study - Part 1) NERA...

385

Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics (2004-2012...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics (2004-2012) Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics (2004-2012) Detailed Monthly and Annual LNG Import Statistics...

386

LNG -- Technology on the edge  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

With immense promise and many supporters, LNG as a vehicular fuel is still, a nascent industry. In about two years, an array of LNG engines should be commercially available, and infrastructure greatly expanded. These developments should reduce the present premium of LNG equipment, greatly improving industry economics. The most propitious sign for LNG-market developed lies in the natural gas industry`s recently refined strategy for natural gas vehicles. The new strategy targets the right competitor--diesel, not gasoline. It also targets the right market for an emerging fuel--high-fuel-usage fleets made up of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, often driven long distances. But problems persist in critical areas of development. These problems are related to the materials handling of LNG and the refueling of vehicles. The paper discusses the studies on LNG handling procedures, its performance benefits to high-fuel use vehicles, economic incentives for its use, tax disadvantages that are being fought, and LNG competition with ``clean`` diesel fuels.

Alexander, C.B.

1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

387

LNG Observer: Second Qatargas train goes onstream  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The January-February, 1997 issue of the LNG Observer is presented. The following topics are discussed: second Qatargas train goes onstream; financing for the eighth Indonesian liquefaction train; Koreans take stakes in Oman LNG; US imports and exports of LNG in 1996; A 60% increase in proved reserves on the North West Shelf; proposals for Indian LNG terminal CEDIGAZ forecasts world LNG trade by 2010; growth for North African gas production and exports; and new forecast sees strong growth for Asian gas.

NONE

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

388

Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-Gallon Radioactive Liquid Waste Storage Tanks at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center  

SciTech Connect

This report provides a record of the Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-gal liquid waste storage tanks and associated equipment at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, as required by U.S. Department of Energy M 435.1-1, ''Radioactive Waste Management Manual.'' This equipment is known collectively as the Tank Farm Facility. The conclusion of this report is that the Tank Farm Facility tanks, vaults, and transfer systems that remain in service for storage are structurally adequate, and are expected to remain structurally adequate over the remainder of their planned service life through 2012. Recommendations are provided for continued monitoring of the Tank Farm Facility.

Bryant, J.W.; Nenni, J.A.; Yoder, T.S.

2003-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

389

Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-Gallon Radioactive Liquid Waste Storage Tanks at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center  

SciTech Connect

This report provides a record of the Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-gal liquid waste storage tanks and associated equipment at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, as required by U.S. Department of Energy M 435.1-1, “Radioactive Waste Management Manual.” This equipment is known collectively as the Tank Farm Facility. This report is an update, and replaces the previous report by the same title issued April 2003. The conclusion of this report is that the Tank Farm Facility tanks, vaults, and transfer systems that remain in service for storage are structurally adequate, and are expected to remain structurally adequate over the remainder of their planned service life through 2012. Recommendations are provided for continued monitoring of the Tank Farm Facility.

Bryant, Jeffrey W.

2010-08-12T23:59:59.000Z

390

Insulating polymer concrete for LNG impounding dikes. [Polymer concretes  

SciTech Connect

An insulating polymer concrete (IPC) composite has been developed under contract to the Gas Research Institute for possible use as a dike insulation material at Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) storage facilities. In the advent of an LNG spill into the impounding dike area, the boiloff rate of the LNG can be substantially reduced if the surfaces of the dike are insulated. This increased safety at the LNG facility will tend to reduce the hazardous explosive mixture with atmospheric air in the surrounding region. The dike insulation material must have a low thermal conductivity and be unaffected by environmental conditions. The IPC composites developed consist of perlite or glass nodule aggregates bound together as a closed cell structure with a polyester resin. In addition to low thermal conductivity and porosity, these composites have correspondingly high strengths and, therefore, can carry transient loads of workmen and maintenance equipment. Prefabricated IPC panels have been installed experimentally and at least one utility is currently considering a complete installation at its LNG facility. 5 refs., 5 tabs.

Fontana, J.J.; Steinberg, M.

1986-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

391

Initial laboratory studies into the chemical and radiological aging of organic materials in underground storage tanks at the Hanford Complex  

SciTech Connect

The underground storage tanks at the Hanford Complex contain wastes generated over many years from plutonium production and recovery processes, and mixed wastes from radiological degradation processes. The chemical changes of the organic materials used in the extraction processes have a direct bearing on several specific safety issues, including potential energy releases from these tanks. The major portion of organic materials that have been added to the tanks consists of tributyl phosphate, dibutyl phosphate, butyl alcohol, hexone (methyl isobutyl ketone), normal paraffin hydrocarbons (NPH), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), hydroxyethylethylenediaminetriadetic acid (HEDTA), other complexants, and lesser quantities of ion exchange polymers and minor organic compounds. A study of how thermal and radiological processes that may have changed the composition of organic tanks constituents has been initiated after a review of the open literature revealed little information was available about the rates and products of these processes under basic pH conditions. This paper will detail the initial findings as they relate to gas generation, e.g. H{sub 2}, CO, NH{sub 3}, CH{sub 4}, and to changes in the composition of the organic and inorganic components brought about by ``Aging`` processes.

Samuels, W.D.; Camaioni, D.M. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Babad, H. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

392

Streamlined approach for environmental restoration closure report for Corrective Action Unit No. 456: Underground storage tank release site 23-111-1, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The underground storage tank (UST) release site 23-111-1 is located in Mercury, Nevada. The site is in Area 23 of the Nevada Test Site, (NTS) located on the north side of Building 111. The tank associated with the release was closed in place using cement grout on September 6, 1990. The tank was not closed by removal due to numerous active underground utilities, a high-voltage transformer pad, and overhead power lines. Soil samples collected below the tank bottom at the time of tank closure activities exceeded the Nevada Administrative Code Action Level of 100 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) for petroleum hydrocarbons. Maximum concentrations detected were 119 mg/kg. Two passive venting wells were subsequently installed at the tank ends to monitor the progress of biodegradation at the site. Quarterly air sampling from the wells was completed for approximately one year, but was discontinued since data indicated that considerable biodegradation was not occurring at the site.

NONE

1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

393

Toward resilient communities: A performance-based engineering framework for design and evaluation of the built environment  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

LNG Facilites System Reliability 6 Piping Storage Tanks ASCELNG Facilites System Reliability 6 Piping Storage Tanks ASCE

Mieler, Michael

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

394

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 6  

SciTech Connect

The scope of the Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) Functional Area includes the programmatic controls associated with the management and operation of the Hanford Tank Farm Facility. The driving management organization implementing the programmatic controls is the Tank Farms Waste Management (WM)organization whose responsibilities are to ensure that performance objectives are established; and that measurable criteria for attaining objectives are defined and reflected in programs, policies and procedures. Objectives for the WM Program include waste minimization, establishment of effective waste segregation methods, waste treatment technology development, radioactive (low-level, high-level) hazardous and mixed waste transfer, treatment, and storage, applicability of a corrective action program, and management and applicability of a decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) program in future years.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

CORROSION CONTROL MEASURES FOR LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE  

SciTech Connect

The Savannah River Site has stored radioactive wastes in large, underground, carbon steel tanks for approximately 60 years. An assessment of potential degradation mechanisms determined that the tanks may be vulnerable to nitrate- induced pitting corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. Controls on the solution chemistry and temperature of the wastes are in place to mitigate these mechanisms. These controls are based upon a series of experiments performed using simulated solutions on materials used for construction of the tanks. The technical bases and evolution of these controls is presented in this paper.

Wiersma, B.; Subramanian, K.

2012-11-27T23:59:59.000Z

396

U.S. LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

397

U.S. LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports...

398

Summary of LNG Export Applications | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Summary of LNG Export Applications Summary of LNG Export Applications List of current LNG Export Applications before the Department of Energy (as of August 7, 2013). Summary of LNG...

