National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for net storage injection

  1. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity

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

    Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity With Data for September 2015 | Release ... Containing storage capacity data for crude oil, petroleum products, and selected biofuels. ...

  2. Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net...

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

    Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

  3. Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net...

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

    Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

  4. AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...

  5. South Central Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    Central Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Central Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year...

  6. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity

    Reports and Publications (EIA)

    2015-01-01

    Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity is the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) report containing storage capacity data for crude oil, petroleum products, and selected biofuels. The report includes tables detailing working and net available shell storage capacity by type of facility, product, and Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PAD District). Net available shell storage capacity is broken down further to show the percent for exclusive use by facility operators and the percent leased to others. Crude oil storage capacity data are also provided for Cushing, Oklahoma, an important crude oil market center. Data are released twice each year near the end of May (data for March 31) and near the end of November (data for September 30).

  7. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

  8. South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

  9. North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2...

  10. New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All...

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

    Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3...

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

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

    Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2013 ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","ngaepg0salstxmmcfa.xls" ,"Available ...

  12. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release Date:","12312015"...

  13. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release Date:","12312015"...

  14. ,"Midwest Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

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

  15. ,"East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

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

  16. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release Date:","12312015"...

  17. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","102015" ,"Release Date:","12312015"...

  18. ,"Mountain Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

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

  19. ,"Pacific Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

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

  20. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators...

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

    Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  1. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity

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

    ... Form EIA-813 "Monthly Crude Oil Report", Form EIA-815 "Monthly Bulk Terminal and Blender Report", Form EIA-819 "Monthly Oxygenate Report" EIAWorking and Net Available Shell ...

  2. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity

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

    ... Form EIA-813 "Monthly Crude Oil Report", Form EIA-815 "Monthly Bulk Terminal and Blender Report", Form EIA-819 "Monthly Oxygenate Report" PAD Districts EIAWorking and Net ...

  3. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity

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

    ... Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-813 "Monthly Crude Oil Report", Form EIA-815 "Monthly Bulk Terminal and Blender Report" PAD Districts 1 EIAWorking and Net ...

  4. ,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"1012015 11:00:54 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070TX2"...

  5. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01292016 2:35:48 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070KS2"...

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

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

    Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2013 ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350snh2a.xls" ,"Available from Web ...

  7. Texas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage Texas Liquefied Natural Gas Additions to and Withdrawals from Storage Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from

  8. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 120 567 -69 -477 -330 -112 -133 -48 -61 -27 3 387 1991 361 223 96 -160 -257 -312 -291 4 -93 32 77 53 1992 426 123 311 198 -391 -307 -299 -184 -126 4 7 193 1993 395 417 417 41 -331 -358 -426 -134 -248 -87 75 310 1994 497 184 180 145 -342 -374 -371 -207 -150 2 3 68 1995 491 456 246 44 -331 -262

  9. Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 -26 -13 -14 47 -10 5 10 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied

  10. Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

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

  11. Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -86 15 -85 5 12 6 0 0 4 1990's -4 1 4 -2 5 3 4 -2 17 15 2000's 12 0 6 51 22 34 18 -21 0 -33 2010's -25 -18 2 1 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net

  12. Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -2,581 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's -1 1 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied

  13. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -16,327 -13,253 -15,555 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas

  14. Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -242 501 1,271 1990's 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of

  15. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -294 -245 699 1970's 211 -189 -255 -549 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net

  16. Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -90 -339 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from

  17. Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -112 -395 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground

  18. Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -166 331 428 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from

  19. Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -589 739 -295 -493 431 -234 3,636 621 4,442 -462 1990's 44 -70 213 466 630 -985 2,128 -29 -36 312 2000's -964 265 -160 81 128 -588 93 82 65 703 2010's 54 22 -545 255 4 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  20. Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 95 -54 -286 162 -70 -136 -48 14 132 -204 1990's 339 -119 111 65 26 -134 127 122 -351 176 2000's -132 348 -31 -83 -8 121 -122 18 -15 -10 2010's 39 -73 -140 280 -202 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  1. Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 289 149 68 89 110 256 -170 205 1990's -548 728 -71 9 -30 31 72 61 -31 -29 2000's -17 1 6 21 -1 8 -55 -73 17 -76 2010's -69 -42 -63 -57 16 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  2. Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -820 701 -1,356 -385 544 -187 198 121 75 -604 1990's 822 -103 -355 -29 -61 -373 680 94 66 -66 2000's -471 -169 182 140 -91 -240 -286 102 207 164 2010's 178 129 260 -68 -327 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

  3. Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 113 -3 -3 -29 39 7 -71 -60 4 -38 1990's 6 7 -5 3 23 -1 11 -8 8 31 2000's 83 10 -43 -28 -10 7 -1 -6 17 3 2010's -2 -31 51 -68 29 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  4. Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 19 132 -16 -52 -634 -932 -86 334 165 1990's 23 113 -47 51 182 -29 -25 32 -460 492 2000's -361 307 -42 91 120 143 -140 -99 -147 387 2010's 70 -19 139 -259 -676 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  5. Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -41 22 47 -530 653 -205 -270 -96 69 -579 1990's 580 -229 222 -31 9 -12 -289 -200 -351 241 2000's -370 231 -283 -548 -58 402 119 132 -381 -260 2010's 74 127 419 -322 -442 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  6. Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -129 204 1,991 -498 1,878 429 615 541 6,077 344 1990's 230 595 -339 738 -95 -239 -234 653 486 582 2000's -480 223 -376 -28 -187 236 -275 86 -766 -590 2010's 835 -380 -977 -81 771 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -609 -259 726 -1,220 1,015 -813 -496 -208 -171 292 1990's 541 1,343 412 75 346 -651 1,978 241 280 72 2000's -53 -411 -743 -1,077 761 219 -899 -115 -166 -244 2010's 146 14 428 -151 -647 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.

  8. Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 185 30 66 -580 459 -459 132 -46 164 -422 1990's 456 -19 239 215 448 -164 -303 425 32 -219 2000's -285 -136 298 -47 19 114 -7 -209 -73 178 2010's -21 -75 -22 63 -206 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  9. Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 14 -19 -11 -34 36 -8 4 9 -12 -32 1990's 106 -11 -1 9 5 -27 -85 -11 2 -1 2000's -1 -2 4 52 -36 -20 12 -3 -21 -24 2010's 2 -7 9 12 14 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  10. California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -916 -105 19 -430 -335 -207 -5 0 -11 0 1990's 0 32 -38 -24 -80 -33 -13 -58 -114 -59 2000's 234 -1 4 3 -1 -31 -16 10 -1 -5 2010's 2 7 -5 3 1 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  11. Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -174 -102 253 1970's -200 -96 -1,074 2,468 1,707 -2,185 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  12. Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -13 -3 -1 -124 32 178 -346 -122 560 49 1990's -249 220 -33 -222 -257 114 -246 48 -256 73 2000's 208 19 -70 15 -3 217 -119 -136 -222 247 2010's -53 -25 -16 -50 111 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  13. Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -869 967 -292 -1,120 1,448 -627 259 1,135 -163 -1,974 1990's 2,632 -22 72 -204 797 -398 867 -1,237 533 669 2000's -206 2,063 -958 -809 689 278 -628 -393 151 -690 2010's 39 206 889 -82 -1,132 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  14. Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -7 -5 -14 -87 41 -3 -49 4 -29 -6 1990's 48 -71 6 -102 -121 -62 17 108 -142 126 2000's 146 56 -543 -400 0 -168 24 79 58 81 2010's -207 1,588 1,296 40 28 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  15. Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's -8 2 -471 -4,718 640 -153 -72 48 -877 761 2000's 90 -87 18 4 -63 10 380 195 -657 532 2010's 0 100 16 -77 -1,094 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  16. Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -76 87 76 -93 110 -20 -74 -90 81 54 1990's -10 35 -59 2 -50 85 -60 51 -21 -61 2000's -40 -26 8 -9 45 -23 36 78 51 -18 2010's -29 20 -67 13 58 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  17. Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 4,337 4,797 5,190 3,883 309 -4,239 -6,215 -5,199 -5,007 -1,224 242 6,626 1991 3,318 1,714 5,949 3,331 -1,317 -3,831 -4,200 -4,430 -5,275 -1,759 -1,468 598 1992 5,804 2,758 6,690 4,146 368 -2,019 -4,177 -6,286 -5,922 -2,169 3,085 2,582 1993 4,633 7,123 4,322 3,979 -2,860 -5,276 -4,335 -5,066

  18. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,832 7,609 5,181 -148 -4,486 -4,736 -5,657 -5,928 -3,720 -3,912 1,953 14,310 1991 20,045 9,791 3,415 -1,298 -3,536 -8,983 -5,100 -6,433 -10,675 -10,757 4,997 13,739 1992 18,442 11,535 3,325 -2,061 -7,583 -7,264 -10,141 -10,162 -10,088 -8,683 7,997 18,942 1993 18,991 10,808 2,692 -5,197 -6,482 -7,776 -10,550

  19. East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 237,678 179,804 106,232 -46,858 -136,399 -125,529 -106,553 -108,445 -116,239 -86,683 61,045 89,203 2015 206,803 194,649 98,736 -69,755 -143,443 -121,935 -90,489 -104,741 -93,904 -59,311 4,874 57,566 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  20. Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,439 -2,074 8,109 -669 -7,057 -14,173 -13,823 -13,760 -14,705 -15,181 -9,069 7,072 1991 48,879 30,368 10,947 -7,292 -19,263 -22,117 -11,877 -6,029 -18,632 -23,315 12,743 30,577 1992 42,343 24,031 10,774 -719 -19,021 -18,063 -13,811 -13,386 -16,545 -18,911 5,495 31,771 1993 42,366 38,260 19,889

  1. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 798,985 584,421 146,319 -212,194 -399,411 -340,172 -243,618 -244,191 -398,130 -385,221 -37,590 383,241 2012 544,477 459,574 -34,987 -137,493 -284,231 -232,226 -134,343 -165,879 -290,456 -241,849 125,379 384,754 2013 721,687 605,009 380,314 -136,310

  2. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 3,632 10,174 5,905 2,064 -587 5,106 -11,583 -12,116 -15,641 -6,679 -4,510 21,682 1991 15,396 3,617 5,383 1,973 -6,552 -7,261 -2,559 -6,977 -10,203 -10,235 8,913 -2,317 1992 4,420 13,082 9,031 4,821 -2,161 -2,319 -4,255 -11,527 -10,142 -3,672 9,027 12,181 1993 19,567 16,242 5,193 -3,008 -23,351 -11,578 -5,301

  3. Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 7,009 -3,443 1,276 -952 -4,745 -5,360 -7,787 -7,006 -7,202 -3,309 4,438 5,964 1991 6,950 3,513 2,589 -3,809 -2,358 -3,297 -5,327 -3,162 -3,437 460 6,590 2,686 1992 1,568 1,211 4,848 1,675 1,236 -1,546 -3,544 -1,610 -4,201 -10,704 1,514 2,982 1993 5,891 11,750 10,031 793 -6,525 -7,919 -7,627

  4. Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 36,920 51,120 32,950 3,696 -30,874 -32,757 -29,394 -35,504 -33,537 -18,692 -594 40,741 1991 60,973 48,068 25,373 -2,559 -30,660 -29,798 -28,745 -34,057 -32,897 -26,390 17,558 34,113 1992 58,118 43,448 25,247 8,578 -31,163 -29,861 -28,140 -35,313 -32,462 -26,155 14,263 42,048 1993 63,751 53,114

  5. Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 4,651 3,709 1,605 -345 -1,751 -1,651 -2,257 -3,691 -4,174 -2,532 -744 3,768 1991 6,551 4,615 3,305 598 -1,770 -1,016 -2,813 -3,797 -4,467 -4,105 -802 4,626 1992 6,794 4,606 4,104 500 -1,206 -2,563 -5,123 -4,107 -5,203 -2,936 2,364 3,610 1993 5,575 5,021 2,557 -390 -1,247 -2,094 -4,346 -4,412

  6. Midwest Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Midwest Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Midwest Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 296,063 212,159 102,669 -41,683 -133,848 -154,212 -153,935 -163,132 -147,193 -111,005 74,778 118,280 2015 236,452 272,661 93,536 -56,557 -129,063 -127,490 -118,778 -139,059 -141,004 -122,971 3,645 102,720 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not

  7. Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 7,755 -319 -769 -4,788 -4,824 -3,171 -6,320 -4,873 -3,975 -3,382 -486 -5,646 1991 12,024 5,196 450 -6,146 -4,093 -3,178 -2,054 -2,102 -5,101 -3,107 7,864 6,130 1992 9,794 1,362 2,086 -106 -3,896 -7,931 -4,165 -297 -6,250 -267 998 6,940 1993 5,799 8,091 5,644 -2,656 -7,032 -4,628 -5,330 -3,295

  8. Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 -1,536 2,285 -251 -1,109 5 5 6 -282 -506 -221 -9 288 1991 163 1,790 1,053 -2,136 -683 -89 -295 -302 -212 -219 -199 12 1992 1,498 1,199 330 -1,570 -427 -146 -266 -218 -208 -191 8 7 1993 1,091 1,811 1,085 -1,551 -1,049 -451 -102 -317 -206 -215 122 -149 1994 1,266 530 278 2,155 -1,454 -1,355 -316

  9. Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 3,955 3,294 1,294 1,004 378 -993 -2,139 -2,068 -2,648 -1,258 1,500 4,819 1991 4,869 1,410 1,308 79 -1,225 -1,235 -1,711 -1,438 -120 1,379 2,875 3,548 1992 3,412 2,207 484 -63 -1,517 -714 -1,026 -766 280 1,357 3,347 5,601 1993 5,100 4,420 2,759 1,710 1,157 685 -1,169 -302 -453 88 4,106 3,207 1994

  10. Mountain Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Mountain Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Mountain Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 36,887 35,320 19,358 1,434 -16,967 -22,706 -21,457 -17,858 -17,611 -12,768 12,630 22,941 2015 20,797 15,081 34 -2,853 -19,103 -19,419 -17,214 -15,317 -16,112 -11,462 5,213 21,235 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,250 -3,160 -1,104 -732 -2,557 -1,057 -2,100 -2,660 -2,435 -1,237 2,125 991 1991 3,005 3,196 1,559 -903 -1,520 -1,590 -1,392 -2,061 -2,084 -800 -334 1,070 1992 3,314 5,269 2,840 958 -3,527 -2,867 -1,942 -2,546 -2,204 -1,333 -544 2,249 1993 4,189 5,170 2,455 613 -2,168 -1,119 -1,074 -1,646 -2,502

  12. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 59,681 58,564 23,810 7,859 -48,468 -64,734 -75,437 -70,900 -52,873 -19,714 10,727 70,637 1991 116,396 63,462 23,719 -25,279 -47,963 -57,062 -58,225 -46,233 -27,703 -32,872 56,578 74,384 1992 82,535 72,236 62,627 -507 -43,850 -66,808 -73,161 -67,079 -67,401 -28,345 47,094 84,911 1993 96,216

  13. Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 534 -1,598 -1,359 -169 -203 -525 596 149 545 343 1990's 1,345 390 16 -42 -94 -1,464 -189 -153 -698 -1,403 2000's -1,126 6,210 2,397 -2,138 -1,052 -1,436 -5,737 1,323 2,481 1,972 2010's 379 2,542 1,378 1,205 3,085 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure

  14. Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 3,991 2,622 -3,556 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 1,697 558 448 -1,356 -429 308 -39 2,174 13,871 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,446 2010's 0 0 -24 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  15. Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -2,408 91 95 -159 150 -81 153 2 -7 -62 1990's 392 126 89 85 410 1,291 4,190 1,186 785 494 2000's -339 -761 -98 -1,789 -1,705 -2,703 3,122 -250 632 4,488 2010's -13 42 27 -5 41 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -3,383 2,585 -1,618 -700 2,734 45 593 -2,043 -1,644 -6,447 1990's 308 -3,967 -1,844 -2,368 -6,820 -3,134 -5,364 -3,517 -7,243 -2,447 2000's -7,518 350 767 4,359 1,584 3,129 156 -1,560 -1,694 -1,221 2010's -963 -753 -1,384 -864 734 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  17. Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -1,643 -234 641 -1,245 1,073 -372 71 -93 56 -1,879 1990's 631 -401 -306 -268 106 -621 -1,175 -541 -1,746,367 -824 2000's -1,780 -667 -385 1,071 651 421 -269 -1,552 -1,324 -882 2010's -1,563 189 65 -1,262 -532 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of

  18. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 16,327 13,253 15,555 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas into

  19. North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 97 2,626 2,019 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections

  20. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 97 243 137 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of

  1. South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 48 80 70 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas

  2. Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 683 740 746 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of

  3. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,274 1,500 179 1970's 391 189 255 2,012 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections

  4. Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 123 366 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas into Underground

  5. Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 112 395 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas into Underground

  6. Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 166 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas into Underground

  7. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of September...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    and also allows for tracking seasonal shifts in petroleum product usage of tanks and underground storage. Using the new storage capacity data, it will be possible to calculate...

  8. Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 293 769 314 1970's 770 937 1,496 413 403 3,912 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  9. New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 805 975 1,281 1970's 1,447 1,626 1,765 1,867 3,953 6,378 1990's 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  10. Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage

  11. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Activity-Net...

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

    AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Activity-Net (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5560US2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground...

  12. South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 -15 11 0 0 0 -143 0 -9 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage South Dakota

  13. AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 20,366 29,330 55,297 93,538 129,284 83,943 104,001 98,054 88,961 65,486 49,635 27,285 1995 24,645 25,960 57,833 78,043 101,019 100,926 77,411 54,611 94,759 84,671 40,182 33,836 1996 34,389 48,922 38,040 76,100 98,243 88,202 88,653 109,284 125,616 91,618 37,375

  14. Illinois Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,189 271 2,720 9,668 32,390 37,507 29,406 35,531 34,922 20,388 6,532 1,553 1991 4,412 442 309 9,233 31,471 30,144 30,332 35,249 33,602 26,760 7,536 2,741 1992 778 229 589 6,696 32,026 31,485 31,568 35,782 32,858 28,319 7,586 6,487 1993 219 53 1,527 13,439 36,040 35,265 34,281 36,399 41,709

  15. Pacific Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Pacific Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 4,011 3,540 14,172 43,546 58,466 51,172 32,264 32,879 23,448 31,224 15,841 14,871 2015 5,947 15,411 23,160 28,448 37,851 21,448 19,718 17,633 22,413 27,233 13,622 8,742 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  16. Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Total Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 50,130 81,827 167,632 312,290 457,725 420,644 359,267 370,180 453,548 436,748 221,389 90,432 2012 74,854 56,243 240,351 263,896 357,965 323,026 263,910 299,798 357,109 327,767 155,554 104,953 2013 70,853 41,928 100,660 271,236 466,627 439,390 372,472

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nebraska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Nevada Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

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

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

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

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Oregon Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Pennsylvania Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","South Dakota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",1998 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Tennessee Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Wisconsin Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alabama Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Alaska Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Arkansas Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","California Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Colorado Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Connecticut Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Delaware Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Georgia Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Idaho Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sid_2a.xls"

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Illinois Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Indiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Iowa Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sia_2a.xls"

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Louisiana Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maine Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_sme_2a.xls"

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Maryland Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Massachusetts Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Missouri Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File

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

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 2,599 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Net Withdrawals of Liquefied

  11. Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,740 243 1,516 3,236 5,817 8,184 5,657 5,928 4,903 4,971 1,423 854 1991 1,166 155 231 1,829 4,897 8,985 6,518 8,058 11,039 10,758 2,782 860 1992 488 43 1,246 3,184 7,652 7,568 11,453 11,281 11,472 9,000 1,228 1,203 1993 0 0 733 5,547 6,489 7,776 10,550 10,150 12,351 8,152 2,437 0 1994 0 75 1,162 3,601 7,153

  12. Carbon Storage Partner Completes First Year of CO2 Injection Operations in

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Illinois | Department of Energy Carbon Storage Partner Completes First Year of CO2 Injection Operations in Illinois Carbon Storage Partner Completes First Year of CO2 Injection Operations in Illinois November 19, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Washington, DC - A project important to demonstrating the commercial viability of carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) technology has completed the first year of injecting carbon dioxide (CO2) from an industrial plant at a large-scale test site in

  13. U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (Million...

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

    Injections (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas Non-Salt Underground Storage Injections (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 23,610...

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

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

    Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016" ,"Excel File Name:","na1350_nus_2a.xls"

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

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 282 362 -46 124 181 239 -130 296 80 -31 1990's 902 250 370 371 290 40 591 865 58 197 2000's 238 -298 -110 -85 -340 -234 87 224 264 21 2010's 327 -147 -168 578 674 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  16. North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 597 -94 -111 -282 448 -233 686 39 261 -1,205 1990's 1,445 -13 -92 -142 316 -138 218 330 203 1,997 2000's -722 1,797 -834 -343 734 -684 313 222 3 811 2010's -2,643 2,194 -258 449 462 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  17. Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's -255 73 -17 -8 31 27 -16 -230 31 -38 1990's -46 393 -420 -337 160 -51 -753 -476 -749 24 2000's -812 -341 -47 -84 87 -64 21 4 -74 -256 2010's -230 -7 60 -21 -879 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  18. South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 3 190 -366 -160 104 191 61 64 -44 -57 1990's 147 -50 16 478 165 173 65 -455 -350 711 2000's -63 680 117 2 -191 -19 108 102 26 15 2010's -214 204 -100 -35 119 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) U.S. Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -2,581 1980's -9,651 4,687 2,488 -5,699 8,780 -3,283 6,504 -89 10,559 -13,807 1990's 13,271 169 -4,501 -6,972 -2,211 -6,549 3,770 348 3,522 2,154 2000's -14,644 9,740 707 -4,213 -834 -3,405 -4,958 14 -302 5,797 2010's -4,282 6,424 1,491 -309 505 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  20. New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1980's -22 -11 0 -84 0 0 -100 -91 -142 -213 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's -102 -37 29 2 -1 1 -1 -2 1 9 2010's -3 4 -6 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

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

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas LNG Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 317 1,117 189 -209 1,468 253 1,916 -185 40 -1,011 1990's 1,442 461 -49 307 1,270 73 1,814 596 617 283 2000's 187 112 1,596 -2,634 -1,929 -2,534 -894 1,776 -178 494 2010's -390 613 205 193 515 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  2. ,"U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects...

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

    12:20:34 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground Storage Activity-Injects (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5440US2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas Salt Underground...

