National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for mecs samples establishments

  1. MECS 2006- Forest Products

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Forest Products (NAICS 321, 322) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  2. MECS 2006- Glass

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Glass (NAICS 3272, 327993) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  3. MECS 2006- Cement

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Cement (NAICS 327310) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  4. MECS 2006- Machinery

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Machinery (NAICS 333) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  5. MECS 2006- Plastics

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Plastics (NAICS 326) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  6. MECS 2006- Textiles

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Textiles (NAICS 313-316) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  7. MECS 2006- Transportation Equipment

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Transportation Equipment (NAICS 336) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  8. MECS 2006- Fabricated Metals

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Fabricated Metals (NAICS 332) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  9. MECS 2006- Foundries

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Foundries (NAICS 3315) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  10. Forest Products (2010 MECS)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Forest Products Sector (NAICS 321, 322) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014

  11. MECS Fuel Oil Figures

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

    Energy Consumption Survey (MECS): Consumption of Energy; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM): Statistics for Industry...

  12. Foundries (2010 MECS)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Foundries Sector (NAICS 3315) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014

  13. Manufacturing-Industrial Energy Consumption Survey(MECS) Historical...

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

    reports, data tables and questionnaires Released: May 2008 The Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) is a periodic national sample survey devoted to measuring...

  14. MECS 2006 - Chemicals | Department of Energy

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

    documents Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Chemicals (121.71 KB) More Documents & Publications Chemicals (2010 MECS) MECS 2006 - Alumina and Aluminum MECS 2006 - Cement

  15. MECS 2006 - Petroleum Refining | Department of Energy

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

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Petroleum Refining (123.98 KB) More Documents & Publications Petroleum Refining (2010 MECS) MECS 2006 - Alumina and Aluminum MECS 2006 - ...

  16. MECS 2006- Alumina and Aluminum

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Alumina and Aluminum Sector (NAICS 3313) with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  17. Cement (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Cement (2010 MECS) Cement (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Cement Sector (NAICS 327310) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Cement (126.44 KB) More Documents & Publications MECS 2006 - Cement Glass and Glass Products (2010 MECS) Textiles

  18. Chemicals (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Chemicals (2010 MECS) Chemicals (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Chemicals Sector (NAICS 325) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Chemicals (125.4 KB) More Documents & Publications All Manufacturing (2010 MECS) Cement (2010 MECS) Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment

  19. Food and Beverage (2010 MECS)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Food and Beverage Sector (NAICS 311, 312) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014

  20. MECS 2006- Iron and Steel

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Iron and Steel Sector (NAICS 3311, 3312) with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  1. Alumina and Aluminum (2010 MECS)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Alumina and Aluminum Sector (NAICS 3313) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014

  2. Textiles (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Textiles (2010 MECS) Textiles (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Textiles Sector (NAICS 313-316) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Textiles (124.04 KB) More Documents & Publications MECS 2006 - Textiles Cement (2010 MECS) Glass and Glass Products (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy Sankey Diagrams Manufacturing energy Sankey

  3. Fabricated Metals (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Fabricated Metals (2010 MECS) Fabricated Metals (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Fabricated Metals Sector (NAICS 332) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Fabricated Metals (124.58 KB) More Documents & Publications MECS 2006 - Fabricated Metals Cement (2010 MECS) Glass and Glass Products (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy Sankey

  4. Machinery (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Machinery (2010 MECS) Machinery (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Machinery Sector (NAICS 333) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Machinery (122.63 KB) More Documents & Publications MECS 2006 - Machinery Cement (2010 MECS) Glass and Glass Products (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy Sankey Diagrams Manufacturing energy Sankey

  5. MECS 2006 - All Manufacturing | Department of Energy

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

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint All Manufacturing (NAICS 31-33) (120.28 KB) More Documents & Publications All Manufacturing (2010 MECS) MECS 2006 - Alumina and Aluminum ...

  6. Transportation Equipment (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Transportation Equipment (2010 MECS) Transportation Equipment (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Transportation Equipment Sector (NAICS 336) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Transportation Equipment (125.57 KB) More Documents & Publications MECS 2006 - Transportation Equipment Cement (2010 MECS) Glass and Glass Products (2010

  7. All Manufacturing (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    All Manufacturing (2010 MECS) All Manufacturing (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for All Manufacturing Sector (NAICS 31-33) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: June 2015 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint All Manufacturing (111.63 KB) More Documents & Publications Cement (2010 MECS) Chemicals (2010 MECS) Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment

  8. MECS 2006 - Food and Beverage | Department of Energy

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

    Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Food and Beverage (121.73 KB) More Documents & Publications Food and Beverage (2010 MECS) MECS 2006 - Alumina and Aluminum MECS 2006 - ...

  9. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Residential...

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

    the 2010 MECS show that energy consumption in the manufacturing sector decreased between 2006 and 2010 MECS 2006-2010 - Release date: March 28, 2012 Energy consumption in the U.S. ...

  10. MECS 2006- Computer, Electronics and Appliances

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Manufacturing Energy Footprint for Computer, Electronics and Appliances (NAICS 334, 335) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

  11. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S. Energy

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

    Information Administration (EIA) 8 MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Data Methodology & Forms + EXPAND ALL Consumption of Energy for All Purposes (First Use) Values SIC RSE Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Establishment Counts XLS XLS XLS First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 1998; Level: National

  12. Establishment and maintenance of a Coal Sample Bank and data base

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davis, A.

    1992-11-23

    During the period 7/9/92-10/8/92 a total of 80 samples (30 DOE Sample Bank samples and 50 other Penn State samples) of various sizes, not including DECS-17, were distributed. Fifteen of these samples were provided to DOE contractors. Six orders for a total of 80 30-gram bags of DECS-17 have been filled. All of these bags have been distributed to DOE dispersed catalyst contractors or those approved by DOE to receive the samples. A total of 188 data printouts were distributed. In addition, 15 special data requests were fulfilled by either search/sort and printout or creation of a data disk, resulting in distribution of limited information on over 1089 samples. Several preliminary requests for Sample Bank and Data Base information and price quotations have also been handled.

  13. Establish and Operate a Geologic Core and Sample Repository in Midland, Texas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tyler, Noel

    2000-08-14

    Shell Oil Company donated its proprietary core and sample repository to the Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin, in 1994. This collection of geologic materials is composed of 325,000 boxes of rocks and samples housed in a 32,700-ft{sup 2} warehouse in Midland, Texas. The material includes cores from more than 3,000 wells (75,000 boxes) and cuttings from more than 90,000 wells (260,000 boxes). In addition to the warehouse space, the repository consists of layout rooms, a processing room, and office space. The U.S. Department of Energy provided $375,000 under Grant Number DE-FG22-94BC14854 for organizing the collection, staffing the facility, and making the material available to the public for the first 5 years of operation. Shell Oil Company provided an endowment of $1.3 million to cover the cost of operating the facility after the fifth year of operation.

  14. Structure of the MecI repressor from Staphylococcus aureus in complex with the cognate DNA operator of mec

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Safo, Martin K.; Ko, Tzu-Ping; Musayev, Faik N.; Zhao, Qixun; Archer, Gordon L.

    2006-04-01

    The up-and-down binding of dimeric MecI to mecA dyad DNA may account for the cooperative effect of the repressor. The dimeric repressor MecI regulates the mecA gene that encodes the penicillin-binding protein PBP-2a in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). MecI is similar to BlaI, the repressor for the blaZ gene of β-lactamase. MecI and BlaI can bind to both operator DNA sequences. The crystal structure of MecI in complex with the 32 base-pair cognate DNA of mec was determined to 3.8 Å resolution. MecI is a homodimer and each monomer consists of a compact N-terminal winged-helix domain, which binds to DNA, and a loosely packed C-terminal helical domain, which intertwines with its counter-monomer. The crystal contains horizontal layers of virtual DNA double helices extending in three directions, which are separated by perpendicular DNA segments. Each DNA segment is bound to two MecI dimers. Similar to the BlaI–mec complex, but unlike the MecI–bla complex, the MecI repressors bind to both sides of the mec DNA dyad that contains four conserved sequences of TACA/TGTA. The results confirm the up-and-down binding to the mec operator, which may account for cooperative effect of the repressor.

  15. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S. Energy

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

    Information Administration (EIA) 2 MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Data Methodology & Forms all tables + EXPAND ALL Consumption of Energy for All Purposes (First Use) Values RSE Table 1.1 By Mfg. Industry & Region (physical units) XLS PDF XLS Table 1.2 By Mfg. Industry & Region (trillion Btu) XLS PDF XLS Table 1.3 By Value of Shipments & Employment Size Category & Region XLS PDF Table 1.4 Number of Establishments Using Energy Consumed

  16. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S. Energy

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

    Information Administration (EIA) 10 MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Data Methodology & Forms + EXPAND ALL Consumption of Energy for All Purposes (First Use) Table 1.1 By Mfg. Industry & Region (physical units) XLS PDF Table 1.2 By Mfg. Industry & Region (trillion Btu) XLS PDF Table 1.3 By Value of Shipments & Employment Size Category & Region XLS PDF Table 1.4 Number of Establishments Using Energy Consumed for All Purpose XLS PDF Table

  17. Iron and Steel (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy

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

    Iron and Steel (2010 MECS) Iron and Steel (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Iron and Steel Sector (NAICS 3311, 3312) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Iron and Steel (125.81 KB) More Documents & Publications MECS 2006 - Iron and Steel Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint - Sector: Iron and Steel (NAICS 3311, 3312), October

  18. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Analysis & Projections -

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

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) About the MECS Survey forms Maps MECS Terminology Archives Features First 2010 Data Press Release 2010 Data Brief Other End Use Surveys Commercial Buildings - CBECS Residential - RECS Transportation DOE Uses MECS Data Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprints Associated Analysis Manufacturing Energy Sankey Diagrams Manufacturing Energy Flows Tool Cost of Natural Gas Used in Manufacturing Sector Has Fallen MECS 2010 - Release date: September 6,

  19. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - U.S. Energy Information

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Administration (EIA) U. S. Census Regions and Divisions: census map About the MECS Survey forms Maps MECS Terminology Archives Features First 2010 Data Press Release 2010 Data Brief Other End Use Surveys Commercial Buildings - CBECS Residential - RECS Transportation DOE Uses MECS Data Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprints Associated Analysis Manufacturing Energy Sankey Diagrams Manufacturing Energy Flows Tool

  20. Establishment and maintenance of a Coal Sample Bank and data base. Project status report, July 9, 1992--October 8, 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davis, A.

    1992-11-23

    During the period 7/9/92-10/8/92 a total of 80 samples (30 DOE Sample Bank samples and 50 other Penn State samples) of various sizes, not including DECS-17, were distributed. Fifteen of these samples were provided to DOE contractors. Six orders for a total of 80 30-gram bags of DECS-17 have been filled. All of these bags have been distributed to DOE dispersed catalyst contractors or those approved by DOE to receive the samples. A total of 188 data printouts were distributed. In addition, 15 special data requests were fulfilled by either search/sort and printout or creation of a data disk, resulting in distribution of limited information on over 1089 samples. Several preliminary requests for Sample Bank and Data Base information and price quotations have also been handled.

  1. Technical support document for proposed 1994 revision of the MEC thermal envelope requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conner, C.C.; Lucas, R.G.