399

The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis > The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage Analysis > The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage Latest update: August 2004 Printer-Friendly Version Natural gas-a colorless, odorless, gaseous hydrocarbon-may be stored in a number of different ways. It is most commonly held in inventory underground under pressure in three types of facilities. These are: (1) depleted reservoirs in oil and/or gas fields, (2) aquifers, and (3) salt cavern formations. (Natural gas is also stored in liquid form in above-ground tanks. A discussion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is beyond the scope of this report. For more information about LNG, please see the EIA report, The Global Liquefied Natural Gas Market: Status & Outlook.) Each storage type has its own physical characteristics (porosity, permeability, retention capability) and economics (site preparation and maintenance costs, deliverability rates, and cycling capability), which govern its suitability to particular applications. Two of the most important characteristics of an underground storage reservoir are its capacity to hold natural gas for future use and the rate at which gas inventory can be withdrawn-its deliverability rate (see Storage Measures, below, for key definitions).

400

The effects of LNG-sloshing on the global responses of LNG-carriers  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The coupling and interactions between ship motion and inner-tank sloshing are investigated by a potential-viscous hybrid method in time domain. For the time domain simulation of vessel motion, the hydrodynamic coefficients and wave forces are obtained by a potential-theory-based 3D diffraction/radiation panel program in frequency domain. Then, the corresponding simulations of motions in time domain are carried out using the convolution-integral method. The liquid sloshing in a tank is simulated in time domain by a Navier-Stokes solver. A finite difference method with SURF scheme, assuming a singlevalued free surface profile, is applied for the direct simulation of liquid sloshing. The computed sloshing forces and moments are then applied as external excitations to the ship motion. The calculated ship motion is in turn inputted as the excitation for liquid sloshing, which is repeated for the ensuing time steps. For comparison, linear inner-fluid motion was calculated using a 3D panel program and it is coupled with the vessel motion program in the frequency domain. The developed computer programs are applied to a barge-type FPSO hull equipped with two partially filled tanks. The time domain simulation results show reasonably good agreement when compared with MARIN's experimental results. The frequency domain results qualitatively reproduce the trend of coupling effects but the peaks are usually over-predicted. It is seen that the coupling effects on roll motions appreciably change with filling level. The most pronounced coupling effects on roll motions are the shift or split of peak frequencies. The pitch motions are much less influenced by the inner-fluid motion compared to roll motions. A developed program is also applied to a more realistic offloading configuration where a LNG-carrier is moored with a floating terminal in a side-by-side configuration. First, a hydrodynamic interaction problem between two bodies is solved successfully in frequency and time domain. A realistic mooring system, including fender, hawser, and simplified mooring system, is also developed to calculate the nonlinear behavior of two bodies in time domain simulation. Then, the LNG-carrier and sloshing problem are coupled in frequency and time domain, similar to the method in the MARIN-FPSO case. Sloshing effect on LNG-carrier motion is investigated with respect to different tank filling levels including various conditions such as gap distance between two bodies, selection of dolphin mooring system, and different cases of environmental conditions using wave, wind, and current.

Lee, Seung Jae

2008-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


401

The application of expansion foam on liquefied natural gas (LNG) to suppress LNG vapor and LNG pool fire thermal radiation  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) hazards include LNG flammable vapor dispersion and LNG pool fire thermal radiation. A large LNG pool fire emits high thermal radiation thus preventing fire fighters from approaching and extinguishing the fire. One of the strategies used in the LNG industry and recommended by federal regulation National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 59A is to use expansion foam to suppress LNG vapors and to control LNG fire by reducing the fire size. In its application, expansion foam effectiveness heavily depends on application rate, generator location, and LNG containment pit design. Complicated phenomena involved and previous studies have not completely filled the gaps increases the needs for LNG field experiments involving expansion foam. In addition, alternative LNG vapor dispersion and pool fire suppression methodology, Foamglas® pool fire suppression (PFS), is investigated as well. This dissertation details the research and experiment development. Results regarding important phenomena are presented and discussed. Foamglas® PFS effectiveness is described. Recommendations for advancing current guidelines in LNG vapor dispersion and pool fire suppression methods are developed. The gaps are presented as the future work and recommendation on how to do the experiment better in the future. This will benefit LNG industries to enhance its safety system and to make LNG facilities safer.

Suardin, Jaffee Arizon

2008-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

402

Assessing the Effectiveness of California's Underground Storage Tank Annual Inspection Rate Requirements  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

tanks used at retail gas stations. The Energy Policy Act ofapplied had far more gas stations (the location of mostwith an average of 48 gas stations in the applicant cities

Cutter, W. Bowman

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

403

Comprehensive monitoring report for underground storage tanks 1219-U, 1222-U, 2082-U, and 2068-U at the Rust Garage Facility, Buildings 9720-15 and 9754-1  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this document is to provide hydrogeologic, geochemical, and vapor monitoring data required for comprehensive monitoring of underground storage tanks at the Rust Garage Facility.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

404

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Part B permit application for tank storage units at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant  

SciTech Connect

In compliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), this report discusses information relating to permit applications for three tank storage units at Y-12. The storage units are: Building 9811-1 RCRA Tank Storage Unit (OD-7); Waste Oil/Solvent Storage Unit (OD-9); and Liquid Organic Solvent Storage Unit (OD-10). Numerous sections discuss the following: Facility description; waste characteristics; process information; groundwater monitoring; procedures to prevent hazards; contingency plan; personnel training; closure plan, post closure plan, and financial requirements; record keeping; other federal laws; organic air emissions; solid waste management units; and certification. Sixteen appendices contain such items as maps, waste analyses and forms, inspection logs, equipment identification, etc.

Not Available

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

405

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 121: Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan identifies the activities required for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 121, Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous Sites. CAU 121 is currently listed in Appendix III of the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' (FFACO, 1996) and consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Area 12 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS): CAS 12-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank; CAS 12-01-02, Aboveground Storage Tank; and CAS 12-22-26, Drums; 2 AST's. CASs 12-01-01 and 12-01-02 are located to the west of the Area 12 Camp, and CAS 12-22-26 is located near the U-12g Tunnel, also known as G-tunnel, in Area 12 (Figure 1). The aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) present at CASs 12-01-01 and 12-01-02 will be removed and disposed of at an appropriate facility. Soil below the ASTs will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted with chemicals or radioactivity above action levels. If impacted soil above action levels is present, the soil will be excavated and disposed of at an appropriate facility. The CAS 12-22-26 site is composed of two overlapping areas, one where drums had formerly been stored, and the other where an AST was used to dispense diesel for locomotives used at G-tunnel. This area is located above an underground radioactive materials area (URMA), and within an area that may have elevated background radioactivity because of containment breaches during nuclear tests and associated tunnel reentry operations. CAS 12-22-26 does not include the URMA or the elevated background radioactivity. An AST that had previously been used to store liquid magnesium chloride (MgCl) was properly disposed of several years ago, and releases from this tank are not an environmental concern. The diesel AST will be removed and disposed of at an appropriate facility. Soil at the former drum area and the diesel AST area will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted by releases, from the drums or the AST, with chemicals or radioactivity above action levels. CAS 12-22-26 has different potential closure pathways that are dependent upon the concentrations and chemicals detected. If only petroleum hydrocarbons are detected above action levels, then the area will be use-restricted. It will not be excavated because of the more significant hazard of excavating within a URMA. Similarly, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) will only be excavated for concentrations of 50 parts per million (ppm) or greater, if there are no other factors that require excavation. For PCBs at concentrations above 1 ppm, the area will be use-restricted as required by Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 761 for PCBs (CFR, 2006), in the ''Toxic Substances Control Act'' (TSCA). Other chemicals at concentrations above the final action levels (FALs) will be excavated. If radioactivity is above action levels, then the soil will be excavated only to a depth of 1 foot (ft) below ground surface (bgs) and replaced with clean fill. This action is intended to remove the ''hot spot'' on the surface caused by leakage from a drum, and not to remediate the URMA.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

406

Two-tank indirect thermal storage designs for solar parabolic trough power plants.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??The performance of a solar thermal parabolic trough plant with thermal storage is dependent upon the arrangement of the heat exchangers that ultimately transfer energy… (more)

Kopp, Joseph E.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

407

HANFORD TANK CLEANUP UPDATE  

SciTech Connect

Access to Hanford's single-shell radioactive waste storage tank C-107 was significantly improved when workers completed the cut of a 55-inch diameter hole in the top of the tank. The core and its associated cutting equipment were removed from the tank and encased in a plastic sleeve to prevent any potential spread of contamination. The larger tank opening allows use of a new more efficient robotic arm to complete tank retrieval.