  3. Pre-injection brine production for managing pressure in compartmentalized CO₂ storage reservoirs

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

    Buscheck, Thomas A.; White, Joshua A.; Chen, Mingjie; Sun, Yunwei; Hao, Yue; Aines, Roger D.; Bourcier, William L.; Bielicki, Jeffrey M.

    2014-12-31

    We present a reservoir management approach for geologic CO₂ storage that combines CO₂ injection with brine extraction. In our approach,dual-mode wells are initially used to extract formation brine and subsequently used to inject CO₂. These wells can also be used to monitor the subsurface during pre-injection brine extraction so that key data is acquired and analyzed prior to CO₂ injection. The relationship between pressure drawdown during pre-injection brine extraction and pressure buildup during CO₂ injection directly informs reservoir managers about CO₂ storage capacity. These data facilitate proactive reservoir management, and thus reduce costs and risks. The brine may be usedmore » directly as make-up brine for nearby reservoir operations; it can also be desalinated and/or treated for a variety of beneficial uses.« less

  4. Pre-injection brine production for managing pressure in compartmentalized CO? storage reservoirs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Buscheck, Thomas A.; White, Joshua A.; Chen, Mingjie; Sun, Yunwei; Hao, Yue; Aines, Roger D.; Bourcier, William L.; Bielicki, Jeffrey M.

    2014-12-31

    We present a reservoir management approach for geologic CO? storage that combines CO? injection with brine extraction. In our approach,dual-mode wells are initially used to extract formation brine and subsequently used to inject CO?. These wells can also be used to monitor the subsurface during pre-injection brine extraction so that key data is acquired and analyzed prior to CO? injection. The relationship between pressure drawdown during pre-injection brine extraction and pressure buildup during CO? injection directly informs reservoir managers about CO? storage capacity. These data facilitate proactive reservoir management, and thus reduce costs and risks. The brine may be used directly as make-up brine for nearby reservoir operations; it can also be desalinated and/or treated for a variety of beneficial uses.

  5. Midwest Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

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

    Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 7,437 14,235 22,615 66,408 136,813 155,687 156,839 166,332 149,212 119,162...

  6. East Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage ...

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

    Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 9,107 10,259 22,569 71,857 144,145 132,960 120,491 118,493 122,207 94,669...

  7. Mountain Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

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

    Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 3,332 3,794 5,368 10,280 21,621 24,914 25,040 22,154 20,026 18,254 8,894...

  8. Injections of Natural Gas into Storage (Annual Supply & Disposition)

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

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  9. ,"Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)"

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

    Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Rhode Island Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (MMcf)",1,"Monthly","12/1996" ,"Release Date:","2/29/2016" ,"Next Release Date:","3/31/2016"

  10. Use of a Naphthalene-Based Binder in Injection Molding Net-Shape Titanium Components of Controlled Porosity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weil, K. Scott; Nyberg, Eric A.; Simmons, Kevin L.

    2005-07-01

    We have recently developed a naphthalene-based binder system for use in powder injection molding (PIM) of ceramic and metallic materials. The use of a binder that can be removed via sublimation offers several unique advantages relative to the typical thermoplastic and/or thermoset binders employed in PIM. One of these is that essentially no volume change takes place during debindering. This offers a relatively facile method of introducing porosity into a net-shape part of potentially complex geometry. In the study described in this paper, the effects of powder loading and subsequent isostatic compaction on the size and amount of porosity in the components produced by this technique were investigated. In general, it was found that the amount of porosity is inversely proportional to the initial concentration of metal powder in the PIM feedstock. Likewise, average pore size displays a similar relationship with powder loading.

  11. A Pulsed Modulator Power Supply for the g-2 Muon Storage Ring Injection Kicker

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mi,J.; Lee, Y.Y.; Morse, W. M.; Pai, C.; Pappas, G.; Sanders, R.; Semertzidis, Y.

    1999-03-29

    This paper describes the pulse modulator power supplies used to drive the kicker magnets that inject the muon beam into the g-2 storage ring that has been built at Brookhaven. Three modulators built into coaxial structures consisting of a series circuit of an energy storage capacitor, damping resistor and a fast thyratron switch are used to energize three magnets that kick the beam into the proper orbit. A 100 kV charging power supply is used to charge the capacitor to 95 kV. the damping resistor shapes the magnet current waveform to a 450 nanosecond half-sine to match the injection requirements. this paper discusses the modulator design, construction and operation.

  12. A PULSED MODULATOR POWER SUPPLY FOR THE G-2 MUON STORAGE RING INJECTION KICKER.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MI,J.LEE,Y.Y.MORSE,W.M.PAI,C.I.PAPPAS,G.C.SANDERS,Y.SEMERTIZIDIS,Y.,ET AL.

    2003-03-01

    This paper describes the pulse modulator power supplies used to drive the kicker magnets that inject the muon beam into the 8-2 storage ring that has been built at Brookhaven National Laboratory. Three modulators built into coaxial structures consisting of a series circuit of an energy storage capacitor, a damping resistor and a fast thyratron switch are used to energize three magnets that kick the beam into the proper orbit. A 100 kV charging power supply is used to charge the capacitor to 95kV. The damping resistor shapes the magnet current waveform to a 450 nanosecond half-sine to match the injection requirements. This paper discusses the modulator design, construction and operation.

  13. Ancient Lava Flows Trap CO2 for Long-Term Storage in Big Sky Injection

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    How can a prehistoric volcanic eruption help us reduce the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere today? The answer is found in the basalt formations created by the lava – formations that can be used as sites for injecting carbon dioxide (CO2) captured from industrial sources in a process called carbon capture and storage. The Big Sky Carbon Sequestration Partnership recently injected 1,000 metric tons of CO2 into the Grande Ronde Basalt Formation in eastern Washington. This first-of-its kind injection is part of research meant to determine if basalt formations could provide a long-term solution for storing CO2, a potent greenhouse gas.

  14. IMPLEMENTATION OF A DC BUMP AT THE STORAGE RING INJECTION STRAIGHT SECTION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, G.M.; Shaftan, T.; Kramer, S.K.; Fliller, R.; Guo, W.; Heese, R.; Yu, L.H.; Parker, B.; Willeke, F.J.

    2011-03-28

    The NSLS II beam injection works with a DC septum, a pulsed septum and four fast kicker magnets. The kicker power supplies each produce a two revolution period pulsed field, 5.2 {micro}s half sine waveform, using {approx}5kA drive voltage. The corresponding close orbit bump amplitude is {approx}15mm. It is desired that the bump is transparent to the users for top-off injection. However, high voltage and short pulse power supplies have challenges to maintain pulse-to-pulse stability and magnet-to-magnet reproducibility. To minimize these issues, we propose implementing a DC local bump on top of the fast bump to reduce the fast kicker strength by a factor of 2/3. This bump uses two storage ring corrector magnets plus one additional magnet at the septum to create a local bump. Additionally, these magnets could provide a DC bump to simulate the septum position effects on the store beam lifetime. This paper presents the detail design of this DC injection bump and related beam dynamics.

  15. An assessment of the net value of CSP systems integrated with thermal energy storage

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

    Mehos, M.; Jorgenson, J.; Denholm, P.; Turchi, C.

    2015-05-01

    Within this study, we evaluate the operational and capacity value—or total system value—for multiple concentrating solar power (CSP) plant configurations under an assumed 33% renewable penetration scenario in California. We calculate the first-year bid price for two CSP plants, including a 2013 molten-salt tower integrated with a conventional Rankine cycle and a hypothetical 2020 molten-salt tower system integrated with an advanced supercritical carbon-dioxide power block. The overall benefit to the regional grid, defined in this study as the net value, is calculated by subtracting the first-year bid price from the total system value.

  16. An assessment of the net value of CSP systems integrated with thermal energy storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mehos, M.; Jorgenson, J.; Denholm, P.; Turchi, C.

    2015-05-01

    Within this study, we evaluate the operational and capacity valueor total system valuefor multiple concentrating solar power (CSP) plant configurations under an assumed 33% renewable penetration scenario in California. We calculate the first-year bid price for two CSP plants, including a 2013 molten-salt tower integrated with a conventional Rankine cycle and a hypothetical 2020 molten-salt tower system integrated with an advanced supercritical carbon-dioxide power block. The overall benefit to the regional grid, defined in this study as the net value, is calculated by subtracting the first-year bid price from the total system value.

  17. Assessment of Factors Influencing Effective CO{sub 2} Storage Capacity and Injectivity in Eastern Gas Shales

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Godec, Michael

    2013-06-30

    Building upon advances in technology, production of natural gas from organic-rich shales is rapidly developing as a major hydrocarbon supply option in North America and around the world. The same technology advances that have facilitated this revolution - dense well spacing, horizontal drilling, and hydraulic fracturing - may help to facilitate enhanced gas recovery (EGR) and carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) storage in these formations. The potential storage of CO {sub 2} in shales is attracting increasing interest, especially in Appalachian Basin states that have extensive shale deposits, but limited CO{sub 2} storage capacity in conventional reservoirs. The goal of this cooperative research project was to build upon previous and on-going work to assess key factors that could influence effective EGR, CO{sub 2} storage capacity, and injectivity in selected Eastern gas shales, including the Devonian Marcellus Shale, the Devonian Ohio Shale, the Ordovician Utica and Point Pleasant shale and equivalent formations, and the late Devonian-age Antrim Shale. The project had the following objectives: (1) Analyze and synthesize geologic information and reservoir data through collaboration with selected State geological surveys, universities, and oil and gas operators; (2) improve reservoir models to perform reservoir simulations to better understand the shale characteristics that impact EGR, storage capacity and CO{sub 2} injectivity in the targeted shales; (3) Analyze results of a targeted, highly monitored, small-scale CO{sub 2} injection test and incorporate into ongoing characterization and simulation work; (4) Test and model a smart particle early warning concept that can potentially be used to inject water with uniquely labeled particles before the start of CO{sub 2} injection; (5) Identify and evaluate potential constraints to economic CO{sub 2} storage in gas shales, and propose development approaches that overcome these constraints; and (6) Complete new basin-level characterizations for the CO{sub 2} storage capacity and injectivity potential of the targeted eastern shales. In total, these Eastern gas shales cover an area of over 116 million acres, may contain an estimated 6,000 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of gas in place, and have a maximum theoretical storage capacity of over 600 million metric tons. Not all of this gas in-place will be recoverable, and economics will further limit how much will be economic to produce using EGR techniques with CO{sub 2} injection. Reservoir models were developed and simulations were conducted to characterize the potential for both CO{sub 2} storage and EGR for the target gas shale formations. Based on that, engineering costing and cash flow analyses were used to estimate economic potential based on future natural gas prices and possible financial incentives. The objective was to assume that EGR and CO{sub 2} storage activities would commence consistent with the historical development practices. Alternative CO{sub 2} injection/EGR scenarios were considered and compared to well production without CO{sub 2} injection. These simulations were conducted for specific, defined model areas in each shale gas play. The resulting outputs were estimated recovery per typical well (per 80 acres), and the estimated CO{sub 2} that would be injected and remain in the reservoir (i.e., not produced), and thus ultimately assumed to be stored. The application of this approach aggregated to the entire area of the four shale gas plays concluded that they contain nearly 1,300 Tcf of both primary production and EGR potential, of which an estimated 460 Tcf could be economic to produce with reasonable gas prices and/or modest incentives. This could facilitate the storage of nearly 50 Gt of CO{sub 2} in the Marcellus, Utica, Antrim, and Devonian Ohio shales.

  18. Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type

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

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History All Operators Net Withdrawals -17,009 -347,562 -7,279 545,848 -252,958 -538,735 1967-2015 Injections 3,291,395 3,421,813 2,825,427 3,155,661 3,838,826 3,638,954 1935-2015 Withdrawals 3,274,385 3,074,251 2,818,148 3,701,510 3,585,867 3,100,219 1944-2015 Salt Cavern Storage Fields Net Withdrawals -58,295 -92,413 -19,528 28,713 -81,890 -56,095 1994-2015 Injections 510,691 532,893 465,005 492,143 634,045 607,160 1994-2015 Withdrawals 452,396 440,480 445,477

  19. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: Illinois is currently undergoing a rulemaking that would change its existing net metering rules. The proposed rules include provisions clarifying virtual net metering policies, facilitating...

  20. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Ohio's net-metering law requires electric distribution utilities to offer net metering to customers who generate electricity using wind energy, solar energy, biomass, landfill gas, hydropower, fu...

  1. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Kansas adopted the Net Metering and Easy Connection Act in May 2009, which established net metering for customers of investor-owned utilities (IOUs). 

  2. Storage

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

    Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering ...

  3. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    NOTE: On October 21, 2015, the NY Public Service Commission denied the Orange and Rockland Utility’s petition to cease offering net-metering and interconnections once the 6% net-metering cap was...

  4. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    New Jersey's net-metering rules require state's investor-owned utilities and energy suppliers (and certain competitive municipal utilities and electric cooperatives) to offer net metering at non-...

  5. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: In January 2016, the California Public Utilities Commission issued a ruling on its net metering successor tariff. Customers on the new net metering successor tariff will have to pay an...

  6. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: On October 12th, 2015 the Hawaii PUC voted to end net metering in favor of 3 alternative options: a grid supply option, a self-supply option, and a time of use tariff. Customers with net...

  7. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    NOTE: Although, this post is categorized as netmetering, the policy adopted by MS does not meet DSIRE's standards for a typical net metering policy. Net metering policy allows a customer to offset...

  8. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    There is no stated limit on the aggregate capacity of net-metered systems in a utility's service territory. Any net excess generation (NEG) during a monthly billing period is carried over to the...

  9. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Net excess generation (NEG) is credited to the customer's next monthly bill. The customer may choose to start the net metering period at the beginning of January, April, July or October to match...

  10. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Missouri enacted legislation in June 2007 requiring all electric utilities—investor-owned utilities, municipal utilities, and electric cooperatives—to offer net metering to customers with systems...

  11. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Net metering is available on a first-come, first-served basis until the cumulative generating capacity of net-metered systems equals 0.5% of a utility’s peak demand during 1996.* At least one-half...

  12. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Customer net excess generation (NEG) is carried forward at the utility's retail rate (i.e., as a kilowatt-hour credit) to a customer's next bill for up to 12 months. At the end of a 12-month...

  13. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Net metering is available to all "qualifying facilities" (QFs), as defined by the federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA), which pertains to renewable energy systems and co...

  14. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

     NOTE: The program website listed above links to the Maryland Public Service Commission's Net Metering Working Group page, which contains a variety of information resources related to the ongoing...

  15. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    North Dakota's net-metering policy, adopted in 1991 by the state Public Service Commission (PSC), applies to renewable-energy systems and combined heat and power (CHP) systems up to 100 kilowatts...

  16. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In Delaware, net metering is available to any customer that generates electricity using solar, wind or hydro resources, anaerobic digesters, or fuel cells capable of being powered by renewable fu...

  17. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Iowa's statutes do not explicitly authorize the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) to mandate net metering, but this authority is implicit through the board's enforcement of PURPA and Iowa Code § 476.41 ...

  18. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In October 2008, Michigan enacted P.A. 295, requiring the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) to establish a statewide net metering program for renewable energy systems. On May 26, 2009 the...

  19. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Net metering in Virginia is available on a first-come, first-served basis until the rated generating capacity owned and operated by customer-generators reaches 1% of an electric distribution...

  20. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    With these regulations, renewable energy systems with a capacity up to 25 kilowatts (kW) are eligible for net metering. Overall enrollment is limited to 1.5% of a utility's retail sales from the...

  1. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    NOTE: On February 2016, the PA Public Service Commission (PUC) issued a final rulemaking order amending net metering regulations to provide clarity and to comply with the statutes. Changes include...

  2. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Utah law requires their only investor-owned utility, Rocky Mountain Power (RMP), and most electric cooperatives* to offer net metering to customers who generate electricity using solar energy, wi...

  3. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Net excess generation (NEG) is treated as a kilowatt-hour (kWh) credit or other compensation on the customer's following bill.* At the beginning of the calendar year, a utility will purchase any...

  4. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Net metering is available to all customers of investor-owned utilities and rural electric cooperatives, exempting TVA utilities. Kentucky's requires the use of a single, bi-directional meter for...

  5. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Nevada's original net-metering law for renewable-energy systems was enacted in 1997 and amended in 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2011, 2013, and 2015. Systems up to one megawatt (MW) in capacity that...

  6. Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In April 2001, Arkansas enacted legislation (HB 2325) directing the Arkansas Public Service Commission (PSC) to establish net-metering rules for certain renewable-energy systems.* The PSC approved...

  7. Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History All Operators Natural Gas in Storage 7,306,429 7,615,688 7,988,797 8,317,848 8,305,034 8,039,759 1973-2015 Base Gas 4,371,340 4,363,455 4,364,233 4,364,778 4,367,380 4,362,559 1973-2015 Working Gas 2,935,089 3,252,232 3,624,564 3,953,070 3,937,654 3,677,200 1973-2015 Net Withdrawals -282,834 -309,104 -371,987 -331,026 12,618 264,608 1973-2015 Injections 378,490 394,079 435,352 401,063 201,400 138,069 1973-2015 Withdrawals 95,656 84,975

  8. Palau- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Palau Net Metering Act of 2009 established net metering on the Island of Palau. Net metering was implemented in order to:

  9. NetCDF

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

    NetCDF NetCDF NetCDF NetCDF (network Common Data Form) is a set of libraries and machine-independent data formats for creation, access, and sharing of array-oriented scientific...

  10. Net-structured Co{sub 3}O{sub 4}/C nanosheet array with enhanced electrochemical performance toward lithium storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yu, Y.X.; Liu, X.Y.; Xia, X.H.; Xiong, Q.Q.; Wang, X.L.; Gu, C.D.; Tu, J.P.

    2014-03-01

    Graphical abstract: - Highlights: Co{sub 3}O{sub 4}/C nanosheet array on nickel foam was synthesized by hydrothermal method, followed by magnetron sputtering of a carbon layer. The Co{sub 3}O{sub 4}/C nanosheet array electrode delivers an initial discharge capacity of 1340.4 mAh g{sup ?1} at 0.1 C. After 100 cycles, the capacity retention of the Co{sub 3}O{sub 4}/C is 88.8% of its initial discharge capacity. The enhanced electrochemical performances are attributed to the porous nanosheet array and the thin carbon layer coated on Co{sub 3}O{sub 4} nanosheets. - Abstract: Freestanding Co{sub 3}O{sub 4}/C nanosheet array growing directly on nickel foam substrate was synthesized using a hydrothermal approach, followed by a direct current magnetron sputtering of a thin carbon layer. The Co{sub 3}O{sub 4} nanosheets with thicknesses of 1020 nm are interconnected with each other, forming a highly open net-structure. The Co{sub 3}O{sub 4}/C nanosheet array electrode delivers an initial discharge capacity of 1340.4 mAh g{sup ?1} at 0.1 C, and maintains a high specific capacity of 912.1 mAh g{sup ?1} at room temperature and can still remain 88.8% of its initial discharge capacity at 55 C at 1 C after 100 cycles. The enhanced electrochemical performances are attributed to the porous nanosheet array and the thin carbon layer coated on Co{sub 3}O{sub 4} nanosheets, which cannot only facilitate Li{sup +} and electron transportation in the electrode, but also improve its structure stability during cycling.

  11. ,"Weekly Blender Net Production"

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

    Blender Net Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Weekly Blender Net ...

  12. Georgia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1974 1975 View History Net Withdrawals -90 -339 1974-1975 Injections 123 366 1974-1975 Withdrawals 33 27 1974...

  13. Connecticut Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    1994 1995 1996 View History Net Withdrawals 0 0 1973-1996 Injections 0 0 0 1973-1996 Withdrawals 0 0 0 1973-1996...

  14. Storage Ring | Advanced Photon Source

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

    The Electron Storage Ring The 7-GeV electrons are injected into the 1104-m-circumference storage ring, a circle of more than 1,000 electromagnets and associated equipment, located...

  15. Weekly Blender Net Production

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

    Blender Net Production (Thousand Barrels per Day) Period: Weekly 4-Week Average Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & ...

  16. SRP- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: Salt River Project (SRP) modified its existing net-metering program for residential customers in February 2015. These changes are effective with the April 2015 billing cycle.

  17. Campo Net Meter Project

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

    Campo Net Meter Project Michael Connolly Miskwish, MA EconomistEngineer Campo Kumeyaay Nation Location map Tribal Energy Planning Current 50 MW project Proposed 160 MW ...

  18. Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    2013 2014 2015 View History Net Withdrawals 1973-1975 Net Withdrawals -7,796 -5,152 782 2013-2015 Injections 1973-1975 Injections 15,054 11,675 9,161 2013-2015 Withdrawals 7,259 6,523 9,943 2013

  19. storage | netl.doe.gov

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

    Geologic Storage Technologies & Simulation & Risk Assessment The Carbon Storage Program's Geologic Storage and Simulation and Risk Assessment (GSRA) Technology Area supports research to develop technologies that can improve containment and injection operations, increase reservoir storage efficiency, and prevent and mitigate unwanted migration of CO2 in all types of storage formations. Research conducted in the near and long term will augment existing technologies to ensure permanent

  20. LADWP- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    LADWP allows its customers to net meter their photovoltaic (PV), wind, and hybrid systems with a capacity of not more than one megawatt. LADWP will provide the necessary metering equipment unless...

  1. Idaho Power- Net Metering

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    In July 2013, the PUC issued an order in response to Idaho Power's application to modify its net metering program. The ruling removed a previously existing service capacity cap of 2.9 MW and chan...

  2. Avista Utilities- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    For Avista Utilities customers, any net excess generation (NEG) during a monthly billing period is credited to the customer's next bill at the utility's retail rate. At the beginning of each ca...

  3. EWEB- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) offers net metering for customers with renewable energy generation systems with an installed capacity of 25 kW or less. Eligible systems use solar power,...

  4. SpawnNet

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2014-12-23

    SpawnNet provides a networking interface similar to Linux sockets that runs natively on High-performance network interfaces. It is intended to be used to bootstrap parallel jobs and communication libraries like MPI.

  5. NetCDF

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

    and Overview NetCDF (Network Common Data Form) is a set of software libraries and machine-independent data formats that support the creation, access, and sharing of...

  6. Austin Energy- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Austin Energy, the municipal utility of Austin Texas, offers net metering to its non-residential retail electricity customers for renewable energy systems up to 20 kilowatts (kW). Austin Energy o...