    1994-03-01

    This report documents the development of the proposed revision of the Council of American Building Officials` (CABO) 1994 supplement to the 1993 Model Energy Code (MEC) building thermal envelope requirements for maximum component U{sub 0}-value. The 1994 amendments to the 1993 MEC were established in last year`s code change cycle and did not change the envelope requirements. The research underlying the proposed MEC revision was conducted by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Standards program. The goal of this research was to develop revised guidelines based on an objective methodology that determines the most cost-effective (least total cost) combination of energy conservation measures (ECMs) (insulation levels and window types) for residential buildings. This least-cost set of ECMs was used as a basis for proposing revised MEC maximum U{sub 0}-values (thermal transmittances). ECMs include window types (for example, double-pane vinyl) and insulation levels (for example, R-19) for ceilings, walls, and floors.

  2. Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment (2010 MECS) | Department of

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

    Energy Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment (2010 MECS) Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment Sector (NAICS 334, 335) Energy use data source: 2010 EIA MECS (with adjustments) Footprint Last Revised: February 2014 View footprints for other sectors here. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint Computers, Electronics and Electrical Equipment (123.71 KB) More Documents

  3. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S....

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

    Archive MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Special Reports (click on table headings to sort) Title Release Year Cycle Year Format Energy-Related...

  4. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprints (2006 MECS) | Department of

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

    Energy Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprints (2006 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprints (2006 MECS) Energy and Carbon Footprints provide a mapping of energy from supply to end use in manufacturing. They show us where energy is used and lost-and where greenhouse gases (GHGs) are emitted. Footprints are available below for 15 manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for U.S. manufacturing as a whole. Analysis of these footprints is also

  5. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - U.S. Energy Information

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

    Administration (EIA) ‹ Consumption & Efficiency Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) Glossary › FAQS › Overview Data 2010 2006 2002 1998 1994 1991 Archive Analysis & Projections Cost of Natural Gas Used in Manufacturing Sector Has Fallen Graph showing Cost of Natural Gas Used in Manufacturing Sector Has Fallen Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) 1998-2010, September 6, 2013. New 2010 Manufacturing Energy

  6. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Analysis & Projections -

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Data Show Large Reductions in Both Manufacturing Energy Use and the Energy Intensity of Manufacturing Activity between 2002 and 2010 MECS 2010 - Release date: March 19, 2013 Total energy consumption in the manufacturing sector decreased by 17 percent from 2002 to 2010 (Figure 1), according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration's (EIA) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS). line chart:air

  7. LCLS Sample Preparation Laboratory | Sample Preparation Laboratories

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

    LCLS Sample Preparation Laboratory Kayla Zimmerman | (650) 926-6281 Lisa Hammon, LCLS Lab Coordinator Welcome to the LCLS Sample Preparation Laboratory. This small general use wet lab is located in Rm 109 of the Far Experimental Hall near the MEC, CXI, and XCS hutches. It conveniently serves all LCLS hutches and is available for final stage sample preparation. Due to space limitations, certain types of activities may be restricted and all access must be scheduled in advance. User lab bench

  8. Forest Products Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  9. Petroleum Refining Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  10. Textiles Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  11. Chemical Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  12. All Manufacturing Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  13. Aluminum Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  14. Cement Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  15. Foundries Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  16. Cement Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  17. Textiles Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  18. Transportation Equipment Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  19. Foundries Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  20. Fabricated Metals Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-19

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  1. Machinery Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  2. Petroleum Refining Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  3. Aluminum Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  4. Chemicals Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  5. Forest Products Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  6. All Manufacturing Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  7. Fabricated Metals Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  8. Transportation Equipment Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  9. Scheduling-shutdown-2014-MEC v4 web.xlsx

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

    Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue MEC Glenzer Optical-laser-only Glenzer Optical-laser-only Glenzer Albert Optical-laser-only Albert Oct 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21...

  10. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S. Energy

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

    Information Administration (EIA) 1 MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Data Methodology & Forms + EXPAND ALL Consumption of Energy for All Purposes (First Use) Total Primary Consumption of Energy for All Purposes by Census Region, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1991: Part 1 (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units) XLS Total Primary Consumption of Energy for All Purposes by Census Region, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1991: Part 2 (Estimates

  11. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S. Energy

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

    Information Administration (EIA) 4 MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Data Methodology & Forms + EXPAND ALL Consumption of Energy for All Purposes (First Use) Total First Use (formerly Primary Consumption) of Energy for All Purposes by Census Region, Census Division, Industry Group, and Selected Industries, 1994: Part 1 (Estimates in Btu or Physical Units) XLS Total First Use (formerly Primary Consumption) of Energy for All Purposes by Census Region,

  12. Modeling plant-level industrial energy demand with the Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) database and the Longitudinal Research Database (LRD)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd, G.A.; Neifer, M.J.; Ross, M.H.

    1992-08-01

    This report discusses Phase 1 of a project to help the US Department of Energy determine the applicability of the Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) database and the Longitudinal Research Database (LRD) for industrial modeling and analysis. Research was conducted at the US Bureau of the Census; disclosure of the MECS/LRD data used as a basis for this report was subject to the Bureau`s confidentiality restriction. The project is designed to examine the plant-level energy behavior of energy-intensive industries. In Phase 1, six industries at the four-digit standard industrial classification (SIC) level were studied. The utility of analyzing four-digit SIC samples at the plant level is mixed, but the plant-level structure of the MECS/LRD makes analyzing samples disaggregated below the four-digit level feasible, particularly when the MECS/LRD data are combined with trade association or other external data. When external data are used, the validity of using value of shipments as a measure of output for analyzing energy use can also be examined. Phase 1 results indicate that technical efficiency and the distribution of energy intensities vary significantly at the plant level. They also show that the six industries exhibit monopsony-like behavior; that is, energy prices vary significantly at the plant level, with lower prices being correlated with a higher level of energy consumption. Finally, they show to what degree selected energy-intensive products are manufactured outside their primary industry.

  13. Structure of the Mecl Repressor from Staphylococcus aureus in Complex with the Cognate DNA Operator of mec

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Safo,M.; Ko, T.; Musayev, F.; Zhao, Q.; Wang, A.; Archer, G.

    2006-01-01

    The dimeric repressor MecI regulates the mecA gene that encodes the penicillin-binding protein PBP-2a in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). MecI is similar to BlaI, the repressor for the blaZ gene of {beta}-lactamase. MecI and BlaI can bind to both operator DNA sequences. The crystal structure of MecI in complex with the 32 base-pair cognate DNA of mec was determined to 3.8 Angstroms resolution. MecI is a homodimer and each monomer consists of a compact N-terminal winged-helix domain, which binds to DNA, and a loosely packed C-terminal helical domain, which intertwines with its counter-monomer. The crystal contains horizontal layers of virtual DNA double helices extending in three directions, which are separated by perpendicular DNA segments. Each DNA segment is bound to two MecI dimers. Similar to the BlaI-mec complex, but unlike the MecI-bla complex, the MecI repressors bind to both sides of the mec DNA dyad that contains four conserved sequences of TACA/TGTA. The results confirm the up-and-down binding to the mec operator, which may account for cooperative effect of the repressor.

  14. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - Data - U.S. Energy

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

    Information Administration (EIA) 6 MECS Survey Data 2010 | 2006 | 2002 | 1998 | 1994 | 1991 | Archive Data Methodology & Forms 2006 Data Tables Revision notice (November 2009): Tables 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 3.5, 4.1 and 4.2 have been slightly revised due to further editing. The revisions in XLS are indicated with a value of "R" in an adjacent column. In the PDF versions, the revised values are superscripted with an "R". No further revisions are anticipated for

  15. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) - U.S. Energy Information

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Administration (EIA) MECS Terminology A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W XYZ B Barrel: A volumetric unit of measure equivalent to 42 U.S. gallons. Biomass: Organic nonfossil material of biological origin constituting a renewable energy source. Blast Furnace: A shaft furnace in which solid fuel (coke) is burned with an air blast to smelt ore in a continuous operation. Blast Furnace Gas: The waste combustible gas generated in a blast furnace when iron ore is being reduced with coke

  16. Microbial Electrolysis Cells (MECs) for High Yield Hydrogen (H2) Production

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

    from Biodegradable Materials | Department of Energy Electrolysis Cells (MECs) for High Yield Hydrogen (H2) Production from Biodegradable Materials Microbial Electrolysis Cells (MECs) for High Yield Hydrogen (H2) Production from Biodegradable Materials Presentation by Jason Ren, University of Colorado Boulder, at the Biological Hydrogen Production Workshop held September 24-25, 2013, at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado. bio_h2_workshop_ren.pdf (437.03 KB) More

  17. Glass and Fiber Glass Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  18. Computers, Electronics, and Appliances Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  19. Plastics and Rubber Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  20. Iron and Steel Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  1. Food and Beverage Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  2. Iron and Steel Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  3. Glass and Fiber Glass Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  4. Plastics and Rubber Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  5. Computers, Electronics, and Appliances Footprint, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-10-17

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of manufacturing energy use. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high- level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The principle energy use data source is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), for consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  6. Food and Beverage Footprint, December 2010 (MECS 2006)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2010-06-01

    Manufacturing energy and carbon footprints map fuel energy consumption and losses, as well as greenhouse gas emissions from fuel consumption, for fifteen individual U.S. manufacturing sectors (representing 94% of all manufacturing energy use) and for the entire manufacturing industry sector. By providing energy consumption and emissions figures broken down by end use, the footprints allow for comparisons of energy use and emissions sources both within and across sectors. The footprints portray a large amount of information for each sector, including: * Comparison of the energy generated offsite and transferred to facilities versus that generated onsite * Nature and amount of energy consumed by end use within facilities * Magnitude of the energy lost both outside and inside facility boundaries * Magnitude of the greenhouse gas emissions released due to the combustion of fuel. Energy losses indicate opportunities to improve efficiency by implementing energy management best practices, upgrading energy systems, and developing new technologies. Footprints are available below for each sector. Data is presented in two levels of detail. The first page provides a high-level snapshot of the offsite and onsite energy flow, and the second page shows the detail for onsite generation and end use of energy. The energy data is primarily provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), and therefore reflects consumption in the year 2006, when the survey was last completed.

  7. Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint - Sector: Foundries (NAICS 3315), October 2012 (MECS 2006)

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

    281 65 Steam Distribution Losses 1 11 Nonprocess Energy 101 Electricity Generation Steam Generation 281 0 Prepared for the Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) by Energetics Incorporated 26 130 57 Generation and Transmission Losses Generation and Transmission Losses 0 123 Onsite Generation 157 154 4 158 180 0 3 0.0 10.9 10.9 0.2 0.2 4.1 13.3 2.6 16 5.2 16.1 0.9 Fuel Total Energy Total Primary Energy Use: Total Combustion Emissions: TBtu MMT CO 2 e Energy use data source: 2006 MECS (with

  8. Establish a User Agreement

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

    Establish a User Agreement Establish a User Agreement Print Wednesday, 26 August 2009 16:00 User Agreements are Required Before a user group can begin their research at the ALS, a User Agreement between Berkeley Lab and the user's sponsoring organization must be signed. Many organizations already have a signed agreement, however if your organization has not established an agreement, please send an email to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view

  9. Exploring Mbar shock conditions and isochorically heated aluminum at the MEC end station of the LCLS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fletcher, L. B.; Lee, H. J.; SLAC, aff; Barbrel, B.; Gauthier, M.; Galtier, E.; Nagler, B.; Doppner, T.; LePape, S.; Ma, T.; Pak, A.; Turnbull, D.; White, T.; Gregori, G.; Wei, M.; Falcone, R. W.; Heimann, P.; Zastrau, U.; Hastings, J. B.; Glenzer, S. H.