BERRIOCHOA MV

2011-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

408

Western LNG project - Project summary  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Western LNG Project is a major new undertaking involving the liquefaction of conventional natural gas from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin at a plant on the British Columbia north coast. The gas in its liquid form will be shipped to Japan for consumption by utility companies. The Project represents a new era in gas processing and marketing for the Canadian natural gas industry.

Forgues, E.L.

1984-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

409

Final Environmental Impact Statement (Supplement to ERDA-1537, September 1977) Waste Management Operations Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High-Level Radioactive Waste Storage Savannah River Plant  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Do Do E/EIS-0062 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT mATEIUIENT (Supplement to ERDA-1537, September 1977) Waste ~ Management Operations Savannah River Plant ! Aiken, South Carolina Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High-Level Radioactive Waste Storage April 1980 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON. D.C.20545 1980 WL 94273 (F.R.) NOTICES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Waste Management Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High-Level Radioactive Waste Storage, Savannah River Plant, Aiken, S.C. Wednesday, July 9, 1980 *46154 Record of Decision Decision. The decision has been made to complete the construction of the 14 double-shell tanks and use them to store defense high-level radioactive waste at the Savannah River Plant (SRP). Background. The SRP, located near Aiken, South Carolina, is a major installation of the

410

Analysis of Underground Storage Tanks System Materials to Increased Leak Potential Associated with E15 Fuel  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 was enacted by Congress to move the nation toward increased energy independence by increasing the production of renewable fuels to meet its transportation energy needs. The law establishes a new renewable fuel standard (RFS) that requires the nation to use 36 billion gallons annually (2.3 million barrels per day) of renewable fuel in its vehicles by 2022. Ethanol is the most widely used renewable fuel in the US, and its production has grown dramatically over the past decade. According to EISA and RFS, ethanol (produced from corn as well as cellulosic feedstocks) will make up the vast majority of the new renewable fuel requirements. However, ethanol use limited to E10 and E85 (in the case of flex fuel vehicles or FFVs) will not meet this target. Even if all of the E0 gasoline dispensers in the country were converted to E10, such sales would represent only about 15 billion gallons per year. If 15% ethanol, rather than 10% were used, the potential would be up to 22 billion gallons. The vast majority of ethanol used in the United States is blended with gasoline to create E10, that is, gasoline with up to 10% ethanol. The remaining ethanol is sold in the form of E85, a gasoline blend with as much as 85% ethanol that can only be used in FFVs. Although DOE remains committed to expanding the E85 infrastructure, that market will not be able to absorb projected volumes of ethanol in the near term. Given this reality, DOE and others have begun assessing the viability of using intermediate ethanol blends as one way to transition to higher volumes of ethanol. In October of 2010, the EPA granted a partial waiver to the Clean Air Act allowing the use of fuel that contains up to 15% ethanol for the model year 2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. This waiver represents the first of a number of actions that are needed to move toward the commercialization of E15 gasoline blends. On January 2011, this waiver was expanded to include model year 2001 light-duty vehicles, but specifically prohibited use in motorcycles and off-road vehicles and equipment. UST stakeholders generally consider fueling infrastructure materials designed for use with E0 to be adequate for use with E10, and there are no known instances of major leaks or failures directly attributable to ethanol use. It is conceivable that many compatibility issues, including accelerated corrosion, do arise and are corrected onsite and, therefore do not lead to a release. However, there is some concern that higher ethanol concentrations, such as E15 or E20, may be incompatible with current materials used in standard gasoline fueling hardware. In the summer of 2008, DOE recognized the need to assess the impact of intermediate blends of ethanol on the fueling infrastructure, specifically located at the fueling station. This includes the dispenser and hanging hardware, the underground storage tank, and associated piping. The DOE program has been co-led and funded by the Office of the Biomass Program and Vehicle Technologies Program with technical expertise from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The infrastructure material compatibility work has been supported through strong collaborations and testing at Underwriters Laboratories (UL). ORNL performed a compatibility study investigating the compatibility of fuel infrastructure materials to gasoline containing intermediate levels of ethanol. These results can be found in the ORNL report entitled Intermediate Ethanol Blends Infrastructure Materials Compatibility Study: Elastomers, Metals and Sealants (hereafter referred to as the ORNL intermediate blends material compatibility study). These materials included elastomers, plastics, metals and sealants typically found in fuel dispenser infrastructure. The test fuels evaluated in the ORNL study were SAE standard test fuel formulations used to assess material-fuel compatibility within a relatively short timeframe. Initially, these material studies included test fuels of Fuel C,

Kass, Michael D [ORNL; Theiss, Timothy J [ORNL; Janke, Christopher James [ORNL; Pawel, Steven J [ORNL

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

411

Analysis of Underground Storage Tanks System Materials to Increased Leak Potential Associated with E15 Fuel  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 was enacted by Congress to move the nation toward increased energy independence by increasing the production of renewable fuels to meet its transportation energy needs. The law establishes a new renewable fuel standard (RFS) that requires the nation to use 36 billion gallons annually (2.3 million barrels per day) of renewable fuel in its vehicles by 2022. Ethanol is the most widely used renewable fuel in the US, and its production has grown dramatically over the past decade. According to EISA and RFS, ethanol (produced from corn as well as cellulosic feedstocks) will make up the vast majority of the new renewable fuel requirements. However, ethanol use limited to E10 and E85 (in the case of flex fuel vehicles or FFVs) will not meet this target. Even if all of the E0 gasoline dispensers in the country were converted to E10, such sales would represent only about 15 billion gallons per year. If 15% ethanol, rather than 10% were used, the potential would be up to 22 billion gallons. The vast majority of ethanol used in the United States is blended with gasoline to create E10, that is, gasoline with up to 10% ethanol. The remaining ethanol is sold in the form of E85, a gasoline blend with as much as 85% ethanol that can only be used in FFVs. Although DOE remains committed to expanding the E85 infrastructure, that market will not be able to absorb projected volumes of ethanol in the near term. Given this reality, DOE and others have begun assessing the viability of using intermediate ethanol blends as one way to transition to higher volumes of ethanol. In October of 2010, the EPA granted a partial waiver to the Clean Air Act allowing the use of fuel that contains up to 15% ethanol for the model year 2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. This waiver represents the first of a number of actions that are needed to move toward the commercialization of E15 gasoline blends. On January 2011, this waiver was expanded to include model year 2001 light-duty vehicles, but specifically prohibited use in motorcycles and off-road vehicles and equipment. UST stakeholders generally consider fueling infrastructure materials designed for use with E0 to be adequate for use with E10, and there are no known instances of major leaks or failures directly attributable to ethanol use. It is conceivable that many compatibility issues, including accelerated corrosion, do arise and are corrected onsite and, therefore do not lead to a release. However, there is some concern that higher ethanol concentrations, such as E15 or E20, may be incompatible with current materials used in standard gasoline fueling hardware. In the summer of 2008, DOE recognized the need to assess the impact of intermediate blends of ethanol on the fueling infrastructure, specifically located at the fueling station. This includes the dispenser and hanging hardware, the underground storage tank, and associated piping. The DOE program has been co-led and funded by the Office of the Biomass Program and Vehicle Technologies Program with technical expertise from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The infrastructure material compatibility work has been supported through strong collaborations and testing at Underwriters Laboratories (UL). ORNL performed a compatibility study investigating the compatibility of fuel infrastructure materials to gasoline containing intermediate levels of ethanol. These results can be found in the ORNL report entitled Intermediate Ethanol Blends Infrastructure Materials Compatibility Study: Elastomers, Metals and Sealants (hereafter referred to as the ORNL intermediate blends material compatibility study). These materials included elastomers, plastics, metals and sealants typically found in fuel dispenser infrastructure. The test fuels evaluated in the ORNL study were SAE standard test fuel formulations used to assess material-fuel compatibility within a relatively short timeframe. Initially, these material studies included test fuels of Fuel C,