  7. NetState

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2005-09-01

    NetState is a distributed network monitoring system. It uses passive sensors to develop status information on a target network. Two major features provided by NetState are version and port tracking. Version tracking maintains information about software and operating systems versions. Port tracking identifies information about active TOP and UDP ports. Multiple NetState sniffers can be deployed, one at each entry point of the target network. The sniffers monitor network traffic, then send the information tomore » the NetState server. The information is stored in centralized database which can then be accessed via standard SQL database queries or this web-based GUI, for further analysis and display.« less

  8. Guam- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: As of October 2015, the net metering program had around 700 customers. According to the Guam Daily Post, the program is expected to reach the current 1,000-customer cap in mid-2016. This cap...

  9. Net Energy Billing

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: On June 30, 2015, the Maine legislature enacted L.D. 1263/H.P. 863, directing the Public Utilities Commission to convene a stakeholder group to develop an alternative to net energy billing.

  10. PSEG Long Island- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Although PSEG Long Island’s net metering policy is not governed by the State’s net metering law, the provisions are similar to the State law. Net metering is available for residential, non-reside...

  11. Storage Statistics

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

    Storage Trends and Summaries Storage by Scientific Discipline Troubleshooting IO ... Storage Trends and Summaries Total Bytes Utilized The growth in NERSC's storage systems ...

  12. Net Metering | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Gas Wind Biomass Geothermal Electric Anaerobic Digestion Small Hydroelectric Tidal Energy Wave Energy No Ashland Electric - Net Metering (Oregon) Net Metering Oregon Commercial...

  13. Grid Net | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Grid Net Jump to: navigation, search Name: Grid Net Address: 340 Brannan St Place: San Francisco, California Zip: 94107 Region: Bay Area Sector: Efficiency Product: Sells open,...

  14. OpenNet Training | Department of Energy

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

    OpenNet Training OpenNet Training Training Instructions for Submitting Document to OpenNet Reference OpenNet

  15. Power-to-Gas for Energy Storage

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

    H2NG Blend Value Proposition Direct Injection H2 Fueling Station Industrial H2 Feed Biogas Methanation Captive RE Ancillary Services Store Energy Seasonal Storage Tx Grid ...

  16. Microbial Mechanisms Enhancing Soil C Storage (Technical Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    and a subsequent enhancement of net primary productivity have been the primary mechanisms thought to increase ecosystem C storage in Northern Hemisphere forests. However, there are...

  17. Direct liquid injection of liquid petroleum gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lewis, D.J.; Phipps, J.R.

    1984-02-14

    A fuel injector and injection system for injecting liquified petroleum gas (LPG) into at least one air/fuel mixing chamber from a storage means that stores pressurized LPG in its liquid state. The fuel injector (including a body), adapted to receive pressurized LPG from the storage means and for selectively delivering the LPG to the air/fuel mixing chamber in its liquified state. The system including means for correcting the injector activation signal for pressure and density variations in the fuel.

  18. Low-pressure injection molding

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mangels, J.A. (Ceradyne Inc., Costa Mesa, CA (United States))

    1994-05-01

    Ceramic injection molding experienced a revival in the 1970s and 1980s with the application of ceramics for gas turbine components. Concurrently, techniques were being developed for the injection molding of powdered metal compositions into complex shaped articles. The impetus for the development of injection molding as a ceramic fabrication process lay in the potential to produce complex-shaped components to near-net shape. In the ceramic injection molding process, ceramic powders are processed to obtain the desired particle size, distribution and morphology and blended to obtain a homogeneous distribution. These powders are then mixed with the organic binders, generally in a heated, highshear mixer at temperatures above the melting point of the organic binders. The injection molding mix is pelletized, cooled and fed into an injection molding machine. The molding mix is reheated to a fluid state and injected under high pressure (7--70 MPa) into a die cavity. The molded part is removed from the tooling after the molding mix has solidified in the die. The organic binders are then removed from the component at temperatures up to 400 C, generally by some combination of wicking and thermal decomposition. Finally, the component is sintered to obtain its final ceramic properties, using conventional ceramic processes.

  19. Mississippi Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage ...

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

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,750 3,607 4,330 6,127 5,544 4,224 6,928 5,497 4,867 4,368 3,234 2,683 1991 2,109 2,492 4,207 6,639 5,633 3,362 3,437...

  20. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    the limit on individual system size from 100 kilowatts (kW) to 1 MW . Net Excess Generation: The District's net-metering rules specify that metering equipment must be capable...

  1. Grays Harbor PUD- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Washington's original net-metering law, which applies to all electric utilities, was enacted in 1998 and amended in 2006. Individual systems are limited to 100 kilowatts (kW) in capacity. Net...

  2. Montana Electric Cooperatives- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Montana Electric Cooperatives' Association (MECA) adopted model interconnection guidelines in 2001 and a revised net-metering policy in September 2008. Net metering is available in whole or...

  3. Washington City Power- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Washington City adopted a net-metering program, including interconnection procedures, in January 2008, and updated the policy in December 2014.* Net metering is available to any customer of...

  4. N. Mariana Islands- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Note: The Commonwealth Utility Corporation issued a moratorium on net metering. However, Public Law 18-62 signed September 6, 2014 states that net metering should be available to all residential...

  5. Kauai Island Utility Cooperative energy storage study.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Akhil, Abbas Ali; Yamane, Mike; Murray, Aaron T.

    2009-06-01

    Sandia National Laboratories performed an assessment of the benefits of energy storage for the Kauai Island Utility Cooperative. This report documents the methodology and results of this study from a generation and production-side benefits perspective only. The KIUC energy storage study focused on the economic impact of using energy storage to shave the system peak, which reduces generator run time and consequently reduces fuel and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. It was determined that a 16-MWh energy storage system would suit KIUC's needs, taking into account the size of the 13 individual generation units in the KIUC system and a system peak of 78 MW. The analysis shows that an energy storage system substantially reduces the run time of Units D1, D2, D3, and D5 - the four smallest and oldest diesel generators at the Port Allen generating plant. The availability of stored energy also evens the diurnal variability of the remaining generation units during the off- and on-peak periods. However, the net economic benefit is insufficient to justify a load-leveling type of energy storage system at this time. While the presence of storage helps reduce the run time of the smaller and older units, the economic dispatch changes and the largest most efficient unit in the KIUC system, the 27.5-MW steam-injected combustion turbine at Kapaia, is run for extra hours to provide the recharge energy for the storage system. The economic benefits of the storage is significantly reduced because the charging energy for the storage is derived from the same fuel source as the peak generation source it displaces. This situation would be substantially different if there were a renewable energy source available to charge the storage. Especially, if there is a wind generation resource introduced in the KIUC system, there may be a potential of capturing the load-leveling benefits as well as using the storage to dampen the dynamic instability that the wind generation could introduce into the KIUC grid. General Electric is presently conducting such a study and results of this study will be available in the near future. Another study conducted by Electric Power Systems, Inc. (EPS) in May 2006 took a broader approach to determine the causes of KIUC system outages. This study concluded that energy storage with batteries will provide stability benefits and possibly eliminate the load shedding while also providing positive voltage control. Due to the lack of fuel diversity in the KIUC generation mix, SNL recommends that KIUC continue its efforts to quantify the dynamic benefits of storage. The value of the dynamic benefits, especially as an enabler of renewable generation such as wind energy, may be far greater than the production cost benefits alone. A combination of these benefits may provide KIUC sufficient positive economic and operational benefits to implement an energy storage project that will contribute to the overall enhancement of the KIUC system.

  6. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    01 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 View History Net Withdrawals -337 131 9 -42 426 16 1968-2006 Injections 556 63 336 262 0 1968-2005 Withdrawals 219 194 344 220 426 16 1968-2006

  7. Delaware Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1969 1970 1971 1973 1975 View History Net Withdrawals 699 211 -189 -255 -549 1967-1975 Injections 179 391 189 255 2,012 1967-1975 Withdrawals 878 602 1,463 1967...

  8. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    340 340 340 340 340 340 1997-2015 Base Gas 340 340 340 340 340 340 1997-2015 Working Gas 1997-2011 Net Withdrawals 1998-2006 Injections 1997-2005 Withdrawals 1997-2006 Change in...

  9. Lake Roosevelt Volunteer Net Pens, Lake Roosevelt Rainbow Trout Net Pens, 2002-2003 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, Gene

    2003-11-01

    The completion of Grand Coulee Dam for power production, flood control, and irrigation resulted in the creation of a blocked area above the dam and in the loss of anadromous fish. Because of lake level fluctuations required to meet the demands for water release or storage, native or indigenous fish were often threatened. For many years very little effort was given to stocking the waters above the dam. However, studies by fish biologists showed that there was a good food base capable of supporting rainbow and kokanee (Gangmark and Fulton 1949, Jagielo 1984, Scholz etal 1986, Peone etal 1990). Further studies indicated that artificial production might be a way of restoring or enhancing the fishery. In the 1980's volunteers experimented with net pens. The method involved putting fingerlings in net pens in the fall and rearing them into early summer before release. The result was an excellent harvest of healthy fish. The use of net pens to hold the fingerlings for approximately nine months appears to reduce predation and the possibility of entrainment during draw down and to relieve the hatcheries to open up available raceways for future production. The volunteer net pen program grew for a few years but raising funds to maintain the pens and purchase food became more and more difficult. In 1995 the volunteer net pen project (LRDA) was awarded a grant through the Northwest Power Planning Council's artificial production provisions.

  10. NV Energy Electricity Storage Valuation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ellison, James F.; Bhatnagar, Dhruv; Samaan, Nader A.; Jin, Chunlian

    2013-06-30

    This study examines how grid-level electricity storage may benet the operations of NV Energy in 2020, and assesses whether those benets justify the cost of the storage system. In order to determine how grid-level storage might impact NV Energy, an hourly production cost model of the Nevada Balancing Authority (\\BA") as projected for 2020 was built and used for the study. Storage facilities were found to add value primarily by providing reserve. Value provided by the provision of time-of-day shifting was found to be limited. If regulating reserve from storage is valued the same as that from slower ramp rate resources, then it appears that a reciprocating engine generator could provide additional capacity at a lower cost than a pumped storage hydro plant or large storage capacity battery system. In addition, a 25-MW battery storage facility would need to cost $650/kW or less in order to produce a positive Net Present Value (NPV). However, if regulating reserve provided by storage is considered to be more useful to the grid than that from slower ramp rate resources, then a grid-level storage facility may have a positive NPV even at today's storage system capital costs. The value of having storage provide services beyond reserve and time-of-day shifting was not assessed in this study, and was therefore not included in storage cost-benefit calculations.

  11. Storage Ring Parameters

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

    Storage Ring Parameters Print General Parameters Parameter Value Beam particle electron Beam energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Injection energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible)...

  12. Net Metering Resources | Department of Energy

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

    Net Metering Resources Net Metering Resources State net metering policies allow customers to produce onsite electricity and sell excess generation to the utility at a set price,...

  13. Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection Systems Webpage Author Oregon Department of...

  14. Passive injection: A strategy for mitigating reservoir pressurization,

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    induced seismicity and brine migration in geologic CO2 storage (Journal Article) | SciTech Connect Journal Article: Passive injection: A strategy for mitigating reservoir pressurization, induced seismicity and brine migration in geologic CO2 storage Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Passive injection: A strategy for mitigating reservoir pressurization, induced seismicity and brine migration in geologic CO2 storage Authors: Dempsey, David ; Kelkar, Sharad ; Pawar, Rajesh Publication

  15. Weekly Refiner Net Production

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Net Production (Thousand Barrels per Day) Period: Weekly 4-Week Average Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Product/Region 02/05/16 02/12/16 02/19/16 02/26/16 03/04/16 03/11/16 View History Finished Motor Gasoline 1,708 1,811 1,620 1,497 1,512 1,554 2010-2016 East Coast (PADD 1) 64 59 65 68 71 64 2010-2016 Midwest (PADD 2) 350 361 354 363 367 347 2010-2016 Gulf Coast (PADD 3) 1,050 1,097 909 778 795 808 2010-2016 Rocky

  16. OglNet

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2010-03-10

    OglNet is designed to capture and visualize network packets as they move from their source to intended destination. This creates a three dimensional representation of an active network and can show misconfigured components, potential security breaches and possible hostile network traffic. This visual representation is customizable by the user and also includes how network components interact with servers around the world. The software is able to process live or real time traffic feeds as wellmore » as offline historical network packet captures. As packets are read into the system, they are processed and visualized in an easy to understand display that includes network names, IP addresses, and global positioning. The software can process and display up to six million packets per second.« less

  17. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    of retail renewable distributed generation and net metering. Details will be posted once a final order is issued. Eligibility and Availability In December 2005 the Colorado...

  18. Road to Net Zero (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Glover, B.

    2011-05-01

    A PowerPoint presentation on NREL's Research Support Facility (RSF) and the road to achieving net zero energy for new construction.

  19. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    who generate electricity using solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, biomass, biogas, combined heat and power, or fuel cell technologies.* A net metering facility must be...

  20. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    Anaerobic Digestion Fuel Cells using Renewable Fuels Program Info Sector Name State State North Carolina Program Type Net Metering Summary The North Carolina Utilities Commission...

  1. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    after 12312014) are eligible. Net-metered systems must be intended primarily to offset part or all of a customer's electricity requirements. Public utilities may not limit...

  2. File storage

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

    File storage File storage Disk Quota Change Request Form Euclid File Systems Euclid has 3 kinds of file systems available to users: home directories, scratch directories and...

  3. CO2 Injection Begins in Illinois | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    CO2 Injection Begins in Illinois CO2 Injection Begins in Illinois November 17, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Washington, DC - The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), one of seven regional partnerships created by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to advance carbon storage technologies nationwide, has begun injecting carbon dioxide (CO2) for their large-scale CO2 injection test in Decatur, Illinois. The test is part of the development phase of the Regional Carbon Sequestration

  4. SensorNet Node Suite

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-09-01

    The software in the SensorNet Node adopts and builds on IEEE 1451 interface principles to read data from and control sensors, stores the data in internal database structures, and transmits it in adapted Web Feature Services protocol packets to the SensorNet database. Failover software ensures that at least one available mode of communication remains alive.

  5. TacNet Tracker Software

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2008-08-04

    The TacNet Tracker will be used for the monitoring and real-time tracking of personnel and assets in an unlimited number of specific applications. The TacNet Tracker software is a VxWorks Operating System based programming package that controls the functionality for the wearable Tracker. One main use of the TacNet Tracker is in Blue Force Tracking, the ability to track the good guys in an adversarial situation or in a force-on-force or real battle conditions. Themore » purpose of blue force tracking is to provide situational awareness to the battlefield commanders and personnel. There are practical military applications with the TacNet Tracker.The mesh network is a wireless IP communications network that moves data packets from source IP addresses to specific destination IP addresses. Addresses on the TacNet infrastructure utilize an 8-bit network mask (255.0.0.0). In other words, valid TacNet addresses range from 10.0.0.1 to 10.254.254.254. The TacNet software design uses uni-cast transmission techniques because earlier mesh network software releases did not provide for the ability to utilize multi-cast data movement. The TacNet design employs a list of addresses to move information within the TacNet infrastructure. For example, a convoy text file containing the IP addresses of all valid receivers of TacNet information could be used for transmitting the information and for limiting transmission to addresses on the list.« less

  6. Projects Selected for Safe and Permanent Geologic Storage of...

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

    Carbon capture and storage (CCS) research is focused on developing technologies to capture ... for a simulated industrial-scale CCS injection project at the Big Sky Regional ...

  7. Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity as of September...

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

    for PAD District 2 and the U.S. total have been revised to correct a processing error that caused some capacity data to be double counted in the original release of this...

  8. Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,156 1,047 309 -913 -1,378 -1,530 1,525 -446 -1,097 -304 405 3,601 1991 1,796 1,007 697 -1,133 -2,906 -2,128 253 167 -901 154 402 2,362 1992 1,540 1,041 46 -604 -1,609 -2,611 -2,083 -1,187 -1,167 316 2,461 3,451 1993 3,338 2,006 1,018 -909 -2,779 -4,020 -2,407 -1,740 -1,442 66 1,763 2,339 1994 2,628 2,733 -143 -959 -2,138 -897 -2,125 -336 -2,125 -930 -182 2,003 1995 2,118 998 933 200 -643 -866 -278 -177 -385 745 1,602 1,597

  9. Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage (Summary)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5,797 -4,282 6,424 1,491 -309 505 1969-2014 Alabama 178 -21 -75 -22 63 -206 1980-2014 Alaska 0 1969-2014 Arkansas -24 2 -7 9 12 14 1980-2014 California -5 2 7 -5 3 1 1980-2014 Colorado 0 0 1980-2014 Connecticut 164 178 129 260 -68 -327 1980-2014 Delaware 3 -2 -31 51 -68 29 1980-2014 Georgia 1,972 379 2,542 1,378 1,205 3,085 1980-2014 Idaho 387 70 -19 139 -259 -676 1981-2014 Illinois -260 74 127 419 -322 -442 1980-2014 Indiana -590 835 -380 -977 -81 771 1980-2014 Iowa -244 146 14 428 -151 -647

  10. New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,160 873 320 -1,825 111 -889 -3,581 -3,193 -1,559 -3,167 -1,010 2,535 1991 3,502 2,091 2,218 -3,039 -2,909 -2,998 -1,031 1,960 -2,642 9 147 -1,002 1992 2,019 710 734 2,400 95 -542 2,103 -1,949 -1,172 -2,559 1,036 -417 1993 2,590 3,995 781 2,902 -2,710 -1,235 -285 2,300 -602 -1,795 2,650 -164 1994 3,002 1,920 -279 1,338 -1,937 -493 194 -105 -4,075 -2,020 548 529 1995 2,171 17 -451 -233 -1,245 -1,130 -41 1,063 -505 -20 1,120

  11. New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 6,978 7,211 3,688 -2,024 -5,813 -9,881 -8,650 9,098 -6,725 -2,817 3,609 9,671 1991 14,187 7,725 4,555 -3,535 -6,425 -7,492 -9,006 -8,498 -8,681 -5,237 3,662 7,125 1992 11,051 13,614 11,629 -2,328 -9,430 -9,127 -10,849 -9,745 -6,488 -3,455 3,023 10,534 1993 13,008 16,042 10,253 -3,979 -10,916 -10,768 -10,108 -8,284 -7,373 -2,085 3,382 9,939 1994 17,959 14,320 8,773 -8,999 -8,805 -12,251 -9,125 -8,906 -5,006 -1,373 2,674 8,913

  12. Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 28,671 21,104 8,786 -3,004 -22,591 -19,754 -19,422 -19,035 -17,413 -11,060 -1,578 19,963 1991 33,610 22,881 15,733 -9,676 -23,939 -20,435 -16,173 -17,817 -16,055 -9,113 12,644 27,910 1992 44,471 35,632 36,501 -2,246 -26,466 -29,912 -28,770 -23,106 -15,846 -11,598 5,352 31,661 1993 37,880 44,150 37,556 -3,716 -30,319 -32,498 -29,821 -27,642 -26,300 -7,245 11,570 39,653 1994 57,211 35,630 17,022 -15,965 -29,636 -31,935 -33,557 -26,755

  13. Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 5,526 7,239 2,427 -885 -10,341 -8,861 -10,616 -7,700 -7,151 -5,802 -3,986 25,852 1991 35,547 5,078 -5,298 -14,900 -15,187 -10,455 -1,095 -4,757 -10,249 -4,702 26,655 11,502 1992 17,866 8,339 3,738 -5,813 -8,448 -11,329 -16,356 -5,444 -12,709 -7,728 16,578 31,363 1993 25,220 20,310 8,195 -14,656 -21,410 -19,631 -15,116 -10,830 -14,976 -7,313 17,378 18,294 1994 34,379 26,584 3,144 -18,906 -26,542 -14,012 -17,293 -13,744 -9,237

  14. Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,698 1,339 698 -1,181 -1,508 -1,244 -764 -636 -372 -188 45 751 1991 1,090 965 1,767 978 -713 -1,554 -1,458 -1,092 -674 -339 -23 487 1992 1,568 1,540 1,586 443 -1,572 -1,540 -1,194 -1,010 -453 -173 1,100 579 1993 1,918 1,397 728 426 -1,636 -1,291 -1,175 -1,036 -575 -487 731 1,103 1994 1,262 1,126 946 820 -1,216 -1,506 -1,202 -1,081 -688 -255 437 638 1995 1,677 385 440 -867 -1,179 -1,034 -695 0 -486 0 58 822 1996 -1,252 -940 -651 -132 -841

  15. Pacific Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 72,695 82,912 10,393 -39,504 -56,302 -48,717 -25,531 -28,027 -15,268 -27,912 6,464 16,684 2015 46,544 2,649 -2,557 -17,550 -32,152 -10,588 -8,243 -3,674 -11,035 -20,831 10,625 49,135

  16. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 35,301 38,473 24,660 -10,808 -47,475 -56,280 -50,273 -52,031 -40,511 -5,886 10,484 52,829 1991 60,339 34,060 25,981 -2,751 -32,592 -24,209 -19,127 -29,625 -34,526 -13,835 10,030 37,591 1992 81,577 73,709 61,022 -6,017 -45,507 -58,946 -41,339 -48,824 -47,631 -28,736 -2,844 57,665 1993 74,051 104,040 58,930 -18,524 -60,221 -56,391 -50,022 -43,202 -51,998 -15,361 6,445 51,602 1994 112,189 79,325 27,563 -36,655 -54,248 -57,942

  17. Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 9 0 -21 -70 -106 -95 -102 -92 -85 -54 -20 -4 1995 60 2 264 0 -27 -42 -35 -218 -592 73 189 400 1996 54 17 162 -153 -367 -670 -205 -395 -440 -117 129 761 1997 531 184 -25 -130 -271 -93 -43 -286 -262 -251 243 243 1998 396 187 248 -245 -144 -623 9 -200 401 -613 -1 139 1999 813 114 312 -137 -471 -210 -235 -81 -402 77 -134 189 2000 916 -307 -8 66 -90 -606 -82 0 110 142 203 85 2001 330 -241 604 -195 44 -576

  18. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 -380 -1,099 -291 -524 -949 -961 -900 -1,482 -1,951 -1,600 917 1,424 2014 -301 559 -197 -701 -263 -1,546 -256 -697 -564 106 -558 -733 2015 194 185 235 219 -71 -78 -171 -108 92 -52 197 140

  19. Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 84 31 38 -36 -100 -473 -527 -481 -279 -28 79 227 1991 762 366 321 195 -131 -339 -487 -14 0 0 629 664 1992 652 519 443 159 16 -509 -852 -664 -434 196 366 624 1993 1,428 1,638 991 259 865 36 56 61 35 262 1,055 1,520 1994 1,468 1,041 1,303 310 -531 -553 -563 -803 -210 64 359 597 1995 1,005 753 539 130 -211 -1,312 -1,494 -1,390 -157 80 618 2,149 1996 2,112 1,115 1,259 -44 -1,302 -1,166 -744 -615 -1,153 -603 562 644 1997 1,978 1,006

  20. California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 18,621 19,323 -4,673 -20,954 -25,367 -13,120 -4,261 -2,802 -4,538 -14,390 299 -42,541 1991 24,004 -498 16,578 -19,948 -25,622 -23,367 -13,136 -3,416 1,455 879 6,113 24,681 1992 40,831 15,305 14,214 -15,220 -15,170 -23,985 -15,281 -10,887 -17,264 -8,186 9,135 54,629 1993 35,741 16,046 -6,099 -14,332 -26,027 -13,004 -21,057 -9,857 -13,719 -11,815 13,528 30,903 1994 39,516 44,297 894 -18,961 -28,160 -20,300 -17,672 -9,372 -25,551

  1. Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1998 116 60 83 0 0 0 -134 -112 -102 -103 -2 131 1999 124 131 80 3 -143 -107 -76 -104 -105 -57 56 164 2000 175 63 63 18 0 0 0 0 -49 -114 -86 -12 2001 59 82 69 -103 -113 -31 -63 -47 -62 -100 -30 1 2002 -50 -1 -1 18 7 2 15 4 3 2 86 46 2003 62 110 68 47 -35 -76 -75 -95 -2 -46 0 51 2004 101 51 12 -32 -32 -46 -63 -55 -6 -25 12 41 2005 43 80 99 81 41 17 7 13 17 9 5 13 2006 8 4 4

  2. Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 -8,367 6,759 5,750 -12,219 -10,652 -12,028 12,128 6,659 -1,052 -17,164 -6,384 36,035 1991 22,767 5,721 373 -13,421 -8,977 -12,883 -2,660 -4,559 -10,004 -856 8,300 9,801 1992 43,357 20,462 4,693 -2,096 -26,278 -16,212 -17,447 -28,309 -15,735 -9,677 35,326 55,358 1993 45,059 24,570 12,043 -19,293 -27,373 -8,069 -9,450 -12,286 -18,214 -6,934 13,647 16,958 1994 73,979 52,993 -8,307 -27,458 -41,962 -12,148 -27,928 -25,090 -30,517 -17,141

  3. New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -218 -14 -218 1970's -157 -3,043 -12,531 -3,310 271 74 1,573 7,648 1980's 1,118 -821 -17,411...