    2015-02-05

    Recent experiments performed at the Matter in Extreme Conditions end station (MEC) of the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) have demonstrated the first spectrally resolved measurements of plasmons from isochorically heated aluminum. The experiments have been performed using a seeded 8-keV x-ray laser beam as a pump and probe to both volumetrically heat and scatter x-rays from aluminum. Collective x-ray Thomson scattering spectra show a well-resolved plasmon feature that is down-shifted in energy by 19 eV. In addition, Mbar shock pressures from laser-compressed aluminum foils using Velocity Interferometer System for Any Reflector (VISAR) have been measured. The combination of experiments fully demonstrates the possibility to perform warm dense matter studies at the LCLS with unprecedented accuracy and precision.

  10. Establish a User Agreement

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

    Establish a User Agreement Print User Agreements are Required Before a user group can begin their research at the ALS, a User Agreement between Berkeley Lab and the user's sponsoring organization must be signed. Many organizations already have a signed agreement, however if your organization has not established an agreement, please send an email to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it to set one up. The User Agreement is valid for up to

  11. Establishing Economic Competitiveness

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

    Establishing Economic Competitiveness Energy storage technologies can transform electric systems operation by providing flexibility. This can improve the efficiency of electric system operation. For example, energy storage systems can smooth the otherwise variable production of renewable energy technologies and help shift the peak demand to reduce peak electric prices. Though energy storage technologies can be game-changing grid technology, they must inevitably compete with alternative

  12. Protections: Sampling

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

    Protections: Sampling Protections: Sampling Protection #3: Sampling for known and unexpected contaminants August 1, 2013 Monitoring stormwater in Los Alamos Canyon Monitoring stormwater in Los Alamos Canyon The Environmental Sampling Board, a key piece of the Strategy, ensures that LANL collects relevant and appropriate data to answer questions about the protection of human and environmental health, and to satisfy regulatory requirements. LANL must demonstrate the data are technically justified

  13. Protections: Sampling

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

    Protection 3: Sampling for known and unexpected contaminants August 1, 2013 Monitoring stormwater in Los Alamos Canyon Monitoring stormwater in Los Alamos Canyon The Environmental ...

  14. Protections: Sampling

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

    and unexpected contaminants August 1, 2013 Monitoring stormwater in Los Alamos Canyon Monitoring stormwater in Los Alamos Canyon The Environmental Sampling Board, a key piece...

  15. SAMPLING SYSTEM

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hannaford, B.A.; Rosenberg, R.; Segaser, C.L.; Terry, C.L.

    1961-01-17

    An apparatus is given for the batch sampling of radioactive liquids such as slurries from a system by remote control, while providing shielding for protection of operating personnel from the harmful effects of radiation.

  16. Sampling box

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Phillips, Terrance D.; Johnson, Craig

    2000-01-01

    An air sampling box that uses a slidable filter tray and a removable filter cartridge to allow for the easy replacement of a filter which catches radioactive particles is disclosed.

  17. Sample Business Plan Framework 5

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    U.S. Department of Energy Better Buildings Neighborhood Program: Sample Business Plan Framework 5: A program that establishes itself as a government entity, then operates using a fee-based structure.

  18. SAMPLING OSCILLOSCOPE

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Sugarman, R.M.

    1960-08-30

    An oscilloscope is designed for displaying transient signal waveforms having random time and amplitude distributions. The oscilloscopc is a sampling device that selects for display a portion of only those waveforms having a particular range of amplitudes. For this purpose a pulse-height analyzer is provided to screen the pulses. A variable voltage-level shifter and a time-scale rampvoltage generator take the pulse height relative to the start of the waveform. The variable voltage shifter produces a voltage level raised one step for each sequential signal waveform to be sampled and this results in an unsmeared record of input signal waveforms. Appropriate delay devices permit each sample waveform to pass its peak amplitude before the circuit selects it for display.

  19. Sampling apparatus

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gordon, Norman R.; King, Lloyd L.; Jackson, Peter O.; Zulich, Alan W.

    1989-01-01

    A sampling apparatus is provided for sampling substances from solid surfaces. The apparatus includes first and second elongated tubular bodies which telescopically and sealingly join relative to one another. An absorbent pad is mounted to the end of a rod which is slidably received through a passageway in the end of one of the joined bodies. The rod is preferably slidably and rotatably received through the passageway, yet provides a selective fluid tight seal relative thereto. A recess is formed in the rod. When the recess and passageway are positioned to be coincident, fluid is permitted to flow through the passageway and around the rod. The pad is preferably laterally orientable relative to the rod and foldably retractable to within one of the bodies. A solvent is provided for wetting of the pad and solubilizing or suspending the material being sampled from a particular surface.

  20. Sampling apparatus

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gordon, N.R.; King, L.L.; Jackson, P.O.; Zulich, A.W.

    1989-07-18

    A sampling apparatus is provided for sampling substances from solid surfaces. The apparatus includes first and second elongated tubular bodies which telescopically and sealingly join relative to one another. An absorbent pad is mounted to the end of a rod which is slidably received through a passageway in the end of one of the joined bodies. The rod is preferably slidably and rotatably received through the passageway, yet provides a selective fluid tight seal relative thereto. A recess is formed in the rod. When the recess and passageway are positioned to be coincident, fluid is permitted to flow through the passageway and around the rod. The pad is preferably laterally orientable relative to the rod and foldably retractable to within one of the bodies. A solvent is provided for wetting of the pad and solubilizing or suspending the material being sampled from a particular surface. 15 figs.

  1. Policy Memorandum #9 - Establishing and Maintaining Competitive...

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

    9 - Establishing and Maintaining Competitive Level Codes Policy Memorandum 9 - Establishing and Maintaining Competitive Level Codes PDF icon Policy Memorandum 9 - Establishing...

  2. Liquid sampling system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Larson, L.L.

    1984-09-17

    A conduit extends from a reservoir through a sampling station and back to the reservoir in a closed loop. A jet ejector in the conduit establishes suction for withdrawing liquid from the reservoir. The conduit has a self-healing septum therein upstream of the jet ejector for receiving one end of a double-ended cannula, the other end of which is received in a serum bottle for sample collection. Gas is introduced into the conduit at a gas bleed between the sample collection bottle and the reservoir. The jet ejector evacuates gas from the conduit and the bottle and aspirates a column of liquid from the reservoir at a high rate. When the withdrawn liquid reaches the jet ejector the rate of flow therethrough reduces substantially and the gas bleed increases the pressure in the conduit for driving liquid into the sample bottle, the gas bleed forming a column of gas behind the withdrawn liquid column and interrupting the withdrawal of liquid from the reservoir. In the case of hazardous and toxic liquids, the sample bottle and the jet ejector may be isolated from the reservoir and may be further isolated from a control station containing remote manipulation means for the sample bottle and control valves for the jet ejector and gas bleed. 5 figs.

  3. Liquid sampling system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Larson, Loren L.

    1987-01-01

    A conduit extends from a reservoir through a sampling station and back to the reservoir in a closed loop. A jet ejector in the conduit establishes suction for withdrawing liquid from the reservoir. The conduit has a self-healing septum therein upstream of the jet ejector for receiving one end of a double-ended cannula, the other end of which is received in a serum bottle for sample collection. Gas is introduced into the conduit at a gas bleed between the sample collection bottle and the reservoir. The jet ejector evacuates gas from the conduit and the bottle and aspirates a column of liquid from the reservoir at a high rate. When the withdrawn liquid reaches the jet ejector the rate of flow therethrough reduces substantially and the gas bleed increases the pressure in the conduit for driving liquid into the sample bottle, the gas bleed forming a column of gas behind the withdrawn liquid column and interrupting the withdrawal of liquid from the reservoir. In the case of hazardous and toxic liquids, the sample bottle and the jet ejector may be isolated from the reservoir and may be further isolated from a control station containing remote manipulation means for the sample bottle and control valves for the jet ejector and gas bleed.

  4. Establishing nuclear facility drill programs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-03-01

    The purpose of DOE Handbook, Establishing Nuclear Facility Drill Programs, is to provide DOE contractor organizations with guidance for development or modification of drill programs that both train on and evaluate facility training and procedures dealing with a variety of abnormal and emergency operating situations likely to occur at a facility. The handbook focuses on conducting drills as part of a training and qualification program (typically within a single facility), and is not intended to included responses of personnel beyond the site boundary, e.g. Local or State Emergency Management, Law Enforcement, etc. Each facility is expected to develop its own facility specific scenarios, and should not limit them to equipment failures but should include personnel injuries and other likely events. A well-developed and consistently administered drill program can effectively provide training and evaluation of facility operating personnel in controlling abnormal and emergency operating situations. To ensure the drills are meeting their intended purpose they should have evaluation criteria for evaluating the knowledge and skills of the facility operating personnel. Training and evaluation of staff skills and knowledge such as component and system interrelationship, reasoning and judgment, team interactions, and communications can be accomplished with drills. The appendices to this Handbook contain both models and additional guidance for establishing drill programs at the Department`s nuclear facilities.

  5. Sample Business Plan Framework 5 | Department of Energy

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

    5 Sample Business Plan Framework 5 U.S. Department of Energy Better Buildings Neighborhood Program: Sample Business Plan Framework 5: A program that establishes itself as a ...

  6. Nuclear Radiological Threat Task Force Established | National...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Radiological Threat Task Force Established Washington, DC NNSA's Administrator Linton Brooks announces the establishment of the Nuclear Radiological Threat Reduction Task ...

  7. Executive Order 13583, Establishing a Coordinated Government...

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

    13583, Establishing a Coordinated Government-Wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce Executive Order 13583, Establishing a Coordinated...

  8. Guidelines Establishing Criteria for Excluding Buildings from...

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

    by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 Guidelines Establishing Criteria for Excluding ... This document contains the Guidelines Establishing Criteria for Excluding Buildings from ...

  9. Recommendation 173: Recommendation to Support Establishment and...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    3: Recommendation to Support Establishment and Continuation of the Office of Communication Recommendation 173: Recommendation to Support Establishment and Continuation of the...

  10. Officials Establish Training Institute, Creating Enterprise Solution...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Officials Establish Training Institute, Creating Enterprise Solution for Worker Safety Officials Establish Training Institute, Creating Enterprise Solution for Worker Safety March ...

  11. Establishment of Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium - Testing

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

    Establishment of Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium - Testing NetworkEstablishment of Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium - Testing Network Establishment of Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium - Testing Network Establishment of Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium - Testing Network The U.S. Department of Energy launched the GMLC in November 2014. The consortium, a strategic partnership between DOE headquarters and the national laboratories, brings together leading experts and

  12. restructuring_mecs94

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

    able to participate--on a limited basis and, for the most part, as participants in pilot projects. There is no reason to believe that the restructuring of the electricity market...

  13. MECS Fuel Oil Tables

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

    202-586-0018 URL: http:www.eia.govemeuconsumptionbriefsmecsmecsfueloiltables.html For questions about content, please contact the National Energy Information Center:...