Kass, Michael D [ORNL; Theiss, Timothy J [ORNL; Janke, Christopher James [ORNL; Pawel, Steven J [ORNL

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

412

LNG 2005.xls  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5 5 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec TOTAL Algeria 6.0 11.3 2.8 9.0 11.4 12.0 6.0 3.2 6.0 11.8 9.0 8.6 97.2 Malaysia 3.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 8.7 Nigeria 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 8.1 Oman 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 Trinidad 43.7 39.2 40.4 35.7 41.2 41.5 41.2 26.8 34.8 33.2 30.1 31.4 439.2 Egypt 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 2.9 5.9 11.1 11.0 8.5 18.9 11.3 72.5 Qatar 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 TOTAL 57.8 53.5 45.9 47.6 52.6 56.4 53.1 43.6 51.8 59.6 58.0 51.3 631.3 LNG Imports by Receiving Terminal (Bcf) 2005 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec TOTAL Cove Point, MD 18.3 20.6 18.7 17.1 23.5 20.7 20.4 8.3 17.3 17.6 18.8 20.5 221.7 Elba Island, GA 7.9 10.6 7.9 7.8 7.9 13.3 13.1 11.1 15.6 13.6 12.5 10.7 132.1 Everett, MA 18.0 13.8 16.7 13.6 12.8 13.4 13.6 13.3 10.4 16.5 12.3 14.3 168.5 Lake Charles, LA 13.7

413

LNG 2006.xls  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6 6 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec TOTAL Algeria 3.0 2.8 3.0 2.8 0.0 2.8 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.4 Malaysia 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nigeria 3.0 3.1 0.0 6.0 3.1 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.0 9.0 5.7 3.1 57.3 Oman 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Trinidad 30.5 27.6 30.2 36.4 44.3 38.6 33.4 37.0 25.2 24.7 24.6 36.7 389.3 Egypt 3.0 5.3 0.0 13.6 19.8 14.3 15.0 8.9 8.8 2.6 16.9 11.4 119.5 Qatar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOTAL 39.5 38.7 33.2 58.8 67.3 61.7 57.6 52.1 40.0 36.2 47.2 51.2 583.5 LNG Imports by Receiving Terminal (Bcf) 2006 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec TOTAL Cove Point, MD 11.9 11.0 8.9 14.4 11.6 14.6 12.0 11.8 5.4 3.0 3.0 9.0 116.6 Elba Island, GA 7.9 7.9 7.9 13.4 13.7 13.8 13.6 16.8 13.9 10.4 13.5 14.0 146.8 Everett, MA 16.6 16.8 16.4 13.9 16.6 13.6 14.3 14.2 9.1 13.9 14.0 16.6 176.1 Lake Charles, LA 3.0 3.1

414

Identifying Technology Flows and Spillovers Through NAICS ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... Refrigeration LNG for Vehicular Fuel ... 2 Storage Battery Manufacturing 2 ... 1 Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing 2 ...

2006-05-04T23:59:59.000Z

415

U.S. LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

416

U.S. LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

417

U.S. LNG Imports from Other Countries  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

418

U.S. LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Galvan Ranch, TX LNG Imports from Algeria LNG Imports from Australia LNG Imports from Brunei LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea LNG Imports from Indonesia LNG Imports from Malaysia LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Period: Monthly Annual

419

U.S. LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

420

U.S. LNG Imports from Other Countries  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

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


421

U.S. LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island,...

422

U.S. LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Cove Point, MD Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX LNG Imports from Qatar Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Sabine...

423

U.S. LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba...

424

Basic research opportunities to support LNG technology. Topical report, July 1989-December 1990  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

As additional gas reserves come on production during the next decade in areas with limited local markets, worldwide LNG trade is expected to expand. The availability of dedicated LNG tankers may well determine the rate at which this growth occurs. Plans are being made now to bring the four U.S. import terminals up to capacity during this period. As LNG becomes a more significant factor in the domestic natural gas market, consideration should be given to applications other than simply regassifying and comingling it with other supplies entering the pipeline grid. The higher energy density and the low temperature of LNG offer opportunities for expanding the use of natural gas into the industrial and transportation sectors. Greater use of LNG in peak shaving and intermediate storage may also provide benefits in increased reliability and performance of the gas transmission and distribution grid. In order to provide new and more cost-effective technologies to respond to these opportunities, it is recommended that GRI broaden the range of research it is currently performing on LNG.

Groten, B.

1991-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

425

Large Neighborhood Search for LNG Inventory Routing  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Feb 3, 2012 ... Large Neighborhood Search for LNG Inventory Routing. Vikas Goel (vikas.goel ** *at*** exxonmobil.com) Kevin Furman (kevin.c.furman ***at*** ...

426

U.S. LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

427

U.S. LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT LNG Imports into Cameron, LA LNG Imports into Cove Point, MD LNG Imports into Elba Island, GA LNG Imports into Everett, MA LNG Imports into Freeport, TX LNG Imports into Golden Pass, TX LNG Imports into Gulf Gateway, LA LNG Imports into Gulf LNG, MS LNG Imports into Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports into Neptune Deepwater Port LNG Imports into Northeast Gateway LNG Imports into Sabine Pass, LA U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Australia Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Brunei Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Canada Highgate Springs, VT LNG Imports from Egypt Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea Elba Island, GA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Indonesia Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Malaysia Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Nigeria Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Norway Cove Point, MD Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Oman Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Peru Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Qatar Cameron, LA Elba Island, GA Golden Pass, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Lake Charles, LA Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Trinidad/Tobago Cameron, LA Cove Point, MD Elba Island, GA Everett, MA Freeport, TX Gulf Gateway, LA Gulf LNG, MS Lake Charles, LA Neptune Deepwater Port Northeast Gateway Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from United Arab Emirates Lake Charles, LA LNG Imports from Yemen Everett, MA Freeport, TX Neptune Deepwater Port Sabine Pass, LA LNG Imports from Other Countries Lake Charles, LA Period: Monthly Annual

428

Northeast Gateway Natural Gas LNG Imports (Price) From Qatar...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Northeast Gateway Natural Gas LNG Imports (Price) From Qatar (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Northeast Gateway Natural Gas LNG Imports (Price) From Qatar (Dollars per Thousand...

429

Lake Charles, LA Natural Gas LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Lake Charles, LA Natural Gas LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Lake Charles, LA Natural Gas LNG Imports from Equatorial Guinea (Dollars per...

430

LNG Safety Research Report to Congress | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Safety Research Report to Congress LNG Safety Research Report to Congress LNG Safety Research Report to Congress May 2012 The February 2007 Government Accountability Office Report...