  4. Net Withdrawals of Liquefied Natural Gas from Storage

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5,797 -4,282 6,424 1,491 -309 505 1969-2014 Alabama 178 -21 -75 -22 63 -206 1980-2014 Alaska 0 1969-2014 Arkansas -24 2 -7 9 12 14 1980-2014 California -5 2 7 -5 3 1 1980-2014 Colorado 0 0 1980-2014 Connecticut 164 178 129 260 -68 -327 1980-2014 Delaware 3 -2 -31 51 -68 29 1980-2014 Georgia 1,972 379 2,542 1,378 1,205 3,085 1980-2014 Idaho 387 70 -19 139 -259 -676 1981-2014 Illinois -260 74 127 419 -322 -442 1980-2014 Indiana -590 835 -380 -977 -81 771 1980-2014 Iowa -244 146 14 428 -151 -647

  5. Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. -282,834 -309,104 -371,987 -331,026 12,618 264,608 1973-2015 Alaska -171 -108 92 -52 197 140 2013-2015 Lower 48 States -282,663 -308,996 -372,079 -330,975 12,421 264,468 2011-2015 Alabama -971 1,057 -2,416 -415 -1,217 -249 1993-2015 Arkansas -437 -403 -141 -212 -283 -127

  6. Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -2,236 -944 -3,760 1970's -10,376 -16,220 -8,299 -16,245 -1,856 -12,038 5,520 -15,840 537 -5,834 1980's 16,547 -9,915 -8,178 17,543 -12,841 -4,895 -2,278 -3,608 12,902 14,147 1990's -21,117 1,397 -6,573 11,625 -4,845 7,178 -7,530 3,013 -11,700 2,725 2000's 30,198 -38,209 9,445 -2,547 -179 1,274 -3,610 5,440 4,694 -4,938 2010's 2,159 -12,704 1,982 21,264 -5,015 -17,554

  7. Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -44,729 -10,238 -15,232 1970's -62,510 -69,864 533 -84,911 -2,820 -58,685 -36,857 -59,717 -13,272 3,174 1980's 9,628 -101,723 -27,381 44,294 -18,691 28,021 18,251 -12,486 -37,886 64,181 1990's -72,890 24,989 13,958 -7,638 -39,794 52,753 10,964 -9,248 -82,860 9,530 2000's 96,201 -150,239 59,958 -21,052 -7,520 37,882 -73,895 12,923 5,924 -46,527 2010's -38,961 -37,124 12,820 14,244 21,565 -88,237

  8. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -347,562 -7,279 553,644 -247,806 -539,517

  9. Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -8,788 -4,285 4,136 1970's -2,352 -2,312 272 901 -1,292 1,437 2,292 241 -3,933 -267 1980's 4,012 -4,080 -380 573 732 1,189 750 543 4,744 619 1990's -5,357 -1,852 -333 5,106 2,090 4,049 24 -544 -876 -63 2000's 4,383 -5,307 -1,058 -224 690 -2,036 -939 1,410 927 -1,758 2010's 2,292 -1,721 2,383 -811 556 -1,304

  10. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 7,152 -4,491 3,244 1970's -27,127 -6,876 31,031 -31,695 17,316 -28,093 42,463 -44,782 -4,039 -61,536 1980's 27,333 -7,319 -29,170 100,847 -21,140 13,008 -48,929 461 823 21,688 1990's -100,848 39,200 2,251 -39,033 -80,996 117,409 -31,671 -3,388 -74,840 32,938 2000's 146,588 -203,022 99,889 -46,488 -50,223 36,242 -98,738 51,912 24,762 -68,275 2010's 40,950 -71,876 15,239 137,820 -75,432 -87,722

  11. Midwest Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -101,059 -125,909

  12. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -531 -523 4 560 -323 19 -69 1980's -591 -648 -369 -87 -696 410 -500 -107 4,068 330 1990's -179 -267 -43 72 -365 104 -30 -373 372 -253 2000's 306 -713 -98 -86 297 -216 -62 14 99 118 2010's -135 -144 105 328 -364 -78

  13. Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 476 -194 905 1970's -3,910 -860 -75,604 -6,488 -30 53 11,018 -16,374 -6,723 7,003 1980's -1,755 -2,228 3,472 7,443 -17,635 -11,423 3,101 -8,029 567 13,394 1990's -19,505 5,884 -1,732 -117 -14,446 7,783 -12,758 3,763 -10,185 14,502 2000's 1,853 -20,286 3,133 -702 -562 -10,530 -9,430 884 -14,056 -13,798 2010's -14,123 -23,691 -16,844 4,714 -35,561 -27,879

  14. Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -69 1,248 865 1970's -1,213 -1,445 -1,496 -1,117 -1,188 32 2,484 -1,310 -1,250 1980's 1,104 277 -156 2,613 -2,438 481 -751 -318 -186 1,647 1990's -1,324 -1,117 15 68 85 -197 -48 -453 173 -567 2000's 567 -799 -414 295 298 -211 -548 -235 196 -958 2010's -356 -865 -399 -330 -1,253 -586

  15. Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -13,819 -9,389 -9,555 1970's -10,476 -6,804 -1,520 -4,565 -5,444 8,635 7,341 1,690 3,586 -7,757 1980's -14,116 -17,139 -6,459 -20,041 -16,237 -9,425 -10,864 -14,297 6,570 22,058 1990's 7,138 9,737 12,602 21,308 7,819 3,599 11,725 11,962 -400 7,884 2000's 13,911 -9,198 -5,933 8,564 -2,647 -19 -17,896 1,292 17,270 -32,563 2010's -3,718 17,556 -4,323 12,926 16,007 -3,197

  16. Mountain Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 19,202 -39,121

  17. Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -646 805 -1,312 1970's 782 -3,626 -6,555 -3,152 -5,304 -4,681 -3,731 -5,903 -7,079 -6,994 1980's -5,754 -6,389 -3,762 1,080 -175 -928 -2,280 -1,666 -48 1,357 1990's 2,376 -229 -407 -2,767 -2,471 5,844 -1,489 -1,590 1,466 473 2000's 4,366 -2,349 984 2,853 -2,242 194 999 -1,689 -1,134 753 2010's 1,043 -2,925 1,897 440 -278 -786

  18. Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage (Summary)

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

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. -282,834 -309,104 -371,987 -331,026 12,618 264,608 1973-2015 Alabama -971 1,057 -2,416 -415 -1,217 -249 1993-2015 Alaska -171 -108 92 -52 197 140 2013-2015 Arkansas -437 -403 -141 -212 -283 -127 1990-2015 California -8,522 1,758 -6,577 -18,709 5,699 44,087 1990-2015 Colorado

  19. California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -3,204 4,546 -13,027 1970's -28,025 -11,624 -45,671 -26,815 -79,534 -4,066 -45,264 -24,912 23,019 -27,375 1980's -2,686 -7,183 32,738 -11,267 8,542 21,393 -364 28,692 -15,792 10,554 1990's -9,322 -12,276 28,120 -19,693 -5,066 -27,358 51,292 16,340 -40,969 8,194 2000's 47,960 -64,674 17,023 -712 -16,333 -10,696 13,290 3,687 -22,721 -14,565 2010's -23,157 -20,591 -48,077 86,502 -45,335 -2,698

  20. Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -1,134 1 -535 1970's -3,127 594 522 -5,290 910 2,465 -3,531 -7,027 1,663 -3,006 1980's -14,819 641 -7,663 3,927 -4,697 1,989 -2,570 1,518 481 -1,223 1990's 3,500 -7,370 4,860 3,162 -1,100 -3,152 -1,004 -525 -5,072 -1,502 2000's 8,613 -7,080 1,141 -759 -149 854 2,670 -633 -2,140 -3,442 2010's 1,760 -3,128 -2,570 -3,404 -1,818 -5,93

  1. East Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -52,743 -120,948

  2. Eastern Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's -149,894 323,014 -179,663 19,518 -206,056 116,549 2000's 376,207 -557,160 265,345 -128,386 -61,278 42,500 -218,051 147,569 43,693 -145,319 2010's 97,323 -226,647 88,721 289,978 -153,715

  3. Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -31,495 -46,034 -48,160 1970's -78,193 -87,592 -39,910 -74,522 -47,744 -69,306 -25,844 -78,904 -6,479 -44,008 1980's -16,621 27,678 -24,056 43,126 -21,022 17,962 -16,244 -177 -8,759 17,378 1990's -15,926 978 8,608 -12,196 -12,907 22,981 -15,109 -10,153 -9,780 -2,715 2000's 24,165 -25,587 19,029 -8,899 4,602 -1,226 -7,163 7,333 -506 -11,464 2010's -2,323 -1,186 1,001 17,324 -10,730 -10,603

  4. Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -4,791 -1,773 -4,098 1970's -10,025 -6,877 76 -14,151 1,218 -4,219 5,176 -10,709 -5,425 -6,982 1980's 1,264 -1,352 -2,205 5,005 -4,472 1,652 -3,137 473 -1,224 1,884 1990's -3,410 926 840 -596 -3,576 711 -1,801 984 -921 -244 2000's 3,892 -5,910 1,840 261 -199 1,422 -2,891 2,419 37 -2,181 2010's 511 -2,401 1,097 1,591 -841 -4,411

  5. Iowa Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -13,122 -2,508 2,306 1970's -4,233 -7,786 -7,279 -16,659 -12,391 -5,661 -5,256 -26,037 -7,516 -9,716 1980's -3,464 53 -11,934 24,768 12,148 -1,876 -2,951 -3,272 -417 9,035 1990's 3,299 5,207 4,259 -3,176 -2,764 6,443 -1,229 -6,255 -2,954 2,445 2000's 13,560 -21,435 4,251 -1,774 -1,667 3,379 -3,563 2,450 -2,274 -4,861 2010's 2,037 -4,244 10,517 3,074 -7,424 -4,955

  6. Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,511 -3,334 -632 1970's -5,898 -184 1,581 -9,652 -8,487 -13,968 -735 -9,101 -928 -4,824 1980's -9,303 -14,263 -43,860 24,992 -23,147 18,349 -11,908 4,790 -16,944 17,160 1990's -12,766 -10,822 18,486 -6,809 -6,218 4,875 12,118 -11,372 -18,691 15,568 2000's 34,047 -45,586 15,153 -9,700 -5,516 -2,038 -3,407 15,355 -14,613 3,685 2010's 8,484 -20,296 11,916 21,416 -15,614 -10,954

  7. Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage (Summary)

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

    Pipeline and Distribution Use Price Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Vehicle Fuel Price Electric Power Price Proved Reserves as of 12/31 Reserves Adjustments Reserves Revision Increases Reserves Revision Decreases Reserves Sales Reserves Acquisitions Reserves Extensions Reserves New Field Discoveries New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields Estimated Production Number of Producing Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From

  8. Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators

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

    -17,009 -347,562 -7,279 545,848 -252,958 -538,735 1967-2015 Alaska 1973-1975 Alaska -7,796 -5,152 782 2013-2015 Lower 48 States -347,562 -7,279 553,644 -247,806 -539,517 2011-2015 Alabama -6,286 -7,357 2,456 5,002 -5,603 -3,817 1968-2015 Arkansas -304 -219 112 852 468 -1,046 1967-2015 California -23,157 -20,591 -48,077 86,502 -45,335 -2,698 1967-2015 Colorado 1,760 -3,128 -2,570 -3,404 -1,818 -5,930 1967-2015 Connecticut 1973-1996 Delaware 1967-1975 Georgia 1974-1975 Idaho 1974-1975 Illinois

  9. Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,419 2,869 1,708 623 -322 -322 -7,253 -6,393 -5,871 -3,107 2,243 -8,207 1991 -8,480 -7,467 -3,946 850 2,405 5,548 6,010 3,813 3,940 560 -5,792 -7,418 1992 -3,899 -415 252 1,845 3,514 2,776 3,526 4,680 3,128 1,284 -5,453 -6,756 1993 -5,850 -5,038 -3,651 -1,016 6,499 6,453 5,028 5,012 4,963 5,080 -5,578 -4,630 1994 -4,333 -7,052 2,976 1,367 6,074 4,054 5,499 6,264 8,505 3,871 -2,363 -5,275 1995 -7,917 -3,395 -3,419 1,003 3,519 6,043 7,217

  10. Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 63 444 322 -203 -304 -296 -185 -322 -244 -204 47 371 1999 308 440 318 -183 -271 -213 -211 -207 -414 -109 181 455 2000 719 107 32 -117 -291 -224 -222 -222 -202 -251 354 789 2001 517 92 39 -434 -532 -402 -244 -322 -271 -32 -27 277 2002 481 696 366 -184 -683 -330 -297 -157 -344 -272 248 442 2003 978 496 179 -268 -447 -475 -412 -823 -615 -129 213 545 2004 975 366 311 -121

  11. Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 -1,451 -3,625 -1,954 -938 0 2,640 2,937 2,937 1,069 205 81 -3,227 1991 -2,437 -103 -2,944 2,833 1,522 2,716 2,138 -60 -5 -1,040 1,040 -458 1992 -1,930 -2,979 -581 -877 1,351 1,175 1,024 1,458 1,196 -760 -947 -3,797 1993 -3,203 -3,122 1,181 956 4,292 825 2,036 597 1,881 -1,639 -3,528 1,639 1994 -1,605 -4,473 -437 2,095 2,599 1,761 1,805 449 1,131 216 -391 -1,576 1995 -2,097 -2,230 -253 233 2,570 1,551 1,413 -271 2,494 -100 67

  12. West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 -17,409 -11,274 -4,292 6,208 18,841 17,270 15,890 16,021 13,295 3,711 -1,220 -13,381 1991 -34,709 -20,279 -6,805 9,715 15,360 16,310 15,495 9,816 8,516 3,606 -11,077 -22,834 1992 -32,275 -29,522 -32,072 1,169 24,410 21,294 19,023 18,576 13,281 12,723 -6,875 -17,912 1993 -28,369 -37,924 -25,933 6,019 39,451 27,877 20,466 18,915 20,560 7,369 -10,806 -29,010 1994 -55,049 -32,236 -16,043 21,190 25,170 27,657 27,180 22,343

  13. Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 -1,823 -1,539 -501 557 957 1,504 2,101 1,874 2,341 1,041 -520 -2,030 1991 -2,500 -626 26 115 802 1,849 2,068 1,628 761 54 -1,809 -1,941 1992 -2,269 -2,005 -866 -84 343 568 1,069 101 814 -1,034 -1,735 -3,440 1993 -4,101 -2,869 -438 611 1,198 2,416 2,413 1,866 1,334 1,035 -1,829 -2,856 1994 -695 -2,756 496 875 1,568 752 1,113 1,499 1,434 963 -659 -2,007 1995 -3,017 -1,374 -1,449 -817 416 1,447 1,580 1,566 1,841 1,125 -768 -2,100

  14. AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's -114,419 113,822 102,555 -13,990 -270,114 36,826 2000's 350,177 -489,871 196,415 -81,500 -18,748 18,569 -203,400 46,656 -5,990 -138,071 2010's -95,259 -112,380 -21,766 144,411 -54,080

  15. Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -27 -142 1970's -566 -183 -129 -554 211 98 1990's 0 -639 73 -1,224 -162 -447 -164 2000's 430 -1,499 -154 -4,165 1,133 -216 -8,477 -140 -4,452 2,278 2010's -6,286 -7,357 2,456 5,002 -5,603 -3,817

  16. Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -7,796 -5,152 782

  17. Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -426 -356 -661 1970's -206 -566 -129 -586 -335 -330 -472 -699 -174 611 1980's 746 -519 -414 756 -2,932 -1,082 -67 -548 -47 1990's -1,466 1,966 514 8,208 2,482 709 64 250 -1,774 233 2000's 3,033 -2,874 397 -1 1,185 313 -707 -278 563 760 2010's -304 -219 112 852 468 -1,046

  18. Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -234 1970's -1,580 -946 -528 1990's -62 -34 2000's 59 -337 131 9 -42 426 16

  19. Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -11,069 2,645 -3,361 1970's 924 -2,398 -39,982 -1,404 604 -3,532 -11,560 -48,885 -37,381 -11,319 1980's -17,058 -27,478 -21,146 46,461 3,726 28,994 -8,300 -6,811 -38,989 15,935 1990's -24,789 -6,398 43,441 10,658 -36,228 26,165 63,869 10,035 -102,117 5,985 2000's 127,251 -172,746 73,811 -30,502 -7,636 -16,061 -75,958 4,918 35,835 -89,608 2010's -25,622 -8,093 -24,376 57,900 -19,539 -91,530

  20. New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -218 -14 -218 1970's -157 -3,043 -12,531 -3,310 271 74 1,573 7,648 1980's 1,118 -821 -17,411 2,387 5,069 -680 4,198 877 -4,996 3,739 1990's -9,226 -3,694 2,458 8,426 -1,379 2,273 5,338 2,065 -6,479 -2,289 2000's -561 -9,425 7,815 2,108 3,330 -5,497 -6,450 -9,228 8,061 -11,649 2010's -2,967 -2,028 -12,074 9,944 7,015 -19,897

  1. Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -1,299 -11,041 3,936 1970's -9,338 -20,083 21,570 -25,411 26,410 -37,808 60,308 -41,666 -16,922 -13,566 1980's -2,907 -15,119 -43,080 26,990 21,382 30,652 -20,858 239 173,550 11,709 1990's -35,334 -431 15,672 13,269 -28,576 38,862 -10,844 -7,336 -26,672 16,019 2000's 48,330 -62,723 28,333 -1,633 -10,835 1,102 -26,685 18,711 9,118 -13,755 2010's 10,768 -28,019 12,134 34,490 -6,127 -33,025

  2. Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -26,505 -10,407 -16,159 1970's -11,416 -20,968 7,791 -22,202 8,279 -2,983 3,758 -27,419 -8,221 -3,293 1980's -10,715 -27,452 -17,524 35,420 -26,137 19,054 871 -8,880 -14,220 14,331 1990's -14,298 12,139 10,058 -14,535 -18,838 19,264 22,961 -9,482 -48,008 -6,703 2000's 88,353 -87,215 36,302 -17,486 -3,163 14,716 -25,075 22,221 -23,252 16,789 2010's -15,481 -13,571 4,223 30,339 -6,811 -32,397

  3. Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's -189 -5 -46 1980's -4,148 -2,721 1990's -1,363 -566 872 100 -720 -880 783 -1,316 -1,278 -589 2000's 212 -2,619 -2,852 786 -707 1,526 -750 -2,126 1,144 429 2010's -1,786 1,271 463 1,938 -3,318 474

  4. Pacific Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -52,112 2,322

  5. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -17,566 155 -4,519 1970's -88,988 -18,777 7,071 -44,570 40,647 -51,876 88,148 -67,564 -26,094 -27,466 1980's 48,039 -49,701 -34,896 57,675 -38,927 50,398 -9,795 504 -8,565 59,078 1990's -101,516 11,335 -5,873 -650 823 63,786 -59,533 28,381 -40,009 23,197 2000's 47,204 -93,763 56,838 -42,304 7,963 -2,702 -34,458 42,484 7,603 -25,350 2010's 27,327 -52,366 11,565 53,389 -41,556 -40,797

  6. South Central Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's -61,096 -255,860

  7. Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,209 -1,267 -3,674 1970's -3,181 -6,774 -7,190 -2,640 1,174 -3,234 673 592 1,070 -2,722 1980's -5,031 -8,635 -17,973 -1,986 -86 3,111 4,148 11,613 -4,965 -6,465 1990's -3,962 -426 8,536 1,221 -2,584 1,552 5,056 908 -2,719 -1,063 2000's 8,063 -8,701 -741 6,155 -8,245 3,090 -5,707 -1,300 2,954 -14,745 2010's 8,293 6,636 -25,015 6,513 -569 -1,237

  8. Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -220 -29 -213 1970's -108 -155 -215 -1,627 -682 -738 228 -330 266 -227 1980's -1,191 -197 12,280 -2,124 3,697 2,067 -1,854 547 533 1,984 1990's -5,196 9,976 -4,482 -7,271 -19,587 -118 12,955 -7,571 676 9,193 2000's 6,537 -12,738 -2,118 4,694 -3,270 -106 -2,608 -2,005 -1,005 -293 2010's 1,769 -7,772 4,530 11,540 -1,155 -8,073

  9. Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -72 -168 -2,009 1970's -1,982 -2,039 -185 -183 146 1,393 1980's -22 1990's 0 0 -510 92 2000's 471 -1,341 -32 -757 -963 -1,820 -974 1,057 -736 284 2010's 1,263 -2,089 812 -317 6 -46

  10. Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -1,064 -1,092 1970's -5,340 -1,242 -3,243 -2,918 -2,483 99 -3,173 -2,702 -302 -1,927 1980's -2,835 160 1,089 2,263 -1,255 -685 -3,052 903 600 -840 1990's 1,325 -3,200 5,667 -1,915 -1,572 -2,363 2,067 -1,003 -539 -1,213 2000's 1,932 -2,821 -362 -1,736 -2,357 -485 1,128 -1,061 668 -358 2010's -2,099 -2,362 653 2,912 -3,458 4,545

  11. West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -10,515 1,644 -1,972 1970's -24,430 -29,246 22,163 -23,510 17,007 -34,744 59,906 -60,727 -7,632 -20,304 1980's 9,031 -2,035 -25,050 18,845 -21,959 20,818 -19,522 5,914 21,591 10,375 1990's -43,659 16,888 8,180 -8,614 -14,932 41,129 -35,844 16,716 -28,267 34,622 2000's 42,171 -79,233 43,298 -20,815 -6,359 4,918 -24,423 14,540 -7,249 -10,174 2010's 12,132 -32,304 26,959 15,043 -765 -28,160

  12. Western Consuming Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals

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

    (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's -23,206 -28,616 82,844 18,423 -49,929 20,650 2000's 87,535 -108,544 6,061 16,905 -33,411 -6,052 -9,935 -2,132 -3,731 -65,419 2010's -19,131 -8,535 -74,234 119,255 -40,011

  13. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Monthly","122015" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel ... 39036,1158 39066,1816 39097,2995 39128,2013 39156,-867 39187,-390 39217,-1416 ...