  14. President Roosevelt Establishes Manhattan Project | National Nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Security Administration | (NNSA) Establishes Manhattan Project President Roosevelt Establishes Manhattan Project Washington, DC President Roosevelt instructs the Army to take responsibility for construction of atomic weapons complex

  15. California - Establishing Transmission Project Review Streamlining...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Regulatory Guidance - Supplemental Material: California - Establishing Transmission Project Review Streamlining DirectivesPermittingRegulatory GuidanceSupplemental Material...

  16. Recommendation 198: Establish a site transition process

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The ORSSAB recommends DOE Establish a Site Transition Process Upon Completion of Remediation at Ongoing Mission Sites.

  17. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Salmon, Mississippi, Site, Water Sampling Location Map .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  18. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........1 Water Sampling Locations at the Rulison, .........3 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  19. Air Sampling System Evaluation Template

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2000-05-09

    The ASSET1.0 software provides a template with which a user can evaluate an Air Sampling System against the latest version of ANSI N13.1 "Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances from the Stacks and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities". The software uses the ANSI N13.1 PIC levels to establish basic design criteria for the existing or proposed sampling system. The software looks at such criteria as PIC level, type of radionuclide emissions, physical state ofmore » the radionuclide, nozzle entrance effects, particulate transmission effects, system and component accuracy and precision evaluations, and basic system operations to provide a detailed look at the subsystems of a monitoring and sampling system/program. A GAP evaluation can then be completed which leads to identification of design and operational flaws in the proposed systems. Corrective measures can then be limited to the GAPs.« less

  20. The Ocean Sampling Day Consortium

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kopf, Anna; Bicak, Mesude; Kottmann, Renzo; Schnetzer, Julia; Kostadinov, Ivaylo; Lehmann, Katja; Fernandez-Guerra, Antonio; Jeanthon, Christian; Rahav, Eyal; Ullrich, Matthias; Wichels, Antje; Gerdts, Gunnar; Polymenakou, Paraskevi; Kotoulas, Giorgos; Siam, Rania; Abdallah, Rehab Z.; Sonnenschein, Eva C.; Cariou, Thierry; O’Gara, Fergal; Jackson, Stephen; Orlic, Sandi; Steinke, Michael; Busch, Julia; Duarte, Bernardo; Caçador, Isabel; Canning-Clode, João; Bobrova, Oleksandra; Marteinsson, Viggo; Reynisson, Eyjolfur; Loureiro, Clara Magalhães; Luna, Gian Marco; Quero, Grazia Marina; Löscher, Carolin R.; Kremp, Anke; DeLorenzo, Marie E.; Øvreås, Lise; Tolman, Jennifer; LaRoche, Julie; Penna, Antonella; Frischer, Marc; Davis, Timothy; Katherine, Barker; Meyer, Christopher P.; Ramos, Sandra; Magalhães, Catarina; Jude-Lemeilleur, Florence; Aguirre-Macedo, Ma Leopoldina; Wang, Shiao; Poulton, Nicole; Jones, Scott; Collin, Rachel; Fuhrman, Jed A.; Conan, Pascal; Alonso, Cecilia; Stambler, Noga; Goodwin, Kelly; Yakimov, Michael M.; Baltar, Federico; Bodrossy, Levente; Van De Kamp, Jodie; Frampton, Dion M. F.; Ostrowski, Martin; Van Ruth, Paul; Malthouse, Paul; Claus, Simon; Deneudt, Klaas; Mortelmans, Jonas; Pitois, Sophie; Wallom, David; Salter, Ian; Costa, Rodrigo; Schroeder, Declan C.; Kandil, Mahrous M.; Amaral, Valentina; Biancalana, Florencia; Santana, Rafael; Pedrotti, Maria Luiza; Yoshida, Takashi; Ogata, Hiroyuki; Ingleton, Tim; Munnik, Kate; Rodriguez-Ezpeleta, Naiara; Berteaux-Lecellier, Veronique; Wecker, Patricia; Cancio, Ibon; Vaulot, Daniel; Bienhold, Christina; Ghazal, Hassan; Chaouni, Bouchra; Essayeh, Soumya; Ettamimi, Sara; Zaid, El Houcine; Boukhatem, Noureddine; Bouali, Abderrahim; Chahboune, Rajaa; Barrijal, Said; Timinouni, Mohammed; El Otmani, Fatima; Bennani, Mohamed; Mea, Marianna; Todorova, Nadezhda; Karamfilov, Ventzislav; ten Hoopen, Petra; Cochrane, Guy; L’Haridon, Stephane; Bizsel, Kemal Can; Vezzi, Alessandro; Lauro, Federico M.; Martin, Patrick; Jensen, Rachelle M.; Hinks, Jamie; Gebbels, Susan; Rosselli, Riccardo; De Pascale, Fabio; Schiavon, Riccardo; dos Santos, Antonina; Villar, Emilie; Pesant, Stéphane; Cataletto, Bruno; Malfatti, Francesca; Edirisinghe, Ranjith; Silveira, Jorge A. Herrera; Barbier, Michele; Turk, Valentina; Tinta, Tinkara; Fuller, Wayne J.; Salihoglu, Ilkay; Serakinci, Nedime; Ergoren, Mahmut Cerkez; Bresnan, Eileen; Iriberri, Juan; Nyhus, Paul Anders Fronth; Bente, Edvardsen; Karlsen, Hans Erik; Golyshin, Peter N.; Gasol, Josep M.; Moncheva, Snejana; Dzhembekova, Nina; Johnson, Zackary; Sinigalliano, Christopher David; Gidley, Maribeth Louise; Zingone, Adriana; Danovaro, Roberto; Tsiamis, George; Clark, Melody S.; Costa, Ana Cristina; El Bour, Monia; Martins, Ana M.; Collins, R. Eric; Ducluzeau, Anne-Lise; Martinez, Jonathan; Costello, Mark J.; Amaral-Zettler, Linda A.; Gilbert, Jack A.; Davies, Neil; Field, Dawn; Glöckner, Frank Oliver

    2015-06-19

    In this study, Ocean Sampling Day was initiated by the EU-funded Micro B3 (Marine Microbial Biodiversity, Bioinformatics, Biotechnology) project to obtain a snapshot of the marine microbial biodiversity and function of the world’s oceans. It is a simultaneous global mega-sequencing campaign aiming to generate the largest standardized microbial data set in a single day. This will be achievable only through the coordinated efforts of an Ocean Sampling Day Consortium, supportive partnerships and networks between sites. This commentary outlines the establishment, function and aims of the Consortium and describes our vision for a sustainable study of marine microbial communities and their embedded functional traits.

  1. New Presidential Memorandum on establishing Quadrennial Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    New Presidential Memorandum on establishing Quadrennial Energy Review Home > Blogs > Graham7781's blog Graham7781's picture Submitted by Graham7781(2017) Super contributor 16...

  2. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    4 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Slick Rock, Colorado, Processing Sites .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  3. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Green River, Utah, Disposal Site August 2014 LMSGRN.........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  4. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and May 2014 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Shiprock, New Mexico, Disposal .........9 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  5. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Rio Blanco, Colorado, Site October 2014 LMSRBLS00514 .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  6. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Natural Gas and Produced Water Sampling at the Rulison, Colorado, Site November 2014 LMS.........3 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  7. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    5 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Rulison, Colorado, Site October 2015 LMS.........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  8. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Monticello, Utah, Processing Site July 2015 LMSMNT.........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  9. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    2015 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Shiprock, New Mexico, Disposal Site .........9 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  10. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Rio Blanco, Colorado, Site October 2015 LMSRBLS00515 .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  11. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    5 Produced Water Sampling at the Rulison, Colorado, Site May 2015 LMSRULS00115 Available .........3 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  12. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Natural Gas and Produced Water Sampling at the Gasbuggy, New Mexico, Site December 2013 .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  13. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Produced Water Sampling at the Rulison, Colorado, Site January 2016 LMSRULS00915 .........3 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  14. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    3 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Monument Valley, Arizona, Processing Site .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  15. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    July 2015 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Gunnison, Colorado, Processing .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  16. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Monticello, Utah, Processing Site July 2014 LMSMNT.........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  17. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    3 Water Sampling at the Monticello, Utah, Processing Site January 2014 LMSMNTS01013 This .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  18. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Naturita, Colorado Processing Site October 2013 LMSNAP.........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  19. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    4 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Gunnison, Colorado, Processing Site .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  20. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Tuba City, Arizona, Disposal Site November 2013 LMSTUB.........9 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  1. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    5 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Monticello, Utah, Processing Site January .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  2. PCB Analysis Plan for Tank Archive Samples

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NGUYEN, D.M.

    2001-03-22

    This analysis plan specifies laboratory analysis, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), and data reporting requirements for analyzing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) concentrations in archive samples. Tank waste archive samples that are planned for PCB analysis are identified in Nguyen 2001. The tanks and samples are summarized in Table 1-1. The analytical data will be used to establish a PCB baseline inventory in Hanford tanks.

  3. Hanford Sampling Quality Management Plan (HSQMP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hyatt, J.E.

    1995-06-01

    HSQMP establishes quality requirements in response to DOE Order 5700. 6C and to 10 Code of Federal Regulations 830.120. HSQMP is designed to meet the needs of Richland Operations Office for controlling the quality of services provided by sampling operations. It is issued through the Analytical Services Program of the Waste Programs Division. This document describes the Environmental Sampling and Analysis Program activities considered to represent the best management activities necessary to achieve a sampling program with adequate control.

  4. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ... Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Interference Check Sample (ICS) Analysis ICP interference check samples ICSA and ICSAB were analyzed at the required frequency to verify the ...

  5. Visual Sample Plan Flyer

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    This flyer better explains that VSP is a free, easy-to-use software tool that supports development of optimal sampling plans based on statistical sampling theory.

  6. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    5 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Tuba City, Arizona Disposal Site June 2015 .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ...

  7. Tank characterization technical sampling basis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, T.M.

    1998-04-28

    Tank Characterization Technical Sampling Basis (this document) is the first step of an in place working process to plan characterization activities in an optimal manner. This document will be used to develop the revision of the Waste Information Requirements Document (WIRD) (Winkelman et al. 1997) and ultimately, to create sampling schedules. The revised WIRD will define all Characterization Project activities over the course of subsequent fiscal years 1999 through 2002. This document establishes priorities for sampling and characterization activities conducted under the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Tank Waste Characterization Project. The Tank Waste Characterization Project is designed to provide all TWRS programs with information describing the physical, chemical, and radiological properties of the contents of waste storage tanks at the Hanford Site. These tanks contain radioactive waste generated from the production of nuclear weapons materials at the Hanford Site. The waste composition varies from tank to tank because of the large number of chemical processes that were used when producing nuclear weapons materials over the years and because the wastes were mixed during efforts to better use tank storage space. The Tank Waste Characterization Project mission is to provide information and waste sample material necessary for TWRS to define and maintain safe interim storage and to process waste fractions into stable forms for ultimate disposal. This document integrates the information needed to address safety issues, regulatory requirements, and retrieval, treatment, and immobilization requirements. Characterization sampling to support tank farm operational needs is also discussed.

  8. Establishing a Comprehensive Wind Energy Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fleeter, Sanford

    2012-09-30

    This project was directed at establishing a comprehensive wind energy program in Indiana, including both educational and research components. A graduate/undergraduate course ME-514 - Fundamentals of Wind Energy has been established and offered and an interactive prediction of VAWT performance developed. Vertical axis wind turbines for education and research have been acquired, instrumented and installed on the roof top of a building on the Calumet campus and at West Lafayette (Kepner Lab). Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) calculations have been performed to simulate these urban wind environments. Also, modal dynamic testing of the West Lafayette VAWT has been performed and a novel horizontal axis design initiated. The 50-meter meteorological tower data obtained at the Purdue Beck Agricultural Research Center have been analyzed and the Purdue Reconfigurable Micro Wind Farm established and simulations directed at the investigation of wind farm configurations initiated. The virtual wind turbine and wind turbine farm simulation in the Visualization Lab has been initiated.