431

Freeport, TX Natural Gas LNG Imports (Price) From Nigeria (Dollars...  

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

Freeport, TX Natural Gas LNG Imports (Price) From Nigeria (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Freeport, TX Natural Gas LNG Imports (Price) From Nigeria (Dollars per Thousand Cubic...

432

Opening of the Cheniere Energy Sabine Pass LNG Regasification...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Cheniere Energy Sabine Pass LNG Regasification Facility Opening of the Cheniere Energy Sabine Pass LNG Regasification Facility April 21, 2008 - 10:49am Addthis Remarks As Prepared...

433

EIS-0492: Oregon LNG Export Project (Warrenton, OR) and Washington...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

92: Oregon LNG Export Project (Warrenton, OR) and Washington Expansion Project (between Sumas and Woodland, WA) EIS-0492: Oregon LNG Export Project (Warrenton, OR) and Washington...

434

EIS-0488: Cameron Pipeline Expansion Project and Cameron LNG...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

88: Cameron Pipeline Expansion Project and Cameron LNG Liquefaction Project, Cameron Parish, LA EIS-0488: Cameron Pipeline Expansion Project and Cameron LNG Liquefaction Project,...

435

A Method to Determine the Optimal Tank Size for a Chilled Water Storage System Under a Time-of-Use Electricity Rate Structure  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

In the downtown area of Austin, it is planned to build a new naturally stratified chilled water storage tank and share it among four separated chilled water plants. An underground piping system is to be established to connect these four plants together. This paper presents the method of determining the optimal tank size as well as corresponding optimal operating strategies for this project. Based on the analysis of the historical log data, utility rate structures, and equipment information, the baseline profiles of electricity fed to buildings, plant cooling load, and utility billing cost for each plant are generated. A simplified TES plus four plants model is built based on some assumptions. The results show that a 3.5 million gallon tank has the shortest payback time and the projected total capital cost is within the budget. The annual billing cost savings are $907,231 and the simple payback time is 12.5 years.

Zhang, Z.; Turner, W. D.; Chen, Q.; Xu, C.; Deng, S.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

436

OPTIMIZATION OF INTERNAL HEAT EXCHANGERS FOR HYDROGEN STORAGE TANKS UTILIZING METAL HYDRIDES  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Two detailed, unit-cell models, a transverse fin design and a longitudinal fin design, of a combined hydride bed and heat exchanger are developed in COMSOL{reg_sign} Multiphysics incorporating and accounting for heat transfer and reaction kinetic limitations. MatLab{reg_sign} scripts for autonomous model generation are developed and incorporated into (1) a grid-based and (2) a systematic optimization routine based on the Nelder-Mead downhill simplex method to determine the geometrical parameters that lead to the optimal structure for each fin design that maximizes the hydrogen stored within the hydride. The optimal designs for both the transverse and longitudinal fin designs point toward closely-spaced, small cooling fluid tubes. Under the hydrogen feed conditions studied (50 bar), a 25 times improvement or better in the hydrogen storage kinetics will be required to simultaneously meet the Department of Energy technical targets for gravimetric capacity and fill time. These models and methodology can be rapidly applied to other hydrogen storage materials, such as other metal hydrides or to cryoadsorbents, in future work.

Garrison, S.; Tamburello, D.; Hardy, B.; Anton, D.; Gorbounov, M.; Cognale, C.; van Hassel, B.; Mosher, D.

2011-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

437

Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP - FE Dkt. No 11-128-LNG | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP - FE Dkt. No 11-128-LNG Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP - FE Dkt. No 11-128-LNG Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP - FE Dkt. No 11-128-LNG ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING LONG-TERM MULTI-CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION TO EXPORT LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS BY VESSEL FROM THE COVE POINT LNG TERMINAL TO NON-FREE TRADE AGREEMENT NATIONS Based on a review of the complete record and for the reasons set forth below, DOE/FE has concluded that the opponents of the DCP Application have not demonstrated that the requested authorization will be inconsistent with the public interest and finds that the exports proposed in this Application are likely to yield net economic benefits to the United States. DOE/FE further finds that DCP's proposed exports on behalf of other entities should be conditionally authorized at a volumetric rate not to exceed the

438

Upgrade of 400,000 gallon water storage tank at Argonne National Laboratory-West to UCRL-15910 high hazard seismic requirements  

SciTech Connect

As part of the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR) Project at Argonne National Laboratory West (ANL-W), it was necessary to strengthen an existing 400,000 gallon flat-bottom water storage tank to meet UCRL-15910 (currently formulated as DOE Standard DOE-STD-1020-92, Draft) high hazard natural phenomena requirements. The tank was constructed in 1988 and preliminary calculations indicated that the existing base anchorage was insufficient to prevent buckling and potential failure during a high hazard seismic event. General design criteria, including ground motion input, load combinations, etc., were based upon the requirements of UCRL-15910 for high hazard facilities. The analysis and capacity assessment criteria were based on the Generic Implementation Procedure developed by the Seismic Qualification Utilities Group (SQUG). Upgrade modifications, consisting of increasing the size of the Generic Implementation Procedure developed by the Seismic Qualification Utilities Group (SQUG). Upgrade modifications, consisting of increasing the size of the foundation and installing additional anchor bolts and chairs, were necessary to increase the capacity of the tank anchorage/support system. The construction of the upgrades took place in 1992 while the tank remained in service to allow continued operation of the EBR-II reactor. The major phases of construction included the installation and testing of 144 1/14in. {times} 15in., and 366 1in. {times} 16in. epoxied concrete anchors, placement of 220 cubic yards of concrete heavily reinforced, and installation of 24 1-1/2in. {times} 60in. tank anchor bolts and chairs. A follow-up inspection of the tank interior by a diver was conducted to determine if the interior tank coating had been damaged by the chair welding. The project was completed on schedule and within budget.

Griffin, M.J. [EQE International, Inc., Irvine, CA (United States); Harris, B.G. [Argonne National Lab., Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

439

Leak potential index model for use in priority ranking of underground storage tanks at formerly used defense sites. Final report  

SciTech Connect

Abandoned underground storage tanks (USTs) that have not been properly closed at formerlC used defense sites (FUDS) may present potential leaking problems, spilling their hazardous contents into nearby soils, groundwater, and well water. The leaking USTs are potential sources of contaminants generally classified as containerized hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (CON/HTRW). CON/IITRW includes petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene (BTEX), and radioactive waste products. The risk to the environment and population associated with the leaking USTs depends not only on the source, but on the migration pathway factor (MPF) (i.e., the ability of the medium of transport such as soil or water-to effectively transport the contaminants to the receptor) and finally on the relative vulnerability of the potential receptor. Thus, the assessment of the relative risk begins with the calculation of the potential of the UST to leak. A method of predicting the risk of leakage of these USTs is therefore desirable. presently, however, leak prediction index (LPI) models (which are used to predict the age at which a UST will leak or the probability of a UST leak at any given age) require soil data that are not readily available, or not easily and economically obtained by LPI.model users. The Warren Rogers leak prediction model was developed circa 1981, and has been used for USTs and incorporated into leak prediction models for other types of underground steel structures.

Stephenson, L.D.

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

440

Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect

This Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) has been developed in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV); the State of Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP); and the US Department of Defense (FFACO, 1996). The CAIP is a document that provides or references all of the specific information for investigation activities associated with Corrective Action Units (CAUs) or Corrective Action Sites (CASs). According to the FFACO, CASs are sites potentially requiring corrective action(s) and may include solid waste management units or individual disposal or release sites (FFACO, 1996). Corrective Action Units consist of one or more CASs grouped together based on geography, technical similarity, or agency responsibility for the purpose of determining corrective actions. This CAIP contains the environmental sample collection objectives and the criteria for conducting site investigation activities at CAU 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), which is located on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The NTS is approximately 105 kilometers (km) (65 miles [mi]) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada.