  14. ,"Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    Monthly","122015" ,"Release Date:","2292016" ,"Next Release Date:","3312016" ,"Excel ... 33984,63751 34015,53114 34043,28317 34074,-2013 34104,-35988 34135,-35244 34165,-33084 ...

  15. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    ... 38822,-45858 38852,-69082 38883,-67606 38913,-40808 38944,-36131 38975,-52254 39005,-11144 39036,6694 39066,49715 39097,90358 39128,155685 39156,29447 39187,-19371 39217,-73239 ...

  16. New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's -2,728 504 -2,726 1970's -6,261 -7,419 10,117 -1,160 -2,691 2,291 10,590 -8,296 -454 -7,418...

  17. Blue Ridge EMC- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Blue Ridge Electric Membership Corporation offers net metering to its residential customers with solar photovoltaic, wind, or micro-hydro generators up to 25 kilowatts. There is no aggregate...

  18. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    commercial) as long as the base requirements are met. All net-metered facilities must be behind a customer's meter, but only a minimal amount of load located on-site is required....

  19. Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    Renewable energy facilities established on military property for on-site military consumption may net meter for systems up to 2.2 megawatts (MW, AC). Aggregate Capacity Limit...

  20. Rocky Mountain Power- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    For residential and small commercial customers, net excess generation (NEG) is credited at Rocky Mountain Power's retail rate and carried forward to the next month. For larger commercial and...

  1. Net Zero Energy Installations (Presentation)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Booth, S.

    2012-05-01

    A net zero energy installation (NZEI) is one that produces as much energy from on-site renewable sources as it consumes. NZEI assessment provides a systematic approach to energy projects.

  2. Valley Electric Association- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Board of Directors for Valley Electric Association (VEA) approved net metering in April 2008. The rules apply to systems up to 30 kW, though owners of larger systems may be able to negotiate...

  3. NREL: Concentrating Solar Power Research - TroughNet Home Page

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

    Research TroughNet is a technical resource for evaluation of parabolic trough solar power plant technologies. Parabolic Trough Technology Parabolic trough solar technology offers the lowest cost solar electric option for large power plant applications. To learn more, read our technology overviews: A photo of a solar field featuring rows and rows of parabolic troughs at a power plant. Solar Field A photo of two, gray, thermal energy storage system tanks, which are very large, at a parabolic

  4. Alabama Injection Project Aimed at Enhanced Oil Recovery, Testing...

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

    Washington, DC - Carbon dioxide (CO2) injection -- an important part of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology -- is underway as part of a pilot study of CO2 enhanced oil ...

  5. Illinois CO2 Injection Project Moves Another Step Forward

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The recent completion of a three-dimensional (3-D) seismic survey at a large Illinois carbon dioxide injection test site is an important step forward for the carbon capture and storage project's planned early 2011 startup.

  6. Carbon Storage

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

    Storage Fact Sheet Research Team Members Key Contacts Carbon Storage Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a key component of the U.S. carbon management portfolio. Numerous studies have shown that CCS can account for up to 55 percent of the emissions reductions needed to stabilize and ultimately reduce atmospheric concentrations of CO2. NETL's Carbon Storage Program is readying CCS technologies for widespread commercial deployment by 2020. The program's goals are: By 2015, develop technologies

  7. Pacific Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    2014 2015 View History Net Withdrawals -52,112 2,322 2014-2015 Injections 325,432 241,625 2014-2015 Withdrawals 273,321 243,947 2014

  8. Alternative Designs for the NSLS-II Injection Straight Section

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shaftan,T.; Heese, R.; Weihreter, E.; Willeke, F.; Rehak, M.; Meier, R.; Fliller, R.; Johnson, E. D.

    2009-05-04

    Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) is developing a state-of-the-art 3 GeV synchrotron light source, the NSLS-II [1]. The 9.3 meter-long injection straight section of its storage ring now fits a conventional injection set-up consisting of four kickers producing a closed bump, together with a DC septum and a pulsed septum. In this paper, we analyze an alternative option based on injection via a pulsed sextupole magnet. We discuss the dynamics of the injected and stored beams and, subsequently, the magnet's specifications and tolerances. We conclude by summarized the advantages and drawbacks of each injection scheme.

  9. Stationary High-Pressure Hydrogen Storage | Department of Energy

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

    High-Pressure Hydrogen Storage Stationary High-Pressure Hydrogen Storage This presentation by Zhili Feng of Oak Ridge National Laboratory was given at the DOE Hydrogen Compression, Storage, and Dispensing Workshop in March 2013. PDF icon csd_workshop_7_feng.pdf More Documents & Publications 2013 Hydrogen Compression, Storage, and Dispensing Cost Reduction Workshop Final Report Materials for High Pressure Fuel Injection Systems R&D of Large Stationary Hydrogen/CNG/HCNG Storage Vessels

  10. CO{sub 2} Injectivity, Storage Capacity, Plume Size, and Reservoir and Seal Integrity of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone and the Cambrian Potosi Formation in the Illnois Basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hannes Leetaru; Alan Brown; Donald Lee; Ozgur Senel; Marcia Coueslan

    2012-05-01

    The Cambro-Ordovician strata of the Illinois and Michigan Basins underlie most of the states of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, and Michigan. This interval also extends through much of the Midwest of the United States and, for some areas, may be the only available target for geological sequestration of CO{sub 2}. We evaluated the Cambro-Ordovician strata above the basal Mt. Simon Sandstone reservoir for sequestration potential. The two targets were the Cambrian carbonate intervals in the Knox and the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone. The evaluation of these two formations was accomplished using wireline data, core data, pressure data, and seismic data from the USDOE-funded Illinois Basin ?? Decatur Project being conducted by the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium in Macon County, Illinois. Interpretations were completed using log analysis software, a reservoir flow simulator, and a finite element solver that determines rock stress and strain changes resulting from the pressure increase associated with CO{sub 2} injection. Results of this research suggest that both the St. Peter Sandstone and the Potosi Dolomite (a formation of the Knox) reservoirs may be capable of storing up to 2 million tonnes of CO{sub 2} per year for a 20-year period. Reservoir simulation results for the St. Peter indicate good injectivity and a relatively small CO{sub 2} plume. While a single St. Peter well is not likely to achieve the targeted injection rate of 2 million tonnes/year, results of this study indicate that development with three or four appropriately spaced wells may be sufficient. Reservoir simulation of the Potosi suggest that much of the CO{sub 2} flows into and through relatively thin, high permeability intervals, resulting in a large plume diameter compared with the St. Peter.

  11. SophiNet Version 12

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-08-09

    SophiNet Version 12 is part of the code contained in the application ‘oglnet’ and comprises the portions that make ‘oglnet’ receive and display Sophia data from the Sophia Daemon ‘sophiad’. Specifically this encompasses the channel, host and alert receiving and the treeview HUD widget.

  12. Energy Storage

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Paranthaman, Parans

    2014-06-23

    ORNL Distinguished Scientist Parans Paranthaman is discovering new materials with potential for greatly increasing batteries' energy storage capacity and bring manufacturing back to the US.

  13. Energy Storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Paranthaman, Parans

    2014-06-03

    ORNL Distinguished Scientist Parans Paranthaman is discovering new materials with potential for greatly increasing batteries' energy storage capacity and bring manufacturing back to the US.

  14. Rich catalytic injection

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Veninger, Albert (Coventry, CT)

    2008-12-30

    A gas turbine engine includes a compressor, a rich catalytic injector, a combustor, and a turbine. The rich catalytic injector includes a rich catalytic device, a mixing zone, and an injection assembly. The injection assembly provides an interface between the mixing zone and the combustor. The injection assembly can inject diffusion fuel into the combustor, provides flame aerodynamic stabilization in the combustor, and may include an ignition device.

  15. Storage Ring Parameters

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

    Storage Ring Parameters Storage Ring Parameters Print General Parameters Parameter Value Beam particle electron Beam energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Injection energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Beam current (all operation is in top-off with ΔI/I ≤ 0.3%) 500 mA in multibunch mode 2 x 17.5 mA in two-bunch mode Filling pattern (multibunch mode) 256-320 bunches; possibility of one or two 5- to 6-mA "camshaft" bunches in filling gaps Bunch spacing: multibunch mode 2 ns Bunch

  16. Injected Beam Dynamics in SPEAR3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Corbett, Jeff; Fisher, Alan; Huang, Xiaobiao; Safranek, James; Westerman, Stuart; Cheng, Weixing; Mok, Walter; /Unlisted

    2012-06-21

    For the top-off operation it is important to understand the time evolution of charge injected into the storage ring. The large-amplitude horizontal oscillation quickly filaments and decoheres, and in some cases exhibits non-linear x-y coupling before damping to the stored orbit. Similarly, in the longitudinal dimension, any mismatch in beam arrival time, beam energy or phase-space results in damped, non-linear synchrotron oscillations. In this paper we report on measurements of injection beam dynamics in the transverse and longitudinal planes using turn-by-turn BPMs, a fast-gated, image-intensified CCD camera and a Hamamatsu C5680 streak camera.

  17. I Laser Engineered Net Shaping

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    I Laser Engineered Net Shaping (LENS?: A Tool for Direct Fabrication of Metal Parts* Clint Atwood, Michelle GriBth, Lane Harwell, Eric Schlienger, Mark Ensz, John Smugeresky, Tony Romero, Don G-reene, Daryl Reckaway LENSm Project Team Sandia National Laboratories PO Box 5800, Mail Stop 0958 Albuquerque, NM, USA 87185-0958 Abstract For many years, Sandia National Laboratories has been involved in the development and application of rapid prototyping and direct fabrication technologies to build

  18. Wire-Net | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wire-Net Jump to: navigation, search Name: Wire-Net Address: 4855 W. 130th Street, Suite 1 Place: Cleveland, OHio Zip: 44135 Sector: Efficiency, Renewable Energy, Services Phone...

  19. ,"U.S. Refinery Net Production"

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

    7:16:49 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Refinery Net Production" ...US1","MMNRXNUS1","MPGRXNUS1" "Date","U.S. Refinery Net Production of Crude Oil and ...

  20. American PowerNet | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    PowerNet Jump to: navigation, search Name: American PowerNet Place: Pennsylvania Phone Number: (877) 977-2636 Website: www.americanpowernet.com Outage Hotline: (877) 977-2636...

  1. ,"U.S. Blender Net Production"

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

    PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Blender Net Production" "Sourcekey","MEP00YPBN...MBBL","MEPPGYPBNUSMBBL" "Date","U.S. Blender Net Production of Crude Oil and Petroleum ...

  2. ,"U.S. Blender Net Input"

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

    PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Blender Net Input" "Sourcekey","MTXRBNUS1","ME..."MO7RBNUS1","MO9RBNUS1" "Date","U.S. Blender Net Input of Total Petroleum Products ...

  3. Hydrogen Storage

    Fuel Cell Technologies Publication and Product Library (EERE)

    This 2-page fact sheet provides a brief introduction to hydrogen storage technologies. Intended for a non-technical audience, it explains the different ways in which hydrogen can be stored, as well a

  4. File Storage

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

    File Storage File Storage Disk Quota Change Request Form Carver File Systems Carver has 3 kinds of file systems available to users: home directories, scratch directories and project directories, all provided by the NERSC Global File system. Each file system serves a different purpose. File System Home Scratch Project Environment Variable Definition $HOME $SCRATCH or $GSCRATCH No environment variable /project/projectdirs/ Description Global homes file system shared by all NERSC systems except

  5. File storage

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

    File storage File storage Disk Quota Change Request Form Euclid File Systems Euclid has 3 kinds of file systems available to users: home directories, scratch directories and project directories, all provided by the NERSC Global File system. Each file system serves a different purpose. File System Home Scratch Project Environment Variable Definition $HOME $SCRATCH or $GSCRATCH No environment variable /project/projectdirs/ Description Global homes file system shared by all NERSC systems except

  6. Energy Storage

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

    Stationary Power/Safety, Security & Resilience of Energy Infrastructure/Energy Storage - Energy StorageTara Camacho-Lopez2015-10-16T01:57:05+00:00 ESTP The contemporary grid limits renewable energy and other distributed energy sources from being economically and reliably integrated into the grid. While a national renewable energy portfolio standard (RPS) has yet to be established, 35 states have forged ahead with their own RPS programs and policies. As this generation becomes a larger

  7. Activated Carbon Injection

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2014-07-16

    History of the Clean Air Act and how the injection of carbon into a coal power plant's flu smoke can reduce the amount of mercury in the smoke.

  8. Liquid Propane Injection Applications

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Liquid propane injection technology meets manufacturing/assembly guidelines, maintenance/repair strategy, and regulations, with same functionality, horsepower, and torque as gasoline counterpart.

  9. Activated Carbon Injection

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2014-07-22

    History of the Clean Air Act and how the injection of carbon into a coal power plant's flu smoke can reduce the amount of mercury in the smoke.

  10. Rock Physics of Geologic Carbon Sequestration/Storage (Technical Report) |

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    SciTech Connect Technical Report: Rock Physics of Geologic Carbon Sequestration/Storage Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Rock Physics of Geologic Carbon Sequestration/Storage This report covers the results of developing the rock physics theory of the effects of CO{sub 2} injection and storage in a host reservoir on the rock�s elastic properties and the resulting seismic signatures (reflections) observed during sequestration and storage. Specific topics addressed are: (a) how the

  11. Next Update: October 2009 Net Internal

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

    March 2009 Next Update: October 2009 Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW) Capacity Margin (percent) Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW) Capacity Margin (percent) Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW) Capacity Margin (percent) Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW) Capacity Margin (percent) Net Internal Demand (MW)1 2007 768,061 946,631 18.9 46,434 53,027 12.4 40,249 47,124 14.6 56,633 74,385 23.9 180,063 764,476 954,872 19.9 44,417 53,553 17.1 41,260

  12. El Paso Electric - Net Metering | Department of Energy

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

    Website http:www.epelectric.comtxbusinessrollback-net-metering-approved-in-... State Texas Program Type Net Metering Summary El Paso Electric (EPE) has offered net metering to...

  13. NREL: TroughNet - Publications

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

    Publications This site features publications about parabolic trough power plants by the following topics: Parabolic trough technology Solar field Thermal energy storage Power plant systems Research and development Market and economic assessment Solar data Models and tools Also see presentations and posters from past parabolic trough technology workshops. For more publications on parabolic trough technology and concentrating solar power, search the NREL Publications database. Printable Version

  14. Energy Storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mukundan, Rangachary

    2014-09-30

    Energy storage technology is critical if the U.S. is to achieve more than 25% penetration of renewable electrical energy, given the intermittency of wind and solar. Energy density is a critical parameter in the economic viability of any energy storage system with liquid fuels being 10 to 100 times better than batteries. However, the economical conversion of electricity to fuel still presents significant technical challenges. This project addressed these challenges by focusing on a specific approach: efficient processes to convert electricity, water and nitrogen to ammonia. Ammonia has many attributes that make it the ideal energy storage compound. The feed stocks are plentiful, ammonia is easily liquefied and routinely stored in large volumes in cheap containers, and it has exceptional energy density for grid scale electrical energy storage. Ammonia can be oxidized efficiently in fuel cells or advanced Carnot cycle engines yielding water and nitrogen as end products. Because of the high energy density and low reactivity of ammonia, the capital cost for grid storage will be lower than any other storage application. This project developed the theoretical foundations of N2 catalysis on specific catalysts and provided for the first time experimental evidence for activation of Mo 2N based catalysts. Theory also revealed that the N atom adsorbed in the bridging position between two metal atoms is the critical step for catalysis. Simple electrochemical ammonia production reactors were designed and built in this project using two novel electrolyte systems. The first one demonstrated the use of ionic liquid electrolytes at room temperature and the second the use of pyrophosphate based electrolytes at intermediate temperatures (200 – 300 ºC). The mechanism of high proton conduction in the pyrophosphate materials was found to be associated with a polyphosphate second phase contrary to literature claims and ammonia production rates as high as 5X 10-8 mol/s/cm2 were achieved.

  15. High productivity injection practices at Rouge Steel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barker, D.H.; Hegler, G.L.; Falls, C.E.

    1995-12-01

    Rouge Steel Company, located in Dearborn, Michigan, operates two blast furnaces. The smaller of the pair, ``B`` Furnace, has a hearth diameter of 20 feet and 12 tuyeres. It has averaged 2,290 NTHM (net ton of hot metal) per day of 8.2 NTHM per 100 cubic feet of working volume. ``C`` Furnace has a hearth diameter of 29 feet and 20 tuyeres. Both of these furnaces are single tap hole furnaces. Prior to its reline in 1991, ``C`` Furnace was producing at a rate of 3,300 NTHM/day or about 6.25 NTHM/100 cfwv. In November, 1994 it averaged 5,106 NTHM/day or 9.6 NTHM/100 cfwv. This paper discusses how the current production rates were achieved. Also, the areas that needed to be addressed as production increased will be described. These areas include casthouse arrangement and workload, hot metal ladle capacity, slag pot capacity and charging capability. Coupled with the high blast temperature capability, the furnace was provided with a new natural gas injection system that injected the gas through the blowpipes and a natural gas injection system to enrich the stove gas. Following the furnace reline, natural gas has been used in three ways: tuyere level control; combination injection; and stove gas enrichment. Coke consumption rate has also decreased per NTHM.

  16. Value of Energy Storage for Grid Applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Denholm, P.; Jorgenson, J.; Hummon, M.; Jenkin, T.; Palchak, D.; Kirby, B.; Ma, O.; O'Malley, M.

    2013-05-01

    This analysis evaluates several operational benefits of electricity storage, including load-leveling, spinning contingency reserves, and regulation reserves. Storage devices were simulated in a utility system in the western United States, and the operational costs of generation was compared to the same system without the added storage. This operational value of storage was estimated for devices of various sizes, providing different services, and with several sensitivities to fuel price and other factors. Overall, the results followed previous analyses that demonstrate relatively low value for load-leveling but greater value for provision of reserve services. The value was estimated by taking the difference in operational costs between cases with and without energy storage and represents the operational cost savings from deploying storage by a traditional vertically integrated utility. The analysis also estimated the potential revenues derived from a merchant storage plant in a restructured market, based on marginal system prices. Due to suppression of on-/off-peak price differentials and incomplete capture of system benefits (such as the cost of power plant starts), the revenue obtained by storage in a market setting appears to be substantially less than the net benefit provided to the system. This demonstrates some of the additional challenges for storage deployed in restructured energy markets.

  17. Underground natural gas storage reservoir management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.

    1995-06-01

    The objective of this study is to research technologies and methodologies that will reduce the costs associated with the operation and maintenance of underground natural gas storage. This effort will include a survey of public information to determine the amount of natural gas lost from underground storage fields, determine the causes of this lost gas, and develop strategies and remedial designs to reduce or stop the gas loss from selected fields. Phase I includes a detailed survey of US natural gas storage reservoirs to determine the actual amount of natural gas annually lost from underground storage fields. These reservoirs will be ranked, the resultant will include the amount of gas and revenue annually lost. The results will be analyzed in conjunction with the type (geologic) of storage reservoirs to determine the significance and impact of the gas loss. A report of the work accomplished will be prepared. The report will include: (1) a summary list by geologic type of US gas storage reservoirs and their annual underground gas storage losses in ft{sup 3}; (2) a rank by geologic classifications as to the amount of gas lost and the resultant lost revenue; and (3) show the level of significance and impact of the losses by geologic type. Concurrently, the amount of storage activity has increased in conjunction with the net increase of natural gas imports as shown on Figure No. 3. Storage is playing an ever increasing importance in supplying the domestic energy requirements.

  18. City of St. George- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The City of St. George Energy Services Department (SGESD) offers a net metering program to its customers, and updated program guidelines and fees in September 2015.* 

  19. NASA Net Zero Energy Buildings Roadmap

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pless, S.; Scheib, J.; Torcellini, P.; Hendron, B.; Slovensky, M.