  9. Fluid sampling tool

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Garcia, Anthony R.; Johnston, Roger G.; Martinez, Ronald K.

    2000-01-01

    A fluid-sampling tool for obtaining a fluid sample from a container. When used in combination with a rotatable drill, the tool bores a hole into a container wall, withdraws a fluid sample from the container, and seals the borehole. The tool collects fluid sample without exposing the operator or the environment to the fluid or to wall shavings from the container.

  10. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Equipment Blank Data ...

  11. 2003 CBECS Sample Design

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

    during the field period. The rate of nonresponse cases where the respondent spoke a language other than English was notably higher for establishments than for buildings (9...

  12. The Sample Preparation Laboratories | Sample Preparation Laboratories

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

    Cynthia Patty 1 Sam Webb 2 John Bargar 3 Arizona 4 Chemicals 5 Team Work 6 Bottles 7 Glass 8 Plan Ahead! See the tabs above for Laboratory Access and forms you'll need to complete. Equipment and Chemicals tabs detail resources already available on site. Avoid delays! Hazardous materials use may require a written Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) before you work. Check the Chemicals tab for more information. The Sample Preparation Laboratories The Sample Preparation Laboratories provide wet lab

  13. The Ocean Sampling Day Consortium

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

    Kopf, Anna; Bicak, Mesude; Kottmann, Renzo; Schnetzer, Julia; Kostadinov, Ivaylo; Lehmann, Katja; Fernandez-Guerra, Antonio; Jeanthon, Christian; Rahav, Eyal; Ullrich, Matthias; et al

    2015-06-19

    In this study, Ocean Sampling Day was initiated by the EU-funded Micro B3 (Marine Microbial Biodiversity, Bioinformatics, Biotechnology) project to obtain a snapshot of the marine microbial biodiversity and function of the world’s oceans. It is a simultaneous global mega-sequencing campaign aiming to generate the largest standardized microbial data set in a single day. This will be achievable only through the coordinated efforts of an Ocean Sampling Day Consortium, supportive partnerships and networks between sites. This commentary outlines the establishment, function and aims of the Consortium and describes our vision for a sustainable study of marine microbial communities and theirmore » embedded functional traits.« less

  14. Rain sampling device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Nelson, D.A.; Tomich, S.D.; Glover, D.W.; Allen, E.V.; Hales, J.M.; Dana, M.T.

    1991-05-14

    The present invention constitutes a rain sampling device adapted for independent operation at locations remote from the user which allows rainfall to be sampled in accordance with any schedule desired by the user. The rain sampling device includes a mechanism for directing wet precipitation into a chamber, a chamber for temporarily holding the precipitation during the process of collection, a valve mechanism for controllably releasing samples of the precipitation from the chamber, a means for distributing the samples released from the holding chamber into vessels adapted for permanently retaining these samples, and an electrical mechanism for regulating the operation of the device. 11 figures.

  15. Rain sampling device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Nelson, Danny A.; Tomich, Stanley D.; Glover, Donald W.; Allen, Errol V.; Hales, Jeremy M.; Dana, Marshall T.

    1991-01-01

    The present invention constitutes a rain sampling device adapted for independent operation at locations remote from the user which allows rainfall to be sampled in accordance with any schedule desired by the user. The rain sampling device includes a mechanism for directing wet precipitation into a chamber, a chamber for temporarily holding the precipitation during the process of collection, a valve mechanism for controllably releasing samples of said precipitation from said chamber, a means for distributing the samples released from the holding chamber into vessels adapted for permanently retaining these samples, and an electrical mechanism for regulating the operation of the device.

  16. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ... 100, 17B, 1A, 72, and 81 were classified as Category II. The sample results were qualified with a "Q" flag, indicating the data are qualitative because of the sampling technique. ...

  17. Water and Sediment Sampling

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

    MDC Blank 7222014 Below MDC Below MDC Water Sampling Results Location Sample Date WIPP ... Tut Tank 3132014 Below MDC Below MDC Fresh Water Tank 3122014 Below MDC Below MDC Hill ...

  18. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ... the applicable MDL. Inductively Coupled Plasma Interference Check Sample Analysis ... and background correction factors for all inductively coupled plasma instruments. ...

  19. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Static Water Level Data Time-Concentration Graphs ...

  20. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........9 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Data Durango Processing Site Surface Water Quality Data Equipment Blank Data Static ...

  1. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........3 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Natural Gas Analysis Data ...

  2. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Static Water Level Data Hydrographs Time-Concentration ...

  3. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Static Water Level Data Hydrograph Time-Concentration ...

  4. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Time-Concentration Graph ...

  5. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Quality Data Equipment Blank Data Static Water Level Data Time-Concentration Graphs ...

  6. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Static Water Level Data Time-Concentration Graphs ...

  7. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........9 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Static Water Level Data ...

  8. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........3 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Time-Concentration Graphs ...

  9. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........7 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Equipment Blank Data Static ...

  10. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    .........5 Water Sampling Field Activities Verification ... Groundwater Quality Data Surface Water Quality Data Equipment Blank Data Static ...

  11. Establishing and operating an incident response team

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Padgett, K.M.

    1992-01-01

    Occurrences of improprieties dealing with computer usage are on the increase. They range all the way from misuse by employees to international computer telecommunications hacking. In addition, natural disasters and other disasters such as catastrophic fires may also fall into the same category. These incidents, like any other breach of acceptable behavior, may or may not involve actual law breaking. A computer incident response team should be created as a first priority. This report discusses the establishment and operation of a response team.

  12. Establishing and operating an incident response team

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Padgett, K.M.

    1992-09-01

    Occurrences of improprieties dealing with computer usage are on the increase. They range all the way from misuse by employees to international computer telecommunications hacking. In addition, natural disasters and other disasters such as catastrophic fires may also fall into the same category. These incidents, like any other breach of acceptable behavior, may or may not involve actual law breaking. A computer incident response team should be created as a first priority. This report discusses the establishment and operation of a response team.

  13. NREL Establishes New Center for Distributed Power

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

    Establishes New Center for Distributed Power Changing Electricity Market Demands Greater Flexibility, New Solutions For more information contact: Gary Schmitz, 303-275-4050 email: Gary Schmitz Golden, Colo., Jan. 8, 2001 - The nation's straining electrical generation system can be enhanced by moving away from an historic reliance on "mega" power plants and toward a network of dispersed, smaller-scale generation facilities. That concept, known as "distributed power," will be

  14. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Water Sampling at the Ambrosia Lake, New Mexico, Disposal Site February 2015 LMS/AMB/S01114 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-November 2014, Ambrosia Lake, New Mexico February 2015 RIN 14116607 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Ambrosia Lake, NM, Disposal Site Planned Sampling Map...........................................................3 Data

  15. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Sampling at the Ambrosia Lake, New Mexico, Disposal Site March 2016 LMS/AMB/S01215 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-December 2015, Ambrosia Lake, New Mexico March 2016 RIN 15117494 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Ambrosia Lake, NM, Disposal Site Planned Sampling Map...........................................................3 Data Assessment

  16. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    October 2013 Groundwater Sampling at the Bluewater, New Mexico, Disposal Site December 2013 LMS/BLU/S00813 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-August and October 2013, Bluewater, New Mexico December 2013 RIN 13085537 and 13095651 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Private Wells Sampled August 2013 and October 2013, Bluewater, NM, Disposal Site

  17. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and Surface Water Sampling at the Monument Valley, Arizona, Processing Site February 2015 LMS/MON/S01214 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-December 2014, Monument Valley, Arizona February 2015 RIN 14126645 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Monument Valley, Arizona, Disposal Site Sample Location Map ..................................................5

  18. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    4 Alternate Water Supply System Sampling at the Riverton, Wyoming, Processing Site May 2014 LMS/RVT/S00314 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-March 2014, Riverton, Wyoming May 2014 RIN 14035986 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Riverton, WY, Processing Site, Sample Location Map ...................................................................3 Data

  19. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    February 2015 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Grand Junction, Colorado, Site April 2015 LMS/GJO/S00215 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-February 2015, Grand Junction, Colorado, Site April 2015 RIN 15026795 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Grand Junction, Colorado, Site Sample Location Map

  20. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Sampling at the Grand Junction, Colorado, Disposal Site November 2013 LMS/GRJ/S00813 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-August 2013, Grand Junction, Colorado November 2013 RIN 13075515 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Grand Junction, Colorado, Disposal Site Sample Location Map ....................................................3 Data Assessment

  1. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Old and New Rifle, Colorado, Processing Sites August 2013 LMS/RFN/RFO/S00613 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-June 2013, Rifle, Colorado August 2013 RIN 13065380 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Sample Location Map, New Rifle, Colorado, Processing Site ........................................................5 Sample Location Map, Old Rifle,

  2. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Slick Rock East and West, Colorado, Processing Sites November 2013 LMS/SRE/SRW/S0913 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-September 2013, Slick Rock, Colorado November 2013 RIN 13095593 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Slick Rock East and West, Colorado, Processing Sites, Sample Location Map

  3. Aerosol sampling system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Masquelier, Donald A.

    2004-02-10

    A system for sampling air and collecting particulate of a predetermined particle size range. A low pass section has an opening of a preselected size for gathering the air but excluding particles larger than the sample particles. An impactor section is connected to the low pass section and separates the air flow into a bypass air flow that does not contain the sample particles and a product air flow that does contain the sample particles. A wetted-wall cyclone collector, connected to the impactor section, receives the product air flow and traps the sample particles in a liquid.

  4. Sample Project Execution Plan

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    The project execution plan (PEP) is the governing document that establishes the means to execute, monitor, and control projects.  The plan serves as the main communication vehicle to ensure that...

  5. Sample Proficiency Test exercise

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alcaraz, A; Gregg, H; Koester, C

    2006-02-05

    The current format of the OPCW proficiency tests has multiple sets of 2 samples sent to an analysis laboratory. In each sample set, one is identified as a sample, the other as a blank. This method of conducting proficiency tests differs from how an OPCW designated laboratory would receive authentic samples (a set of three containers, each not identified, consisting of the authentic sample, a control sample, and a blank sample). This exercise was designed to test the reporting if the proficiency tests were to be conducted. As such, this is not an official OPCW proficiency test, and the attached report is one method by which LLNL might report their analyses under a more realistic testing scheme. Therefore, the title on the report ''Report of the Umpteenth Official OPCW Proficiency Test'' is meaningless, and provides a bit of whimsy for the analyses and readers of the report.

  6. Defining And Characterizing Sample Representativeness For DWPF Melter Feed Samples

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shine, E. P.; Poirier, M. R.