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

1999-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

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


441

Waste Management's LNG Truck Fleet: Final Results  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Waste Management, Inc., began operating a fleet of heavy-duty LNG refuse trucks at its Washington, Pennsylvania, facility. The objective of the project was to provide transportation professionals with quantitative, unbiased information on the cost, maintenance, operational, and emissions characteristics of LNG as one alternative to conventional diesel for heavy-duty trucking applications.

Chandler, K. [Battelle (US); Norton, P. [National Renewable Energy Laboratory (US); Clark, N. [West Virginia University (US)

2001-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

442

LNG links remote supplies and markets  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) has established a niche for itself by matching remote gas supplies to markets that both lacked indigenous gas reserves and felt threatened in the aftermath of the energy crises of the 1970s and 1980s. It has provided a cost-effective energy source for these markets, while also offering an environmentally friendly fuel long before that was fashionable. The introduction of natural-gas use via LNG in the early years (mostly into France and Japan) has also allowed LNG to play a major role in developing gas infrastructure. Today, natural gas, often supplied as LNG, is particularly well-suited for use in the combined cycle technology used in independent power generation projects (IPPs). Today, LNG players cannot simply focus on monetizing gas resources. Instead, they must adapt their projects to meet the needs of changing markets. The impact of these changes on the LNG industry has been felt throughout the value chain from finding and producing gas, gas treatment, liquefaction, transport as a liquid, receiving terminals and regasification, and finally, to consumption by power producers, industrial users, and households. These factors have influenced the evolution of the LNG industry and have implications for the future of LNG, particularly in the context of worldwide natural gas.

Avidan, A.A.; Gardner, R.E.; Nelson, D.; Borrelli, E.N. [Mobil LNG Inc., Houston, TX (United States); Rethore, T.J. [Arthur D. Little Inc., Houston, TX (United States)

1997-06-02T23:59:59.000Z

443

Reserves hike to buoy Bontang LNG  

SciTech Connect

This paper reports that a redetermination of reserves in an Indonesian production sharing contract (PSC) will boost liquefied natural gas sales for an Indonesian joint venture (IJV) of Lasmo plc, Union Texas (South East Asia) Inc., Chinese Petroleum Corp. (CPC), and Japex Rantau Ltd. The Indonesian reserves increase involves the Sanga PSC operated by Virginia Indonesia Co., a 50-50 joint venture of Lasmo and Union Texas. Union Texas holds a 38% interest in the IJV and Lasmo 37.8%, with remaining interests held by CPC and Japex. meantime, in US LNG news: Shell LNG Co. has shelved plans to buy an added interest in the LNG business of Columbia Gas System Inc. Panhandle Eastern Corp. units Trunkline Gas Co., Trunkline LNG Co., and Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. (PEPL) filed settlement agreements with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to recover from customers $243 million in costs associated with Panhandle's Trunkline LNG operation at Lake Charles, Louisiana.

Not Available

1992-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

444

LNG Export Study | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LNG Export Study LNG Export Study LNG Export Study As part of a broader effort to further inform decisions related to LNG exports, the Department of Energy commissioned NERA Economic Consulting to conduct a third party study in order to gain a better understanding of how U.S. LNG exports could affect the public interest, with an emphasis on the energy and manufacturing sectors. The Department is releasing that study and making it available for public review and comment. As this is not a Department of Energy product, the Department will be conducting its own review of the study as well as consideration of relevant comments made throughout the process prior to making final determinations. Federal law generally requires approval of natural gas exports to countries that have a free trade agreement with the United States. For countries that

445

Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

Pipeline and Distribution Use Price Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Vehicle Fuel Price Electric Power Price Proved Reserves as of 12/31 Reserves Adjustments Reserves Revision Increases Reserves Revision Decreases Reserves Sales Reserves Acquisitions Reserves Extensions Reserves New Field Discoveries New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields Estimated Production Number of Producing Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production Natural Gas Processed NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Underground Storage Injections Underground Storage Withdrawals Underground Storage Net Withdrawals LNG Storage Additions LNG Storage Withdrawals LNG Storage Net Withdrawals Total Consumption Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption Lease Fuel Plant Fuel Pipeline & Distribution Use Delivered to Consumers Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Power Period: Monthly Annual

446

LNG 2013 Rev 1.xls  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

TX 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Golden Pass, TX 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gulf LNG, MS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lake Charles, LA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Neptune...

447

Life Cycle Assessment of Thermal Energy Storage: Two-Tank Indirect and Thermocline  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

In the United States, concentrating solar power (CSP) is one of the most promising renewable energy (RE) technologies for reduction of electric sector greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and for rapid capacity expansion. It is also one of the most price-competitive RE technologies, thanks in large measure to decades of field experience and consistent improvements in design. One of the key design features that makes CSP more attractive than many other RE technologies, like solar photovoltaics and wind, is the potential for including relatively low-cost and efficient thermal energy storage (TES), which can smooth the daily fluctuation of electricity production and extend its duration into the evening peak hours or longer. Because operational environmental burdens are typically small for RE technologies, life cycle assessment (LCA) is recognized as the most appropriate analytical approach for determining their environmental impacts of these technologies, including CSP. An LCA accounts for impacts from all stages in the development, operation, and decommissioning of a CSP plant, including such upstream stages as the extraction of raw materials used in system components, manufacturing of those components, and construction of the plant. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is undertaking an LCA of modern CSP plants, starting with those of parabolic trough design.

Heath, G.; Turchi, C.; Burkhardt, J.; Kutscher, C.; Decker, T.

2009-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

448

Natural Gas Monthly (NGM) - Energy Information Administration ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Exploration and reserves, storage, imports and exports, production, prices, sales. Electricity. ... offloaded into above-ground LNG storage tanks, ...

449

23rd World Gas Conference, Amsterdam 2006 DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORLD'S LARGEST ABOVE-GROUND  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

LNG STORAGE TANK 1. INTRODUCTION Since the first introduction of liquefied natural gas (LNG) in Korea the growing needs of natural gas, Korea Gas Corporation (KOGAS) had to build a lot of LNG storage tanks around has grown remarkably. In order to meet the natural gas demand, KOGAS has built many LNG storage tanks

Laughlin, Robert B.

450

AX Tank Farm tank removal study  

SciTech Connect

This report considers the feasibility of exposing, demolishing, and removing underground storage tanks from the 241-AX Tank Farm at the Hanford Site. For the study, it was assumed that the tanks would each contain 360 ft{sup 3} of residual waste (corresponding to the one percent residual Inventory target cited in the Tri-Party Agreement) at the time of demolition. The 241-AX Tank Farm is being employed as a ''strawman'' in engineering studies evaluating clean and landfill closure options for Hanford single-shell tank farms. The report is one of several reports being prepared for use by the Hanford Tanks Initiative Project to explore potential closure options and to develop retrieval performance evaluation criteria for tank farms.

SKELLY, W.A.