    2014-10-01

    In preparation for the time-phased net zero energy requirement for new federal buildings starting in 2020, set forth in Executive Order 13514, NASA requested that the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to develop a roadmap for NASA's compliance. NASA detailed a Statement of Work that requested information on strategic, organizational, and tactical aspects of net zero energy buildings. In response, this document presents a high-level approach to net zero energy planning, design, construction, and operations, based on NREL's first-hand experience procuring net zero energy construction, and based on NREL and other industry research on net zero energy feasibility. The strategic approach to net zero energy starts with an interpretation of the executive order language relating to net zero energy. Specifically, this roadmap defines a net zero energy acquisition process as one that sets an aggressive energy use intensity goal for the building in project planning, meets the reduced demand goal through energy efficiency strategies and technologies, then adds renewable energy in a prioritized manner, using building-associated, emission- free sources first, to offset the annual energy use required at the building; the net zero energy process extends through the life of the building, requiring a balance of energy use and production in each calendar year.

  20. Millenial Net Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    MA 01803 Sector: Services Product: Millennial Net is a US-based developer of wireless sensor networking software, systems, and services. Coordinates: 44.446275, -108.431704...

  1. Next Update: October 2010 Net Internal

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    entity that oversee electric reliability. * NERC Regional names may be found on the EIA web page for electric reliability. 1. The ReliabilityFirst Corporation value for Net ...

  2. Next Update: December 2011 Net Internal Demand

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

    entity that oversee electric reliability. * NERC Regional names may be found on the EIA web page for electric reliability. 1. The ReliabilityFirst Corporation value for Net ...

  3. Carbon Capture and Storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Friedmann, S

    2007-10-03

    Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is the long-term isolation of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through physical, chemical, biological, or engineered processes. This includes a range of approaches including soil carbon sequestration (e.g., through no-till farming), terrestrial biomass sequestration (e.g., through planting forests), direct ocean injection of CO{sub 2} either onto the deep seafloor or into the intermediate depths, injection into deep geological formations, or even direct conversion of CO{sub 2} to carbonate minerals. Some of these approaches are considered geoengineering (see the appropriate chapter herein). All are considered in the 2005 special report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2005). Of the range of options available, geological carbon sequestration (GCS) appears to be the most actionable and economic option for major greenhouse gas reduction in the next 10-30 years. The basis for this interest includes several factors: (1) The potential capacities are large based on initial estimates. Formal estimates for global storage potential vary substantially, but are likely to be between 800 and 3300 Gt of C (3000 and 10,000 Gt of CO{sub 2}), with significant capacity located reasonably near large point sources of the CO{sub 2}. (2) GCS can begin operations with demonstrated technology. Carbon dioxide has been separated from large point sources for nearly 100 years, and has been injected underground for over 30 years (below). (3) Testing of GCS at intermediate scale is feasible. In the US, Canada, and many industrial countries, large CO{sub 2} sources like power plants and refineries lie near prospective storage sites. These plants could be retrofit today and injection begun (while bearing in mind scientific uncertainties and unknowns). Indeed, some have, and three projects described here provide a great deal of information on the operational needs and field implementation of CCS. Part of this interest comes from several key documents written in the last three years that provide information on the status, economics, technology, and impact of CCS. These are cited throughout this text and identified as key references at the end of this manuscript. When coupled with improvements in energy efficiency, renewable energy supplies, and nuclear power, CCS help dramatically reduce current and future emissions (US CCTP 2005, MIT 2007). If CCS is not available as a carbon management option, it will be much more difficult and much more expensive to stabilize atmospheric CO{sub 2} emissions. Recent estimates put the cost of carbon abatement without CCS to be 30-80% higher that if CCS were to be available (Edmonds et al. 2004).

  4. NREL: Energy Storage - Awards

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

    Energy Storage Transportation Research Energy Storage Printable Version Awards R&D 100 2013 NREL's energy storage innovation has been recognized with numerous awards. R&D 100 ...

  5. Premixed direct injection disk

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    York, William David; Ziminsky, Willy Steve; Johnson, Thomas Edward; Lacy, Benjamin; Zuo, Baifang; Uhm, Jong Ho

    2013-04-23

    A fuel/air mixing disk for use in a fuel/air mixing combustor assembly is provided. The disk includes a first face, a second face, and at least one fuel plenum disposed therebetween. A plurality of fuel/air mixing tubes extend through the pre-mixing disk, each mixing tube including an outer tube wall extending axially along a tube axis and in fluid communication with the at least one fuel plenum. At least a portion of the plurality of fuel/air mixing tubes further includes at least one fuel injection hole have a fuel injection hole diameter extending through said outer tube wall, the fuel injection hole having an injection angle relative to the tube axis. The invention provides good fuel air mixing with low combustion generated NOx and low flow pressure loss translating to a high gas turbine efficiency, that is durable, and resistant to flame holding and flash back.

  6. Tevatron injection timing

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Saritepe, S.; Annala, G.

    1993-06-01

    Bunched beam transfer from one accelerator to another requires coordination and synchronization of many ramped devices. During collider operation timing issues are more complicated since one has to switch from proton injection devices to antiproton injection devices. Proton and antiproton transfers are clearly distinct sequences since protons and antiprotons circulate in opposite directions in the Main Ring (MR) and in the Tevatron. The time bumps are different, the kicker firing delays are different, the kickers and lambertson magnets are different, etc. Antiprotons are too precious to be used for tuning purposes, therefore protons are transferred from the Tevatron back into the Main Ring, tracing the path of antiprotons backwards. This tuning operation is called ``reverse injection.`` Previously, the reverse injection was handled in one supercycle. One batch of uncoalesced bunches was injected into the Tevatron and ejected after 40 seconds. Then the orbit closure was performed in the MR. In the new scheme the lambertson magnets have to be moved and separator polarities have to be switched, activities that cannot be completed in one supercycle. Therefore, the reverse injection sequence was changed. This involved the redefinition of TVBS clock event $D8 as MRBS $D8 thus making it possible to inject 6 proton batches (or coalesced bunches) and eject them one at a time on command, performing orbit closure each time in the MR. Injection devices are clock event driven. The TCLK is used as the reference clock. Certain TCLK events are triggered by the MR beam synchronized clock (MRBS) events. Some delays are measured in terms of MRBS ticks and MR revolutions. See Appendix A for a brief description of the beam synchronized clocks.

  7. Storage Ring Parameters

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

    Storage Ring Parameters Print General Parameters Parameter Value Beam particle electron Beam energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Injection energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Beam current (all operation is in top-off with ΔI/I ≤ 0.3%) 500 mA in multibunch mode 2 x 17.5 mA in two-bunch mode Filling pattern (multibunch mode) 256-320 bunches; possibility of one or two 5- to 6-mA "camshaft" bunches in filling gaps Bunch spacing: multibunch mode 2 ns Bunch spacing: two-bunch mode 328

  8. Storage Ring Parameters

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

    Storage Ring Parameters Print General Parameters Parameter Value Beam particle electron Beam energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Injection energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Beam current (all operation is in top-off with ΔI/I ≤ 0.3%) 500 mA in multibunch mode 2 x 17.5 mA in two-bunch mode Filling pattern (multibunch mode) 256-320 bunches; possibility of one or two 5- to 6-mA "camshaft" bunches in filling gaps Bunch spacing: multibunch mode 2 ns Bunch spacing: two-bunch mode 328

  9. Storage Ring Parameters

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

    Storage Ring Parameters Print General Parameters Parameter Value Beam particle electron Beam energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Injection energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Beam current (all operation is in top-off with ΔI/I ≤ 0.3%) 500 mA in multibunch mode 2 x 17.5 mA in two-bunch mode Filling pattern (multibunch mode) 256-320 bunches; possibility of one or two 5- to 6-mA "camshaft" bunches in filling gaps Bunch spacing: multibunch mode 2 ns Bunch spacing: two-bunch mode 328

  10. Storage Ring Parameters

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

    Storage Ring Parameters Print General Parameters Parameter Value Beam particle electron Beam energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Injection energy 1.9 GeV (1.0-1.9 GeV possible) Beam current (all operation is in top-off with ΔI/I ≤ 0.3%) 500 mA in multibunch mode 2 x 17.5 mA in two-bunch mode Filling pattern (multibunch mode) 256-320 bunches; possibility of one or two 5- to 6-mA "camshaft" bunches in filling gaps Bunch spacing: multibunch mode 2 ns Bunch spacing: two-bunch mode 328

  11. Energy Storage

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

    Energy Storage - Creation of 3D mesh from surface and background meshes using conformal decomposition finite-element method (CDFEM) for a LiCoO2 cathode: (a) reconstructed surface mesh from Avizo for particle phase, (b) background mesh for CDFEM, and (c) resultant 3D mesh for particle and electrolyte phases from CDFEM. Permalink Gallery Sandia Wins Funding for Two DOE-EERE Computer-Aided Battery-Safety R&D Projects Analysis, Capabilities, Computational Modeling & Simulation, Design,

  12. Carbon Storage

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

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

  13. Energy Storage

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

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

  14. Energy Storage

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

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

  15. Energy Storage

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

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

  16. Energy Storage

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

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

  17. ,"U.S. Blender Net Input"

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

    7:11:07 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Blender Net Input" "Sourcekey","MTXRBNUS1...US1","MO7RBNUS1","MO9RBNUS1" "Date","U.S. Blender Net Input of Total Petroleum ...

  18. VruiNet Version 12(SOPHIA)

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2012-08-09

    VruiNet Version 12 is the code used exclusively by the executable ‘vruinet’. VruiNet Version 12 provides a wrapper around the code for ‘oglnet’ that makes it compatible for VRUI systems such as the CAVE at CAES.

  19. Transonic Combustion ’ - Injection Strategy Development for...

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

    Transonic Combustion - Injection Strategy Development for Supercritical Gasoline Injection-Ignition in a Light Duty Engine Transonic Combustion - Injection Strategy ...

  20. Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,140 1970's 1,606 1,750 2,325 1990's 0 453 599 2000's 273 556 63 336 262

  1. Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 34,836 31,597 33,943 1970's 36,805 36,850 87,251 46,592 54,705 54,333 61,110 85,913 91,373 82,325 1980's 109,242 124,439 141,811 135,309 145,916 125,560 121,631 121,245 146,758 161,181 1990's 175,039 170,908 340,602 221,412 310,273 274,724 305,914 312,254 344,461 291,802 2000's 311,995 482,270 363,682 415,541 395,115 345,945 356,273 362,593 401,600 435,089 2010's 460,453 437,440 378,438 394,375 474,392 494,375

  2. Maryland Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 12,465 10,520 5,281 1970's 10,421 11,746 7,920 11,328 11,016 6,830 19,012 16,820 19,121 19,715 1980's 16,907 18,753 19,476 16,298 16,154 17,362 16,330 16,539 14,653 18,548 1990's 19,431 22,508 19,502 15,314 15,316 15,610 17,448 15,510 14,627 18,802 2000's 15,341 19,786 15,445 19,166 16,347 18,026 14,947 20,309 16,517 15,088 2010's 14,384 15,592 10,582 14,165 20,362 17,373

  3. Michigan Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 222,800 255,365 257,737 1970's 344,524 296,475 275,460 299,766 287,776 322,960 342,010 372,262 390,610 424,176 1980's 290,497 354,911 371,216 227,107 379,036 325,729 366,672 268,325 341,649 414,819 1990's 415,309 354,996 390,465 476,312 470,220 377,121 503,138 424,651 391,041 343,675 2000's 402,150 543,881 312,348 519,235 475,423 404,258 386,208 410,421 467,589 462,022 2010's 393,814 457,240 307,948

  4. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 829 1,502 839 551 1,326 1,267 987 1980's 1,217 1,125 1,601 646 1,113 1,640 1,146 476 1,142 1,226 1990's 1,256 1,285 1,372 1,762 1,556 1,478 1,655 1,417 1,291 1,384 2000's 1,375 1,669 1,218 1,521 1,471 1,418 1,255 1,380 1,493 1,405 2010's 1,046 1,454 1,010 1,451 1,549 1,044

  5. Mississippi Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 4,701 6,904 7,493 1970's 12,489 8,149 83,548 29,089 25,439 27,345 50,545 65,693 63,032 60,597 1980's 59,653 42,916 43,834 44,467 54,186 54,105 38,678 43,550 41,780 50,478 1990's 53,161 48,054 55,105 55,903 64,972 74,821 88,684 63,216 69,268 48,217 2000's 63,917 68,987 72,418 79,014 90,316 114,658 108,823 148,487 160,388 127,212 2010's 145,854 124,165 129,889 145,082 199,696 202,642

  6. Montana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 19,919 17,398 20,409 1970's 20,891 18,668 8,801 16,969 19,791 13,090 12,507 15,908 16,351 23,254 1980's 29,751 30,147 25,180 33,262 39,814 36,786 22,084 22,894 13,782 10,479 1990's 14,648 12,392 11,708 10,894 14,690 18,054 19,871 18,219 23,876 20,232 2000's 15,571 33,998 39,809 35,082 31,339 29,118 42,492 26,512 18,394 57,631 2010's 35,577 17,582 26,813 21,426 15,290 19,826

  7. Utah Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 609 640 580 1970's 547 883 906 2,320 999 1,340 1,069 1,446 1,180 1,193 1980's 2,381 11,107 12,089 19,948 17,291 20,386 9,542 14,359 19,426 16,885 1990's 27,196 32,248 31,222 34,488 42,508 32,201 32,368 42,803 23,744 37,380 2000's 40,179 47,942 42,159 44,227 46,829 38,478 39,761 41,284 42,304 38,618 2010's 35,519 44,170 28,146 26,724 41,548 36,027

  8. Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 3,748 5,337 6,695 1970's 8,305 11,325 11,996 9,854 7,025 13,276 10,404 10,061 8,812 11,193 1980's 11,194 12,695 21,860 11,546 6,110 7,565 7,701 2,932 9,719 12,546 1990's 12,146 10,872 5,340 13,605 10,596 9,448 10,422 14,080 15,212 11,458 2000's 6,144 19,510 19,547 18,304 26,689 18,665 19,820 22,213 19,194 24,183 2010's 14,762 14,102 37,107 18,868 15,440 10,236

  9. Nebraska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5,012 2,959 4,838 1970's 3,074 5,982 8,837 5,280 5,667 5,459 4,508 7,053 9,995 10,087 1980's 6,557 7,198 7,455 3,869 5,628 6,848 5,748 6,241 7,615 6,952 1990's 7,395 8,916 10,254 14,485 12,524 3,872 8,423 6,659 5,264 5,802 2000's 3,763 8,303 5,735 5,334 8,454 8,412 7,760 10,860 9,155 8,936 2010's 8,146 10,482 6,349 9,578 9,998 8,05

  10. Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 142,717 169,955 168,142 1970's 182,405 188,916 163,884 179,078 152,580 183,032 146,228 188,721 199,851 193,251 1980's 169,268 177,387 193,275 129,541 156,006 138,801 163,093 143,588 162,801 132,898 1990's 154,452 134,060 160,009 175,630 191,660 161,350 198,642 200,327 191,831 182,142 2000's 179,728 206,841 174,175 193,194 186,313 176,524 150,608 180,397 185,095 175,526 2010's 178,746 182,167 146,552 166,098

  11. Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,438 46,871 53,945 1970's 57,142 66,666 59,061 88,000 70,076 87,459 88,577 104,347 109,076 110,354 1980's 112,403 111,148 104,572 75,872 105,055 87,860 84,072 84,031 95,241 98,370 1990's 95,274 94,221 97,468 151,249 123,576 94,809 117,067 132,489 165,631 121,312 2000's 136,287 179,459 110,539 152,536 128,902 125,362 140,895 130,927 162,457 115,885 2010's 145,951 140,729 95,877 127,670 160,232 154,3

  12. Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 189 5 46 1980's 4,148 4,944 1990's 5,894 5,853 6,114 6,202 5,956 4,447 4,416 6,259 5,673 7,605 2000's 8,892 10,487 16,746 10,194 9,101 13,138 12,449 13,195 15,088 10,570 2010's 8,658 11,976 8,732 12,176 15,858 9,061

  13. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 219,010 235,415 244,892 1970's 335,966 303,286 315,183 321,757 265,901 332,183 293,596 364,262 372,402 357,234 1980's 212,048 360,752 405,477 284,948 362,878 350,022 249,028 335,166 377,046 572,180 1990's 388,569 707,371 383,762 381,711 339,512 332,608 376,290 312,787 328,118 319,041 2000's 370,957 398,034 318,381 413,078 368,897 385,186 337,341 372,938 377,401 380,986 2010's 335,068 371,341 291,507

  14. Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Data Series Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. 378,490 394,079 435,352 401,063 201,400 138,069 1973-2015 Alaska 865 857 682 824 756 717 2013-2015 Lower 48 States 377,626 393,223 434,670 400,239 200,643 137,352 2011-2015 Alabama 2,339 1,330 3,800 1,746 3,084 1,867 1994-2015 Arkansas 437 403 150 225 372 538 1990-2015

  15. Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 158 272 2,143 1970's 2,175 2,286 278 320 112 1,079 1980's 22 1990's 0 2,369 2,378 2000's 2,455...

  16. Missouri Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 10,206 8,919 9,044 1970's 10,957 11,741 10,188 10,847 9,413 8,658 6,634 8,074 8,836 8,836 1980's...

  17. Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 536 577 1970's 1,153 992 568 1,070 410 434 1990's 694 1,375 3,349 2,022 2,220 2,646 2000's 2,022 3,913 3,785 10,190 12,734 15,572 20,604 20,009 31,208 21,020 2010's 23,026 22,766 21,195 17,966 34,286 33,004

  18. Alaska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 15,054 11,675 9,161

  19. Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,317 1,210 1,168 1970's 1,467 1,674 1,316 2,218 1,783 1,555 1,033 1,462 1,572 2,081 1980's 1,107 1,690 1,854 241 1,817 4,359 1,871 398 1,522 1,299 1990's 1,938 1,044 2,461 272 3,249 5,368 7,152 6,665 6,951 5,784 2000's 3,943 5,806 3,210 5,757 4,457 4,394 4,789 5,695 5,023 4,108 2010's 4,672 4,628 2,848 3,112 3,398 3,31

  20. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,270 974 1,827 1970's 6,688 7,442 9,608 8,598 7,993 12,009 13,858 15,540 7,358 14,332 1980's...

  1. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

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

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 929 289 499 863 0 2,707 2,937 2,937 1,101 622 906 507 1991 833 586 299 3,139 1,705 2,716 2,138 291 308 0 1,447 753 1992...

  2. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

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

    Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,474 33,037 58,753 1970's 110,680 132,263 84,201 151,287 81,960 149,966 132,724 144,053 155,450 140,433 1980's 134,386...

  3. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 17,712 15,346 15,364 11,228 15,333 18,647 19,527 17,703 19,665 19,333 15,705 14,621 1991 2,280 4,842 12,957 13,291 22,317 22,447 17,260 17,261 23,603 27,512 9,950 4,281 1992 7,699 4,109 13,109 16,478 29,243 21,440 20,695 21,713 23,276 24,685 7,374 3,230 1993 4,314 1,638 8,805 14,315 34,776 33,317 27,192 28,570 32,062 21,236 21,232 2,111 1994 3,737 9,288 9,922 26,592 34,270 23,811 30,757 28,317 24,211 15,673 13,387 4,560 1995

  4. Maryland Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 239 2,623 1,788 2,614 1,243 2,126 2,822 2,513 2,065 403 535 1991 63 182 612 1,414 1,596 1,606 1,492 2,061 9,642 963 1,273 1,604 1992 1,487 148 759 573 3,542 2,886 2,153 2,566 2,310 1,780 732 565 1993 281 0 1,364 604 2,216 1,472 1,128 1,717 2,542 2,679 823 486 1994 2 890 1,570 1,256 2,111 1,537 2,113 1,468 1,654 1,781 196 736 1995 657 199 1,442 1,267 2,010 2,042 1,080 1,854 2,210 1,468 830 550 1996 732 1,205 1,514 1,155 2,219

  5. Michigan Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 9,245 1,582 10,686 31,603 52,870 66,300 76,718 72,178 53,824 26,587 11,504 2,212 1991 1,032 3,107 15,520 34,937 50,769 57,972 60,903 49,098 32,321 37,468 6,791 5,078 1992 1,016 711 1,745 17,659 47,567 67,131 73,573 69,301 68,599 37,430 3,947 1,784 1993 940 824 5,731 30,848 76,196 84,210 84,659 82,086 67,557 38,106 4,009 1,148 1994 1,753 2,710 5,746 48,993 74,457 74,862 76,199 76,055 66,415 34,456 5,582 2,992 1995 666 1,317 4,527

  6. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 69 477 330 112 133 48 61 27 0 0 1991 0 0 42 228 257 312 291 61 93 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 391 307 299 250 126 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 178 331 358 426 134 248 87 0 0 1994 0 0 0 46 342 374 371 273 150 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 27 331 262 306 301 241 9 0 0 1996 - - - 142 366 294 287 280 202 83 - - 1997 0 0 0 173 273 312 321 207 130 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 169 289 284 275 187 87 0 1999 0 0 0 0 0 172 308 320 272 175 136 0 2000 0 0 0 0 0 132 343 343 266

  7. Missouri Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,544 12 1,155 1,115 0 0 0 287 512 228 21 442 1991 669 0 0 2,142 701 120 299 306 216 222 225 70 1992 0 0 0 1,579 439 155 273 224 214 197 0 0 1993 0 0 0 1,558 1,054 462 108 323 211 221 556 218 1994 528 57 98 0 1,549 1,361 322 318 276 219 240 29 1995 0 191 610 59 669 0 0 376 484 144 180 65 1996 358 1,295 1,377 410 1,326 268 247 213 212 218 161 484 1997 1,025 621 88 466 1,207 121 440 387 248 223 254 0 1998 303 167 471 36 595 0 0

  8. Montana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 137 138 399 945 1,030 1,589 2,636 2,459 2,918 1,868 224 305 1991 49 400 337 661 1,912 1,830 2,316 2,077 1,390 1,069 208 144 1992 94 209 651 983 2,344 1,142 1,727 1,673 1,209 1,045 508 123 1993 282 135 618 768 1,156 889 1,969 1,580 1,608 1,404 175 310 1994 267 118 585 1,090 1,929 2,511 1,794 1,632 2,256 1,750 409 348 1995 225 467 966 1,330 1,775 2,542 3,316 3,925 2,132 871 325 180 1996 171 319 392 1,087 1,169 3,866 3,549 3,819