    2013-10-29

    statisticians used carefully thought out designs that systematically and economically provided plans for data collection from the DWPF process. Key shared features of the sampling designs used at DWPF and the Gy sampling methodology were the specification of a standard for sample representativeness, an investigation that produced data from the process to study the sampling function, and a decision framework used to assess whether the specification was met based on the data. Without going into detail with regard to the seven errors identified by Pierre Gy, as excellent summaries are readily available such as Pitard [1989] and Smith [2001], SRS engineers understood, for example, that samplers can be biased (Gy�s extraction error), and developed plans to mitigate those biases. Experiments that compared installed samplers with more representative samples obtained directly from the tank may not have resulted in systematically partitioning sampling errors into the now well-known error categories of Gy, but did provide overall information on the suitability of sampling systems. Most of the designs in this report are related to the DWPF vessels, not the large SRS Tank Farm tanks. Samples from the DWPF Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME), which contains the feed to the DWPF melter, are characterized using standardized analytical methods with known uncertainty. The analytical error is combined with the established error from sampling and processing in DWPF to determine the melter feed composition. This composition is used with the known uncertainty of the models in the Product Composition Control System (PCCS) to ensure that the wasteform that is produced is comfortably within the acceptable processing and product performance region. Having the advantage of many years of processing that meets the waste glass product acceptance criteria, the DWPF process has provided a considerable amount of data about itself in addition to the data from many special studies. Demonstrating representative

  7. Appendix D: Chapter 4 - Establish a Process

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

    D April 2016 APPENDIX D: Chapter 4 - Establish a Process Appendix D-1: At-A-Glance - Owner Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Appendix D-2: At-A-Glance - Request for Proposals (RFP) to Pre-Qualify ESCOs Appendix D-3: At-A-Glance - Final ESCO Selection Appendix D-4: At-A-Glance - ESCO Base Contract (Contract for Pre-Qualified ESCOs) Appendix D-5: At-A-Glance - Investment Grade Audit (IGA) and Project Proposal Contract Appendix D-6: At-A-Glance - Energy Savings Performance Contract Appendix D-7:

  8. Visualization of information with an established order

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Wong, Pak Chung; Foote, Harlan P.; Thomas, James J.; Wong, Kwong-Kwok

    2007-02-13

    Among the embodiments of the present invention is a system including one or more processors operable to access data representative of a biopolymer sequence of monomer units. The one or more processors are further operable to establish a pattern corresponding to at least one fractal curve and generate one or more output signals corresponding to a number of image elements each representative of one of the monomer units. Also included is a display device responsive to the one or more output signals to visualize the biopolymer sequence by displaying the image elements in accordance with the pattern.

  9. Establishing Ergonomics in Industrially Developing Countries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stewart, K; Silverstein, B; Kiefer, M

    2005-08-29

    The introduction of ergonomics is an ongoing effort in industrially developing countries and will ultimately require an organized, programmatic approach spanning several countries and organizations. Our preliminary efforts with our partner countries of Viet Nam, Thailand, and Nicaragua have demonstrated that a one-time course is just the first step in a series of necessary events to provide skills and create an infrastructure that will have lasting impact for the host country. To facilitate that any sort of training has a lasting impact, it is recommended that host countries establish a 'contract' with class participants and the guest instructors for at least one follow-up visit so instructors can see the progress and support the participants in current and future efforts. With repeated exchanges, the class participants can become the 'in country experts' and the next generation of ergonomic trainers. Additionally, providing participants with an easy to use hazard assessment tool and methods for evaluating the financial impact of the project (cost/benefit analysis) will assist increase the likelihood of success and establish a foundation for future projects. In the future, developing trade and regionally/culturally specific 'ergonomics toolkits' can help promote broader implementation, especially where training resources may be limited.

  10. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    and September 2013 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Durango, Colorado, Disposal and Processing Sites March 2014 LMS/DUD/DUP/S00613 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-June and September 2013, Durango, Colorado March 2014 RIN 13055370 and 13085577 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Durango, Colorado, Disposal Site Sample Location Map-June

  11. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ... The gross alpha, gross beta, radium-226, and radium-228 method blank results were below the DLC. Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Interference Check Sample (ICS) Analysis ICP ...

  12. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Groundwater, Surface Water, and Alternate Water Supply System Sampling at the Riverton, Wyoming, Processing Site December 2013 LMSRVTS00913 This page intentionally left blank ...

  13. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Bluewater, New Mexico, Disposal Site February 2014 LMS/BLU/S01113 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-November 2013, Bluewater, New Mexico February 2014 RIN 13115746 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Bluewater, New Mexico, Disposal Site Sample Location Map.......................................................5 Data Assessment Summary

  14. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Burrell, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site January 2014 LMS/BUR/S01113 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-November 2013, Burrell, Pennsylvania January 2014 RIN 13095638 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Burrell, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site, Sample Location Map ..........................................................3 Data Assessment Summary

  15. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site February 2014 LMS/CAN/S01113 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-November 2013, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania February 2014 RIN 13095639 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site, Sample Location Map ..................................................3 Data Assessment Summary

  16. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Green River, Utah, Disposal Site August 2013 LMS/GRN/S00613 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-June 2013, Green River, Utah August 2013 RIN 13065402 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Data Assessment Summary ..............................................................................................................7 Water Sampling Field Activities

  17. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Disposal Site August 2014 LMS/LKD/S00514 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-May 2014, Lakeview, Oregon, Disposal August 2014 RIN 14056157 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Lakeview, Oregon, Disposal Site, Sample Location Map ...............................................................3 Data Assessment Summary

  18. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Processing Site August 2014 LMS/LKP/S00514 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-May 2014, Lakeview, Oregon, Processing August 2014 RIN 14056157 and 14056158 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Lakeview, Oregon, Processing Site, Sample Location Map ............................................................3 Data Assessment Summary

  19. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Riverton, Wyoming, Processing Site September 2013 LMS/RVT/S00613 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-June 2013, Riverton, Wyoming September 2013 RIN 13065379 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Riverton, Wyoming, Processing Site, Sample Location Map .........................................................5 Data Assessment Summary

  20. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Riverton, Wyoming, Processing Site February 2016 LMS/RVT/S00915 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-September 2015, Riverton, Wyoming February 2016 RINs 15097345, 15097346, and 15097347 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Riverton, Wyoming, Processing Site Planned Sampling Location Map .........................................7 Data Assessment Summary

  1. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Rifle, Colorado, New and Old Processing Sites January 2014 LMS/RFN/RFO/S01113 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-November 2013, Rifle, Colorado January 2014 RIN 13115731 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 New Rifle, Colorado, Processing Site, Sample Location Map ........................................................5 Old Rifle, Colorado, Processing

  2. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Old and New Rifle, Colorado, Processing Sites January 2015 LMS/RFN/RFO/S01114 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-November 2014, Rifle, Colorado January 2015 RINs 14106568 and 14106569 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 New Rifle, Colorado, Processing Site, Planned Sampling Map ......................................................3 Old Rifle,

  3. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Slick Rock, Colorado, Processing Sites January 2016 LMS/SRE/SRW/S00915 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy DVP-September 2015, Slick Rock, Colorado January 2016 RINs 15087319 and 15107424 Page i Contents Sampling Event Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Slick Rock, Colorado, Processing Sites, Sample Location Map .....................................................5 Data Assessment

  4. Creating Sample Plans

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1999-03-24

    The program has been designed to increase the accuracy and reduce the preparation time for completing sampling plans. It consists of our files 1. Analyte/Combination (AnalCombo) A list of analytes and combinations of analytes that can be requested of the onsite and offsite labs. Whenever a specific combination of analytes or suite names appear on the same line as the code number, this indicates that one sample can be placed in one bottle to bemore » analyzed for these paremeters. A code number is assigned for each analyte and combination of analytes. 2. Sampling Plans Database (SPDb) A database that contains all of the analytes and combinations of analytes along with the basic information required for preparing a sample plan. That basic information includes the following fields; matrix, hold time, preservation, sample volume, container size, if the bottle caps are taped, acceptable choices. 3. Sampling plans create (SPcreate) a file that will lookup information from the Sampling Plans Database and the Job Log File (JLF98) A major database used by Sample Managemnet Services for recording more than 100 fields of information.« less

  5. Sampling system and method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Decker, David L.; Lyles, Brad F.; Purcell, Richard G.; Hershey, Ronald Lee

    2013-04-16

    The present disclosure provides an apparatus and method for coupling conduit segments together. A first pump obtains a sample and transmits it through a first conduit to a reservoir accessible by a second pump. The second pump further conducts the sample from the reservoir through a second conduit.

  6. Adaptive Sampling Proxy Application

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-10-22

    ASPA is an implementation of an adaptive sampling algorithm [1-3], which is used to reduce the computational expense of computer simulations that couple disparate physical scales. The purpose of ASPA is to encapsulate the algorithms required for adaptive sampling independently from any specific application, so that alternative algorithms and programming models for exascale computers can be investigated more easily.

  7. Biological sample collector

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Murphy, Gloria A.

    2010-09-07

    A biological sample collector is adapted to a collect several biological samples in a plurality of filter wells. A biological sample collector may comprise a manifold plate for mounting a filter plate thereon, the filter plate having a plurality of filter wells therein; a hollow slider for engaging and positioning a tube that slides therethrough; and a slide case within which the hollow slider travels to allow the tube to be aligned with a selected filter well of the plurality of filter wells, wherein when the tube is aligned with the selected filter well, the tube is pushed through the hollow slider and into the selected filter well to sealingly engage the selected filter well and to allow the tube to deposit a biological sample onto a filter in the bottom of the selected filter well. The biological sample collector may be portable.

  8. San Jose, California, Partners With Established Community Groups...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    California, Partners With Established Community Groups to Win Over Homeowners San Jose, California, Partners With Established Community Groups to Win Over Homeowners A photo of a ...

  9. Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief...

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

    Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief Financial Officer Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief Financial Officer Neal Elliot ...

  10. Bush Administration Establishes Program to Reduce Foreign Oil...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Establishes Program to Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency, Greenhouse Gases Bush Administration Establishes Program to Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency, Greenhouse Gases April 10, 2007 - ...

  11. Study of Factors Affecting Shrub Establishment on the Monticello...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Study of Factors Affecting Shrub Establishment on the Monticello, Utah, Disposal Cell Cover Study of Factors Affecting Shrub Establishment on the Monticello, Utah, Disposal Cell...

  12. Joint Venture Established Between Russian Weapons Plant And the...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home Library Press Releases Joint Venture Established Between Russian Weapons Plant ... Joint Venture Established...

  13. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    ... 10 pCiL Liquid Scintillation LMR-15 Uranium Vanadium Zinc Total No. of Analytes 4 0 ... 26, 2013 TO: Rick Findlay FROM: Jeff Price SUBJECT: Trip Report (LTHMP Sampling) ...

  14. Water Sample Concentrator

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Idaho National Laboratory

    2010-01-08

    Automated portable device that concentrates and packages a sample of suspected contaminated water for safe, efficient transport to a qualified analytical laboratory. This technology will help safeguard against pathogen contamination or chemical and biolog

  15. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Groundwater, Surface Water, Produced Water, and Natural Gas Sampling at the Gasbuggy, New Mexico, Site October 2014 LMSGSBS00614 Available for sale to the public from: U.S. ...

  16. Establishment of the International Power Institute

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coles, Julius E.