1998-10-14T23:59:59.000Z

451

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement  

Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center (EERE)

Liquefied Natural Gas Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Measurement LNG is taxed based on the gasoline gallon equivalent, or 6.6 pounds of LNG

452

U.S. LNG Imports from Canada  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Buffalo, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Sweetgrass, MT Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to India Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Japan Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Kenai, AK Port Nikiski, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Mexico Douglas, AZ Nogales, AZ Calexico, CA Ogilby Mesa, CA Otay Mesa, CA San Diego, CA Alamo, TX Clint, TX Del Rio, TX Eagle Pass, TX El Paso, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX Rio Bravo, TX Roma, TX Total to Portugal Sabine Pass, LA Total to Russia Kenai, AK Total to South Korea Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Spain Cameron, LA Sabine Pass, LA Total to United Kingdom Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA LNG Exports from Cameron, LA LNG Exports from Kenai, AK LNG Exports from Freeport, TX LNG Exports from Nogales, AZ LNG Exports from Otay Mesa, CA LNG Exports from Sabine Pass, LA LNG Exports from Sweetgrass, MT Period: Monthly Annual

453

Potential for world trade in LNG  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Deliveries of LNG in 1978 in international trade amounted to about 24.77 billion cu m; of the actual deliveries, 9% were received by the U.S., 30% by West European countries, and 61% by Japan. For Spain, these deliveries represented 100% of its natural gas supply; for the U.S., they represented only 2% of natural gas demand. By the mid-1980's, the international LNG growth rate will slow to approx. 16%/yr, although projects totaling 130 million cu m/day may be completed. During the late 1980's, another 94.1 million cu m/day of LNG projects could be implemented. The over-all growth rate for the decade would then be approx. 11%/yr in LNG volumes. After 1990, several LNG export projects could be put into operation, possibly in the Middle East, West Africa, and the U.S.S.R. In 1980-2000, energy demand may increase by 2%/yr. Oil should retain its 65-70% of the primary energy supply; whether natural gas can increase its relative share depends on economic and political factors. Pipeline transport of gas costs twice as much as crude oil, and sea transport of LNG costs four to five times as much as crude oil. Wider use of the refrigeration available at LNG import terminals could affect project economics favorably. Tables.

Anderson, P.J.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

454

LNG fire and vapor control system technologies  

SciTech Connect

This report provides a review of fire and vapor control practices used in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry. Specific objectives of this effort were to summarize the state-of-the-art of LNG fire and vapor control; define representative LNG facilities and their associated fire and vapor control systems; and develop an approach for a quantitative effectiveness evaluation of LNG fire and vapor control systems. In this report a brief summary of LNG physical properties is given. This is followed by a discussion of basic fire and vapor control design philosophy and detailed reviews of fire and vapor control practices. The operating characteristics and typical applications and application limitations of leak detectors, fire detectors, dikes, coatings, closed circuit television, communication systems, dry chemicals, water, high expansion foam, carbon dioxide and halogenated hydrocarbons are described. Summary descriptions of a representative LNG peakshaving facility and import terminal are included in this report together with typical fire and vapor control systems and their locations in these types of facilities. This state-of-the-art review identifies large differences in the application of fire and vapor control systems throughout the LNG industry.

Konzek, G.J.; Yasutake, K.M.; Franklin, A.L.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

455

Guidance on risk analysis and safety implications of a large liquefied natural gas (LNG) spill over water.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

While recognized standards exist for the systematic safety analysis of potential spills or releases from LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) storage terminals and facilities on land, no equivalent set of standards or guidance exists for the evaluation of the safety or consequences from LNG spills over water. Heightened security awareness and energy surety issues have increased industry's and the public's attention to these activities. The report reviews several existing studies of LNG spills with respect to their assumptions, inputs, models, and experimental data. Based on this review and further analysis, the report provides guidance on the appropriateness of models, assumptions, and risk management to address public safety and property relative to a potential LNG spill over water.

Wellman, Gerald William; Melof, Brian Matthew; Luketa-Hanlin, Anay Josephine; Hightower, Marion Michael; Covan, John Morgan; Gritzo, Louis Alan; Irwin, Michael James; Kaneshige, Michael Jiro; Morrow, Charles W.

2004-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

456

Renewable LNG: Update on the World's Largest Landfill Gas to LNG Plant  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

LNG LNG Update on the world's largest landfill gas to LNG plant Mike McGowan Head of Government Affairs Linde NA, Inc. June 12, 2012 $18.3 billion global sales A leading gases and engineering company Linde North America Profile $2.3 billion in gases sales revenue in North America in 2011 5,000 employees throughout the U.S., Canada and the Caribbean Supplier of compressed and cryogenic gases and technology Atmospheric gases - oxygen, nitrogen, argon Helium LNG and LPG Hydrogen Rare gases Plant engineering and supply LNG Petrochemicals Natural gas processing Atmospheric gases 3 Linde's alternative fuels portfolio Green hydrogen production - Magog, Quebec Renewable liquefied natural gas production - Altamont, CA Biogas fueling, LNG import terminal - Sweden

457

Prediction of velocity and temperature profiles in thermally driven gravity currents applied to stratified thermal storage tanks  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

It has been demonstrated that one way of producing thin thermoclines in a chilled water thermal storage tank is by introducing the fluid in the form of a gravity current. Early in the flow the gravity current is controlled mainly by inertia and buoyancy forces, producing what is called the inertia-buoyancy (I-B) regime. Subsequently, the viscous force dominates inertia, and the flow is governed by viscous and buoyancy forces, resulting in the viscous-buoyancy (V-B) regime. In the work to be reported, vertical profiles of velocity and temperature in two-dimensional, thermally driven, constant inflow gravity currents were studied. This was done to provide a basis for understanding the initial stages of the formation of a thermocline. The gravity current was modelled with three regions, the head, the main body and the mixed region. In this analysis, the head was ignored and a laminar flow model was used to predict velocity and temperature profiles in the main body near the floor and in the mixed region above the main body and behind the head. Analytical and numerical models were developed for both regimes. Major features of the I-B regime temperature above the floor to an elevation roughly equal to the top of the inlet diffuser opening and a high gradient region above the top of the inlet opening. Velocity profiles in the I-B regime velocity profiles and also higher gradients above the top of the inlet opening than those in the V-B regime. 6 refs., 8 figs.

Nakos, J.T.; Wildin, M.W.

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

458

Raley's LNG Truck Site Final Data Report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Raley's is a 120-store grocery chain with headquarters in Sacramento, California, that has been operating eight heavy-duty LNG trucks (Kenworth T800 trucks with Cummins L10-300G engines) and two LNG yard tractors (Ottawa trucks with Cummins B5.9G engines) since April 1997. This report describes the results of data collection and evaluation of the eight heavy-duty LNG trucks compared to similar heavy-duty diesel trucks operating at Raley's. The data collection and evaluation are a part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)/National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Alternative Fuel Truck Evaluation Project.

Battelle

1999-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

459

Nuclear criticality safety evaluation of the passage of decontaminated salt solution from the ITP filters into tank 50H for interim storage  

SciTech Connect

This report assesses the nuclear criticality safety associated with the decontaminated salt solution after passing through the In-Tank Precipitation (ITP) filters, through the stripper columns and into Tank 50H for interim storage until transfer to the Saltstone facility. The criticality safety basis for the ITP process is documented. Criticality safety in the ITP filtrate has been analyzed under normal and process upset conditions. This report evaluates the potential for criticality due to the precipitation or crystallization of fissionable material from solution and an ITP process filter failure in which insoluble material carryover from salt dissolution is present. It is concluded that no single inadvertent error will cause criticality and that the process will remain subcritical under normal and credible abnormal conditions.

Hobbs, D.T.; Davis, J.R.

1994-05-27T23:59:59.000Z

460

Norcal Prototype LNG Truck Fleet: Final Results  

SciTech Connect

U.S. DOE and National Renewable Energy Laboratory evaluated Norcal Waste Systems liquefied natural gas (LNG) waste transfer trucks. Trucks had prototype Cummins Westport ISXG engines. Report gives final evaluation results.

Not Available

2004-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


461

Microsoft Word - LNG_Jan2007.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

07 1 January 2007 Short-Term Energy Outlook Supplement: U.S. LNG Imports - The Next Wave Damien Gaul and Kobi Platt Overview * This supplement to the Energy Information...

462

DOE - Fossil Energy: 2013 LNG Export Applications  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Us on Twitter Sign Up for NewsAlerts Subscribe to our RSS Feeds You are here: 2013 - LNG Export, Re-Exports & Long Term Natural Gas Applications Please note: To view the complete...