  9. Nebraska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 29 194 1,042 1,483 1,696 30 778 1,165 695 281 4 1991 5 0 112 1,421 2,977 2,197 163 265 1,023 340 412 0 1992 0 108 275 703 1,637 2,634 2,118 1,220 1,200 360 0 0 1993 0 0 162 1,050 2,814 4,060 2,435 1,851 1,518 586 0 10 1994 0 0 582 1,280 2,156 1,045 2,245 933 2,230 1,100 938 15 1995 27 148 490 478 727 920 346 207 408 120 0 0 1996 - 101 14 530 1,650 1,984 1,325 1,416 875 213 289 25 1997 302 267 721 615 796 885 271 1,005 1,123

  10. California Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 71,148 58,085 77,617 1970's 80,260 89,373 118,758 92,331 129,945 105,167 107,749 109,760 108,432 100,522 1980's 93,556 99,397 112,916 97,424 103,983 124,099 89,891 130,990 120,167 140,933 1990's 147,074 136,433 148,039 155,135 155,910 144,312 104,238 145,511 172,343 128,420 2000's 110,172 189,640 124,641 166,879 211,010 190,055 168,957 214,469 237,364 199,763 2010's 226,810 263,067 218,663 182,046

  11. California Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,676 4,631 11,774 22,230 26,798 17,079 11,773 10,071 10,383 17,080 11,528 1,051 1991 1,964 7,531 6,205 21,709 28,179 25,042 16,510 8,436 6,788 7,412 4,368 2,289 1992 1,926 6,570 5,706 17,569 17,167 26,308 19,985 14,876 21,087 11,679 3,331 1,835 1993 915 3,429 15,021 19,520 27,830 15,806 23,522 15,977 16,113 13,773 1,939 1,289 1994 870 494 6,150 20,903 28,804 21,822 18,914 11,381 26,575 14,221 2,254 3,522 1995 1,383 6,220 3,765

  12. Colorado Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 6,391 6,849 8,663 1970's 8,757 5,839 8,502 10,673 11,444 13,420 16,987 21,717 20,630 25,334 1980's 32,974 25,291 32,861 26,361 26,228 26,722 24,313 24,083 25,898 28,165 1990's 27,674 30,584 23,061 51,132 31,185 39,717 37,808 39,389 39,789 37,828 2000's 31,601 36,951 37,980 40,146 38,320 38,588 35,836 38,619 39,034 45,861 2010's 43,250 51,469 59,096 66,935 72,510 69,983

  13. Colorado Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 538 235 252 265 1,274 4,266 6,279 5,212 5,012 1,957 1,734 650 1991 992 654 483 61 2,494 3,876 4,219 4,449 5,296 3,296 2,611 2,153 1992 0 301 61 53 158 2,168 4,187 6,308 5,942 2,708 395 779 1993 1,476 514 1,328 277 3,434 5,426 4,400 5,097 4,898 19,867 1,773 2,642 1994 349 561 1,525 594 6,187 1,887 5,096 5,311 5,305 1,318 1,652 1,401 1995 1,508 1,548 1,831 1,379 3,769 6,416 6,446 4,716 4,341 2,877 3,680 1,206 1996 1,050 3,496

  14. Indiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 25,027 26,679 26,483 1970's 35,065 33,816 40,220 46,617 36,070 43,845 18,252 32,090 25,903 27,177 1980's 24,509 24,301 25,489 20,160 22,069 21,885 22,118 15,844 24,423 24,816 1990's 23,054 23,654 25,770 25,928 24,656 24,335 27,263 23,403 22,034 21,533 2000's 19,486 24,647 20,425 23,563 23,451 21,405 23,598 22,686 22,874 24,399 2010's 21,943 23,864 19,878 22,435 22,067 20,542

  15. Indiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 997 821 771 1,207 1,916 1,673 2,268 3,772 4,202 2,896 1,993 539 1991 91 245 158 710 1,849 1,107 2,920 3,845 4,606 4,490 3,131 501 1992 98 349 429 1,076 1,611 2,638 5,174 4,168 5,309 3,579 926 413 1993 681 526 882 1,587 2,170 2,733 4,564 4,464 4,276 2,659 911 475 1994 328 565 519 609 934 2,541 5,229 4,565 4,175 3,340 1,546 305 1995 439 80 786 1,211 1,057 1,831 2,892 3,751 4,791 4,578 2,437 483 1996 262 870 948 968 1,028 2,560

  16. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 41,661 44,524 50,772 1970's 52,966 49,267 46,810 42,910 45,642 52,045 48,582 51,344 52,242 59,148 1980's 87,788 101,892 128,737 70,412 104,782 96,153 97,214 87,570 107,182 104,735 1990's 108,143 109,627 84,249 116,284 106,069 105,693 104,871 114,848 118,404 103,396 2000's 104,007 127,342 93,675 112,643 101,386 99,621 103,105 113,399 115,669 102,406 2010's 113,253 119,823 93,460 103,676 111,853 110,750

  17. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 7,635 3,835 6,654 5,480 4,038 7,424 13,042 13,023 16,981 12,047 11,053 6,933 1991 5,647 10,096 7,403 7,023 8,901 9,815 5,663 9,450 12,006 14,791 7,219 11,614 1992 6,014 7,237 5,144 3,501 8,711 5,088 6,556 12,676 12,171 9,476 3,696 3,978 1993 3,474 3,941 5,856 10,399 23,758 12,175 7,172 10,616 15,593 14,770 2,712 5,817 1994 3,919 3,957 8,082 8,386 13,732 9,332 12,132 14,307 11,682 8,641 4,889 7,010 1995 3,561 3,694 6,319 7,908 11,537

  18. Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 26,084 28,993 31,726 1970's 38,968 46,139 51,437 54,392 50,903 70,609 69,954 69,097 72,674 68,961 1980's 49,142 67,518 64,789 42,090 63,617 62,202 43,698 42,388 55,774 55,277 1990's 66,195 47,425 49,367 48,117 59,831 58,561 69,498 57,073 65,267 55,134 2000's 55,348 75,165 49,577 70,497 66,037 61,190 65,956 70,682 77,503 71,972 2010's 85,167 77,526 64,483 60,782 80,129 80,247

  19. Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 3,591 7,852 5,644 4,269 4,991 5,462 7,829 7,379 7,268 5,324 3,591 2,996 1991 1,910 2,777 4,468 4,883 2,671 3,345 5,395 4,818 4,660 4,074 4,315 4,110 1992 5,509 3,635 2,314 2,151 1,697 2,787 4,724 4,202 5,539 10,882 3,272 2,656 1993 1,967 990 928 2,687 7,049 7,985 7,838 5,873 7,014 3,907 1,397 482 1994 431 928 1,526 6,100 10,571 9,346 9,742 7,138 4,696 4,684 3,438 1,230 1995 1,189 478 2,868 4,780 13,288 7,749 8,687 5,375 6,889

  20. Michigan Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 222,800 255,365 257,737 1970's 344,524 296,475 275,460 299,766 287,776 322,960 342,010 372,262 390,610 424,176 1980's 290,497 354,911 371,216 227,107 379,036 325,729 366,672 268,325 341,649 414,819 1990's 415,309 354,996 390,465 476,312 470,220 377,121 503,138 424,651 391,041 343,675 2000's 402,150 543,881 312,348 519,235 475,423 404,258 386,208 410,421 467,589 462,022 2010's 393,814 457,240 307,948

  1. Minnesota Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 829 1,502 839 551 1,326 1,267 987 1980's 1,217 1,125 1,601 646 1,113 1,640 1,146 476 1,142 1,226 1990's 1,256 1,285 1,372 1,762 1,556 1,478 1,655 1,417 1,291 1,384 2000's 1,375 1,669 1,218 1,521 1,471 1,418 1,255 1,380 1,493 1,405 2010's 1,046 1,454 1,010 1,451 1,549 1,044

  2. Mississippi Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 4,701 6,904 7,493 1970's 12,489 8,149 83,548 29,089 25,439 27,345 50,545 65,693 63,032 60,597 1980's 59,653 42,916 43,834 44,467 54,186 54,105 38,678 43,550 41,780 50,478 1990's 53,161 48,054 55,105 55,903 64,972 74,821 88,684 63,216 69,268 48,217 2000's 63,917 68,987 72,418 79,014 90,316 114,658 108,823 148,487 160,388 127,212 2010's 145,854 124,165 129,889 145,082 199,696 202,642

  3. Missouri Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 10,206 8,919 9,044 1970's 10,957 11,741 10,188 10,847 9,413 8,658 6,634 8,074 8,836 8,836 1980's 5,305 4,727 4,407 924 4,431 4,537 2,835 1,337 4,240 2,911 1990's 5,316 4,972 3,080 4,711 4,997 2,777 6,570 5,081 2,670 3,159 2000's 2,619 3,794 2,977 2,963 3,213 2,455 1,689 2,423 2,634 2,684 2010's 2,437 2,114 1,647 3,388 4,188 2,973

  4. Montana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 19,919 17,398 20,409 1970's 20,891 18,668 8,801 16,969 19,791 13,090 12,507 15,908 16,351 23,254 1980's 29,751 30,147 25,180 33,262 39,814 36,786 22,084 22,894 13,782 10,479 1990's 14,648 12,392 11,708 10,894 14,690 18,054 19,871 18,219 23,876 20,232 2000's 15,571 33,998 39,809 35,082 31,339 29,118 42,492 26,512 18,394 57,631 2010's 35,577 17,582 26,813 21,426 15,290 19,826

  5. Nebraska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 5,012 2,959 4,838 1970's 3,074 5,982 8,837 5,280 5,667 5,459 4,508 7,053 9,995 10,087 1980's 6,557 7,198 7,455 3,869 5,628 6,848 5,748 6,241 7,615 6,952 1990's 7,395 8,916 10,254 14,485 12,524 3,872 8,423 6,659 5,264 5,802 2000's 3,763 8,303 5,735 5,334 8,454 8,412 7,760 10,860 9,155 8,936 2010's 8,146 10,482 6,349 9,578 9,998 8,05

  6. New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 383 74 383 1970's 398 5,067 12,589 4,160 1,005 2,378 472 39 1980's 2,871 2,801 19,894 2,500 4,033 14,552 11,531 14,892 19,407 14,036 1990's 22,352 21,563 18,963 16,369 18,551 14,712 11,953 12,936 16,821 17,459 2000's 16,529 18,263 12,032 13,544 13,422 16,131 18,011 22,390 16,132 21,094 2010's 18,643 19,738 22,732 14,077 14,010 26,085

  7. New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 42,344 44,978 41,874 1970's 45,802 48,026 32,777 40,277 56,403 43,207 42,565 53,768 51,620 46,439 1980's 41,857 57,610 55,213 43,106 59,702 48,748 49,185 42,616 56,332 53,490 1990's 63,690 63,411 62,265 68,532 66,627 60,947 76,475 67,135 63,298 57,442 2000's 61,763 66,179 64,381 79,757 71,554 69,022 68,290 75,186 69,946 89,822 2010's 99,802 92,660 75,635 79,917 94,858 88,447

  8. Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 142,717 169,955 168,142 1970's 182,405 188,916 163,884 179,078 152,580 183,032 146,228 188,721 199,851 193,251 1980's 169,268 177,387 193,275 129,541 156,006 138,801 163,093 143,588 162,801 132,898 1990's 154,452 134,060 160,009 175,630 191,660 161,350 198,642 200,327 191,831 182,142 2000's 179,728 206,841 174,175 193,194 186,313 176,524 150,608 180,397 185,095 175,526 2010's 178,746 182,167 146,552 166,098

  9. Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,438 46,871 53,945 1970's 57,142 66,666 59,061 88,000 70,076 87,459 88,577 104,347 109,076 110,354 1980's 112,403 111,148 104,572 75,872 105,055 87,860 84,072 84,031 95,241 98,370 1990's 95,274 94,221 97,468 151,249 123,576 94,809 117,067 132,489 165,631 121,312 2000's 136,287 179,459 110,539 152,536 128,902 125,362 140,895 130,927 162,457 115,885 2010's 145,951 140,729 95,877 127,670 160,232

  10. Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 189 5 46 1980's 4,148 4,944 1990's 5,894 5,853 6,114 6,202 5,956 4,447 4,416 6,259 5,673 7,605 2000's 8,892 10,487 16,746 10,194 9,101 13,138 12,449 13,195 15,088 10,570 2010's 8,658 11,976 8,732 12,176 15,858 9,061

  11. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 219,010 235,415 244,892 1970's 335,966 303,286 315,183 321,757 265,901 332,183 293,596 364,262 372,402 357,234 1980's 212,048 360,752 405,477 284,948 362,878 350,022 249,028 335,166 377,046 572,180 1990's 388,569 707,371 383,762 381,711 339,512 332,608 376,290 312,787 328,118 319,041 2000's 370,957 398,034 318,381 413,078 368,897 385,186 337,341 372,938 377,401 380,986 2010's 335,068 371,341 291,507

  12. West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage...

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 159,545 181,338 183,114 1970's 209,292 190,785 171,946 184,984 124,988 161,604 138,767 195,861...

  13. Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 2,140 1970's 1,606 1,750 2,325 1990's 0 453 599 2000's 273 556 63 336 262

  14. Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 34,836 31,597 33,943 1970's 36,805 36,850 87,251 46,592 54,705 54,333 61,110 85,913 91,373 82,325 1980's 109,242 124,439 141,811 135,309 145,916 125,560 121,631 121,245 146,758 161,181 1990's 175,039 170,908 340,602 221,412 310,273 274,724 305,914 312,254 344,461 291,802 2000's 311,995 482,270 363,682 415,541 395,115 345,945 356,273 362,593 401,600 435,089 2010's 460,453 437,440 378,438 394,375 474,392 494,375

  15. Utah Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 609 640 580 1970's 547 883 906 2,320 999 1,340 1,069 1,446 1,180 1,193 1980's 2,381 11,107 12,089 19,948 17,291 20,386 9,542 14,359 19,426 16,885 1990's 27,196 32,248 31,222 34,488 42,508 32,201 32,368 42,803 23,744 37,380 2000's 40,179 47,942 42,159 44,227 46,829 38,478 39,761 41,284 42,304 38,618 2010's 35,519 44,170 28,146 26,724 41,548 36,027

  16. Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 158 272 2,143 1970's 2,175 2,286 278 320 112 1,079 1980's 22 1990's 0 2,369 2,378 2000's 2,455 3,440 3,012 4,008 7,073 9,696 6,997 8,796 10,467 9,464 2010's 10,315 12,006 10,593 11,361 12,602 12,930

  17. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,270 974 1,827 1970's 6,688 7,442 9,608 8,598 7,993 12,009 13,858 15,540 7,358 14,332 1980's 14,408 11,083 5,344 6,218 12,002 7,847 6,269 6,884 5,415 12,921 1990's 14,296 14,214 13,294 19,575 18,705 17,815 20,124 20,018 23,136 19,227 2000's 24,424 25,176 25,378 26,357 22,194 22,562 21,997 26,184 25,304 26,411 2010's 25,968 27,946 25,183 28,208 29,058 25,789

  18. Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 536 577 1970's 1,153 992 568 1,070 410 434 1990's 694 1,375 3,349 2,022 2,220 2,646 2000's 2,022 3,913 3,785 10,190 12,734 15,572 20,604 20,009 31,208 21,020 2010's 23,026 22,766 21,195 17,966 34,286 33,004

  19. Alabama Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 8 12 26 71 106 95 103 93 85 55 25 14 1995 0 122 0 0 44 42 41 252 592 156 24 101 1996 231 185 141 192 390 670 318 395 440 166 63 160 1997 297 101 63 168 271 161 108 286 262 251 27 27 1998 26 0 81 245 188 623 25 203 139 613 76 0 1999 0 0 14 645 547 213 333 202 459 0 166 67 2000 48 534 44 51 232 606 166 0 0 42 12 286 2001 411 304 85 323 207 618 250 293 370 414 529 109 2002 711 278 182 349 240 54 357 139 106 318 515 536 2003 242 818

  20. Alaska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2010's 15,054 11,675 9,161

  1. Alaska Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013 1,120 2,185 1,860 933 1,065 1,131 977 1,518 1,981 1,627 367 291 2014 701 337 1,062 1,084 903 2,078 831 997 774 678 976 1,255 2015 1,039 982 589 621 618 611 865 857 682 824 756 717

  2. Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 1,317 1,210 1,168 1970's 1,467 1,674 1,316 2,218 1,783 1,555 1,033 1,462 1,572 2,081 1980's 1,107 1,690 1,854 241 1,817 4,359 1,871 398 1,522 1,299 1990's 1,938 1,044 2,461 272 3,249 5,368 7,152 6,665 6,951 5,784 2000's 3,943 5,806 3,210 5,757 4,457 4,394 4,789 5,695 5,023 4,108 2010's 4,672 4,628 2,848 3,112 3,398 3,31

  3. Arkansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 0 46 104 473 527 481 279 28 0 0 1991 0 0 0 72 132 339 487 14 0 0 0 0 1992 0 0 0 0 0 510 852 665 434 0 0 0 1993 0 0 0 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 657 639 648 859 214 79 65 88 1995 0 0 0 0 307 1,384 1,567 1,461 230 83 182 154 1996 99 281 117 396 1,355 1,217 795 664 1,199 690 110 229 1997 144 82 148 138 651 1,374 1,509 1,278 1,091 93 157 0 1998 138 64 130 555 1,075 1,129 1,070 1,040 848 616 175 109 1999 0 31 0 792 1,053

  4. Tennessee Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 112 102 103 2 0 1999 6 0 0 0 143 107 76 104 105 57 0 0 2000 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 114 86 21 2001 0 0 0 103 113 32 63 47 62 100 32 4 2002 50 3 6 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 2003 0 0 0 0 42 76 75 95 2 46 0 0 2004 2 0 0 33 32 46 63 55 6 25 0 0 2005

  5. Texas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 17,004 8,785 10,204 19,677 17,706 20,683 10,352 12,126 22,756 13,644 6,455 1991 15,296 7,922 10,668 19,418 15,195 17,722 9,489 19,572 16,485 9,703 16,161 13,277 1992 28,613 14,959 26,061 25,971 36,754 40,361 32,383 37,832 33,591 24,896 15,309 23,871 1993 10,338 4,336 10,991 24,985 30,856 19,793 22,155 23,862 26,751 20,149 16,519 10,678 1994 9,151 9,187 22,843 31,648 45,809 29,041 34,716 32,744 34,998 26,664 23,258 10,215 1995 12,078

  6. New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 502 1,137 1,088 2,198 1,190 1,665 3,674 3,203 2,048 3,187 1,857 602 1991 341 245 267 3,130 3,097 3,033 1,930 790 3,099 1,538 1,556 2,536 1992 1,345 741 1,159 197 1,538 1,940 1,147 2,411 2,287 2,932 1,133 2,132 1993 864 0 1,404 1 2,822 2,560 1,786 692 1,343 2,719 533 1,645 1994 412 604 1,464 275 2,297 1,630 1,349 986 4,132 2,343 1,241 1,817 1995 404 867 2,089 944 1,779 1,734 1,688 999 1,550 1,392 691 577 1996 690 567 167 587

  7. Ohio Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,095 2,783 8,487 12,731 23,624 20,221 19,895 19,615 18,355 13,780 9,089 3,777 1991 474 569 2,278 13,918 24,470 20,782 18,348 18,211 16,615 12,371 5,205 819 1992 46 383 775 11,319 27,233 30,305 29,147 24,617 16,672 14,358 4,364 790 1993 152 278 1,376 10,017 30,894 32,804 30,187 28,001 26,720 12,055 3,036 109 1994 1,075 1,772 2,164 19,428 30,107 32,303 33,898 27,173 22,437 13,196 7,269 837 1995 617 1,176 1,782 7,066 28,599 32,073 31,206

  8. Oklahoma Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 4,366 3,193 6,903 5,872 11,548 13,440 11,689 10,380 8,709 8,453 8,353 2,367 1991 26 3,253 7,982 15,800 16,462 10,864 4,815 6,272 10,749 9,706 3,437 4,853 1992 1,358 3,452 5,980 8,163 10,270 11,596 17,116 11,326 13,627 11,199 2,570 812 1993 1,709 2,183 3,139 17,592 30,401 25,865 16,422 17,249 15,631 12,044 1,415 7,600 1994 692 1,521 7,130 20,751 26,772 15,711 17,419 13,891 9,370 6,950 2,330 1,038 1995 1,144 1,218 4,867 9,018

  9. Oregon Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 0 0 0 1,181 1,508 1,244 764 636 372 188 0 0 1991 0 0 0 0 713 1,554 1,458 1,092 674 339 23 0 1992 0 0 0 0 1,572 1,540 1,194 1,010 453 195 0 149 1993 0 0 0 0 1,636 1,291 1,175 1,036 575 487 0 0 1994 0 0 0 0 1,216 1,506 1,202 1,081 688 264 0 0 1995 0 182 0 867 1,179 1,034 695 0 490 0 0 0 1996 - - - - 841 1,365 1,318 509 121 262 - - 1997 0 24 0 0 1,300 1,681 1,301 1,178 411 97 267 0 1998 0 0 0 0 0 1,968 1,188 1,143 1,141 28 0 205 1999 0 0 0 0

  10. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 13,295 9,924 21,742 28,238 51,655 57,413 51,832 54,045 43,121 22,964 20,337 14,002 1991 73,993 63,063 44,655 46,683 64,031 52,754 59,771 61,123 70,362 55,270 57,416 58,249 1992 7,189 3,229 6,490 28,679 50,918 60,273 46,504 57,126 51,685 38,133 24,553 8,982 1993 5,815 1,906 9,046 31,461 62,602 58,643 54,419 47,350 54,543 27,811 19,970 8,144 1994 772 4,575 12,272 40,407 57,110 58,758 53,083 45,208 27,767 23,356 8,648 7,555 1995

  11. Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 22 16 140 1,047 1,248 1,648 2,162 1,899 2,415 1,135 222 191 1991 56 467 479 368 908 1,922 2,233 1,628 1,090 1,135 423 164 1992 0 73 211 356 439 605 1,402 465 861 525 208 194 1993 8 15 557 1,247 1,443 2,426 2,423 1,875 1,433 1,533 482 163 1994 145 16 930 1,339 1,692 771 1,125 1,524 1,444 1,060 412 138 1995 17 76 89 67 863 1,452 1,588 1,896 1,849 1,265 236 52 1996 13 0 66 974 2,862 1,764 2,169 836 641 540 243 312 1997 157 0 47 372