    2000-04-29

    Building on the two previous trips to Central America last year, International Power Institute (IPI) and its partner Tennessee Valley Infrastructure Group (TVIG) have focused their attention this quarter on project sites in Honduras. TVIG's unit--an Integrated Infrastructure Platform or IIP--combines water and electricity production in a single integrated unit, thereby providing both products at a lower cost than could be attained for each one separately. Because of the unmet demand for clean drinking water and electricity in remote towns throughout the developing world, the need for such units is widespread. Previous visits to Honduras have resulted in strong in-country commercial interest, support in the form of memorandums of understanding by key government agencies, and identification of four prospective project sites for IIP installations. From March 5 to March 15 and with IPI support and participation, representatives from the TVIG, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), IPI, and market research firm International Business Initiatives (IBI) conducted an intensive survey of project opportunities in the four communities, to establish how IIPs might help these four communities enhance their economic development, A key aspect of the projects examined is the need to make them economically self-supporting so that they will be viable in the private sector. Summary of specific project site studies follow here, and feasibility studies for the four sites are included as attachments.

  17. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROTOCOLS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jannik, T; P Fledderman, P

    2007-02-09

    Radiological sampling and analyses are performed to collect data for a variety of specific reasons covering a wide range of projects. These activities include: Effluent monitoring; Environmental surveillance; Emergency response; Routine ambient monitoring; Background assessments; Nuclear license termination; Remediation; Deactivation and decommissioning (D&D); and Waste management. In this chapter, effluent monitoring and environmental surveillance programs at nuclear operating facilities and radiological sampling and analysis plans for remediation and D&D activities will be discussed.

  18. Dissolution actuated sample container

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Nance, Thomas A.; McCoy, Frank T.

    2013-03-26

    A sample collection vial and process of using a vial is provided. The sample collection vial has an opening secured by a dissolvable plug. When dissolved, liquids may enter into the interior of the collection vial passing along one or more edges of a dissolvable blocking member. As the blocking member is dissolved, a spring actuated closure is directed towards the opening of the vial which, when engaged, secures the vial contents against loss or contamination.

  19. Optimal sampling efficiency in Monte Carlo sampling with an approximat...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Journal Article: Optimal sampling efficiency in Monte Carlo sampling with an approximate potential Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Optimal sampling efficiency in Monte ...

  20. Fluid sampling system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Houck, Edward D.

    1994-01-01

    An fluid sampling system allows sampling of radioactive liquid without spillage. A feed tank is connected to a liquid transfer jet powered by a pumping chamber pressurized by compressed air. The liquid is pumped upwardly into a sampling jet of a venturi design having a lumen with an inlet, an outlet, a constricted middle portion, and a port located above the constricted middle portion. The liquid is passed under pressure through the constricted portion causing its velocity to increase and its pressure to decreased, thereby preventing liquid from escaping. A septum sealing the port can be pierced by a two pointed hollow needle leading into a sample bottle also sealed by a pierceable septum affixed to one end. The bottle is evacuated by flow through the sample jet, cyclic variation in the sampler jet pressure periodically leaves the evacuated bottle with lower pressure than that of the port, thus causing solution to pass into the bottle. The remaining solution in the system is returned to the feed tank via a holding tank.

  1. Fluid sampling system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Houck, E.D.

    1994-10-11

    An fluid sampling system allows sampling of radioactive liquid without spillage. A feed tank is connected to a liquid transfer jet powered by a pumping chamber pressurized by compressed air. The liquid is pumped upwardly into a sampling jet of a venturi design having a lumen with an inlet, an outlet, a constricted middle portion, and a port located above the constricted middle portion. The liquid is passed under pressure through the constricted portion causing its velocity to increase and its pressure to be decreased, thereby preventing liquid from escaping. A septum sealing the port can be pierced by a two pointed hollow needle leading into a sample bottle also sealed by a pierceable septum affixed to one end. The bottle is evacuated by flow through the sample jet, cyclic variation in the sampler jet pressure periodically leaves the evacuated bottle with lower pressure than that of the port, thus causing solution to pass into the bottle. The remaining solution in the system is returned to the feed tank via a holding tank. 4 figs.

  2. Visual Sample Plan

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2007-10-25

    VSP selects the appropriate number and location of environmental samples to ensure that the results of statistical tests performed to provide input to risk decisions have the required confidence and performance. VSP Version 5.0 provides sample-size equations or algorithms needed by specific statistical tests appropriate for specific environmental sampling objectives. It also provides data quality assessment and statistical analysis functions to support evaluation of the data and determine whether the data support decisions regarding sitesmore » suspected of contamination. The easy-to-use program is highly visual and graphic. VSP runs on personal computers with Microsoft Windows operating systems (98, NT, 2000, Millennium Edition, CE, and XP) Designed primarily for project managers and users without expertise in statistics, VSP is applicable to two- and three-dimensional populations to be sampled (e.g., rooms and buildings, surface soil, a defined layer of subsurface soil, water bodies, and other similar applications) for studies of environmental quality. VSP is also applicable for designing sampling plans for assessing chem./rad/bio threat and hazard identification within rooms and buildings, and for designing geophysical surveys for UXO identification.« less

  3. Viscous sludge sample collector

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Beitel, George A [Richland, WA

    1983-01-01

    A vertical core sample collection system for viscous sludge. A sample tube's upper end has a flange and is attached to a piston. The tube and piston are located in the upper end of a bore in a housing. The bore's lower end leads outside the housing and has an inwardly extending rim. Compressed gas, from a storage cylinder, is quickly introduced into the bore's upper end to rapidly accelerate the piston and tube down the bore. The lower end of the tube has a high sludge entering velocity to obtain a full-length sludge sample without disturbing strata detail. The tube's downward motion is stopped when its upper end flange impacts against the bore's lower end inwardly extending rim.

  4. Sampling Report for August 15, 2014 WIPP Samples

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    X X X X X Sampling Report for August 15, 2014 WIPP Samples UNCLASSIFIED Forensic Science Center December 19, 2014 Sampling Report for August 15 2014 WIPP Samples Lawrence ...

  5. Establishment of Small Wind Regional Test Centers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jimenez, T.; Forsyth, T.; Huskey, A.; Mendoza, I.; Sinclair, K.; Smith, J.

    2011-01-01

    The rapid growth of the small wind turbine (SWT) market is attracting numerous entrants. Small wind turbine purchasers now have many options, but often lack information (such as third-party certification) to select a quality turbine. Most SWTs do not have third-party certification due to the expense and difficulty of the certification process. Until recently, the only SWT certification bodies were in Europe. In North America, testing has been limited to a small number of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) subsidized tests conducted at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) National Wind Technology Center (NWTC) under the ongoing Independent Testing Project. During the past few years, DOE, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and some states have worked with the North American SWT industry to create a SWT certification infrastructure. The goal is to increase the number of certified turbines and gain greater consumer confidence in SWT technology. The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) released the AWEA Small Wind Turbine Performance and Safety Standard, AWEA Standard 9.1 - 2009, in December 2009. The Small Wind Certification Council (SWCC) and Intertek, North American SWT certification bodies, began accepting applications for certification to the AWEA standard in 2010. To reduce certification testing costs, DOE and NREL are providing financial and technical assistance for an initial round of tests at four SWT test sites, which were selected through a competitive solicitation. The four organizations selected are Windward Engineering (Utah), The Alternative Energy Institute at West Texas A and M (Texas), a consortium consisting of Kansas State University and Colby Community College (Kansas), and Intertek (New York). Each organization will test two small wind turbines as part of their respective subcontracts with DOE and NREL. The testing results will be made publically available. The goal is to establish a lower-cost U.S. small wind testing

  6. MECS 1991 Publications and Tables

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

    Capability To Switch Fuels Appendices Appendix A. Detailed Tables Appendix B. Survey Design, Implementation, and Estimates (file size 141,211 bytes) pages: 22. Appendix C....

  7. ANNULAR IMPACTOR SAMPLING DEVICE

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tait, G.W.C.

    1959-03-31

    A high-rate air sampler capable of sampling alphaemitting particles as small as 0.5 microns is described. The device is a cylindrical shaped cup that fits in front of a suction tube and which has sticky grease coating along its base. Suction forces contaminated air against the periodically monitored particle absorbing grease.

  8. Field Sampling | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Field Mapping Hand-held X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Macrophotography Portable X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) Field Sampling Gas Sampling Gas Flux Sampling Soil Gas Sampling Surface Gas...

  9. DWPF SMECT PVV SAMPLE CHARACTERIZATION AND REMEDIATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bannochie, C.; Crawford, C.

    2013-06-18

    On April 2, 2013, a solid sample of material collected from the Defense Waste Processing Facilitys Process Vessel Vent (PVV) jumper for the Slurry Mix Evaporator Condensate Tank (SMECT) was received at the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). DWPF has experienced pressure spikes within the SMECT and other process vessels which have resulted in processing delays while a vacuum was re-established. Work on this sample was requested in a Technical Assistance Request (TAR). This document reports the results of chemical and physical property measurements made on the sample, as well as insights into the possible impact to the material using DWPFs proposed remediation methods. DWPF was interested in what the facility could expect when the material was exposed to either 8M nitric acid or 90% formic acid, the two materials they have the ability to flush through the PVV line in addition to process water once the line is capped off during a facility outage.

  10. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alabama Prisons Adopt Propane, Establish

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Fuel Savings for Years to Come Alabama Prisons Adopt Propane, Establish Fuel Savings for Years to Come to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alabama Prisons Adopt Propane, Establish Fuel Savings for Years to Come on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alabama Prisons Adopt Propane, Establish Fuel Savings for Years to Come on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alabama Prisons Adopt Propane, Establish Fuel Savings for Years to Come on Google

  11. Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief Financial

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

    Officer | Department of Energy Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief Financial Officer Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief Financial Officer Neal Elliot of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy shares insights on how to establish and maintain a partnership with the Chief Financial Officer on this presentation. Establishing & Maintaining a Strategic Partnership with the Chief Financial Officer (August 9,

  12. NID Copper Sample Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kouzes, Richard T.; Zhu, Zihua

    2011-09-12

    The current focal point of the nuclear physics program at PNNL is the MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR, and the follow-on Tonne-Scale experiment, a large array of ultra-low background high-purity germanium detectors, enriched in 76Ge, designed to search for zero-neutrino double-beta decay (0νββ). This experiment requires the use of germanium isotopically enriched in 76Ge. The MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR is a DOE and NSF funded project with a major science impact. The DEMONSTRATOR will utilize 76Ge from Russia, but for the Tonne-Scale experiment it is hoped that an alternate technology, possibly one under development at Nonlinear Ion Dynamics (NID), will be a viable, US-based, lower-cost source of separated material. Samples of separated material from NID require analysis to determine the isotopic distribution and impurities. DOE is funding NID through an SBIR grant for development of their separation technology for application to the Tonne-Scale experiment. The Environmental Molecular Sciences facility (EMSL), a DOE user facility at PNNL, has the required mass spectroscopy instruments for making isotopic measurements that are essential to the quality assurance for the MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR and for the development of the future separation technology required for the Tonne-Scale experiment. A sample of isotopically separated copper was provided by NID to PNNL in January 2011 for isotopic analysis as a test of the NID technology. The results of that analysis are reported here. A second sample of isotopically separated copper was provided by NID to PNNL in August 2011 for isotopic analysis as a test of the NID technology. The results of that analysis are also reported here.

  13. Stack sampling apparatus

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lind, Randall F; Lloyd, Peter D; Love, Lonnie J; Noakes, Mark W; Pin, Francois G; Richardson, Bradley S; Rowe, John C

    2014-09-16

    An apparatus for obtaining samples from a structure includes a support member, at least one stabilizing member, and at least one moveable member. The stabilizing member has a first portion coupled to the support member and a second portion configured to engage with the structure to restrict relative movement between the support member and the structure. The stabilizing member is radially expandable from a first configuration where the second portion does not engage with a surface of the structure to a second configuration where the second portion engages with the surface of the structure.