463

Environmental and Economical Evaluation of Integrating NGL Extraction and LNG Liquefaction Technology in Iran LNG Project  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The combination of changing global markets for natural gas liquids (NGL) with the simultaneous increase in global demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG) has stimulated an interest in the integration of NGL recovery technology with LNG liquefaction technologies. Historically, the removal of “heavy” or high-freezing-point hydrocarbons from the feed to LNG plants has been characterized as “gas conditioning” and achieved using one or more distillation columns. While some attempts to provide reflux to the distillation columns marginally enhanced NGL recovery, little emphasis was placed on maximizing NGL recovery as a product from the LNG process. As such, the integration of the two processes was not a priority. Integrating state-of-the art NGL recovery technology within the CoP LNGSM Process1, formerly the Phillips Optimized Cascade LNG Process, results in a significant reduction in the specific power required to produce LNG, while maximizing NGL recovery. This corresponds to a production increase in both LNG and NGL for comparable compression schemes as compared to stand-alone LNG liquefaction and NGL extraction facilities. In addition, there are potential enhancements to the overall facility availability and project economics and environmental impacts using the integrated concept. This integrated concept has been applied to three ongoing international NGL/LNG projects using the CoP LNG Process in Iran LNG project. In this respect, simulation has been performed in THERMOFLEX software. Moreover, thermo economic analysis has been applied for economic and thermodynamic analysis of base and integrated cases through computer code has been provided here. Finally, the base and integrated case have been evaluated and comprised in view of thermodynamics, economics and environmental impacts.

Manesh, M. H. K.; Mazhari, V.

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

464

Fragility Analysis Methodology for Degraded Structures and Passive Components in Nuclear Power Plants - Illustrated using a Condensate Storage Tank  

SciTech Connect

The Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) is conducting a five-year research project to develop a realistic seismic risk evaluation system which includes the consideration of aging of structures and components in nuclear power plants (NPPs). The KAERI research project includes three specific areas that are essential to seismic probabilistic risk assessment (PRA): (1) probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, (2) seismic fragility analysis including the effects of aging, and (3) a plant seismic risk analysis. Since 2007, Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) has entered into a collaboration agreement with KAERI to support its development of seismic capability evaluation technology for degraded structures and components. The collaborative research effort is intended to continue over a five year period. The goal of this collaboration endeavor is to assist KAERI to develop seismic fragility analysis methods that consider the potential effects of age-related degradation of structures, systems, and components (SSCs). The research results of this multi-year collaboration will be utilized as input to seismic PRAs. In the Year 1 scope of work, BNL collected and reviewed degradation occurrences in US NPPs and identified important aging characteristics needed for the seismic capability evaluations. This information is presented in the Annual Report for the Year 1 Task, identified as BNL Report-81741-2008 and also designated as KAERI/RR-2931/2008. The report presents results of the statistical and trending analysis of this data and compares the results to prior aging studies. In addition, the report provides a description of U.S. current regulatory requirements, regulatory guidance documents, generic communications, industry standards and guidance, and past research related to aging degradation of SSCs. In the Year 2 scope of work, BNL carried out a research effort to identify and assess degradation models for the long-term behavior of dominant materials that are determined to be risk significant to NPPs. Multiple models have been identified for concrete, carbon and low-alloy steel, and stainless steel. These models are documented in the Annual Report for the Year 2 Task, identified as BNL Report-82249-2009 and also designated as KAERI/TR-3757/2009. This report describes the research effort performed by BNL for the Year 3 scope of work. The objective is for BNL to develop the seismic fragility capacity for a condensate storage tank with various degradation scenarios. The conservative deterministic failure margin method has been utilized for the undegraded case and has been modified to accommodate the degraded cases. A total of five seismic fragility analysis cases have been described: (1) undegraded case, (2) degraded stainless tank shell, (3) degraded anchor bolts, (4) anchorage concrete cracking, and (5)a perfect combination of the three degradation scenarios. Insights from these fragility analyses are also presented.

Nie, J.; Braverman, J.; Hofmayer, C.; Choun, Y.; Kim, M.; Choi, I.

2010-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

465

GRI workshop on LNG vehicle technology, economics, and safety issues: Focus-group recommendations summary. Topical report, April 29 and 30, 1992  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

GRI organized and conducted the Workshop on LNG Vehicle Technology, Economics, and Safety Issues on April 29 and 30, 1992, in Houston, Texas. The workshop included various presentations, a tour of Houston Metro (LNG bus project) facilities, and focus group discussions. The report documents the recommendations generated by the focus group. There were five separate focus groups with an average of ten members each. They met for 2-1/2 hours to discuss LNG vehicle issues and evolve recommendations for GRI R and D. Fifty-three recommendations were generated and prioritized (through voting) by the focus groups. The report consolidates these recommendations. Recommendations relative to the LNG fuel composition issue received the most votes, followed by consolidated recommendations pertaining to gas venting elimination, safety codes, and odorants or leak detectors. Component development recommendations (in order of votes) included the refueling nozzle, fuel level gage, refueling pump and meter, vehicle pump/regulator/vaporizer, and vehicle tank.

Not Available

1992-07-07T23:59:59.000Z

466

U.S. LNG Imports and Exports (2004-2012) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LNG Imports and Exports (2004-2012) U.S. LNG Imports and Exports (2004-2012) U.S. LNG Imports and Exports (2004-2012) U.S. LNG Imports and Exports (2004-2012)...

467

Base Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Summary)  

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

Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground Storage Base Gas in Underground Storage Working Gas in Underground Storage Underground Storage Injections Underground Storage Withdrawals Underground Storage Net Withdrawals Total Consumption Lease and Plant Fuel Consumption Pipeline & Distribution Use Delivered to Consumers Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Power Period:

468

RECORD OF CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION SEMPRA LNG MARKETING, LLC  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

SEMPRA LNG MARKETING, LLC SEMPRA LNG MARKETING, LLC FE DOCKET NO. lO-llO-LNG PROPOSED ACTIONS: 5empra LNG Marketing, lLC (Sempra) filed an application with the Office of Fossil Energy (FE) on September 2,2010, seeking authorization to export LNG from the Cameron LNG Terminal to any co untry not prohibited by U.S. law or policy. The Application was submitted pursuant to section 3 of the Natural Gas Act and 10 CFR part 590 of the Department of Energy's (DOE) regulations. No new facilities or modification to any existing facilities at the Cameron LNG Terminal are required in order for 5empra to export LNG from that facility. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION TO BE APPLIED: Under th e above circumstances, DOE's NEPA procedures provide for a categorical exclusio n for which neither an environmental assessment (EA) nor an

469

U.S. LNG Markets and Uses: June 2004 Update  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

U.S. LNG Markets and Uses: June 2004 Update This article is an update of the Energy Information Administration’s January 2003 report U.S. LNG Markets

470

An Assessment of Technologies to Provide Extended Sludge Retrieval from Underground Storage Tanks at the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this study was to identify sludge mobilization technologies that can be readily installed in double-shell tanks along with mixer pumps to augment mixer pump operation when mixer pumps do not adequately mobilize waste. The supplementary technologies will mobilize sludge that may accumulate in tank locations out-of-reach of the mixer-pump jet and move the sludge into the mixer-pump range of operation. The identified technologies will be evaluated to determine if their performances and configurations are adequate to meet requirements developed for enhanced sludge removal systems. The study proceeded in three parallel paths to identify technologies that: (1) have been previously deployed or demonstrated in radioactive waste tanks, (2) have been specifically evaluated for their ability to mobilize or dislodge waste simulants with physical and theological properties similar to those anticipated during waste retrieval, and (3) have been used in similar industrial conditions, bu t not specifically evaluated for radioactive waste retrieval.

JA Bamberger