  12. California Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 71,148 58,085 77,617 1970's 80,260 89,373 118,758 92,331 129,945 105,167 107,749 109,760 108,432 100,522 1980's 93,556 99,397 112,916 97,424 103,983 124,099 89,891 130,990 120,167 140,933 1990's 147,074 136,433 148,039 155,135 155,910 144,312 104,238 145,511 172,343 128,420 2000's 110,172 189,640 124,641 166,879 211,010 190,055 168,957 214,469 237,364 199,763 2010's 226,810 263,067 218,663 182,046

  13. Colorado Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 6,391 6,849 8,663 1970's 8,757 5,839 8,502 10,673 11,444 13,420 16,987 21,717 20,630 25,334 1980's 32,974 25,291 32,861 26,361 26,228 26,722 24,313 24,083 25,898 28,165 1990's 27,674 30,584 23,061 51,132 31,185 39,717 37,808 39,389 39,789 37,828 2000's 31,601 36,951 37,980 40,146 38,320 38,588 35,836 38,619 39,034 45,861 2010's 43,250 51,469 59,096 66,935 72,510 69,983

  14. Illinois Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 119,125 143,180 153,497 1970's 190,661 214,871 237,098 233,112 232,284 294,689 235,310 293,311 236,669 253,320 1980's 197,385 141,824 217,536 122,620 194,327 165,688 156,754 125,066 166,713 199,165 1990's 213,076 212,232 214,404 240,515 235,778 263,409 241,129 227,785 225,089 238,325 2000's 225,524 231,097 246,574 249,228 246,747 260,515 242,754 243,789 260,333 259,421 2010's 247,458 258,690 249,953

  15. Indiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 25,027 26,679 26,483 1970's 35,065 33,816 40,220 46,617 36,070 43,845 18,252 32,090 25,903 27,177 1980's 24,509 24,301 25,489 20,160 22,069 21,885 22,118 15,844 24,423 24,816 1990's 23,054 23,654 25,770 25,928 24,656 24,335 27,263 23,403 22,034 21,533 2000's 19,486 24,647 20,425 23,563 23,451 21,405 23,598 22,686 22,874 24,399 2010's 21,943 23,864 19,878 22,435 22,067 20,542

  16. Injections of Natural Gas into Underground Storage - All Operators

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

    3,291,395 3,421,813 2,825,427 3,155,661 3,838,826 3,638,954 1935-2015 Alaska 1973-1975 Alaska 15,054 11,675 9,161 2013-2015 Lower 48 States 3,421,813 2,825,427 3,047,153 3,827,150 3,629,792 2011-2015 Alabama 23,026 22,766 21,195 17,966 34,286 33,004 1968-2015 Arkansas 4,672 4,628 2,848 3,112 3,398 3,318 1967-2015 California 226,810 263,067 218,663 182,046 280,516 206,774 1967-2015 Colorado 43,250 51,469 59,096 66,935 72,510 69,983 1967-2015 Connecticut 1973-1996 Delaware 1967-1975 Georgia

  17. Iowa Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 49,603 57,082 43,037 1970's 46,301 53,186 53,137 57,011 56,505 59,065 55,005 71,002 68,772 70,967 1980's 61,413 48,918 61,121 49,523 44,355 64,993 52,084 45,128 55,076 58,386 1990's 44,471 57,278 65,818 64,184 70,926 70,785 61,060 61,132 70,001 73,398 2000's 69,893 80,546 66,202 67,017 70,097 66,827 68,750 70,329 70,022 79,012 2010's 76,407 77,783 66,774 71,793 80,866 71,767

  18. Kansas Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 41,661 44,524 50,772 1970's 52,966 49,267 46,810 42,910 45,642 52,045 48,582 51,344 52,242 59,148 1980's 87,788 101,892 128,737 70,412 104,782 96,153 97,214 87,570 107,182 104,735 1990's 108,143 109,627 84,249 116,284 106,069 105,693 104,871 114,848 118,404 103,396 2000's 104,007 127,342 93,675 112,643 101,386 99,621 103,105 113,399 115,669 102,406 2010's 113,253 119,823 93,460 103,676 111,853 110,750

  19. Kentucky Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 26,084 28,993 31,726 1970's 38,968 46,139 51,437 54,392 50,903 70,609 69,954 69,097 72,674 68,961 1980's 49,142 67,518 64,789 42,090 63,617 62,202 43,698 42,388 55,774 55,277 1990's 66,195 47,425 49,367 48,117 59,831 58,561 69,498 57,073 65,267 55,134 2000's 55,348 75,165 49,577 70,497 66,037 61,190 65,956 70,682 77,503 71,972 2010's 85,167 77,526 64,483 60,782 80,129 80,247

  20. Louisiana Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 47,474 33,037 58,753 1970's 110,680 132,263 84,201 151,287 81,960 149,966 132,724 144,053 155,450 140,433 1980's 134,386 212,267 177,194 148,679 193,096 184,351 174,222 188,110 194,251 178,222 1990's 200,183 178,002 193,051 229,568 224,525 209,575 249,153 302,324 321,681 261,763 2000's 242,566 351,853 282,824 314,609 296,365 273,161 291,259 272,581 287,449 315,872 2010's 343,090 342,092 270,858 328,452

  1. Maryland Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 12,465 10,520 5,281 1970's 10,421 11,746 7,920 11,328 11,016 6,830 19,012 16,820 19,121 19,715 1980's 16,907 18,753 19,476 16,298 16,154 17,362 16,330 16,539 14,653 18,548 1990's 19,431 22,508 19,502 15,314 15,316 15,610 17,448 15,510 14,627 18,802 2000's 15,341 19,786 15,445 19,166 16,347 18,026 14,947 20,309 16,517 15,088 2010's 14,384 15,592 10,582 14,165 20,362 17,373

  2. Utah Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 217 15 3 133 1,503 1,503 7,253 6,393 5,871 3,255 768 282 1991 85 0 2,099 2,224 2,645 5,554 6,015 3,813 3,940 2,080 1,316 2,475 1992 389 1,210 2,719 3,032 3,970 3,612 3,759 4,834 3,898 3,111 506 182 1993 0 6 93 168 6,607 6,471 5,034 5,017 4,968 5,083 501 541 1994 45 195 3,861 2,050 6,133 4,069 5,508 6,269 8,509 4,218 1,026 624 1995 71 1,029 918 1,645 4,350 6,226 7,254 3,681 2,323 1,721 2,729 256 1996 7 276 904 1,589 5,596 6,757 6,824 4,746

  3. Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 303 22 31 220 304 296 185 322 301 225 78 84 1999 326 59 50 220 278 267 249 236 414 109 45 125 2000 127 269 47 282 291 224 222 222 350 299 62 60 2001 83 244 244 434 532 402 274 322 362 275 242 25 2002 95 92 0 186 683 339 344 283 434 327 44 183 2003 51 220 70 276 458 504 482 823 671 147 102 203 2004 325 454 190 347 1,013 415 611 1,104 894 1,138 303 279 2005 599 566 319 458 699 560 923 747 783 834 2,614

  4. Washington Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 929 289 499 863 0 2,707 2,937 2,937 1,101 622 906 507 1991 833 586 299 3,139 1,705 2,716 2,138 291 308 0 1,447 753 1992 436 149 945 1,205 1,824 1,543 1,336 1,618 1,578 979 785 895 1993 750 383 2,192 1,363 4,359 1,112 2,036 1,280 2,258 340 326 3,176 1994 1,579 318 1,268 3,455 2,882 2,005 1,945 965 1,330 503 1,263 1,192 1995 541 827 1,671 1,661 2,601 2,020 1,565 829 2,494 464 1,696 1,447 1996 808 2,027 1,081 1,609 2,176 3,349

  5. West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 2,636 3,056 7,714 11,094 19,622 17,419 16,104 16,323 13,930 7,415 6,785 4,120 1991 843 2,207 5,193 12,543 15,471 16,359 15,601 10,248 9,551 8,573 5,375 2,288 1992 1,013 1,191 1,116 9,299 25,331 21,514 19,498 21,430 15,698 16,466 5,155 936 1993 467 42 1,620 11,145 39,477 28,118 20,621 18,991 20,910 11,087 7,110 863 1994 331 2,543 4,529 21,836 25,960 28,392 28,083 23,234 21,272 9,826 3,695 1,516 1995 1,637 1,663 6,487 10,136

  6. West Virginia Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million

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

    Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 159,545 181,338 183,114 1970's 209,292 190,785 171,946 184,984 124,988 161,604 138,767 195,861 177,263 173,060 1980's 128,443 127,788 144,153 87,355 128,717 129,134 134,394 98,311 106,318 115,421 1990's 126,217 104,251 138,647 160,450 171,216 145,958 200,612 164,299 172,191 160,166 2000's 155,359 198,730 140,907 197,794 176,486 171,199 163,026 184,167 192,729 188,539 2010's 171,179 197,202 153,479

  7. Wyoming Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic

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

    Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 3,748 5,337 6,695 1970's 8,305 11,325 11,996 9,854 7,025 13,276 10,404 10,061 8,812 11,193 1980's 11,194 12,695 21,860 11,546 6,110 7,565 7,701 2,932 9,719 12,546 1990's 12,146 10,872 5,340 13,605 10,596 9,448 10,422 14,080 15,212 11,458 2000's 6,144 19,510 19,547 18,304 26,689 18,665 19,820 22,213 19,194 24,183 2010's 14,762 14,102 37,107 18,868 15,440 10,236

  8. New Mexico Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

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

    Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 383 74 383 1970's 398 5,067 12,589 4,160 1,005 2,378 472 39 1980's 2,871 2,801 19,894 2,500...

  9. New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1990 1,869 1,563 3,711 4,231 6,916 10,157 8,932 7,141 5,172 2,549 1,879 1991 539 1,202 1,845 5,002 7,611 7,983 9,509 8,881...

  10. New York Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1960's 42,344 44,978 41,874 1970's 45,802 48,026 32,777 40,277 56,403 43,207 42,565 53,768 51,620 46,439 1980's 41,857 57,610 55,213 43,106 59,702 48,748...

  11. Development of Improved Oil Field Waste Injection Disposal Techniques

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Terralog Technologies

    2002-11-25

    The goals of this project have was to: (1) assemble and analyze a comprehensive database of past waste injection operations; (2) develop improved diagnostic techniques for monitoring fracture growth and formation changes; (3) develop operating guidelines to optimize daily operations and ultimate storage capacity of the target formation; and (4) to apply these improved models and guidelines in the field.

  12. Development of Improved Oil Field Waste Injection Disposal Techniques

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Terralog Technologies USA Inc.

    2001-12-17

    The goals of this DOE sponsored project are to: (1) assemble and analyze a comprehensive database of past waste injection operations; (2) develop improved diagnostic techniques for monitoring fracture growth and formation changes; (3) develop operating guidelines to optimize daily operations and ultimate storage capacity of the target formation; and (4) to test these improved models and guidelines in the field.

  13. Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report - EIA

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

    See All Natural Gas Reports Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report for week ending March 4, 2016 | Released: March 10, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. | Next Release: March 17, 2016 Working gas in underground storage, Lower 48 states Summary text CSV JSN Historical Comparisons Stocks billion cubic feet (Bcf) Year ago (03/04/15) 5-year average (2011-15) Region 03/04/16 02/26/16 net change implied flow Bcf % change Bcf % change East 464 495 -31 -31 322 44.1 363 27.8 Midwest 587 621 -34 -34 320 83.4 400 46.8

  14. Injection Laser System

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

    Injection Laser System For each of NIF's 192 beams: The pulse shape as a function of time must be generated with a high degree of precision The energy delivered to the target must be precise The energy must be delivered to the target at exactly the specified time NIF's injection laser system (ILS) plays a key role in meeting these three requirements. The ILS system is responsible for generating a prescribed pulse shape, adjusting the energy in each of the 192 beams, and adjusting the time it

  15. Fuel injection apparatus

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Suzuki, Y.; Kuroda, Y.; Ogata, K.

    1988-07-12

    A fuel injection apparatus is described for injecting fuel responsive to a rotary speed of an engine by utilizing the pressure of compressed air, the apparatus comprising means for regulating the supplying time of the compressed air responsive to at least one of the rotary speed of the engine and the load of the engine, and the regulating means including means for supplying the compressed air for a longer time at least one of low rotary speed and low load of the engine than at least one of high rotary speed and high load of the engine.

  16. DOE Partner Begins Carbon Storage Test | Department of Energy

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

    Partner Begins Carbon Storage Test DOE Partner Begins Carbon Storage Test June 25, 2009 - 1:00pm Addthis Washington, D.C. -- A Department of Energy sponsored project in Hopkins County, Kentucky has begun injecting carbon dioxide (CO2) into a mature oil field to assess the region's CO2 storage capacity and feasibility for enhanced oil recovery. The project is part of DOE's Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (RCSP) program and is being conducted by The Midwest Geological Sequestration

  17. Gas storage materials, including hydrogen storage materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Mohtadi, Rana F; Wicks, George G; Heung, Leung K; Nakamura, Kenji

    2014-11-25

    A material for the storage and release of gases comprises a plurality of hollow elements, each hollow element comprising a porous wall enclosing an interior cavity, the interior cavity including structures of a solid-state storage material. In particular examples, the storage material is a hydrogen storage material, such as a solid state hydride. An improved method for forming such materials includes the solution diffusion of a storage material solution through a porous wall of a hollow element into an interior cavity.

  18. Gas storage materials, including hydrogen storage materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Mohtadi, Rana F; Wicks, George G; Heung, Leung K; Nakamura, Kenji

    2013-02-19

    A material for the storage and release of gases comprises a plurality of hollow elements, each hollow element comprising a porous wall enclosing an interior cavity, the interior cavity including structures of a solid-state storage material. In particular examples, the storage material is a hydrogen storage material such as a solid state hydride. An improved method for forming such materials includes the solution diffusion of a storage material solution through a porous wall of a hollow element into an interior cavity.

  19. AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground

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

    Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 7,862 17,834 34,190 160,946 247,849 262,039 269,285 244,910 208,853 134,234 47,094 16,471 1995 13,614 4,932 36,048 85,712 223,991 260,731 242,718 212,493 214,385 160,007 37,788 12,190 1996 12,276 39,022 32,753 130,232 233,717 285,798 303,416 270,223

  20. AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground

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

    Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Injections into Underground Storage (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1994 2,449 542 13,722 29,089 48,055 33,801 35,146 27,858 45,903 22,113 5,766 6,401 1995 2,960 9,426 8,840 10,680 42,987 47,386 37,349 22,868 31,053 25,873 15,711 3,003 1996 2,819 8,696 9,595 20,495 41,216 36,086 25,987 20,787 24,773 17,795 13,530 9,122

  1. Definition of a 'Zero Net Energy' Community

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carlisle, N.; Van Geet, O.; Pless, S.

    2009-11-01

    This document provides a definition for a net zero-energy community. A community that offsets all of its energy use from renewables available within the community's built environment.

  2. Farmington Electric Utility System- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Farmington Electric, a municipal utility, offers net metering to residential customers with systems up to 10 kilowatts (kW) in capacity. This option is available for photovoltaic (PV), wind, hydro...

  3. Collective Impact for Zero Net Energy Homes

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

    Home Energy Star Certified New Home Building America Goal: High-Performance Zero Net-Energy Ready New & Existing Homes ZNER NewExist. Home Low HERS Code New Home Building...

  4. June 25 Webinar to Explore Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Register for the Net Metering webinar, which will be held on Wednesday, June 25, 2014, from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Mountain time.

  5. Murray City Power- Net Metering Pilot Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Under a pilot program, Murray City Power offers net metering to customers that generate electricity using photovoltaic (PV), wind-electric or hydroelectric systems with a maximum capacity of 10...

  6. U.S. Virgin Islands- Net Metering

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In February 2007, the U.S. Virgin Islands Public Services Commission approved a limited net-metering program for residential and commercial photovoltaic (PV), wind-energy or other renewable energ...

  7. ,"U.S. Blender Net Production"

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

    586-8800",,,"10272015 12:31:57 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Blender Net Production" "Sourcekey","MEP00YPBNUSMBBL","MGFRZNUS1","MGRRZNUS1","MG1RZNUS1","MEPM0...

  8. ,"U.S. Refinery Net Production"

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

    586-8800",,,"10272015 12:31:05 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: U.S. Refinery Net Production" "Sourcekey","MTTRXNUS1","MLPRXNUS1","METRXNUS1","MENRXNUS1","MEYRXNUS1","...

  9. ARM - Measurement - Longwave broadband net irradiance

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

    net irradiance ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Measurement : Longwave broadband net irradiance The difference between upwelling and downwelling broadband longwave radiation. Categories Radiometric Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a list of all available

  10. ARM - Measurement - Net broadband total irradiance

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

    govMeasurementsNet broadband total irradiance ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Measurement : Net broadband total irradiance The difference between upwelling and downwelling, covering longwave and shortwave radiation. Categories Radiometric Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each

  11. ARM - Measurement - Shortwave broadband total net irradiance

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

    net irradiance ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Measurement : Shortwave broadband total net irradiance The difference between upwelling and downwelling broadband shortwave radiation. Categories Radiometric Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a list of all available

  12. Geological Carbon Sequestration Storage Resource Estimates for the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, Illinois and Michigan Basins, USA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, David; Ellett, Kevin; Leetaru, Hannes

    2014-09-30

    The Cambro-Ordovician strata of the Midwest of the United States is a primary target for potential geological storage of CO2 in deep saline formations. The objective of this project is to develop a comprehensive evaluation of the Cambro-Ordovician strata in the Illinois and Michigan Basins above the basal Mount Simon Sandstone since the Mount Simon is the subject of other investigations including a demonstration-scale injection at the Illinois Basin Decatur Project. The primary reservoir targets investigated in this study are the middle Ordovician St Peter Sandstone and the late Cambrian to early Ordovician Knox Group carbonates. The topic of this report is a regional-scale evaluation of the geologic storage resource potential of the St Peter Sandstone in both the Illinois and Michigan Basins. Multiple deterministic-based approaches were used in conjunction with the probabilistic-based storage efficiency factors published in the DOE methodology to estimate the carbon storage resource of the formation. Extensive data sets of core analyses and wireline logs were compiled to develop the necessary inputs for volumetric calculations. Results demonstrate how the range in uncertainty of storage resource estimates varies as a function of data availability and quality, and the underlying assumptions used in the different approaches. In the simplest approach, storage resource estimates were calculated from mapping the gross thickness of the formation and applying a single estimate of the effective mean porosity of the formation. Results from this approach led to storage resource estimates ranging from 3.3 to 35.1 Gt in the Michigan Basin, and 1.0 to 11.0 Gt in the Illinois Basin at the P10 and P90 probability level, respectively. The second approach involved consideration of the diagenetic history of the formation throughout the two basins and used depth-dependent functions of porosity to derive a more realistic spatially variable model of porosity rather than applying a single estimate of porosity throughout the entire potential reservoir domains. The second approach resulted in storage resource estimates of 3.0 to 31.6 Gt in the Michigan Basin, and 0.6 to 6.1 Gt in the Illinois Basin. The third approach attempted to account for the local-scale variability in reservoir quality as a function of both porosity and permeability by using core and log analyses to calculate explicitly the net effective porosity at multiple well locations, and interpolate those results throughout the two basins. This approach resulted in storage resource estimates of 10.7 to 34.7 Gt in the Michigan Basin, and 11.2 to 36.4 Gt in the Illinois Basin. A final approach used advanced reservoir characterization as the most sophisticated means to estimating storage resource by defining reservoir properties for multiple facies within the St Peter formation. This approach was limited to the Michigan Basin since the Illinois Basin data set did not have the requisite level of data quality and sampling density to support such an analysis. Results from this approach led to storage resource estimates of 15.4 Gt to 50.1 Gt for the Michigan Basin. The observed variability in results from the four different approaches is evaluated in the context of data and methodological constraints, leading to the conclusion that the storage resource estimates from the first two approaches may be conservative, whereas the net porosity based approaches may over-estimate the resource.

  13. Injection-controlled laser resonator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chang, J.J.

    1995-07-18

    A new injection-controlled laser resonator incorporates self-filtering and self-imaging characteristics with an efficient injection scheme. A low-divergence laser signal is injected into the resonator, which enables the injection signal to be converted to the desired resonator modes before the main laser pulse starts. This injection technique and resonator design enable the laser cavity to improve the quality of the injection signal through self-filtering before the main laser pulse starts. The self-imaging property of the present resonator reduces the cavity induced diffraction effects and, in turn, improves the laser beam quality. 5 figs.

  14. Designing Hawaii's First LEED Platinum Net Zero Community: Kaupuni...

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

    Designing Hawaii's First LEED Platinum Net Zero Community: Kaupuni Village Designing Hawaii's First LEED Platinum Net Zero Community: Kaupuni Village U.S. Department of Energy...

  15. Lessons Learned from Net Zero Energy Assessments and Renewable...

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

    Lessons Learned from Net Zero Energy Assessments and Renewable Energy Projects at Military Installations Lessons Learned from Net Zero Energy Assessments and Renewable Energy...

  16. US Crude Oil Production Surpasses Net Imports | Department of...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    US Crude Oil Production Surpasses Net Imports US Crude Oil Production Surpasses Net Imports Source: Energy Information Administration Short Term Energy Outlook. Chart by Daniel...

  17. Nevada Renewable Energy Application For Net Metering Customers...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Renewable Energy Application For Net Metering Customers Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Nevada Renewable Energy Application For Net...

  18. Net Zero Waste - Tools and Technical Support ...and other observations...

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

    Net Zero Waste - Tools and Technical Support ...and other observations Net Zero Waste - Tools and Technical Support ...and other observations Presentation at Waste-to-Energy using...

  19. Best Practices for Controlling Capital Costs in Net Zero Energy...

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

    Best Practices for Controlling Capital Costs in Net Zero Energy Design and Construction - 2014 BTO Peer Review Best Practices for Controlling Capital Costs in Net Zero Energy ...

  20. Army Net Zero: Guide to Renewable Energy Conservation Investment...

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

    Army Net Zero: Guide to Renewable Energy Conservation Investment Program (ECIP) Projects Army Net Zero: Guide to Renewable Energy Conservation Investment Program (ECIP) Projects...