  14. Germanium-76 Sample Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kouzes, Richard T.; Engelhard, Mark H.; Zhu, Zihua

    2011-04-01

    The MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR is a large array of ultra-low background high-purity germanium detectors, enriched in 76Ge, designed to search for zero-neutrino double-beta decay (0???). The DEMONSTRATOR will utilize 76Ge from Russia, and the first one gram sample was received from the supplier for analysis on April 24, 2011. The Environmental Molecular Sciences facility, a DOE user facility at PNNL, was used to make the required isotopic and chemical purity measurements that are essential to the quality assurance for the MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR. The results of this first analysis are reported here.

  15. September 2004 Water Sampling

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    4 Groundwater Sampling at the Central Nevada Test Area February 2015 LMS/CNT/S01214 Available for sale to the public from: U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service 5301 Shawnee Road Alexandria, VA 22312 Telephone: 800.553.6847 Fax: 703.605.6900 E-mail: orders@ntis.gov Online Ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/scitech/ Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in

  16. Pulsed field sample neutralization

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Appelhans, Anthony D.; Dahl, David A.; Delmore, James E.

    1990-01-01

    An apparatus and method for alternating voltage and for varying the rate of extraction during the extraction of secondary particles, resulting in periods when either positive ions, or negative ions and electrons are extracted at varying rates. Using voltage with alternating charge during successive periods to extract particles from materials which accumulate charge opposite that being extracted causes accumulation of surface charge of opposite sign. Charge accumulation can then be adjusted to a ratio which maintains a balance of positive and negative charge emission, thus maintaining the charge neutrality of the sample.

  17. Post-Award Deliverables Sample (Part 2 of Sample Deliverables...

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

    J-4) Post-Award Deliverables Sample (Part 2 of Sample Deliverables for Task Orders, IDIQ Attachment. J-4) Document offers a post-award deliverables sample for an energy savings ...

  18. Nuclear Radiological Threat Task Force Established | National Nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Security Administration | (NNSA) Radiological Threat Task Force Established Nuclear Radiological Threat Task Force Established Washington, DC NNSA's Administrator Linton Brooks announces the establishment of the Nuclear Radiological Threat Reduction Task Force (NRTRTF) to combat the threats posed by radiological dispersion devices or "dirty bombs."

  19. Fluid sampling tool

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Garcia, A.R.; Johnston, R.G.; Martinez, R.K.

    1999-05-25

    A fluid sampling tool is described for sampling fluid from a container. The tool has a fluid collecting portion which is drilled into the container wall, thereby affixing it to the wall. The tool may have a fluid extracting section which withdraws fluid collected by the fluid collecting section. The fluid collecting section has a fluted shank with an end configured to drill a hole into a container wall. The shank has a threaded portion for tapping the borehole. The shank is threadably engaged to a cylindrical housing having an inner axial passageway sealed at one end by a septum. A flexible member having a cylindrical portion and a bulbous portion is provided. The housing can be slid into an inner axial passageway in the cylindrical portion and sealed to the flexible member. The bulbous portion has an outer lip defining an opening. The housing is clamped into the chuck of a drill, the lip of the bulbous section is pressed against a container wall until the shank touches the wall, and the user operates the drill. Wall shavings (kerf) are confined in a chamber formed in the bulbous section as it folds when the shank advances inside the container. After sufficient advancement of the shank, an o-ring makes a seal with the container wall. 6 figs.

  20. NID Copper Sample Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kouzes, Richard T.; Zhu, Zihua

    2011-02-01

    The current focal point of the nuclear physics program at PNNL is the MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR, and the follow-on Tonne-Scale experiment, a large array of ultra-low background high-purity germanium detectors, enriched in 76Ge, designed to search for zero-neutrino double-beta decay (0νββ). This experiment requires the use of germanium isotopically enriched in 76Ge. The DEMONSTRATOR will utilize 76Ge from Russia, but for the Tonne-Scale experiment it is hoped that an alternate technology under development at Nonlinear Ion Dynamics (NID) will be a viable, US-based, lower-cost source of separated material. Samples of separated material from NID require analysis to determine the isotopic distribution and impurities. The MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR is a DOE and NSF funded project with a major science impact. DOE is funding NID through an SBIR grant for development of their separation technology for application to the Tonne-Scale experiment. The Environmental Molecular Sciences facility (EMSL), a DOE user facility at PNNL, has the required mass spectroscopy instruments for making these isotopic measurements that are essential to the quality assurance for the MAJORANA DEMONSTRATOR and for the development of the future separation technology required for the Tonne-Scale experiment. A sample of isotopically separated copper was provided by NID to PNNL for isotopic analysis as a test of the NID technology. The results of that analysis are reported here.

  1. Fluid sampling tool

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Garcia, Anthony R.; Johnston, Roger G.; Martinez, Ronald K.

    1999-05-25

    A fluid sampling tool for sampling fluid from a container. The tool has a fluid collecting portion which is drilled into the container wall, thereby affixing it to the wall. The tool may have a fluid extracting section which withdraws fluid collected by the fluid collecting section. The fluid collecting section has a fluted shank with an end configured to drill a hole into a container wall. The shank has a threaded portion for tapping the borehole. The shank is threadably engaged to a cylindrical housing having an inner axial passageway sealed at one end by a septum. A flexible member having a cylindrical portion and a bulbous portion is provided. The housing can be slid into an inner axial passageway in the cylindrical portion and sealed to the flexible member. The bulbous portion has an outer lip defining an opening. The housing is clamped into the chuck of a drill, the lip of the bulbous section is pressed against a container wall until the shank touches the wall, and the user operates the drill. Wall shavings (kerf) are confined in a chamber formed in the bulbous section as it folds when the shank advances inside the container. After sufficient advancement of the shank, an o-ring makes a seal with the container wall.

  2. Sample introducing apparatus and sample modules for mass spectrometer

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Thompson, Cyril V.; Wise, Marcus B.

    1993-01-01

    An apparatus for introducing gaseous samples from a wide range of environmental matrices into a mass spectrometer for analysis of the samples is described. Several sample preparing modules including a real-time air monitoring module, a soil/liquid purge module, and a thermal desorption module are individually and rapidly attachable to the sample introducing apparatus for supplying gaseous samples to the mass spectrometer. The sample-introducing apparatus uses a capillary column for conveying the gaseous samples into the mass spectrometer and is provided with an open/split interface in communication with the capillary and a sample archiving port through which at least about 90 percent of the gaseous sample in a mixture with an inert gas that was introduced into the sample introducing apparatus is separated from a minor portion of the mixture entering the capillary discharged from the sample introducing apparatus.

  3. Sample introducing apparatus and sample modules for mass spectrometer

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Thompson, C.V.; Wise, M.B.

    1993-12-21

    An apparatus for introducing gaseous samples from a wide range of environmental matrices into a mass spectrometer for analysis of the samples is described. Several sample preparing modules including a real-time air monitoring module, a soil/liquid purge module, and a thermal desorption module are individually and rapidly attachable to the sample introducing apparatus for supplying gaseous samples to the mass spectrometer. The sample-introducing apparatus uses a capillary column for conveying the gaseous samples into the mass spectrometer and is provided with an open/split interface in communication with the capillary and a sample archiving port through which at least about 90 percent of the gaseous sample in a mixture with an inert gas that was introduced into the sample introducing apparatus is separated from a minor portion of the mixture entering the capillary discharged from the sample introducing apparatus. 5 figures.

  4. Soil sampling kit and a method of sampling therewith

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Thompson, Cyril V.

    1991-01-01

    A soil sampling device and a sample containment device for containing a soil sample is disclosed. In addition, a method for taking a soil sample using the soil sampling device and soil sample containment device to minimize the loss of any volatile organic compounds contained in the soil sample prior to analysis is disclosed. The soil sampling device comprises two close fitting, longitudinal tubular members of suitable length, the inner tube having the outward end closed. With the inner closed tube withdrawn a selected distance, the outer tube can be inserted into the ground or other similar soft material to withdraw a sample of material for examination. The inner closed end tube controls the volume of the sample taken and also serves to eject the sample. The soil sample containment device has a sealing member which is adapted to attach to an analytical apparatus which analyzes the volatile organic compounds contained in the sample. The soil sampling device in combination with the soil sample containment device allow an operator to obtain a soil sample containing volatile organic compounds and minimizing the loss of the volatile organic compounds prior to analysis of the soil sample for the volatile organic compounds.

  5. Soil sampling kit and a method of sampling therewith

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Thompson, C.V.

    1991-02-05

    A soil sampling device and a sample containment device for containing a soil sample is disclosed. In addition, a method for taking a soil sample using the soil sampling device and soil sample containment device to minimize the loss of any volatile organic compounds contained in the soil sample prior to analysis is disclosed. The soil sampling device comprises two close fitting, longitudinal tubular members of suitable length, the inner tube having the outward end closed. With the inner closed tube withdrawn a selected distance, the outer tube can be inserted into the ground or other similar soft material to withdraw a sample of material for examination. The inner closed end tube controls the volume of the sample taken and also serves to eject the sample. The soil sample containment device has a sealing member which is adapted to attach to an analytical apparatus which analyzes the volatile organic compounds contained in the sample. The soil sampling device in combination with the soil sample containment device allows an operator to obtain a soil sample containing volatile organic compounds and minimizing the loss of the volatile organic compounds prior to analysis of the soil sample for the volatile organic compounds. 11 figures.

  6. Fluid sampling apparatus and method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Yeamans, David R.

    1998-01-01

    Incorporation of a bellows in a sampling syringe eliminates ingress of contaminants, permits replication of amounts and compression of multiple sample injections, and enables remote sampling for off-site analysis.

  7. Fluid sampling apparatus and method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Yeamans, D.R.

    1998-02-03

    Incorporation of a bellows in a sampling syringe eliminates ingress of contaminants, permits replication of amounts and compression of multiple sample injections, and enables remote sampling for off-site analysis. 3 figs.

  8. Fluid sampling tool

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Johnston, Roger G.; Garcia, Anthony R. E.; Martinez, Ronald K.

    2001-09-25

    The invention includes a rotatable tool for collecting fluid through the wall of a container. The tool includes a fluid collection section with a cylindrical shank having an end portion for drilling a hole in the container wall when the tool is rotated, and a threaded portion for tapping the hole in the container wall. A passageway in the shank in communication with at least one radial inlet hole in the drilling end and an opening at the end of the shank is adapted to receive fluid from the container. The tool also includes a cylindrical chamber affixed to the end of the shank opposite to the drilling portion thereof for receiving and storing fluid passing through the passageway. The tool also includes a flexible, deformable gasket that provides a fluid-tight chamber to confine kerf generated during the drilling and tapping of the hole. The invention also includes a fluid extractor section for extracting fluid samples from the fluid collecting section.

  9. Rock Sampling | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    resource at depth. These hand samples can be collected using a rock hammer or sledge. Data Access and Acquisition Under a detailed investigation, a systematic sampling procedure...

  10. Water Sampling | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Water Sampling Details Activities (63) Areas (51) Regions (5) NEPA(2) Exploration Technique Information Exploration Group: Field Techniques Exploration Sub Group: Field Sampling...